It is a particularly confusing moment around Torrey Pines Mesa, the epicenter of the Biomedical Innovation Industry of the County of San Diego, while the researchers find themselves excluding inclusiveness in response to a frame of January 20 order This considers that the diversity, equity and inclusion programs are “discriminatory”.
This edict to increase the work funded by the federal government is particularly hard in San Diego, with its distribution excluding tension of the federal funds.
The region received around $ 1 billion in subsidies from the National Institutes of Health during the year 2024, according to the online financing database of this agency. And the number is even greater with additional funding from federal charts such as National Science Foundation and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Biocom California, a group for defense of the life sciences on a state level, estimates that the multiple financing commitments of the NIH and NSF region totaled $ 2.2 billion in 2023, employing more than 178 000 people and generating $ 56 billion in total economic production.
This fundamental support was itself threatened in a separate order from the American management and budget office which interrupted around 3 billions of dollars in federal subsidies on January 27 to cancel this action two days later after a judge Federal intervened, issuing a temporary prescription order.
The fast walking of the granting freezing calmed the immediate terror of so many research projects suddenly learning that their funding had become uncertain. And a new concern appeared on Friday when the NIH published new guidelines, capping the indirect costs for the administration of grants and other operating and maintenance costs at 15%, a much lower rate than the average about 27%. And the order of I remains, forcing the researchers to comply with the requests for changes which are not yet well defined.
Reports, including one published Tuesday by the Washington Post, surfaced this week by detailing a list of verbotens words such as “Women”, “various” and “institutional” which would have been revised by the National Science Foundation in its meticulous examination Active grants and research projects.
The associated biology professor of the University of San Diego, Nicole Danos, said that she had recently received an opinion from the NSF That all researchers must cease “all non -compliant grant and allocation activities” concerning Dei. This includes A multi -year subsidy that she received in 2023 to study “the structure and function of skeletal muscle and associated connective tissues during pregnancy and lactation”.
His research proposal includes highly technical methods, such as the use of high -speed videography and electromyography – placing electrodes on the skin to detect muscle activity – in the study of rats. The hypothesis is that the hormones present during pregnancy can “improve locomotor performance” by helping muscles to improve the potential energy of muscle tissue. While two research objectives listed focus on direct experimentation, a third calls for the development of educational resources which can “identify the new areas of research on anatomy and physiology specific to women and improve the feeling of belonging to STEM students ”.
At present, Danos and thousands of her scientific colleagues in the country meet university officials who are trying to analyze exactly where the line is, what aspects of research, already funded or offered in requests From grant, are now prohibited because they study a specific sex or offer to reach out to specific demographic data.
The concern, she added, is that it seems to be an administrative process motivated by non-sciences.
“It is very worrying that the National Science Foundation examines either prices that are now subject or things that have already been submitted according to someone who is not a scientist,” said Danos.
It was shocked, she added, with the speed at which large professional organizations rubbed the content focused on the diversity of their websites.
“This affects global scientific culture, and not only if some people will be able to do their work or not,” said Danos.
The president’s decree seems to say that such activities, focused on the study of women and help students to learn, are no longer allowed, although there is currently a lot of confusion on where the light line is between Dei and research on specific sexes.
Dr. David Smith, Virologist of Translational Research and Head of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health at UC San Diego, said that he had recently spent time cleaning the mentions of inclusiveness and diversity of requests of grant he planned to submit for funding.
A large part of the targeted verbiage has been necessary, he said, to describe research on what experts call for “structural determinants of health”, external forces such as access to nutritious foods and neighborhoods safe who are shown repeatedly as being important contributors to the general well-being of a person.
In the same way, there has been a continuous effort to encourage a more diverse group of Americans to participate in clinical trials.
Currently, Smith said, the research community has not received any direction that it should lose interest in any of existing clinical trials. But it fears that the friction of any focus on the diversity of grant programs erodes progress towards more effective drugs.
“I fear that if we decide that we do not need to increase the awareness and construction of confidence in the communities, the discoveries that we make will all continue to focus on those who participate, who have Historically was white men in the United States, “said Smith. “We will miss a broader understanding of how these discoveries work for everyone.”
While many institutions are trying to respond to the requests of the decree of the Dei president, it is also clear that the interpretation of its requirements by the administration remains an open question.
Joe Panetta, emeritus president of Biocom California, has spent time in Washington, DC, this week supporting an effort to find out as much as possible on how orders for the new administration will take place in the real world. So far, he said, there are many more questions than answers.
“I think everyone is just in a state of confusion right now,” said Panetta. “They don’t know what to do, and they don’t know what to say at this stage.”
So far, he said, there has been no sign that the decrees have already blocked research.
“These are more subsidies in the future and the continuation of subsidy requests that will expire,” said Panetta. “I don’t think we are still in panic mode; We are now at a time when it’s just a little wait and see what’s going on. »»
Tim Scott, President of Biocom, said in an email on Friday afternoon: “Large and conflicting nature recently published directives affecting a wide range of agencies and federal programs stimulates uncertainty and concerns in the California innovation ecosystem. Biocom California strives to ensure that our companies and our universities continue to have access to crucial federal programs and actively communicates with high -level officials on policy changes that can have a negative impact on the ability of the Community of life sciences to conduct research and develop vital innovative drugs, diagnostics and devices. »»
California Daily Newspapers
