On Consensus and Funding

While a whole lot of debate is to be raised, analyzed, and productively utilized in the context of grant funding by NIH, Dr. Düzgünes' article was a timely boost in that direction. The issues he has raised are not the unique ones that only he thinks are to be modified. Many scientists would probably agree on the matters he has highlighted. It's good to hear from professors like the author that NIH needs to look deeper into the policies. What I liked most in his thoughtful discussion i

Josna Kanungo
Jun 6, 1999

While a whole lot of debate is to be raised, analyzed, and productively utilized in the context of grant funding by NIH, Dr. Düzgünes' article was a timely boost in that direction. The issues he has raised are not the unique ones that only he thinks are to be modified. Many scientists would probably agree on the matters he has highlighted. It's good to hear from professors like the author that NIH needs to look deeper into the policies. What I liked most in his thoughtful discussion is in the last paragraph that points out the waste of 75 percent of the trained brains because of the NIH's current policies of funding. I also liked Dr. Düzgünes' discussion of what percentage of time could be saved if it were not for preparing/writing grant proposals every few years wasting God knows how many paid manhours.

Josna Kanungo, Ph.D.
Washington School of...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?