[FoRK] Harvard University approves undergrad program in human regenerative biology

geege schuman geege4 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 06:55:03 PDT 2009


Incidental, but the DOD just gave up $5m for MS research. This is first-time
give. I personally know of large DOD grants for Traumatic Brain Injury
research.  I can see the interest of DOD in TBI, but MS?

It's all good.

(As it was explained to me, there's not much private money in MS research
because MS effects a relatively small number of people....)

Drawing no conclusions,
G

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Russell Turpin <russell.turpin at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:37 PM, J. Andrew Rogers
> <andrew at ceruleansystems.com> wrote:
> > Second, the states with the least religious populations in the US are in
> fact "red" states...
>
> Take a gander at this listing of the ten most and least religious states:
>
> http://www.gallup.com/poll/114022/State-States-Importance-Religion.aspx
>
> All the least religious are blue, except for Alaska (#5), and a purple
> Nevada (#9).
>
> All of the ten most religious states are red, except arguably a North
> Carolina that is becoming purplish.
>
> Yes, most liberals are religious. But they are not religious in the
> way most conservatives are religious. That divide extends to religion.
> Yes, black religiosity likely pushed California's proposition 8 over
> the bar. Yes, we are divided into a dozen recognizable political
> groupings, not two.
>
> All those complexities recognized, I think it is silly to see someone
> argue that the religious right has no influence in American politics
> or that that influence didn't extend to a stupid hiatus on the funding
> of embryonic stem-cell research.
>
> > One of the best trends of the last few decades is the relative decline of
> publicly
> > funded basic research.  Note that I said "relative", government funding
> has been
> > roughly flat over the last half century in constant dollars.  What *has*
> happened
> > is that more and more basic research is done by private foundations...
>
> I'd like to see some numbers on this. I doubt your claim. I see very
> little private funding of basic research. (There has always been a lot
> of private funding of applied research, when it starts to have a
> visible commercial potential. But basic? Not much.) An interesting
> exercise might be to go through the papers published in some science
> journal, and identify who funded the research behind them. I suspect
> basic research is still more than 95% government funded. I fully
> expect that to be the case twenty years from now, also.
>  _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>


More information about the FoRK mailing list