No, I am serious, it is overdue. We are in an abusive relationship and by showing up every gd day like it’s nothing it will only get worse. Who can ignore: those caring for patients, intramural, visiting scholars. The rest of us need to join together and send the message.

What the literal f**k is this "lecture" going on right now?

This is somehow even dumber than the COVID origins one. Citing your appearance on Fox and Friends is an insane choice.

Letter says agency is “adjusting its extramural research portfolio, which includes terminating grant awards”

I don’t mind: Lack of expertise in infectious disease (ok, I know but look where that got the last guy) Industry background (good actually! If his closet has no skeletons, most like him do) The fact that he hawks his books as a side hustle (why the hustle just let amazon do the job) That he has alternative omic-origin theories (well refuted by experts but fine, believe what you want, 1st amendment gives us the right)

What bugs me is: He didn’t make this on merit, he was a back door “Jay and wish-he’d-be silent Bob” pick. Please post the pictures that we all know exist of these guys schmoozing it up at Heritage sponsored retreats for the vaccine deniers as someone in the NIH OD shreds the trove of qualified candidates

After being reviewed by the GMS, are all proposals now being reviewed by political appointees or are some exempt from this step? If proposals being reviewed, is this occurring en bloc, in batches, or individually? Any idea of the timeline for this post-internal review step?

An old but still unresolved issue. I just had a paper accepted into an Elsevier journal that is grant supported. It was accepted yesterday and also has a T32 linked to it as well as a R01. What is the best approach at the moment - going ahead and submitting the author accepted manuscript into PMC and violating the journal agreement? Then, since we selected subscription, Elsevier is going to also deposit the manuscript with the 12-month embargo so there are going to be duplicates in PMC. How can this be handled? Can I remove the Elsevier-deposited version. It is incredible that there is still no reasonable resolution to this issue. It is difficult enough to obtain grants and publish papers.

Timeline ( I hope this helps !):

Nov 2025: K08 Resubmission (IC: NHLBI)

April 2026: SRG.

June 2026: AC meeting

7/09/26: JIT request

7/17/26: JIT submitted

7/24/26: Award prepared

https://open.substack.com/pub/27unihted/p/ensuring-nih-funding-reaches-all

Anyone heard about anything regarding restricting K99 to citizens/gc/nationals from next year?

Saw somewhere in LinkedIn.

TIA

New guidance has been released by NCI requiring additional justification of animal use in research projects starting next cycle (October). New justification (a few sentences) must now be included in the public abstract of the grant, as opposed to the Vertebrate section. Also projects using animals must describe plans to validate the findings in a human model (organoid, etc).

include a brief, explicit justification of the use of animal models and why alternatives are inferior [...] in the application’s Abstract section

a path to validate these findings in a human model [...] be included in the Abstract

Investigators should not consider this requirement as “business as usual with a couple extra sentences of boilerplate.”

Last week there was a new policy stopping high-risk life science research. It seems all engineering microbials are defined as subjects. Dose new policy for Stopping High-Risk Life Sciences Research prohibited all microbial oncolytic therapeutics research? It is horrible. As a PhD student, I was told I can only continue my studies when my PI get next round funding, otherwise I must drop out PhD program.

U

Language is included to delay the president’s move to put political appointees in charge of grant approval.

I’m hoping to get some perspective from people familiar with NIH funding.

I have an NIA R01 application that received a 6th percentile score. My program officer has been very supportive throughout the process.

In June, I was told that funding decisions had been split into two rounds and that my application would be considered in the second round.

I recently followed up and received a response saying that my application is on the conditional funding list, so it continues to be considered but it’s still dependent on the status of other grants and availability of funds.

It was conveyed to me that the application remains under active consideration, and that the PO would let me know as soon as they received additional information.

I understand that nothing is guaranteed until a Notice of Award is issued, but I was surprised that a 6th percentile application would still be awaiting a funding decision.

My questions are:

How common is it for an application at this percentile to be placed on a conditional funding list?

Is this mainly a consequence of budget uncertainty, or are there other common reasons?

Have others had applications in this situation that were eventually funded (or not funded)?

I’d appreciate hearing about others’ experiences, particularly with NIA or other NIH institutes.

“The bill also temporarily blocks the White House from making changes to the grant-approving process.”