Why science matters in the campaign


Dr. Art Hunt at The RNA Underworld explains why Obama’s plan to double NIH research funding is a good idea.

Big bang for the buck:  Hunt’s analysis suggests doubling the research budgets might drive as much as a trillion dollar increase in our economy. Sure it’s optimistic — but read what he says.  And then consider:  Which platform offers the greatest hope of cures or treatments for cancers?  Which platform offers the best hope for a cure or treatments for Alzheimer’s disease?

The two industries I mention here – pharma and biotech – are intimately interwoven with the basic biomedical research enterprise, and a significant amount of the innovation that drives these industries originates (or originated) in the NIH-funded biomedical research laboratory. In this respect, the NIH budget is an investment, and a wildly-successful one. Even if we don’t take the face-value numbers I have pulled from Wiki here (that show an annual return of some 1000%, and more than 750,000 high-paying jobs the tax receipts from which would probably pay much of the NIH tab by themselves), and instead factor in that some of these receipts and jobs are not American, it is still easy to see that basic biomedical research returns considerably more than the investment made by the government. (And this doesn’t begin to weigh the intangibles, the ways that the research enterprise gives back to society as a whole.)

Science bloggers have been not so noisy as this issue might need:  The closest John McCain came to supporting science, the driver of our economy, was when he offered to assault education, and that’s the opposite of supporting science. Obama’s mentions are encouraging, but not frequent enough nor strident enough.

Think of just three of the issues that are affected by basic science research, that will be yelled about during the campaign:

The silence on science should make us very, very concerned.

Have you read Obama’s response to the 14 big questions on science policy?  McCain has not answered.

Other reading:

One Response to Why science matters in the campaign

  1. […] Why science matters in the campaign By Ed Darrell Science bloggers have been not so noisy as this issue might need: The closest John McCain came to supporting science, the driver of our economy, was when he offered to assault education, and that’s the opposite of supporting science. … Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub – https://timpanogos.wordpress.com […]

    Like

Please play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes. While your e-mail will not show with comments, note that it is our policy not to allow false e-mail addresses. Comments with non-working e-mail addresses may be deleted.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: