Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

You again? No one said Hopkins would be disproportionately affected, they like every other research university will not by making this up with “medical endowment and revenue streams,” whatever that is suppose to mean.

Yeah, there seems to be a troll and/or political lobbyist poster on this thread spewing crap to justify this insane move.

This halt in funds will adversely affect research institutions like Hopkins. It also adversely affects all Americans because research is vital to health and innovation.

I'm concerned that this money will become a political pawn to benefit certain people. Musk will redirect this money to himself. Or 2025 to Liberty or red state schools. Or Trump will start his own "research " facility or appointment himself head of NIH a large Kennedy Center. Or similar insanity.

1st, attach learning, knowledge, truth, empathy and diversity. Then, enrichment self based on the fear and anger generated by spewing lies. It is dystopian.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did this thread turn into one about racism or DEI? Can we get back to the point? Which is that unless the most recent announcement is walked back due to it's ridiculousness, this is going to disastrous for scientific and medical research in our country. US will definitely no longer be a world leader in this area under these conditions. And no, it's not just going to affect the social sciences like some people seem to think. I work in research we are all stunned and find it surreal to see people celebrating Trump's decisions.

My advice is to calm down. There was a lot of bloat and wasteful research that didn't contribute much. People have illustrated examples on this thread. But you'd rather believe in a different narrative so you pretend otherwise. I also cannot jump to automatically defend higher education because I'm not wild on how certain aspects of research was utilized through higher education, to use as a controversial but increasingly likely example, NIH gave grants to various universities who in turn subbed out the grants to a certain research lab in Wuhan, either directly or indirectly via a certain entity called EcoHealth Alliance. This is indisputable and factual. And I don't doubt we will learn a lot more about this as the new administration is determined to turn over all stones and reveal everything.

As it is, we also have a $36 trillion dollar deficit that really is not sustainable either. Cuts will have to be made. Deeply and significantly. I did notice that so far the initial attacks by the new administration is effectively a class warfare against the "educated" classes of America: higher edu, legacy media, Fed agencies. But these entities were not kind to the rest of America either.

This is so on the point. I am a University professor at an A+ research univeristy and deal with both NIH and NSF. Double dipping and very high overhead is the major problem for these funding. Upper management at university keeps on coming after professors and they have to continue going after additional funding. Fat at the higher level within Universities is so bad that these positions need to go.

Double dipping is prohibited already and you know that. It’s called supplanting and any audit will catch it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bump

This thread is going to get list in the colleges area but it is a massive policy shift for biomedical research and health.

How does this benefit MAGA voters or red states? Research is expensive but compared to our national budget it is nothing. Confused, How is science and medical research partisan?

MAGAs must believe they are a superior breed of humans immune from cancer, Alzheimer’s and premier afflictions.

stop lumping all magas together. some like jd vance, elon, rfk even, and trump’s family are fairly well educated. the reality is the democrats gave a piss poor choice. kamala was an abject disaster with an inability to put forth a plan that would solve the inflationary issues or budget deficit . trump was a less bad alternative.

Trump hasn’t once mentioned anything to bring down inflation other than the weakest EO on the planet.

In fact, he specifically mentioned policies like tariffs that would increase inflation.

Also, nobody gives a shit about the budget deficit…both your arguments are just the subterfuge for providing the real reasons for voting MAGA.

in correct - he advocated for reduced government spending and a balanced budget repeatedly which would
infact lower inflation. tariffs as a policy are one cog in the complex economic system. It appears you are the one who did no research

And yet you never considered that he greatly increased the deficit during his first term, incredible.

im well aware of his first term. he made a lot of noticeable changes since including allying himself with fiscally conservative republicans and thought leaders. kamala would have been more of the same

So I don’t get it…the first two weeks have been kind of awful with inflation increasing again and the proposed tariffs absolutely increasing prices…a proposal to colonize Gaza that would be a massive increase to the deficit and in fact inject America into an endless foreign conflict…immigration raids that barely arrest anyone and they just release them back into the population….Elon running wild.

The actual budget proposed does nothing on the deficit except make it larger.

More of the same would have been just fine.

How can people seriously judge inflation in his first two weeks to him? That's insane and due to Biden's policy overhang.

Trump got almost all israel hostages to be released where as biden made significantly less progress. Trump also negotiated the ceasefire in Gaza when again Biden did absolutely nothing. I see progress.

Elon is the major area I disagree on from an execution perspective. I'd rather he be deported.

If inflation were due to Biden overhang, then inflation would have been worse in the US as compared to other countries. The fact is, the inflation is better here and the economy is better here because of Biden’s policies. If you don’t understand that basic fact, then it is hard to draw valid conclusions from the other parts of your argument.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did this thread turn into one about racism or DEI? Can we get back to the point? Which is that unless the most recent announcement is walked back due to it's ridiculousness, this is going to disastrous for scientific and medical research in our country. US will definitely no longer be a world leader in this area under these conditions. And no, it's not just going to affect the social sciences like some people seem to think. I work in research we are all stunned and find it surreal to see people celebrating Trump's decisions.

My advice is to calm down. There was a lot of bloat and wasteful research that didn't contribute much. People have illustrated examples on this thread. But you'd rather believe in a different narrative so you pretend otherwise. I also cannot jump to automatically defend higher education because I'm not wild on how certain aspects of research was utilized through higher education, to use as a controversial but increasingly likely example, NIH gave grants to various universities who in turn subbed out the grants to a certain research lab in Wuhan, either directly or indirectly via a certain entity called EcoHealth Alliance. This is indisputable and factual. And I don't doubt we will learn a lot more about this as the new administration is determined to turn over all stones and reveal everything.

As it is, we also have a $36 trillion dollar deficit that really is not sustainable either. Cuts will have to be made. Deeply and significantly. I did notice that so far the initial attacks by the new administration is effectively a class warfare against the "educated" classes of America: higher edu, legacy media, Fed agencies. But these entities were not kind to the rest of America either.

This is so on the point. I am a University professor at an A+ research univeristy and deal with both NIH and NSF. Double dipping and very high overhead is the major problem for these funding. Upper management at university keeps on coming after professors and they have to continue going after additional funding. Fat at the higher level within Universities is so bad that these positions need to go.

This is ridiculous -- US does not have a 36T deficit, you mean 32T debt, which is largely owed to us and is about 120% of GDP. Annual deficits are on the order of 1.5T. The Republicans are talking about blowing another 5-11T hole in the debt with their tax plan -- so none of this "cost cutting DOGE stuff" is in the name of fiscal responsibility. The fiction that tax cuts pay for themselves is just that. We can sustain debt loads of 120% GDP for a while, as long as we take sensible measures to both raise taxes and cut spending to reduce annual deficits and stabilize market concerns. Japan has done so in face of an aging population and stagnant growth. The US has a huge trump card -- immigration, which will keep the growth engine going. But the MAGA folks want to cut all that, which will lead us into some dark fiscal waters.

As for this overhead -- call it what it is. Every government contractor asks for overhead, which are capex. SpaceX does too. Some medical schools got a little ahead of their skis but many of the associate vice dean and other admin positions are because of all the compliance regs that NIH/NSF/DARPA/DOE all impose. Also, biomedical research has gotten expensive, while NIH direct costs have remained flat over 20 years. Something has to keep pace with inflation - so the burden gets shifted onto "overhead" which also comprise of core facilities, grant admin and all the ancillary activities that support research.

All of this is bad faith and the memo was clearly written by an ideologue with no knowledge of the research enterprise. A good way to do this would be to have the announcement after some audit and discussion about an optimal level of indirects (note that acutal indirects are 30-35% of the total award, not the 60+% claimed) and introduce it over a 3-5 year period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

It will probably make some kind of deal.

If it doesn’t, research funding will be cut something like 20 percent to 30 percent, because of a sudden cut in overhead funding, and that will cause terrible pain at Hopkins.

Obviously, once we having professors going into mass graves, that will cause more problems.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a research scientist and yes! Tell her to choose a well-funded lab to weather the storm for her PhD (HHMI funding would be ideal). We still need a pipeline of young scientists and science as a whole is not going to die, just shrink for a while. She can go to Europe or Canada if all hell really does break loose.

Thanks! We had discussed that for years and if she manages to get hers here, she will likely depart if possible, depending on how this plays out. She said there’s research showing every 3 mo delay leads to a 40% decline in numbers of scientists in 5 yrs.

Yikes. 😭

Yeah sure. People are coming up with weird stats out of nowhere. If it is so important then universities need to step in and use their endowments but why would they care about research.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did this thread turn into one about racism or DEI? Can we get back to the point? Which is that unless the most recent announcement is walked back due to it's ridiculousness, this is going to disastrous for scientific and medical research in our country. US will definitely no longer be a world leader in this area under these conditions. And no, it's not just going to affect the social sciences like some people seem to think. I work in research we are all stunned and find it surreal to see people celebrating Trump's decisions.

My advice is to calm down. There was a lot of bloat and wasteful research that didn't contribute much. People have illustrated examples on this thread. But you'd rather believe in a different narrative so you pretend otherwise. I also cannot jump to automatically defend higher education because I'm not wild on how certain aspects of research was utilized through higher education, to use as a controversial but increasingly likely example, NIH gave grants to various universities who in turn subbed out the grants to a certain research lab in Wuhan, either directly or indirectly via a certain entity called EcoHealth Alliance. This is indisputable and factual. And I don't doubt we will learn a lot more about this as the new administration is determined to turn over all stones and reveal everything.

As it is, we also have a $36 trillion dollar deficit that really is not sustainable either. Cuts will have to be made. Deeply and significantly. I did notice that so far the initial attacks by the new administration is effectively a class warfare against the "educated" classes of America: higher edu, legacy media, Fed agencies. But these entities were not kind to the rest of America either.

This is so on the point. I am a University professor at an A+ research univeristy and deal with both NIH and NSF. Double dipping and very high overhead is the major problem for these funding. Upper management at university keeps on coming after professors and they have to continue going after additional funding. Fat at the higher level within Universities is so bad that these positions need to go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

The ultra rich SLACs should muddle through.

Some kind of deal might save the public flagships.

All of the medical schools with midsize universities attached are toast. Harvard, Yale and Stanford will stumble forward, but most of the others will either have to get their goons to off Musk’s goons or face terrible pain.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

You again? No one said Hopkins would be disproportionately affected, they like every other research university will not by making this up with “medical endowment and revenue streams,” whatever that is suppose to mean.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/jhm/documents/entity-fact-sheets/jhm-fast-facts.pdf

JHU medicine comprises of a profitable business and separate extremely sizeable endowment separate from the university.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/jhm/documents/entity-fact-sheets/jhm-brief.pdf

Page 9 - JHU has $10B in annual revenues and that's from 2023.

Meant to say Hopkins medicine institutions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

You again? No one said Hopkins would be disproportionately affected, they like every other research university will not by making this up with “medical endowment and revenue streams,” whatever that is suppose to mean.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/jhm/documents/entity-fact-sheets/jhm-fast-facts.pdf

JHU medicine comprises of a profitable business and separate extremely sizeable endowment separate from the university.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/jhm/documents/entity-fact-sheets/jhm-brief.pdf

Page 9 - JHU has $10B in annual revenues and that's from 2023.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

You again? No one said Hopkins would be disproportionately affected, they like every other research university will not by making this up with “medical endowment and revenue streams,” whatever that is suppose to mean.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/jhm/documents/entity-fact-sheets/jhm-fast-facts.pdf

JHU medicine comprises of a profitable business and separate extremely sizeable endowment separate from the university.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

You again? No one said Hopkins would be disproportionately affected, they like every other research university will not by making this up with “medical endowment and revenue streams,” whatever that is suppose to mean.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

And can it, BME and several other engineering divisions are not sounding the alarm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it begins.

NIH lowers allowable indirect costs from 60% to 15%.

Seismic.

Indirect costs pay for the building maintenance, admin salaries, utilities, etc.

Johns Hopkins going to get slaughtered.

Yup. I am at Hopkins. We are in shock.

Hopkins will not get slaughtered. I doubt you are there. Internal contingency planning already underway without alarm.

Dp who works there. Absolutely not true, everyone is shocked and beyond alarmed.

They along with other universities will be impacted. See Penn and others. Stop making it sound like Hopkins will be disproportionately impacte. They have a separate medical endowment and revenue streams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bump

This thread is going to get list in the colleges area but it is a massive policy shift for biomedical research and health.

How does this benefit MAGA voters or red states? Research is expensive but compared to our national budget it is nothing. Confused, How is science and medical research partisan?

MAGAs must believe they are a superior breed of humans immune from cancer, Alzheimer’s and premier afflictions.

stop lumping all magas together. some like jd vance, elon, rfk even, and trump’s family are fairly well educated. the reality is the democrats gave a piss poor choice. kamala was an abject disaster with an inability to put forth a plan that would solve the inflationary issues or budget deficit . trump was a less bad alternative.

Harris was a way better option than Trump. Misogyny and racism won the day on Nov. 5th.

America will pay the price.

But....the price of eggs!

Yup! The 45% Hispanic population, 39% of Asians and 20% of Blacks who voted for Trump are all racist.

Who better to tell these Hispanics, Asians and Blacks what is good for them and if they are racist or not than a white woman?

MAGA doesn't have a monopoly on ignorance. Some minorities are fools too.

FAFO is coming.