The Influence of Political Forces on Research Funding
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Influence of then occurs. A recent study found most optimistic outlook is that these Political Forces on that from the years 1983 to 2002, funds will be dispersed to individual the political effect on this process scientists or groups of scientists us- Research Funding ranged from 2.85% to 6.74%. ing the effective peer review system Robert J. Genco, DDS, PhD Clearly, this is a minor effect, and already in place at the NIH, which State University of New York at it is encouraging to know that peer is relatively insulated from the po- review is the main mechanism by litical process. Buffalo which NIH research and training Advocacy efforts for dental re- awards are made. search are carried out mainly by 2 Non–defense research carried Major, multi–year shifts in over- organizations, which interact with out in American universities is 60% all federal funding of biomedical the NIDCR: the Friends of the NID- federally funded, and most biomed- research often comes through major CR, which is a group of individuals ical research is funded through the economic crises such as the one we interested in promoting the strate- National Institutes of Health (NIH). are in now, or major advocacy ef- gic plan and other programs of the We will address the effects of politi- forts of scientists, the biomedical NIDCR to many different audienc- cal forces on the awarding of indi- industry and other groups, such as es, including legislators. The other vidual grants and the overall level patient advocacy groups working group is the National Oral Health of research funding from the NIH. closely with legislators. Two recent Advocacy Committee, which is The awarding of individual examples of this include the dou- a combined advocacy committee grants to university faculty and oth- bling of the NIH budget from 1998 of the American Association for er researchers by the NIH is based to 2003, which came about largely Dental Research and the American mainly on peer review. The process because of well–reasoned and co- Dental Education Association. The of determining the yearly national ordinated arguments from scientific primary purpose of these organi- research budget, including that of organizations such as the American zations is to increase and enhance the NIH, is complex as congres- Association for the Advancement of the efficacy of advocacy efforts on sional appropriations wind their Science, and from biomedical de- behalf of dental research and den- way through to become law. These vice and pharmaceutical companies tal education. To this end, there is a decisions are not insulated from as well as patent advocacy groups National Advocacy Network, which political influence. A recent study arguing that strong basic research is the infrastructure through which reported the effect of representation was needed for a viable health care members and advocacy coordina- on congressional or senate commit- system. tors can carry out joint advocacy tees involved in the grants obtained The most recent major change in and mobilize members of the House by the state or congressional region. federal funding for research result- and Senate to take legislative action. The process behind government ed from efforts to reverse the results Those interested in participating in appropriations involves the Appro- of the recent economic crisis by this network should contact Mon- priations Committees of the House passing the American Recovery and ette McKinnon at mckinnonm@ and Senate, the Labor, Health and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, adea.org. Advocacy organizations Human Services, Education–relat- which was signed into law by Presi- can be effective vehicles for those ed Agencies Subcommittee and the dent Obama on February 17, 2009. interested in promoting broad bio- subcommittee of the Senate Appro- The overall budget of the NIH rose medical and dental research, as can priations Committee. from $8.3 billion in fiscal year 1984 participation in the efforts of patient It all begins with a budget which to $28.7 billion in fiscal year 2008, advocacy groups. Also, local ef- is presented by the President which and in 2009–2010 will increase forts can be effective in educating NIH negotiates with the Department another $10 billion based on the legislators. A simple measure such of Health and Human Services and ARRA. The National Institute of as inviting congressmen and other the Office of Management and Bud- Dental and Craniofacial Research legislators to visit laboratories, clin- get within the Executive Office of (NIDCR) has a series of programs ics, dental or dental hygiene schools the President. The various govern- supported by the ARRA, and these is often effective to help convince ment committees mark–up the ap- can be reviewed at www.nidcr.nih. legislators on the value of our edu- propriations bill from the President, gov/Recovery/. However, these are cational and research programs to and present it to the House and Sen- temporary funds, and their func- oral and general health. ate for a vote. The allocation and tion is to support the best science disbursement of approved funding while stimulating the economy. Our Volume 83 Issue 4 Fall 2009 The Journal of Dental Hygiene 203 Building Relationships elements for the discovery phase is property and publication rights. It is from an Industry increasing. In order for these col- absolutely critical to have these ele- laboration models to be sustainable ments defined up–front because this Perspective and deliver the desired impact on has been the cause of many irresolv- J. Leslie Winston, DDS, PhD oral health, they must be flexible able conflicts. Procter & Gamble Oral Health and need proper funding from both There are a number of potential government and industry sources to strategies for building research re- Much of the interest in fostering succeed.1 The potential to develop lationships with industry. Enter into collaborations between academia common best practices is enormous these relationships with eyes wide and industry began in the 1980s, and there is great need to publish the open. There will be big issues along when the government encouraged experiences with industry–universi- the way that stall progress. In order collaboration that would foster a ty collaborations so that knowledge to survive in the current research quicker pace of innovation. While and experience may be disseminat- climate all parties need to roll up industry sought out relationships ed appropriately.2,3 their sleeves and work through it with universities earlier, it became While collaborations between with the end goal in mind. more widely accepted due to the academia and industry are encour- The most common downfall “blessing” of institutions, such as aged, there has been greater empha- when academia approaches indus- the National Institutes of Health sis on whether these kinds of collab- try regarding potential partnerships and Medical Research Council of orations have the potential to create is a lack of understanding of the Canada. University–industry col- conflict of interest that may jeopar- business which is targeted. Great laborations foster economic growth, dize the safety of study participants ideas which are not framed appro- improve standards of living and ex- and the integrity of the data.4 Esca- priately are summarily dismissed tend humanity’s intellectual reach. lating awareness is being driven by because the audience is not under- With these lofty goals a long–term the intense focus of the media on stood. Identify partners with similar relationship mindset is essential. these types of issues which cast an interests and complementary needs Industry enters into collabora- unfavorable light on many positive, – all sides need to gain from the col- tive relationships for many reasons. productive relationships. laboration. Most often it is to access a technol- Over the past 20 years, fewer than The most efficient way to build ogy and gain expertise. Leveraging a dozen dentistry–specific drugs a research relationship is to find a the credibility that an investigator have gained US Food and Drug way in. Champions are critical in brings and enabling the credential- Administration (FDA) approval. these endeavors. Interestingly, many ing of the end result with the broad- Only one area, locally delivered an- of these partnerships are forged er oral health community is highly timicrobials for periodontitis, has through informal means such as desirable. at least 3 new drug approvals and, networking during poster sessions Academia often needs expertise or sadly, none of these could readily at research conferences. capability that an industrial partner be classified as a blockbuster. This There is an increasing emphasis may provide. Industry has to oper- reality has made industry question on translational research in the den- ate efficiently to remain competitive the return on investment of the drug tal research community. The skill and deliver desirable returns on in- development route. Instead, oral set to take the great inventions in the vestment for their shareholders. The care research and development has laboratory and make them relevant introduction of process, a system to more typically been focused on to the daily care of patients is un- move towards goals efficiently, is a FDA monograph actives (fluoride likely to occur in a single individu- strength that industry cultivates in for caries) and devices such as im- al. While dental hygienist scientists order to survive. This experience plants, toothbrushes or restorative have the potential