Why the NIH is a broken funding system

[@laveraparato258]

I love this so much! I hope you get hired to help reform NIH. Glad your friend is confirmed!

[@LTzEz03z]

The best thing in the RFK confirmation hearing was Sen. Maggie Hassan. "Science gets things wrong, if you keep creating doubt, it can't move forward." - quote not exact.

[@mimimoon6082]

NIH is not only broken but very corrupted too.

[@benomkarababa]

This is an invaluable window into the utterly corrupt and degenerated nature of public institutions. Thank you so much for your service to the public in making this information available.

[@a.randomjack6661]

It is really hard to find one that isn't badly broken...

[@NOYFB982]

Some (large) proporation of grants should be set aside for (boring) validation work. Given some (many?) studies are designed poorly or underpowered, so much of current research will never validate, yet scientists take these same studies as foundations or branching off points for further (poorly designed, underpowered) studies. Our current scientific understanding is a house of cards. (One reason why AI trained on it will not find cures or other breakthrough discoveries).

[@haverstock]

Excellent points

[@go2therock]

Very interesting add to the conversation.

[@YouT-DJ]

Research for the sake of research? With corrupt referees... Where the hell are the clearly defined needs for research? $36 trillion and counting....

[@walterbortz355]

Have any of these NIH decision makers been taken to task on the abysmal lack of covid research performed when it was(is) desperately needed?

[@roberthowell7814]

The more shows you can be on spreading the truth the better! Get back on Megan Kelly show to give her more real information about what’s going on in healthcare.

[@a_numbers_girl7025]

Great conversation! Ben- excellent questions; all the best in your studies.

[@DangRenBo]

12:30 "They have never used science to determine if the way they are giving out billions of dollars in finding is effective." I think we xna make this statement about so many government processes.

[@KageOji77]

100% I've always wondered why so few politicians and pundits remark upon how federal dollars are never studied for efficiency, but rather a continuous, and almost aimless stream of additions to the budget of various depts. We can't keep increasing our expenses without any scrutiny into outcomes.

[@Paladin101]

I’m an old guy and my kids and grandkids know that a ‘grunt’ has weight and a positive grunt has value (to them). You get the later for this one. It’s easy to have spirit in a crowd but I like those that stand alone and you have been - good job.

[@lindseyeckert5914]

Wonderful Format really enjoyed!! ❤ ya Vinay

[@joshuastavos4376]

Small private labs should be given the opportunity to compete with big institutional labs for grants and projects especially when the projects go against Big Pharma agendas.

[@ElizabethDohertyThomas]

Love those questions and your appreciation of his questions.

[@hazell1593]

I worked on a melanoma floor at NIH. The most depressing time of my life. All this "research" with poor outcomes.....

[@99guspuppet8]

❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ billions of dollars …… what could go wrong

[@irish80122]

Professor who is funded and ends up on study sections several times a year. I gotta admit, my top pub has 360 citations. Fair point :). Overall a very fair review in my experience.

[@CharlesWilliams-sb1vt]

With regard to random lottery. The proposal has some merits. Just look at where Nobel laureate work gets published. The seminal work is usually in a mid to low tier Journal because editors and reviewers at NCS didn't see the import or impact, this is the same flaw that we see throughout science.

[@tommcfarland6008]

NIH has internal platforms it supports - it does not encourage boldness and ingenuity - redundant research dominates .

[@a.randomjack6661]

You mean corp research. They also get grants to confirm their research bias.

[@tommcfarland6008]

@@a.randomjack6661 yes that's true also

[@joshuastavos4376]

How much of Fauci’s new Georgetown University salary comes from NIH and other federal funding from our tax dollars??

[@kimfleury]

Interesting format. Enjoyed it.

[@CharlesWilliams-sb1vt]

All metrics need to be looked at in the scope of the field. 8 papers a year is phenomenal for a normal sized lab doing bench research,some fields of physics people are lucky to be one of a hundred authors on a study once every few years.

[@dolce9876]

Keep up the great work

[@jy6174]

Awesome program V

[@c.m.8776]

I am literally in love with you. All of these videos have been fire. Please marry me.

[@whatuknow4sure332]

😂😂😂😂He is cute

[@c.m.8776]

@ he really is. And he’s so smart which is the main thing 😍

[@furyofbongos]

Someone point to where in the constitution it says the federal government can have something like NIH.

[@haverstock]

20:08 THIS is the point. For all of government. But few people pay attention enough to care.

[@sheepdog03]

Well said. Such is big government

[@Photoshop729]

Growing up in the 80s and pondering the advances in medical science over my lifetime as compared to advances in computing technology I’d have to conclude it has been a disappointment.

[@silentnot4812]

The “advances” include starting cancer screening at younger ages and vastly increasing our obesity rates.

[@howardtenenbaum3537]

Once had a grant rejected that focused on genes that might regulate the mineralization of bone. We had a model system that allowed us to turn mineralization on and off. In so doing we proposed to identify genes that might be upregulated or downregulated. The lead reviewer said at the time...'there are already plenty of known genes in bone, why look for more?'. Huh? Grant rejected and then in the following years, others identified important new discoveries of genes in bone (of course). What's when I learned that insofar as reviewers are concerned, we're not dealing with the best and brightest. I learned from a former mentor/supervisor that any good research should have a reasonable chance of failure and he was right. But the agencies will only fund studies that are almost guaranteed to 'succeed' because the applicants would have included so called 'preliminary data' in the application supporting the probability that the grant would be funded. But in those cases, it's actually funded for work that HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE! The whole system needs to be thrown out.

[@erccdang]

How the "scientific community" eagerly jumped at the chance to impose censorship and forced vaccinations forever shattered my belief in our scientific institutions.

[@Kenya3131]

Vinay, any reaction to the HHS hearing and ya boi Z dogg's reaction to it?

[@irish80122]

23:00 often the grants that I see score best aren’t necessarily the best but are the ones who know how to write these grants and what things you have to say regardless of whether or not they are published in the ratings criteria. I have been successful with grants and I know a lot of it is I know what to say.

[@annettewhitlock2002]

Would love for you to interview Marty McKary who will be heading up the FDA.

[@kimfleury]

I think Zdogg interviewed Marty 5 years ago

[@kids.cats.crazy.]

He has had multiple conversations with Marty while doing shows with ZDogg.

[@elizacrafts4507]

They can study stupid shit but the definition for autism in the dsm is still based on male autism stereotypes, how autistic people being disabled inconvenience the non disabled people around them, and behavioral bs instead of what the individual is experiencing. There's also still not enough research on the connections between autism and stuff like ellers downlow syndrome, the MTHFR gene, sleep issues, etc. I'm so glad we can research pointless shit though, it's so fun (/sarcastic) Thank you for talking about institutional waste. It's so frustrating as a disabled person when our medical system spends money on useless things but can't research the things we need to.

[@lat1419]

This isn't new, in my experience in the UK it was going on the the 70s and 80s here when I was involved in applying for research grants. One grant I eventually got was in a novel field, and after being batted back and forth between two different research grant bodies eventually went to Margaret Thatcher through No 10 science advisers, who banged heads together and we eventually got the grant.

[@joshuastavos4376]

We need funding for LINE-1 studies regarding the countermeasures.

[@WalkerOne]

I watch his videos because he really makes it interesting.

[@Mjmsc]

What if it was mandatory the NIH study whether any current/new Medicare law for docs improves outcomes - at what percentage of mammo ordering do I improve outcomes. At what percentage of Pap smear ordering do I improve outcomes? (I follow ASCCP to the letter, but there is an extra button to click to say I’m doing it because apparently reading my note is too much effort for the people that care if I’m doing it and sometimes I forget). You know, like all that effort documenting beta blockers after MI …

[@coragypsatratus6157]

Medicare compelled doctors to use "electronic medical records" which are cumbersome, expensive, and randomly different from each other, even for different EPIC installations in the same town. NIH should study the cost benefit of EMR for/ against patient care

[@joymurray13]

Ty❤

[@Anastasia91000]

The books" Plague of Corruption- Restoring Faith in the promise of Science (Forward by Robert F. Kennedy Jr), and the book "Plague" by Dr. Judy Mikovits and Kent Heckenlively lay out what can transpire if the researcher comes to an inconvenient discovery.

[@David-TX59]

Why spend on research when people don't follow good health practices now.

[@sdjohnston67]

Excellent.

[@clairetimberlake5892]

I like your novel idea.

[@EricSmith9000]

I love turning subjective bias into percentiles to make them look objective.

[@microcolonel]

Modify the lottery to favor research by researchers who have had their work replicated, and proposals for close replication of highly cited work.

[@robinfallentine]

It costs money to publish your work. Big Pharma has a lot of money!

[@thatguynamedian]

Great thoughts.

[@NEILANIL1]

14:59 with Ai isn't meta research just automatic?

[@robinfallentine]

We need to know all sides and have honest dialog. Things take off as a result.

[@CharlesWilliams-sb1vt]

Just a personal Hot take here is that if enough people are doing work similar to yours that they will cite your paper 1000 times, you may not be innovative enough.

[@nbrown5907]

Will it continue to grow as we leave it in droves?

[@jalpari7117]

🙏💕✨. Omg 😳 are you wearing a hoodie?! 😮😂😘

[@ms-jl6dl]

No he's wearing Fetterman tonight.

[@gen-xboomer]

When are you going to get with RFK and give him some thoughts? Or maybe just one of the Trump kids😊

[@michelle8190]

Scientists are so weird. They can’t take criticism & they can’t see the person criticizing them are the other side of the same coin. Of all professions scientists should be the one who welcomes criticism. Science isn’t feelings.

[@hmbdata]

Hmm, how many of Vinay's publications are opinions, reviews, and simple cross-sectional analyses? Easy to publish lots of those, not so easy to publish lots of big randomize trials.

[@ms-jl6dl]

Not so easy to get grants for such trials. Topic of this discussion.

[@barbaraberwick8993]

So true

[@joshuastavos4376]

Gain of function is funded by NIH ( our taxes).

[@tallard666]

I like Vinay, I like the student's questions, and the conceptual part, but OMG that student's voice is way too irritating, as if he was trying to be Lex Friedman, who's the LEAST meritous of anyone in podcasting.

[@jeffjeff4477]

Another great video All in all its been a giant cash grab

[@weegie2818]

Hi Vinay

[@pepesmama7515]

I know Vinay isn’t a trump fan, but I would love to see him appoint Vinay as the nih disrupter!

[@rpc2210]

24:46 THIS!

[@coragypsatratus6157]

NIH is a sheltered workshop for PhD's.

[@dmitris12]

I disagree. The system is not perfect, but better than in the EU. Scientific merit significance and innovation are easy to pick. Most reviewers do care.

[@dso1017]

17:35 best wtf on the Internet

[@suhubu1]

Some of the studies that get funded are utter bs. Why should our tax $ fund some professor's pet topic?

[@DragonBane2012]

ya, drink with the lowly

[@lynnlavoy6778]

4 algo

[@drj6418]

You are always the contrarian, aren't you? Is there ANYTHING about American medicine that you approve of? You are obviously a bright and accomplished fellow and it's just a shame that all you do is complain and complain. As a retired physician, it is too bad that you don't devote your obvious intellect and talents towards being a real caring doctor and oncologist. I guess you make more money as a KZbinr rather than caring for people in need. Too bad!

[@haverstock]

I get your point and it’s valid feedback, and maybe an episode looking at the “good” parts of American medicine, esp. in comparison to other developed nations, would be informative. However, is there evidence he’s not a “real caring doctor and oncologist”? Please share. His numerous posts interrogating poor clinical study designs and marginal-to-no-benefit anti-cancer drugs indicate he cares about improving outcomes and value of care.

[@drj6418]

@@haverstock Much like fellow KZbinr Suneel Dhand, instead of trying to be constructive and reparative to our imperfect system, they are destructive medical narcissists, both of whom think they know it all, better than the rest of us. Neither come across as caring individuals and are only concerned with increasing their base and viewership to line their pockets. To each his/her own, but I have learned little from them and will likely discontinue my subscriptions.

[@matt566]

pinning this just in case you conveniently forget about saying this when shit gets 10x worse later this year

[@cdavidlake2]

Vinay isn't following the science.

[@DragonBane2012]

xtragayluvur