Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday February 14 2018, @07:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the funding++ dept.

An analysis of research papers has found that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided funding to the research of 210 new drugs that were approved from 2010 and 2016:

A new study makes a strong case for the importance of government support for basic research: Federally funded studies contributed to the science that underlies every one of the 210 new drugs approved between 2010 and 2016.

Researchers at Bentley University scoured millions of research papers for mentions of those 210 new molecular entities, or NMEs, as well as studies on their molecular targets. Then, they looked to see which of those studies had received any funding from the National Institutes of Health.

The authors say the study, published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the first to capture the full scope of public funding behind FDA-approved drugs, both directly and indirectly. They also say it points to the need for continued federal funding for basic science — which the Trump administration has previously suggested slashing.

"Knowing the scale of the investment in the basic science leading to new medicines is critical to ensuring that there is adequate funding for a robust pipeline of new cures in the future," said Dr. Fred Ledley, one of the study's authors and a Bentley University researcher who studies the intersection of science and industry.

Contribution of NIH funding to new drug approvals 2010–2016 (open, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715368115) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:53AM (1 child)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:53AM (#638080) Journal

    We really need something new comparable to NIH in funding.

    The illusion (or delusion) of a new start: because if the old is somehow flawed (especially when unbearable flawed), anything new is necessarily going to be better.

    Reality check: most of the time, the new is going to be broken as well - perhaps somehow differently broken.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @12:45PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @12:45PM (#638207)

    NIH will be like the catholic church is today. It will still exist and have a bunch of money and followers, but it's activities will not be considered to be primary.