I couldn’t stop thinking about this. The absolute dependence of biotech and pharma on nih research (and yes it is a mutually beneficial relationship) is reason this is so fantastically shortsighted and stupid. Would be great to see pharma putting some muscle into defending IDC.

Also important to note IDC rates are also based on what percentage of research is done at a place. Mostly education and a little research? Lower IDC rate. Strictly research institute? Higher because their costs associated with research ARE higher.

I am not seeing any NOFOs or other funding info though - not sure if that was there previously or not though.

Weird. I’m able to access it all on my phone. I absolutely believe that (at minimum) the instability of these sites reflects incompetence if not malfeasance.

Surprisingly (thankfully) I can access it though maybe I am seeing something cached?

I get that. RFK is a threat to science, medicine, human health and enlightenment thinking in general. An additional unpleasant aspect of SD is that when people ask what it is the easiest answer is "the same thing RFK has". Ugh.

He's a scientist himself so for the sake of scientific innovation and his career, let's hope that NIH funding stays available! :)

At even v. low dose, he can't speak above a whisper for 3-6 weeks or more. When the voice does comes back, it is stronger but the effect lasts only a few weeks more before the dysfunction resumes. There is no good tx and SD is permanent. Losing the ability to communicate naturally is miserable.

It sounds like it hurts but it apparently does not. But talking in crowded settings, or loudly, is very hard and that strain makes the vocal quality even worse. As a professor it's a huge drag for him. Came on suddenly a few years ago. Botox is arguably helpful but not really (1/2)

Can't stand the dude but the voice is not his fault. My husband has the same condition and it's pretty miserable for him.

I always have 1 audiobook and one kindle / paper book going. By the end of the year I often forget which was which. Generally plot and overall retention is superior with audio but phrasing and text appreciation is better with written. YMMV.

The brain didn’t evolve TO read. We tap into the systems that did evolve (speaking and listening) using visual symbols to convey the same meaning through reading. So maybe we can argue the unabridged audiobook is even more “real” a medium for human comprehension. Silly arguments either way.

Coming here to look for this read exactly

It's as though because they have mastered one domain of science, they assume their intuition can supplant the scientific method in all others.