Earmarking: Varmus/Shine testimonies

[Barbara Blake-Krebs <BarbKKFI@xxxxxxx>]

I would like to have some facts from PAN, NPF, et al regarding the following
points raised by the Varmus/Shine testimonies (brought to us, thank you, by
the faithful sleuth, Margaret Tuchman):

1. V:  "NIH has already improved its responsivenss to
disease-specific...groups"

Is data available to either prove or disprove this?

2.  V:  "...groups might...urge other actions such as NIH-sponsored
workshop...."

Isn't this coordinating function incorporated in the Udall bill for PD?

On funding decision guidelines--

1.  S:  "Emphasize research not likely to be pursued in the private sector"

Would PD research pass such a hurdle?  It strikes me that this would likely
be more rare diseases that strike fewer people and therefore would be "less
profitable"  for private researchers.

2.  S: "Examining impact of a particular research agenda on future research
opportunities"

I surmise that PD research WOULD meet this criteria

3  S:  "Examining the burden beyond mortality of a particular disease on the
US and the world's population."

Again, without repeating what has been presented before on this list, I
surmise that PD WOULD WITHOUT A DOUBT meet this criteria.


Is there a comprehensive report available on PD-related research which
breaksdown the $$$s, both private and public, spent annually say for the last
5 years?

Regards,

Barbara Blake-Krebs
BarbKKFI@xxxxxxx
to the PD think tank in cyberspace