@DKThomp@VPrasadMDMPH The problem is thinking that writing grants (which is a project plan) is somehow separate from doing science. Prasad wouldn’t know because he has never had an NIH grant and his research is parasitic. You might need to improve your science follow list.
AddisCoder had a State Department grant cancelled. The weirdest part of this: AddisCoder has no, and never has had, any federal grant, from the State Dept or from anywhere else. So what got cancelled? 🤔
(They did want to give us $$ at some point, but we didn’t agree on terms.)
Seeing how the USA now hellbent on emulating their newfound ally of Russia, both at home and abroad, I find myself obliged to repost my dive into Russia's posh cities, just to give your average MAGA a glimpse into the greatness Trump is sure to bring about! Do enjoy!🧵
Fixed it for you: Two essential elements of successful NIH grant applications are 1)Study sections being able to meet and review grants and 2)Councils being able to meet and approve grants...
@JohnStreicher1 He might be taking into account fringe costs and tuition reimbursement? UCSF grad students are making 50K as of October 2024, so plus modified tuition costs and fringe, it would be about 60K.
Cutting NIH to save budget is like cutting the front lobe of brain to lose weight. It’s <1% of body weight yet it governs reasoning and problem solving functions of the brain, basically determining how smart you are. Dumb move to send IT kids to do your brain surgery, America.
This breaks my heart 💔
Some of my most successful trainees were Pitt PhDs, and I helped run the neuroscience grad program for a few years - one of the best & largest in the country
Scientific progress will halt if we stop training the next generation
https://t.co/hhHMozx4ok
@MTomasson@JohnStreicher1 I really want this thing to get better - it would be awesome to outsource some hypothesis or mechanism generation - but I am honest when I say those things are a dime a dozen. That’s absolutely not where discovery lies.
@MTomasson@JohnStreicher1 Maybe. I spent a fair bit of time prompting it but it just wasn’t even able to go in any sort of testable direction. I was hoping it would give us an alternative that we can follow if our hypothesis is wrong but nothing usable came from it.
@JohnStreicher1 I think of this as a difference between retrospective vs prospective trials. All LLMs can do at the moment is retrospective. Call me when they can do prospective.
@JohnStreicher1 A month ago, I and a client did a bunch of leg work to come up with a hypothesis that explains some strange results. We came up with something cool and they are testing it now. I fed the same results we have into LLM and it gave us nothing testable.
ok, shit’s getting real
an AI did in hours what a team of PhDs took years to find.
for the first time AI generated a novel scientific hypothesis, one that took human researchers years to figure out.
and it got it right
I actually would love it if we can feed AI a bunch of results and it spits out potential mechanisms. But hypothetical mechanisms are a f’ing dime a dozen in biology and the real work is actually data generation that either support or disprove hypotheses
NEW: The Trump administration is exploiting a loophole to keep funding frozen at the NIH - a move that some legal experts say is illegal.
Federal Register notices are blocked so no grant-review sessions can be scheduled.
All the gritty details in @Nature
https://t.co/IXctBuXhLT