Comment on FR Doc # 2026-12725 from Molly Maloney
AnonymousOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter, a private individual, opposes the proposed guidance because they believe it allows for political interference in grant funding and bypasses the peer-review process. They argue that the changes threaten funding for critical medical research and urge for a delay in the OMB timeline to consider more public comments.
My brother is currently being treated at NIH with a rare autoimmune disorder, general autoimmune encephalopathy. For years, my parents worked endlessly finding doctors that could diagnosis him. He has been misdiagnosed several times, and it was not until he started receiving treatment at NIH that my parents and my family felt a sense of relief that he was in the right hands. For a bit over a year now, they have worked tirelessly to get a more specific diagnosis, and the right treatment plan. I am absolutely appalled and disgusted that this administration wants to cut funding to so many programs to children and people like my brother, who have been struggling or hopeless until they found NIH. Its a place where miracles happen, and section 230.340 regarding grant termination takes away that ability. Seeing grant money go under the jurisdiction of a bias political administration instead of trusted scientists, as it has been since WWII, is appalling. Section 200.205 truly is terrifying for families like my own, allowing the OMB to oppose mandatory political pre-issuance review as a bypass of peer review. Let the scientists handle science and politicians handle politics.
I urge all senators, politicians, and organizations to do everything in their power to press the OMB timeline past October 1st, in order to take into account all 80,000+ comments.