Comment from Anita Autry

I am an Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and I receive NIH funding that supports fundamental research and the training of the next generation of scientists. I also serve as a reviewer for NIH research and training grants. I am writing today in response to the proposed changes to merit based review outlined in section 200.205. This section proposes to empower political appointees to override recommendations made by rigorous peer review in order to advance special interest projects based on administrative preferences of the day. This rule will hurt the advancement of the most rigorous and urgent research as evaluated by subject matter experts and put funding decisions into the hands of political appointees. This practice will introduce extreme bias into the process of NIH funding of research projects and training grants which could ultimately shrivel entire research fields or graduate/medical training programs based on the political whim of the day. Rigorous merit based peer review ensures equitable distribution of funds to the best research across fields and institutes to promote sustainable research aimed at training the next generation of scientists and improving health/lifespan of Americans through innovation. I strongly urge the OMB to preserve the integrity of peer review as it currently stands and not move forward with proposed changes allowing pre-issuance review by political appointees.