Comment from Mira Swartzlander
Mira SwartzlanderOpposeAcademic
Summary: A PhD student in a neuroscience program opposes the proposed regulation, arguing that it would unfairly restrict funding for research on understudied and vulnerable populations, such as post-menopausal women. The commenter contends that the policy would create gaps in public health understanding, potentially violate federal law, and hinder the development of life-saving treatments for dementia.
As a PhD student training in one of the nation's top Neuroscience programs, I am certain that the prioritization of politics over scientific expertise in the Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance rule would be devastating for myself and the entire scientific community. My research aims to identify the biological mechanisms leading to dementia among the populations who are most vulnerable to the disease--specifically post-menopausal individuals. In doing so, the neuroscience community can more effectively target what makes an individual susceptible to dementia in order to create better treatments for all patients suffering from the disease. Despite the fact that my research would lead to the ability to develop more targeted treatment for all individuals who might suffer from dementia, my funding would likely be denied due to focusing on a population that is most likely to lead us to those critical discoveries.
The Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance proposal aims to limit research on populations that are already critically understudied. This would create critical gaps in our public health and scientific understanding of disease mechanisms. Research on these populations are not only more effective in targeting public health risks, but research on specific populations that are most vulnerable to a disease are more likely to uncover clues that lead to cures.
Furthermore, because the Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance proposal would lead to rejection of grants that focus on protected classes such as race, gender, sex, orientation, etc. this policy is likely to violate federal law. Leading to costly legal battles that syphon even more money from taxpayers that could have gone towards this life-saving research in the first place.
If the Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance policy were to be adopted, my research funding would likely be rejected, not based on the rigor of my work or the feasibility of my proposal, but because I study a population that this administration has deemed dispensable. I don't deserve that, post-menopausal women+ don't deserve that, dementia patients don't deserve that, taxpayers who expect their contributions to fund scientific progress don't deserve that. Our country doesn't deserve that.