Comment from Michael Green
Michael GreenOpposeAcademic
Summary: A clinical researcher specializing in schizophrenia opposes the proposed rule because it shifts final approval of federal research awards from scientific peer review to political appointees. The commenter argues that this change will make research less predictable and potentially compromise the United States' position in scientific discovery.
Regarding 200.205.
I am clinical researcher who has spent decades trying to improve the functioning of people with chronic schizophrenia. As drafted, the rule (200.205) would have senior political appointees give final approval to every federal research award for alignment with presidential priorities, while reducing scientific peer review to an advisory role that no longer determines what is funded. This is a monumental change, and its consequences are likely to compromise the preeminent position of the United States in scientific discovery and its application. It will certainly make our work on schizophrenia much harder and less predictable to maintain.