Mar 25, 2008 8:00 AM

Flat NIH funding impacts work of young researchers

UCLA faculty members Michael Rodriguez and Isla Garraway are two different types of researchers in two very different fields. He is an associate professor of family medicine who studies the impact of ethnicity and socioeconomic status on health problems. She is an assistant professor of urology and Jonsson Cancer Center member who is working to identify markers on stem cells so they can be used in treatments for prostate cancer.

Yet when it comes to conducting research, the two have something in common: not enough money.

Specifically, it's a lack of funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that concerns young investigators like Rodriguez and Garraway. Scientists all over the country — especially the junior ones — are feeling the effects of five consecutive years of flat funding for the NIH. This has meant stiffer competition for such awards as the NIH's coveted Research Project ("R01") grants, which can help launch careers.

"Turning off the NIH funding spigot not only slows down potential medical breakthroughs, it discourages some of our finest young medical minds from pursuing careers in academic research," said Gerald S. Levey, vice chancellor of medical sciences and dean of the David Geffen School of Medicine. "While we do the best we can to provide internal support to our young scientists, nothing can replace the gold standard of NIH funding over the long haul."

The pain is especially acute for investigators like Rodriguez, whose research isn't conducted in a lab, but out in the community. With the help of two NIH grants, he and his staff identify the health-care needs of low-income and ethnic minority populations, particularly in the area of domestic violence. Rodriguez also runs a component of the "Project Export" center grant that helps train future researchers in health-care disparities among Latinos and African Americans.

Although Rodriguez received a five-year NIH grant for the domestic violence project, he finds that each year, the amount of the award gets smaller. And that has forced him to scale back his operation. "It becomes very challenging to do the work, and very challenging to publish afterward, because you may not have as robust a project," he said.

Garraway has received a five-year Physician Research Training Award from the Department of Defense, but hopes to generate enough data within the next two years to apply for an R01 grant from the NIH. Like Rodriguez, Garraway has found it necessary to obtain funding from private sources. She considers herself fortunate to have funding, but despairs over the discouraging situation many investigators find themselves in.

"I got my M.D. and Ph.D. as part of the Medical Scientist Training Program, which is funded by the NIH. The whole idea is to train physician-scientists for the future," she said. "But between finishing my Ph.D. and going back to science, it was an eight-year period. How do you come back after eight years and get funding? I've seen many people go into private practice because it becomes too overwhelming to try to go back into the lab, find funding and establish a new research program."

There are some bright spots, however. On March 10, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute announced a new program that will award $300 million to as many as 70 young biomedical scientists. And on March 11, academic leaders and researchers from around the country appeared at a hearing before the U.S. Senate Education Committee to outline the negative effects of inadequate government funds on young researchers. Among the examples they pointed to in their brochures were Garraway and Rodriguez, who remains optimistic about the future.

"I feel very fortunate that I've been able to continue to get some funding," Rodriguez said. "And I will continue to do whatever it is I need to do in order to carry on the good work."

For more information about the NIH funding shortage, visit www.brokenpipeline.org.

1