Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

question everything

(47,517 posts)
Fri Oct 26, 2012, 11:39 AM Oct 2012

Scientists Quit Texas Cancer Institute in Flap

AUSTIN, Texas—Thirty-three scientists resigned from a state-funded cancer research institute this month, with some publicly complaining that political appointees were trying to improperly influence how its money was doled out.

(snip)

Known as CPRIT and financed with public bonds, the institute has disbursed $755 million in cancer funding over the last three years—second in the U.S. only to the National Institutes of Health. Lance Armstrong, the now-disgraced cyclist, cancer survivor and Austin resident, had campaigned across the state to persuade voters to pass the ballot proposition that created it. But the institute has been battered by infighting between the panel of scientists who provide advice on research-grant requests—which numbered 140 before the 33 resigned—and its oversight committee, which includes laypeople appointed by state political leaders.

Some of the departing scientists—who include Nobel laureates Phillip A. Sharp and Alfred Gilman, who had been the institute's chief scientific officer—said in resignation letters and interviews with The Wall Street Journal that they were protesting a willingness by the oversight committee to fund commercial projects aimed at developing new cancer therapies, regardless of whether the projects had been thoroughly vetted by the scientists.

The dispute reflects a larger debate in the cancer-research world between groups who want to focus on scientific research to answer basic questions about the disease, and those who favor investment in commercial projects such as drug companies that can bring products quickly to market.

More..

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203937004578079033293231440.html

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scientists Quit Texas Cancer Institute in Flap (Original Post) question everything Oct 2012 OP
K&R patrice Oct 2012 #1
I assume this is because of the overwhelming majority of republcans in Texas sadbear Oct 2012 #2
I am sorry. I thought this was availble as a freebie question everything Oct 2012 #3
So it is because of anti-science republican appointees? sadbear Oct 2012 #4
It did not say question everything Oct 2012 #7
k&r HappyMe Oct 2012 #5
Copy the title into Google to get a link where you can read the article for free jsr Oct 2012 #6

sadbear

(4,340 posts)
2. I assume this is because of the overwhelming majority of republcans in Texas
Fri Oct 26, 2012, 11:43 AM
Oct 2012

but I don't subscribe to WSJ, so I can't read the rest of the article.

question everything

(47,517 posts)
3. I am sorry. I thought this was availble as a freebie
Fri Oct 26, 2012, 11:53 AM
Oct 2012

as a "trial" subscription. At least, I opened it from google news.

sadbear

(4,340 posts)
4. So it is because of anti-science republican appointees?
Fri Oct 26, 2012, 11:56 AM
Oct 2012

I really don't need to read the rest of the article. I'm pretty sure I know how it went down.

question everything

(47,517 posts)
7. It did not say
Fri Oct 26, 2012, 12:32 PM
Oct 2012

only that some of the criticism was favoritism toward the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

Perhaps Texan DUers can shed more light.

Here is also a story from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/texas-embattled-3b-cancer-fighting-agency-out-to-repair-image-this-week-after-bruising-year/2012/10/24/40dd7218-1dab-11e2-8817-41b9a7aaabc7_story.html

The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas opened its annual meeting under a cloud of scrutiny brought by the mass resignation of nearly three dozen scientists, some of whom criticized the fund for “hucksterism” and “suspicion of favoritism” on their way out the door.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Scientists Quit Texas Can...