More federal research money after years of flat funding?

Let's hope so.

Researchers say they've had plenty of practice with hard times. With the lid firmly on NIH funding, five long years of static cash flow [1] has steadily eaten away at research budgets.

Obama's picks for top science advisers, though, may help change that grim trend. Genetics researcher Eric Lander and Nobel Prize-winning cancer research Harold Varmus--two top science advisers to the new administration--have lobbied long and hard for new federal dollars. They're unlikely to change positions now that they have the ear of the president. And this new president, love him or hate him, has certainly indicated his support for more funding.

For more than a year now, I've been writing a weekly profile on emerging biotech companies [2]. Time after time I've traced their drug programs back to an academic project at a U.S. university. Early research efforts have opened a host of new fields in drug discovery and are at the center of the drive toward personalized therapies. As the government becomes more interested in accelerating that trend, our money will be well spent putting an increasing number of researchers to work. In turn, they will help spawn the next generation of up-and-coming developers, the lifeblood of a growth industry like biotechnology.

Related Articles:
New NIH chief faces some big challenges [3]
NSF crunches the (eroding) numbers on academic R&D [4]
Dwindling NIH funds triggers research "crisis" [1]
Report warns of consequences of flat NIH funding [5]