Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Sci. Signal., 30 June 2009
Vol. 2, Issue 77, p. eg8
[DOI: 10.1126/scisignal.277eg8]


Challenging Times

Michael B. Yaffe1,2*

1 Chief Scientific Editor of Science Signaling, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1200 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20005, USA.
2 David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Departments of Biology and Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.

Abstract: The deluge of NIH "challenge grants" massively overloaded the grant-writing skills of individual scientists and the support skills of the grants administrators. These grants now promise to strain the pool of likely reviewers. As bench scientists and grant reviewers, our primary responsibility should be to ensure that a much-needed short-term increase in NIH funding does not threaten the long-term viability of biomedical research.

* Corresponding author. E-mail: myaffe{at}

Citation: M. B. Yaffe, Challenging Times. Sci. Signal. 2, eg8 (2009).

Read the Full Text

To Advertise     Find Products

Science Signaling. ISSN 1937-9145 (online), 1945-0877 (print). Pre-2008: Science's STKE. ISSN 1525-8882