| OCR Text |
Show 1 ! 1 Reduction of Funds Could Be Bad For Science. Utah Researcher Says "There has been a relatively recent 90 percent drop in the number of medical doctors going into biomedical research," according to Dr. Donald F. Summers, professor and chairman of the Department of Cellular, Viral and Molecular Biology at the University . of Utah School of Medicine; "This trend is alarming. If it is to be reversed and if talented, young scientists are to be attracted to research, America's biomedical research community must receive a predictable level of public financial support," Dr. Summers said. "We can expect an exponential increase in pragmatic results from the research of the past few years if research funding is stabilized. "How can we turn young people on to biomedical research when we can't assure them that they won't be 'unemployed' in four years?" Dr. Summers asked. "The present political ground swell for tax reduction could be an absolute disaster for science. The uncertainty it is creating in research careers is causing the interest of today's bright, young people to plummet," he said. "Academic training programs already have been cut. Research support also has been cut adding to the dismal picture. "The biosciences save billions of dollars each year through disease control, not to speak of the improvement of the quality of life itself," Dr. Summers said. "But this is not recognized in the levels of support. "Biomedidne is ex- ploding in the '80's like physics did In the '40's, the war years, but the funding isn't available in like manner," according to Dr. Summers. "Scientific research and high quality higher education are national resources unique to U.S. society. They cannot be manipulated like highway and water projects. "Good health and good education in this wealthy country are rights each citizen should demand. If we let these resources slip now, it will take years to retrieve them at tremendous expense. Our foremost national resource is not oil or minerals or profits. It is our unequaled system of higher education and our talented, capable young people who should be free to choose creative careers. "The public must decide whether or not to support the present level of excellence," Dr. Summers said. "Government has not developed a plan to provide steady funding for biomedical research and education. The scientific community has no lobbyists in Washington (and they shouldn't) and every state legislator thinks he knows what's best. The result often is very shortsighted and damaging," Dr. Summer said. "Funding for biomedical research, for medical care for everyone and for medical education should be controlled by a national advisory panel consisting of leaders in the various scientific fields. They could determine the nation's research and medical education needs and then tell the public, i.e., Congress, what it will cost," Dr. Summers said. "Young people are not going on to higher education and then into biomedical research because they can make better, more Stable living's in business," Dr. Summers said. "There has to be stability, a sense of dedicated excitement, a sense of direction in government employment, ! and that's what we medical researchers are, government employees. It simply doesn't exist now," Dr. Summers said. "If a steady source of public funds were provided under the direction of the proposed national academy of scientists, young' people could be lured Into research by the excitement, the challenges and the ego satisfaction. Most scientific researchers are highly dedicated, incredibly happy; but the constant political hassle about funding really detracts," Dr. Summers said. "Through their recent support for tax cuts curtailing research and education, the voters of America are saying that our young people are not a national resource to be nourished," Dr. Summers said. "We have plenty of money in this country, we just have our priorities wrong. The public says their bread and utilities cost more so we must cut expenses somewhere. The first thing that seems easy to cut is taxes, not realizing that those taxes pay for research and education," Dr. Summers said. "A constant source of funding for biomedical research probably is not going to happen unless we change our priorities. We'll continue to have ups and downs, good times and bad and continue telling our bright, young researchers to seek their livelihoods elsewhere," Dr. Summers said. "There isn't a single faculty member in my department at the Utah medical school who couldn't leave tomorrow and Increase his or her income. A research career promises an exciting future, yet, all too often discussions begin with cutting the budget," Dr. Summer said. "Bright young researchers don't want that kind of career uncertainty." "Federal and state budget cuts are cutting educational opportunity which impacts most heavily on the lower economic classes. Those who can afford to come to medical school will, while those who may be marginally able, simply won't," Dr. Summers said. "The constitution says we should have free education in America and we have free education up to the university level. But why not say we have freely available education without limits open to every kid so that they can reach their potential regardless of financial li mitations? They could be required to give national service in return. This could be of particular use in the case of medical education which is so very expensive. "When a person graduates from medical school, he has an obligation to society because medical education is sub sidized by all of us, the taxpayers," according to Dr. Summers. "1 favor a form of national health care in which medical school I graduates would serve in i a public health-care sys-tem in rural or under- I privileged areas as part i of repaying society for 1 subsidizing the education they received. Other countries do it and it has been successful. HI |
