HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post

mts · 04-17-2008, 01:59 PM

Hi Jean-

I serve on a breast research panel that is sponsored by the US Congress. Every year, we review numerous breast cancer research proposals from all over the world (yes, the world !) and along with the 15 scientists that sit on the panel- try to figure out which proposals are the ones based on sound scientific merit and whether they should be considered for research funding. These scientists, while reviewing a proposal, will cumulatively provide their take on the proposal and very effectivley assess whether the proposal is viable with the suggested outcome the proposer provides. If the steps in research do not jive, they recommend changes to the proposal so that whoever proposed it can revamp and apply again... and again... Please know that if I were told that tying my boobs in a knot behind my head would be a cure I would vote to fund that ! But based off scientific merit, that concept like many proposals unfortunately just don't cut it. These people are not doctors. They are PhD's in nuclear physics, endocrinology, mechanical physics--- these are the people that teach our own doc's and onc's how to treat us. When they all sit in one room, you can palpate their desperation in trying to find a cure. I have no doubt that these people are trying their best. These are the people that in the end say where research funds go. And beleive me when I say that it is really sad when there is 220M in research available just for this group and only 10M is given out because most proposals are not based on sound research.
I firmly believe that its not the lack of funding, but the lack of more scientists ! A lot of these people end up being private practitioners and for those very few who stay in research- they specialize in the aspects of one molecule. Because a molecule is in a world of its own- research can be spent for decades researching just one !! Just look at the research done on estrogen alone... we now have tamoxifen- herceptin- arimidex- And all those drugs were based on estrogen metabolism.
The incremental, next obvious steps in breast cancer research are funded. Its the leap-frog, most "out there" types that we need more of. And those types are the ones we work on.
I am proud to say that the USA provided more bc research funding than any other nation. And if you sat on one of these panels, you would see another side of the breast cancer that's rarely seen.
Any bc patient can serve as a consumer reviewer on these panels. I have pasted info on the Congressionally Directed Breast Research Panels below as well as a review of the program itself. I would encourage anyone to participate and see first hand how breast cancer research is funded. These funds are appropriated by Congress and managed by the Dept of Defense. So, some of those dollars we see going to defense, are actually also going to bc research !!! Why do they go to the Dept of Defense? Well, because they have setup a mechanism to get the dollars out there for the leap-frog research. For the proposals that don't make it to the DOD, they apply to the NIH where the incremental, obvious next research steps are funded. I know I am not the know all of bc research, but maybe my experience can help explain a small bit of how our gov't does provide funding.
As a parting thought- As I sat eating dinner with my fellow panelists, I asked them how many true scientists working on breast cancer there were in the world... their answer was: "enough to fill up this restaurant".
We were eating in a restaurant with max seating of 75.

Maria

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309057809

http://cdmrp.army.mil/cwg/why.htm

04-17-2008, 01:59 PM	#7
mts Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Central Florida Posts: 503	Hi Jean- I serve on a breast research panel that is sponsored by the US Congress. Every year, we review numerous breast cancer research proposals from all over the world (yes, the world !) and along with the 15 scientists that sit on the panel- try to figure out which proposals are the ones based on sound scientific merit and whether they should be considered for research funding. These scientists, while reviewing a proposal, will cumulatively provide their take on the proposal and very effectivley assess whether the proposal is viable with the suggested outcome the proposer provides. If the steps in research do not jive, they recommend changes to the proposal so that whoever proposed it can revamp and apply again... and again... Please know that if I were told that tying my boobs in a knot behind my head would be a cure I would vote to fund that ! But based off scientific merit, that concept like many proposals unfortunately just don't cut it. These people are not doctors. They are PhD's in nuclear physics, endocrinology, mechanical physics--- these are the people that teach our own doc's and onc's how to treat us. When they all sit in one room, you can palpate their desperation in trying to find a cure. I have no doubt that these people are trying their best. These are the people that in the end say where research funds go. And beleive me when I say that it is really sad when there is 220M in research available just for this group and only 10M is given out because most proposals are not based on sound research. I firmly believe that its not the lack of funding, but the lack of more scientists ! A lot of these people end up being private practitioners and for those very few who stay in research- they specialize in the aspects of one molecule. Because a molecule is in a world of its own- research can be spent for decades researching just one !! Just look at the research done on estrogen alone... we now have tamoxifen- herceptin- arimidex- And all those drugs were based on estrogen metabolism. The incremental, next obvious steps in breast cancer research are funded. Its the leap-frog, most "out there" types that we need more of. And those types are the ones we work on. I am proud to say that the USA provided more bc research funding than any other nation. And if you sat on one of these panels, you would see another side of the breast cancer that's rarely seen. Any bc patient can serve as a consumer reviewer on these panels. I have pasted info on the Congressionally Directed Breast Research Panels below as well as a review of the program itself. I would encourage anyone to participate and see first hand how breast cancer research is funded. These funds are appropriated by Congress and managed by the Dept of Defense. So, some of those dollars we see going to defense, are actually also going to bc research !!! Why do they go to the Dept of Defense? Well, because they have setup a mechanism to get the dollars out there for the leap-frog research. For the proposals that don't make it to the DOD, they apply to the NIH where the incremental, obvious next research steps are funded. I know I am not the know all of bc research, but maybe my experience can help explain a small bit of how our gov't does provide funding. As a parting thought- As I sat eating dinner with my fellow panelists, I asked them how many true scientists working on breast cancer there were in the world... their answer was: "enough to fill up this restaurant". We were eating in a restaurant with max seating of 75. Maria http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309057809 http://cdmrp.army.mil/cwg/why.htm