digestdot.com digestdot.com
Search:    Site Home -> About Us -> Security & Privacy -> ToS -> Add Url -> Submit Article   
Add Url
 

Property & Estate

Education & Learning

Automotive

Online & Indoor Games

Culture & Art

Jobs & Careers

Finance & Banking

Society & Communities

Eating & Drinking

Home Family & Garden

Online Shopping

Relationship & Lifestyle

Sports

Teens & Kids

Science & Research

Issues & News

Travel & Accommodation

Self Management

Entertainment

Law & Politics

Medical Care

Health & Hygiene

Internet & Computers

Business & Services

 

  Site Home » Education & Learning » Science Courses
   
 

NIH Advisory Council Meets

   
The NIH National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research was convened for its twelfth meeting on September 22, 1994, in Washington, D.C. Francis Collins, Director of the NIH National Center for Human Genome Research (NCHGR), presided. Selected highlights of the meeting follow.

Jeffrey Trent, Scientific Director of the NCHGR Division of Intramural Research, updated the council on the division's activities. The intramural division was established in 1993 to study genes that cause diseases, including cancer, and to focus on medical genetics, clinical gene-therapy research, and development of clinical diagnostic tests. Trent also reported overwhelmingly positive response to the new visiting investigator program, which allows university scientists to use NCHGR resources for 3 to 12 months [HGN 6(2), 7 (July 1994)].

The council discussed a draft mission statement calling for the DOE-NIH Working Group on Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI) to report to both the NCHGR advisory council and the DOE Health and Environmental Research Advisory Committee. Collins noted that the White House Office of Science and Technology had proposed establishing a National Bioethics Advisory Commission within the Executive Branch [Federal Register 59(155), 41584-86 (August 12, 1994)]. This advisory commission would consider bioethics issues arising from research on human biology and behavior and applications of that research.

Jane Peterson (Chief, NCHGR Mammalian Genomics Branch) presented a set of guidelines for assessing physical-mapping progress toward Human Genome Project 5-year goals. David Cox (Stanford Human Genome Center) stated that a meeting of center directors had developed reporting standards, and the goal now is to inform the scientific community about reporting mapping data in a common context. The guidelines were published in Science (September 30, 1994).

Peterson led the discussion on limiting ELSI components of NCHGR genome science and technology centers (GESTECs) to 5% of the total budget. She said some GESTEC proposals contain expanded ELSI components, which are reviewed differently from individual ELSI proposals. GESTEC reviewers do not see the full range of ELSI proposals, nor do ELSI review groups see the scientific context of education applications. Rather than establish a policy, the council recommended approaching each GESTEC review on a case-by-case basis. They requested a report on the ELSI portfolio at the January meeting, focusing particularly on education components in ELSI grants and GESTECs.

David Benton (Director, NCHGR Genome Informatics Program) described the informatics meeting of GESTEC directors at which 10 centers were represented [meeting report http://www.gdb.org/Dan/nchgr/intro.html)]. Of issues identified at the meeting, Benton reported significant action to disseminate information on software, database integration, and priority software needs. He also announced that GESTEC informatics staff would hold two meetings during the next 18 months. David Botstein (Stanford University) noted enormous progress in identifying and addressing informatics problems.

Linda Engel (NIH Office of Scientific Review) described NIH and NCHGR reinvention initiatives, including the use of triage for quick response to funding applications and summaries of reviewers' unedited comments and discussions. A proposal has been made that the scientific review office stop calculating recommended budgets, except for GESTECs with priority scores of 200 or higher. Reviewers would give overall recommendations, and applicants would provide detailed budgets at the time of award. This procedure would save time and work for reviewers, applicants, and staff.

The council reviewed 123 applications requesting $31,650,501 and recommended approval for 81 applications totaling $19,437,332.

Author: Aaron Hall
 
Author Bio:

This article can be searched using: social sciences, health colorado at denver & health sciences, 10 social sciences
 
 
 

Related Articles

 
Technology Acceptance Models
 
Audio Books ?C Rest your eyes and still read a good book.
 
Personal Statement for College: An Investment for Your Future
 
New High School Is First in Arizona Schools to Have No Textbooks
 
Plain Speaking - 4 Secrets For Getting Your Book Purchased
 
Scholarships
 
It Cannot Hurt To Learn Chinese
 
Autism Means Great Workers
 
Distance Learning
 
Directing Lightning to Enemy Combatants
 
 
 
 
 

Educational Games

Learning is made easier if it is mixed with fun and play, especially for children. Playing takes a v ... - Eddie Tobey
 

Flexible Estimation in Math

Flexibility in estimation helps students master this important math skill. Rounding rules can cause ... - Peter Waycik
 

Sinister Plots of International Terrorist Cells and Multi-Level Marketing

As soon you go to meeting you find out all the great reasons why someone needs to do their own busin ... - Lance Winslow
 
 

Distance Learning - Is It The Answer?

It seems more and more of us are gaining qualifications now with more passes than ever in the exam r ... - Mark Flanighan
 

Why Study Math? - The Circle

Analytic Geometry is a branch of mathematics that treats the relation of algebraic functions and the ... - Joe Pagano
 
 
Site Home -> Security & Privacy -> ToS
© 2006-2008 www.digestdot.com All Rights Reserved Worldwide.