//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
ProfilePosts









Loading...
7/ In reality, my colleagues still inside NIH tell me that their assessments are largely ignored. Once a grant or application is picked up by the tool, they are almost never able to move the grant forward as is - regardless of the scientific justification.
Current NIH leadership want you to think they are using rigorous, consistent & scientific processes to screen studies to align them with agency priorities. But the process that they have put down on paper is a sham. It’s important to know NIH is not following its own guidance. Here’s why: 🧵1/