Response to: "Rescuing the NIH before it is too late"
We, the directors of the 27 NIH institutes and centers, wanted to respond to the points made by Andrew Marks in his recent editorial. While we appreciate that the scientific community has concerns, the current initiatives and directions of the NIH have been developed through planning processes that...
Saved in:
Published in: | The Journal of clinical investigation Vol. 116; no. 6; pp. 1462 - 1463 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
United States
American Society for Clinical Investigation
01-06-2006
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | We, the directors of the 27 NIH institutes and centers, wanted to respond to the points made by Andrew Marks in his recent editorial. While we appreciate that the scientific community has concerns, the current initiatives and directions of the NIH have been developed through planning processes that reflect openness and continued constituency input, all aimed at assessing scientific opportunities and addressing public health needs. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | SourceType-Other Sources-1 content type line 63 ObjectType-Correspondence-1 ObjectType-Commentary-2 ObjectType-Article-3 |
ISSN: | 0021-9738 1558-8238 |
DOI: | 10.1172/JCI28894 |