The grants are scored by a percentile rank and there is a payline. So a score of 100 or below with a payline of 80 will get funded. There is also a propensity of new researchers getting "first awards". The issue with that is, new researchers do not always have the support systems in place or the networking skills available to produce publishable bodies of work like senior researchers...

These days though, EVERYBODY is definitely NOT getting funding unless you cure a disease and you are the flavor of the month...

I KNOW THIS PROCESS ALL TO WELL!!! LOL!!! Enough reasons for leaving the field...

Oh, and the peer reviewer cores in the molecular side is VERY misogynistic, homophobic, racist, sexist and elitist.

So some top diseases will not be determined if you are in the "in crowd"--often driven by politics...

Basically, we are playing catch up to other countries who have been doing human embryonic stem cells for ~8 years now...

Great news, now is a great time to invest in Stem Cell research companies.
And for the record: We should use embryonic cells as well and I think we'll see a shift that way. The fact that Obama opposed a partial birth abortion ban as a legislator leads me to think that he'll give the green light to embryonic stem cell research.

The way the Michigan law that was passed in November reads, the only embryonic stem cells that can be used here are those that are excess embryos from invitro fertilization that will be thrown away anyway because the parents aren't going to use them. It specifies that no embryos can be created for the purpose of embryonic stem cell research, no agency can make money off of selling embryos for the purpose of stem cell research, etc. It's quite specific. From all the "vote no on 2" signs that were around, I thought for sure it was going to fail but it actually passed by a pretty good margin. I think the people against it were just much more vocal.

AKA: I'm sorry to hear it's that way for molecular. The scientists I know who sit on NIH study sections are none of those things. In fact, most of them are minorities and/or women. Perhaps my view is slanted because my institution is well developed in research and the senior investigators mentor and nurture the junior investigators to help them get going. They often tag on the junior investigator projects to their own major projects so that they can have pilot data when they apply.

IDK what it is, either my University in the department I was in, but the reviews were vicious and missed the scope of what I was trying to convey. I had zero support by my so-called mentors. I was doing R32's and school pilots (while they were not NIH directly). I even took a special grant class offered by my University, I received ZERO support. Now if I lived in DC or came from a big named school, where I original was located, like UT Southwestern, I probably would have gotten the kinds of grant funding for my research. But somehow, I was penalized to making a life-altering decision...

Interestingly, the school were I was, is going to be heavily penalized, they are losing too much money to be a Research 1 university... Dunno what's going to happen, but basically, they will be bankrupt... Kinna sad.

Anywho, folks are not going to be treated very well healthwise in this area and don't ask one major financier to bail them out...

Call it The Freeze... My former institution would have been smart to institute a collaborative research... Oh well...

But it's not the VA or NIH who are saying that we shouldn't fund stem cell research. That is a purely political dictum!

Stemcells inc. (NYSE:STEM) is up 33.5% today.

Where did you put money down on these? I would go with Stem Cell Technologies if you can... They have a more grounded company. The other one I'd support is Geron...

I didn't actually invest but I would have if I wasn't a 20 year old college student.
My fantasy stock market account for one of my classes started three days ago is up 19% over that time period though. /shameless bragging