Skip to main content

R21 Figure 4

I've not had as much blogging time as I'd like because I'm writing a grant that is due a week from Thursday. I was thinking today that I could probably get a nice quid pro quo from my audience. I've attached the current appearance of Figure 4, which is the key bit of preliminary data that will hopefully fund a grant. I'd like to ask everyone's assistance in helping me write the figure legend. (I hate writing figure legends!) Look at the figure above, and try to summarize what it's saying in one sentence (or more, if you're particularly bored). I'll pin them all together and paste them into the grant before I send it off.

Thanks for helping me out!

Comments

  1. Rachel7:05 AM

    Please keep in mind that I can't make heads or tails of this ...

    How about:

    "This lovely diagram proves my point completely. Please approve grant moneys right away. Quick, like a bunny!"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Carol11:22 AM

    Since quid pro quo means to get something for something or to get this for that, I'm assuming that this diagram actually MEANS something. However, in this case, since I haven't the slightest clue as to what the hell this is, I have to go with the fact that it means nothing without grant money to investigate it further. That being said, I can't figure out if actually knowing what it's saying would get me something, or just you, J.Michael. Gee, I hope this helps!!! LOLOLOL

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous5:21 PM

    The age at which scientists receive their first grant from the NIH has been increasing in recent decades. The number and percentage of grants awarded to younger researchers has been decreasing. While investigators under the age of 40 received over half of the competitive research awards in 1980, that age cohort received fewer than 17% of awards in 2003. As of 2002, the median age at which PhD researchers receive their first research grant was 42. Moreover, the percentage and absolute number of awards made to new investigators—regardless of age—has declined over the last several years, with new investigators receiving less
    than 4% of NIH research awards made in 2002.

    Academic biomedical researchers are therefore spending long periods of time at the beginning of their careers unable to set their own research directions or establish their independence. This has led to a fear that promising prospective scientists will choose not to pursue a career in academic biomedical research and, instead, opt for career paths that provide a greater chance for independence. This “crisis of expectation” has severe and troubling implications for the future of biomedical research in the US. I am under 40, and as you can see from Figure 4, I am a trained biologist. So, if you give me a lot of money, that will help solve the crisis that biomedical research faces.

    ReplyDelete
  4. J. Michael Andresen2:06 PM

    This is perfect! I loved "Quick, like a bunny" from Rachel. That would be nice. Carol's logical taunt of "give me money to figure out what the figure means" is also compelling. Grant's text might be a little long for a figure legend, but I so wish I could put all those alarming statistics in the cover letter. The NIH actually does realize those alarming discrepancies, and has "new investigator status" for those applying for their first grant to get a break of a few percentage points on the funding level. Sadly, this grant is a collaborative effort with someone who does not have "new" status, which means the grant doesn't get it either. Sad.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous2:30 PM

    Figure 4. QED. See above address for where to send taxed AIG bonus monies...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Can You Cross Your Toes?

Katie and I had a heated discussion the night before last. We were sitting on the couch watching Jon Stewart when she noticed a large, apparently cancerous growth sticking out of the bottom of my foot. She asked what the big lump in my sock was. "That's my toe," I responded, nonplussed. I had crossed my first and second toes, causing a lump to protrude from the bottom of my sock. Katie was quite alarmed. "You can cross your toes?" "Sure, can't you? Everyone can cross their toes!" "Of course I can't cross my toes. Who can cross their toes?" And I confirmed that Katie could not, in fact, cross her toes. Even manipulating her toes with my fingers, I could not get her toes to stay crossed. She just has very short toes. That led, of course, into a discussion of who was the freak. Were my long, crossable toes abnormal, or were her stubby, uncrossable phalanges the outliers? In case you're confused, here are some pictures. First, of my v...
37 comments
Read more

Leagalize drugs!

The Economist has a wonderful editorial this week about legalizing drugs. I wholeheartedly agree that the world will be better off by far if the United States legalized, taxed, and regulated illicit drugs such as cannabis, cocaine, and heroin. The goods that will come from legalization: 1. We will save the $40 billion the US spends trying to eliminate the supply of drugs. 2. We will save the costs involved in incarcerating so many drug offenders (as well as gain their productivity in society). 3. We will gain money through taxation on the legal drug trade. 4. Legalized drugs will be regulated, and thus purer and safer to take. 5. With all these savings, we will have lots of money to spend on treating drug addiction as a public health issue rather than as a law and order issue. We will have lots of money to fund treatment programs for addicts that are ensnared by the easier availability of drugs. 6. We will prevent tens of thousands of killings in countries that produce drugs when proc...
10 comments
Read more

2016 PROGNOSTICATION QUIZ

Entry deadline is 3:30 p.m. CST on  Saturday, January 16, 2016 . Send fifteen answers and one tie-break to jmandresen at gmail.com. Anyone with an email address is welcome to enter! 1. Freedom (January) Freedom House is an international organization that studies democracy and freedom in the world, publishing an annual report on how many countries it calculates to be free, partly free, or not free. The 2015 report calculated that 89 of the world’s 195 nations were free in 2014. Will freedom advance, stay stagnant, or retreat in this year’s report, covering 2014? Note: the nine  worst  free countries (with the highest likelihood of being downgraded) are Botswana, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guyana, India, Jamaica, Lesotho, Montenegro, and Peru. The fifteen  best  partly free countries (with the highest likelihood of being upgraded) are Albania, Bolivia, Ecuador, Georgia, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Paraguay, Philippines, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, ...
2 comments
Read more