Disgusting Democrats sit instead of applauding a child.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
Oh did he?
Got a citation for that claim?

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00540-2

@Rajk999 said
On the plus side it might give Americans the incentive to find out why they have so many self-inflicted diseases, and hopefully they will realise that they dont need a whole ton of expensive research. Americans are nototious for eating rubbish food, living lazy lifestyles, getting fat and sick, then buying drugs to live on or doing ridiculously expensive surgery. Think of T ...[text shortened]... s alreay know what is the cause of cancer, and it can in 90% of the cases, be stopped at the source.

I would agree with your statement if that was the argument that Trump's administration was making.

Imagine trump parading a kid with cancer to the state of the union, pointing at him and saying "we froze funds for researching treatments to cure your illness, but on the bright side your classmates may think twice about getting themselves diagnosed with cancer."

Would Republicans stand and cheer?

@wildgrass said
I would agree with your statement if that was the argument that Trump's administration was making.

Imagine trump parading a kid with cancer to the state of the union, pointing at him and saying "we froze funds for researching treatments to cure your illness, but on the bright side your classmates may think twice about getting themselves diagnosed with cancer."

Would Republicans stand and cheer?

Wasn’t this in the 1400 page bill that included raises for congress and more, with a stand alone bill passed by the house and killed by Schumer?

@wildgrass said
I would agree with your statement if that was the argument that Trump's administration was making.

Imagine trump parading a kid with cancer to the state of the union, pointing at him and saying "we froze funds for researching treatments to cure your illness, but on the bright side your classmates may think twice about getting themselves diagnosed with cancer."

Would Republicans stand and cheer?

Well the parading part is stupid and childish... no argument .

@wildgrass said
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00540-2

The NIH is guilty of some quite serious corruptions allegations. It is therefore to do a review of the practices in that organisation. Here is what Perplexity says :

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has faced several allegations and instances of corruption and misconduct over the years. Here are some key issues:

Ethics Failures and Conflicts of Interest:
Payments from Pharmaceutical Companies: There have been cases where NIH scientists accepted payments from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, leading to concerns about conflicts of interest and ethics violations. This has been described as one of the worst scandals in NIH history1.

Undisclosed Royalty Payments: Over 2,400 NIH scientists have received substantial royalty payments, totaling $325 million over the past decade, which were not fully disclosed. This lack of transparency has raised concerns about cronyism and potential conflicts of interest3.

Misuse of Funds and Grant Fraud:
Grant Misuse: There have been instances of researchers improperly charging or overcharging the NIH for grant activities, leading to significant financial losses. For example, Harvard University and Scripps Research Institute had to refund millions of dollars due to such practices2.

Allegations of Fraud: The NIH has faced allegations of grant fraud, including embezzlement and theft of funds. Between 2013 and 2022, there were over 200 allegations of grant fraud2.

Cronyism and Lack of Transparency:
Cronyism: The NIH has been criticized for a culture of cronyism, where bureaucrats may benefit from relationships with major corporations, potentially undermining the integrity of regulatory processes3.

Lack of Transparency: Efforts to uncover details about royalty payments and other financial arrangements have been met with resistance, further eroding public trust3.

In summary, the NIH has faced issues related to ethics violations, conflicts of interest, misuse of funds, and a lack of transparency, which have contributed to concerns about corruption within the organization.

@wildgrass said
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00540-2

It's a temporary freeze until they look at what kind of ridiculous studies are going on, like the trans lgbtbbq stuff. So what?

@Rajk999 said
The NIH is guilty of some quite serious corruptions allegations. It is therefore to do a review of the practices in that organisation. Here is what Perplexity says :

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has faced several allegations and instances of corruption and misconduct over the years. Here are some key issues:

Ethics Failures and Conflicts of Interest:
Pa ...[text shortened]... ck of transparency, which have contributed to concerns about corruption within the organization.

Royalty income is given to researchers for patented inventions that go on to create new drugs, devices, treatments etc. The more the better in my book.

There is a legal cap per person for this if you work directly for the NIH (intramural) that seems reasonable. And yes, of course ethics violations happen, should be looked into and taken very seriously. Thats not a substantive reason whatsoever to halt funding.

Important to note that most of the NIH budget is distributed extramurally to labs all over the country. The royalties there would depend on the institute that researcher works for.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
It's a temporary freeze until they look at what kind of ridiculous studies are going on, like the trans lgbtbbq stuff. So what?

Oh, so you admit they froze funds?

Transgenic and transgender are completely different things. Trump can't tell.

@Indonesia-Phil said
I think this is a matter of perception, beauty, as it were, being in the eye of the beholder. A Democrat might say that Mister Trump is the ugliest person in Christendom, and that even if all other Republicans were the epitome of masculine and feminine beauty, on average the Republicans would still be uglier.

Ugly on the inside is the worst kind of ugly.

@my-king-and-i removed their quoted post

There's one born every minute.

And they all work at Fox News.

Oh, no, wait, one of them is now Sec. of Defense (God save us all).

@Suzianne said
Ugly on the inside is the worst kind of ugly.

Quite so.

@Indonesia-Phil said
I have nothing to win or lose, I was merely making a point. Politics in any case isn't a beauty contest, beauty and ugliness come in many forms.

Yeah, but the Dems are ugly on the inside too. They are just evil hate-filled people.

@Cliff-Mashburn said
Yeah, but the Dems are ugly on the inside too. They are just evil hate-filled people.

Do you think trumps people know the difference between transgenic and transgender?

@Cliff-Mashburn said
Yeah, but the Dems are ugly on the inside too. They are just evil hate-filled people.

Yes. Only we Independents are pure at heart. Only WE can lift Thor's hammer. Only WE can sit in Seat Perilous. Only WE can find the Grail! 😆

@wildgrass said
Do you think trumps people know the difference between transgenic and transgender?

I'm not familiar with the term transgenic. Did you make it up?