On E. coli, super soil bacteria, and Hank Williams Jr.

Early this week, grant application; yesterday and today, IRB and IACUC for another project. But once again, fellow Sbers are keeping me busy reading about stories I'd like to be writing on; see yet again Mike on E. coli O157:H7--everything old is new again; Ed on a new study showing yet again how amazing bacteria are; and DrugMonkey discussing heroin addiction as a family legacy, and notes that this sad story again shows that Narcan saves lives.

More like this

So, today apparently is "blog about diarrhea" day. Hope no one's eating lunch. (One of the upsides of being a microbiologist is that we can talk about blood and gore and bodily fluids while we eat and no one gets grossed out. Or, perhaps, that's a downside. Anyway, I digress...) Two still…
Via new acquaintance Tom Levinson of the Inverse Square blog comes an all-too-familiar story of our "compassionate conservative" administration putting their own morality above proven public health programs: Fact 1: public health officials around the country...are distributing rescue kits […
That's certainly the claim in a new New York Times editorial (via The Frontal Cortex). The author, Nina Planck (author of Real Foods: What to Eat and Why), claims that it's as easy as just feeding cattle grass, and poof!--E. coli O157 will vanish. More on this and why organic farming won't…
. . .that's the message from Dr Bertha Madras, deputy director of the White House Office on National Drug Control Policy, to heroin and morphine users whose lives might be saved in the overdose situation by public distribution of "overdose rescue kits" comprised of a $9.50 nasal spray containing…

I must say, turning in a grant AND being engaged in other activities seems very impressive to me at the moment... I'm struggling with just completing a grant, but that alone provides more empathy than I can contain: Woot! Congratulations on getting the grant in!

Today I submitted mine to the officials living in the second circle of administratia... time will tell if it is passed to the third.

-Peter

Why do grants have to be a load of paperwork.I wih they had a simpler online process which would shoot grant request to both private and governmental sources

Sandy,
Unfortunately, everyone (private and government) wants something different in the application. For instance, because by law, every grant sent to NIH must undergo peer review they have to be complete as submitted. Private Foundations have the luxury of asking for 1-2 page outlines that can then be reviewed in house with invitations for full applications requested for the select few.

Also, by law NIH has to consider the standard five review criteria for applications. Private foundations do not have that limitation either.

Why do we have these, and many other, laws governing how NIH works? Ask the PIs who complained to congress 20-30 years ago for just these changes.

On the plus side all of the Federal Government grant submissions are supposed to use Grants.gov, eventually. One stop shopping for $$$.

D