Is there a difference between science and magic? I would certainly say so. However, is there really a difference in our perception of doctors versus our perception of fortune-tellers? People gladly receive treatment from doctors without contemplating the logic and science behind their techniques. Despite this unawareness, modern medicine has developed as a result of the same scientific method popularized by Francis Bacon and Galileo. Yet there is a huge disconnect between how much our society relies on medicine and the extent we understand and respect (or fund) the scientists whose shoulders medical doctors perch on.
Before going further, biomedicine is the realm of scientific research in which various types of biological and physical scientists seek to understand aspects of life to gain knowledge useful to human health.
It would be one thing if the public didn't understand the value of biomedicine, but the policymakers in this country have an equal mix of disdain and bewilderment toward this science. The government is there to serve the people, yet repeatedly, science is forced to take a backseat to national defense, which we are told is the unquestionable priority.
Specifically, the National Institutes of Health are the lifeblood of biomedical research in the United States. The NIH not only houses some of the largest and most respected research facilities in the world; its external grants fund up to one-third of all research in the United States. Considering the rest of the funding comes mostly from private industry, the NIH is a major source of funding for nonindustry-based research. Most importantly, a significant amount of great leaps in medicine over the last 25 years has been either funded by or performed by scientists at the NIH.
Consistent with funding cuts for every other science-based governmental organization over the last five years, the Bush administration's 2008 budget will cut NIH funding by $250 million. As a result, current research projects will not be continued and immediate progress will be slowed. This progress is not as abstract as it may sound; it may come in areas such as new methods to visualize brain behavior in neurological disorders or insight into the genetics behind cancer.
Also, innovative proposals will not be funded in favor of proposals that guarantee results. Even more devastating is that these budget cuts will have repercussions for years to come. As money is sucked out of biomedical research, more students may be willing to take higher-paying jobs in private practice and the commercial health industries.
Medicine, as much as some want to believe, is not going to evolve without aggressive support. This means understanding and addressing it on all levels, not just politically viable ones like universal health care. Of course, universal health care is completely necessary, but it must be accompanied with an increase in science education and funding for biomedical research.
There is no end in sight to the advances that can come in the field of biomedicine. For that reason, new researchers must be groomed. The government must overcome its pattern of shortsighted domestic policies and refocus efforts on giving medical care to those in need while improving medicine at all levels.
At the core of many pressing issues in this country is neglect for science. The tragic irony of this is how much the world relies on science, especially in the form of medicine. The time has come for us to understand that the hope for an improved world can be attained through the scientific method. However, as there is so much knowledge and creativity throughout the world, it seems money is the limiting factor in scientific advancement.
Josh Levitz is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences and a science columnist for The Eagle.
