The hottest Biomedical Research Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top Health & Wellness Topics

Science Has a Major Fraud Problem

Common Sense with Bari Weiss ā€¢ 2323 implied HN points ā€¢ 10 Mar 26
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. Fraudulent and manipulated data happen in science, and even high-profile papers and labs can be wrong or dishonest.
  2. Online forums and independent sleuthsā€”including students and journalistsā€”are playing a big role in finding and exposing bad science that institutions missed.
  3. Academic incentives and prestige often protect powerful researchers and can punish those who insist on honest, rigorous work, making it harder to fix the problem.

Why we need to reform the IRB review process and how we propose to do it

Heterodox STEM ā€¢ 142 implied HN points ā€¢ 18 Mar 26
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. IRBs have drifted from their core job of assessing participant risk and now too often overregulate, police intellectual content, and block or delay valid research.
  2. The Mudd Code lays out concrete reformsā€”more transparency, stronger fidelity to Belmont principles, and a renewed focus on balancing risk and benefit instead of trying to eliminate risk entirely.
  3. Momentum is building for change: professional groups and institutions are engaging with the Mudd Code and investigators are encouraged to read it and discuss these reforms with their IRBs.

The Office of Research Integrity Should Investigate Nature Medicineā€™s Corrupt ā€œProximal Originsā€ Paper

The DisInformation Chronicle ā€¢ 365 implied HN points ā€¢ 13 Jan 26
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. House investigators and public emails show Jeremy Farrar helped organize and lead drafting of the Proximal Origins paper but was not listed or acknowledged, which the piece frames as ghostwriting that meets federal plagiarism criteria.
  2. Because the paper disclosed NIH funding, the Office of Research Integrity has legal authority to investigate it for fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism.
  3. ORI currently relies on Scripps, Tulane, and other institutions to investigate themselves, and the article argues that if those institutional reports ignore the public evidence, it would indicate the ORI system is broken and needs reform.

Effects of Delays and Chaos in Science Funding

Heterodox STEM ā€¢ 64 implied HN points ā€¢ 15 Feb 26
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. Sudden federal funding cuts, freezes, and delays have created chaos and uncertainty for medical research, forcing project pauses and at least some layoffs and undermining the ability to plan long-term.
  2. Policy shifts like multi-year grants, caps on indirect costs, and heightened political scrutiny (including around DEI) will change how research dollars are allocated and could leave many investigatorsā€”especially early-career and international traineesā€”without support.
  3. Trust in the funding system has been damaged, so rebuilding stable support will require clearer public communication and political action, since there is no alternative funder on NIH's scale to sustain basic biomedical research.

A Reality-Based View of Government Funding of Science

The Good Science Project ā€¢ 55 implied HN points ā€¢ 18 Feb 26
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. There is a tension between official grant rules and everyday practice: policies can require prior approval for scope changes, but in practice researchers often shift aims as discoveries arise and report those changes in annual progress reports.
  2. Peer review at large agencies tends to favor safer, well-supported proposals, yet agencies also run small high-risk, high-reward programs that have worked; the debate is how much of the overall portfolio should be devoted to those bolder bets.
  3. Private funders behave differently from government: venture capital favors short- to medium-term, marketable projects and foundations have narrow scopes and limited funds, so long, uncertain basic research often still relies on government support.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Coming at 3 p.m.: I talk live to Jim Haslam, who has investigated Covid's origins for years, about Ralph Baric, Tony Fauci, and the Rocky Mountain National Lab

Unreported Truths ā€¢ 11 implied HN points ā€¢ 13 Mar 26
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. Thereā€™s a live interview with investigator Jim Haslam about COVID origins that will discuss Ralph Baric, Tony Fauci, and the Rocky Mountain National Lab.
  2. Haslam is presenting a theory that relies on previously unseen evidence about Baric, and that theory is being aired so it can be examined and scrutinized.
  3. This session is part of an effort to run more live podcasts after a recent successful episode, and viewers are invited to join at 3 p.m. Eastern (2 p.m. Central, noon Pacific).

Understanding and Modeling NIH Research Grant Success Rates and the Impact of ā€œMultiyear Fundingā€

The Good Science Project ā€¢ 52 implied HN points ā€¢ 30 Jan 26
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. NIH grant success rates follow predictably from inflation-adjusted appropriations, the number of applications, and the pool of already-committed outyear funds, and a model that includes those factors matches historical success rates well.
  2. Funding more years up front (multiyear funding) ties up larger shares of each yearā€™s appropriation and therefore reduces how many new and competing grants can be awarded; the recent increase in multiyear funding could mean roughly 1,000 (ā‰ˆ10%) fewer new/competing grants in FY2026 unless appropriations are increased.
  3. The push for much greater multiyear funding fits with broader proposals to reshape NIH funding (for example, block grants to states) and has coincided with major leadership turnover, raising concerns the changes may be driven by policy aims rather than scientific priorities.

Update on Metascience-Related Language in the NIH Budget

The Good Science Project ā€¢ 59 implied HN points ā€¢ 24 Jan 26
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. Lawmakers barred NIH and other agencies from changing how negotiated indirect cost rates are calculated or pursuing rulemaking to alter the 2017 approach, while asking agencies to discuss transparency improvements and consider models like FAIR.
  2. The bill encourages expanding person-focused grants (like R35/MIRA) and boosting support for early-career researchers, but it rejected a House proposal for $100M in replication funding and only asks NIH to encourage and brief the committee on replication efforts.
  3. Committees directed NIH to tackle high article-processing charges, promote alternatives to animal research, allow international subawards for clinical trials, and reduce administrative burden, while saying any major NIH restructuring must follow statutory notice rules.

Orbital Biolabs: Unleashing Cosmic Potential for Earth's Scientific Progress

Space Ambition ā€¢ 199 implied HN points ā€¢ 26 May 23
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. Space labs help scientists learn about biology in unique ways. In microgravity, they can see how living things react differently than on Earth.
  2. New technologies, like 3D printing and gene editing, are being tested in space. This could lead to cool advances in medicine and health back on Earth.
  3. There's a growing trend of private companies joining space research. This means more opportunities for innovative experiments and discoveries.

Metascience at the NIH

The Good Science Project ā€¢ 59 implied HN points ā€¢ 05 Aug 25
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. The NIH is looking to limit high article processing charges for open-access journals. This is important because some journals ask for really high fees that can take away from research funding.
  2. The NIH is working to reduce bureaucracy that slows down research. Researchers spend a lot of time on paperwork, which could be better spent on their actual science work.
  3. Thereā€™s a focus on funding more replication experiments in science. This is key because it helps check if important research findings are true and not based on mistakes or fraud.

Dashing Data Viz - Issue 234

Dashing Data Viz ā€¢ 98 implied HN points ā€¢ 19 Apr 23
šŸ•¹ Technology Biomedical Research
  1. Consider ways to find freelance data visualization work through various platforms or lead-generation services.
  2. Explore different data visualization tools and seek resources to understand them better.
  3. Learn how to enhance your data visualization skills by creating appealing and interactive visualizations using tools like Vega-Lite and ggplot2.

Turns out even more of you are doctors (and nurses) than I expected

Unreported Truths ā€¢ 43 implied HN points ā€¢ 15 Jul 25
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. Many readers identify as healthcare professionals, with a significant portion being doctors and nurses. It's great to see so many engaged in the conversation about medical issues.
  2. There are concerns about the medical field focusing too much on procedures rather than promoting healthier lifestyles. This prioritization may be driven by financial considerations.
  3. Some healthcare professionals express distrust towards the research system and the influence of pharmaceutical companies. They feel that conflicts of interest may impact patient care and safety.

Some Candid and Scathing Opinions from a Former NIH Insider

The Good Science Project ā€¢ 48 implied HN points ā€¢ 16 Dec 24
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. NIH has many institutes, but their setup often comes from political pressure, not careful planning. This can create issues when trying to reorganize for better efficiency.
  2. The Scientific Management Review Board (SMRB) was meant to help with changes at NIH, but it lost effectiveness under pressure from leadership, showing the challenges of making serious reforms.
  3. Collins, as the NIH director, was seen as domineering and sometimes pushed decisions without considering othersā€™ views. This behavior can lead to problematic decisions and lack of support within the organization.

Reforming the NIHā€™s Intramural Program

The Good Science Project ā€¢ 29 implied HN points ā€¢ 15 Jan 25
šŸ„ Health Politics Biomedical Research
  1. The NIH's Intramural Research Program (IRP) needs major changes to better support innovative research. It was meant for high-risk projects, but now resembles traditional university grant-funded research.
  2. There's a call for more transparency and less bureaucracy in the IRP to help scientists focus on their research. Right now, unnecessary paperwork and spending limits reduce their ability to innovate.
  3. To boost true high-risk research, the IRP should evaluate its ongoing projects compared to other research being done outside the NIH. This way, they can ensure they are doing unique work that couldnā€™t be done elsewhere.

Axial Discovery - Phenotypic screening

Discovery by Axial ā€¢ 3 implied HN points ā€¢ 27 Mar 23
šŸ”¬ Science Biomedical Research
  1. Phenotypic screening focuses on identifying specific physical or biochemical traits of interest for drug discovery.
  2. Key rules for effective phenotypic screens include selecting relevant cell models, designing disease-specific assays, and defining clinical-like endpoints.
  3. Advancing phenotypic screening requires improving throughput of complex models, developing translational disease models, enhancing proteomic tools, and integrating phenotypic and target-based screening.