The hottest Research Funding Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways

The one science reform we can all agree on, but we're too cowardly to do

Experimental History • 59806 implied HN points • 03 Mar 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

For-profit scientific publishers extract large sums from publicly funded research by paywalling papers and charging institutions and authors to publish or read work the public already paid for.
Many ‘open access’ rules let publishers just shift costs onto authors through huge article-processing fees, so the profit-skimming continues unless for-profit publishers are cut out entirely.
This is a collective-action problem that only governments and big funders can solve; banning for-profit journals from handling grant-funded work would save money and create room for nonprofit, more honest publishing models.

AI Won't Automatically Accelerate Clinical Trials

Asimov Press • 786 implied HN points • 27 Feb 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

Better AI-designed molecules won't automatically make clinical trials faster, because timelines are set by human biology, patient recruitment, logistics, and regulatory processes that take real calendar time.
Clinical trials do two jobs—validation and learning—and AI needs rich human trial data to improve; many important outcomes, especially for chronic diseases and aging, take years to observe so trials remain slow even with better drugs.
Real acceleration requires institutional and regulatory reforms—like validated surrogate endpoints, streamlined review pathways, and better data sharing—because AI alone can only improve trials at the margins until those systems change.

Rescuing Science

Heterodox STEM • 241 implied HN points • 08 Mar 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

Massive federal funding has created an entrenched system of universities, agencies, publishers, and politicians that protects funding flows rather than fostering open scientific discovery.
The grant-centric culture — short funding cycles, heavy administration, and productivity metrics — drains creativity and sometimes drives researchers to play the funding game instead of doing bold science.
Fixing this means slowly reducing federal control by reforming indirect costs, making funds portable and tied to scientists, and restoring philanthropic and institutional support so research priorities return to scientists and discovery can flourish.

How to use NHS data for scientific research – without creating a privacy nightmare

Odds and Ends of History • 871 implied HN points • 24 Feb 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

NHS health records are a huge, nation-wide dataset that can drive life-saving discoveries and help improve how care is delivered, so using them responsibly is a public good.
Trusted Research Environments (like OpenSafely) let researchers run code on NHS data without individual records leaving secure servers. They protect privacy by design using auditing, open-source code, dummy data for testing, and only returning aggregated results.
The OpenSafely model shows strong results but needs stable, scaled funding and wider adoption so TREs can be expanded across health research and other government data; funders should support open, competitive calls for this infrastructure.

Shutting Down NCAR Is Vindictive Governance

The Honest Broker Newsletter • 3591 implied HN points • 17 Dec 25

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

Shutting down NCAR appears politically motivated and vindictive, not based on a clear national need. It would harm U.S. scientific capacity and undermine research that supports public safety and the economy.
NCAR is a large, federally funded research center that provides broad atmospheric science, community models, and high-performance computing used worldwide, and it is not simply a hub of ‘climate alarmism.’ Its work spans weather, climate, space physics, and observational technology essential to many sectors.
NCAR has real issues like mission creep and competition with universities that deserve reform, but modernizing and narrowing its mission is far smarter than dismantling the center. Terminating the center would cause unnecessary, long-lasting damage to the scientific enterprise.

Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

DisInformation Chronicle Podcast with Jan Jekielek on Chinese Organ Harvesting

The DisInformation Chronicle • 235 implied HN points • 17 Feb 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

American and Chinese transplant communities are closely connected, with U.S. hospitals and researchers training Chinese surgeons and collaborating on transplant studies, and some patients traveling to China for faster transplants.
Independent investigations and peer‑reviewed analyses provide strong evidence that prisoners in China have been killed for their organs, including cases where organ removal likely caused death.
There is growing pressure for accountability and oversight of international transplant partnerships and funding, with calls for institutions and lawmakers to provide answers and tighten scrutiny.

Research funding opportunities - Apply Now

Progress and Poverty • 654 implied HN points • 10 Feb 26

💰 Finance Research Funding

The Center for Land Economics launched a short-term Land Economics Fellowship that provides a $3,000 stipend, access to data and mentorship, and a public platform for 4–6 months of focused research; it’s open to people from many backgrounds and applications are due March 1.
The Progress and Poverty Institute is offering Progress of Ideas grants (up to $10,000) to fund research on land value taxation and related topics; they’re especially interested in valuation methods, fiscal and distributional modeling, political messaging, legal constraints, and policy design, with applications due April 6 and eligibility limited to US 501(c)(3) organizations.
The Henry George Foundation of Great Britain offers research grants for work on the modern political and ethical implications of Henry George’s ideas, especially with an international or UK focus, and there’s also a Land Research Network you can join via a short form to connect with other researchers and future opportunities.

Ideas for Biotechnology BBNs

FreakTakes • 26 implied HN points • 13 Mar 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

Flowers by Design: engineer new flower traits across many species to make beautiful, bespoke plants and to uncover general principles of plant development that can translate to food crops.
Biosensor for Anything: build a platform of protein or cell-based sensors plus large datasets and predictive models so we can cheaply and reliably detect many molecules and signals in real-world samples.
Proteins for Pennies: develop a fast, low-cost protein fabricator or "printer" to make any protein for pennies, cutting testing costs and enabling cheaper therapeutics and faster AI-driven design.

BOOK EXCERPT: "Redfield’s Warning: What I Learned (But Couldn’t Tell You) Might Save Your Life"

The DisInformation Chronicle • 325 implied HN points • 04 Feb 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

SARS‑CoV‑2 was likely engineered to infect humans and probably escaped unintentionally from a Wuhan virology lab during gain‑of‑function research.
Gain‑of‑function experiments and publishing their methods are inherently risky because labs have a history of containment failures and such work can enable misuse.
Stronger oversight, stricter limits on risky pathogen research, and greater transparency about funding and lab safety are needed to prevent future lab‑caused pandemics.

Why Do Research Institutes Look the Same?

Asimov Press • 535 implied HN points • 08 Jan 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

Many new research organizations end up resembling traditional universities or startups, because a few familiar institutional models dominate the space.
Forces like researchers' fear of harming future academic careers, investor demands for market-fit and growth, and tax/legal categories push organizations to conform to existing forms.
To create truly different institutions, funders and founders can experiment with new legal structures, hire people less bound to academic incentives, use patient philanthropy, or try time-limited and project-based models.

2.3% chance an asteroid hits Earth, book blurbs finally die, and the new AI Deep Research can't find me a mattress

The Intrinsic Perspective • 10063 implied HN points • 08 Feb 25

🔬 Science Research Funding

There’s a small but growing chance that an asteroid could hit Earth, currently about 2.3%. This could lead to serious problems if it hits a populated area.
Book publishers like Simon & Schuster are dropping the requirement for authors to get book blurbs, which is a relief for new writers who struggle with this.
The NIH is reducing the indirect costs that universities take from research grants. This means more money will go directly to scientists rather than the universities.

Venture Capital Has Lessons for Government and Philanthropy

The Good Science Project • 126 implied HN points • 13 Feb 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

Government and philanthropic science funding is often bogged down by heavy bureaucracy, rigid reporting, and incentives that favor safe, incremental work over bold, risky ideas.
Venture capital shows useful practices—betting on people not fixed five-year plans, moving fast, tolerating failure, providing networks, and giving investors some personal stake—that could make research funding more effective.
VC isn’t a perfect model because it chases big financial returns and concentrates capital, so reforms should blend VC strengths with public roles like long-term, large-scale, and noncommercial research while creating more diverse, accountable funding institutions.

EXCLUSIVE: Leaked Details of Trump’s Plan to Control Dangerous Virus Research

The DisInformation Chronicle • 415 implied HN points • 22 Dec 25

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

The administration is building a risk-based policy to limit and track gain-of-function pathogen research, and researchers or their institutions can be barred from federal programs if they fail to follow the rules.
The plan sets up multiple checks — funding agencies, institutions, scientists, and a new Independent Review Board led by OSTP — and submitting proposals to the board would provide a safe harbor.
The rollout has been delayed and sparked controversy across agencies and the media, and key enforcement details, especially penalties for federal employees, remain unclear.

American biomedical science in 2026

Can We Still Govern? • 190 implied HN points • 27 Jan 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

NIH is being run more from the White House than by Congress and independent scientists, which undermines stable, long-term peer review and research planning.
Chronic underfunding and falling grant success rates have overloaded researchers and damaged the biomedical workforce; the fix is steady public funding or fewer applicants, not relying on billionaire philanthropy.
Scientists must stop staying silent and organize publicly and politically to defend scientific independence, free speech, and trustworthy journalism.

Effects of Delays and Chaos in Science Funding

Heterodox STEM • 64 implied HN points • 15 Feb 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

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.
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 investigators—especially early-career and international trainees—without support.
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.

💰🧪 Funding outside the box: A Quick Q&A with … philanthropy expert Stuart Buck

Faster, Please! • 456 implied HN points • 11 Dec 25

🔬 Science Research Funding

Government research funders are risk-averse because they must show accountability to taxpayers and avoid political backlash, so many high-risk, curiosity-driven projects that can produce big breakthroughs go unfunded.
Wealthy philanthropists can back unconventional, high-risk research because they aren’t tied to voter accountability, but most still give to safe, prestigious institutions unless they’re actively incentivized or advised to take bolder bets.
Growing institutional diversity and nudging more creative philanthropy would raise the chances of major discoveries, but private donations alone can’t fully replace large-scale federal R&D funding cuts.

A Reality-Based View of Government Funding of Science

The Good Science Project • 55 implied HN points • 18 Feb 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

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.
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.
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.

NIH: The quiet engine of science is being dismantled

Your Local Epidemiologist • 1846 implied HN points • 23 Jul 25

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

The NIH is the biggest funder of research in the world, supporting important studies on health and disease. Cuts to its funding can leave many research projects unfunded, impacting public health.
Recently, around 5,500 research projects have been halted due to budget cuts, which means many unanswered questions and less progress in health research. This affects local communities and the jobs connected to scientific research.
It's important for scientists to communicate their work better to the public. Engaging people, simplifying grant applications, and balancing funding across different health topics can help make research more visible and supported.

A week of chaos in public health

Your Local Epidemiologist • 3907 implied HN points • 24 Jan 25

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

There has been a major pause in public health communications and research, which could lead to delays in tackling important health threats like bird flu.
The changes in public health leadership could have serious impacts on funding for research and the health safety systems that protect communities.
Despite the chaos, local public health teams are still crucial and will keep working to ensure community health, showing that public health is about more than just federal leadership.

Billions of Pieces of Human DNA from an Aborted Fetus in Every Dose

Injecting Freedom • 66 implied HN points • 30 Jan 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

The government has ended funding for research that uses aborted fetal tissue.
A central claim is that every dose of MMR and chickenpox vaccine contains billions of pieces of human DNA and cellular material from cell lines derived from an aborted fetus.
The piece highlights an exchange describing how fetal tissue was physically processed to develop those cell lines, using graphic language about cutting tissue into pieces.

The Economy of Knowing

The Good Science Project • 167 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25

🔬 Science Research Funding

Metascience needs a clear micro vs. macro distinction: micro focuses on individual scientists’ beliefs, trust, and behaviors, while macro covers institutions, funding, and governance.
Reforms often fail when they operate at only one level because individuals respond to incentives in predictable ways, producing unintended outcomes like gaming rules or self‑censoring risky work.
Fixing science requires a full‑stack approach that designs policies to change both institutional incentives and the everyday experience of researchers, accounting for the feedback loops between the two.

Why should you care about an indirect cost?

Your Local Epidemiologist • 2155 implied HN points • 11 Feb 25

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

Indirect costs are essential for research. They cover things like rent and internet, helping researchers do their work effectively.
A proposed cut in indirect costs could greatly harm universities and their communities. This could lead to job losses and less innovation, affecting everyone.
Researchers need to do a better job of connecting with the public. If people understand the importance of research funding, they may be more likely to support it.

Understanding and Modeling NIH Research Grant Success Rates and the Impact of “Multiyear Funding”

The Good Science Project • 52 implied HN points • 30 Jan 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

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.
Funding more years up front (multiyear funding) ties up larger shares of each year’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 (≈10%) fewer new/competing grants in FY2026 unless appropriations are increased.
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.

Remember When Experts Said ‘Science Isn’t Political? They Were Lying

Unmasked • 33 implied HN points • 13 Feb 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

The slogan "science isn't political" was misleading, because political considerations ended up shaping scientific decisions.
Major health institutions, especially the NIH, pushed to mix politics into science and public-health policy.
The COVID response is presented as an example where governments abandoned evidence-based decision-making and relied on politicized expert advice to justify measures like lockdowns.

Update on Metascience-Related Language in the NIH Budget

The Good Science Project • 59 implied HN points • 24 Jan 26

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

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.
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.
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.

Transparency Crisis: A Black Box of Overhead Spending & Academia’s Mission Creep from Rigorous Science

OpenTheBooks Substack • 121 implied HN points • 22 Dec 25

🚌 Education Research Funding

Universities get growing federal research dollars plus large overhead payments that have fueled administrative bloat and pulled resources away from core scientific work.
Science faces reproducibility problems and many recent graduates lack the practical job skills employers want, revealing a gap between academic priorities and workforce needs.
Grant rules requiring “broader impacts” and targeted outreach (including DEI goals) shift money and faculty time toward programs and administration instead of direct research.

Back and Forth on the Value of Replication

The Good Science Project • 48 implied HN points • 29 Jan 26

🔬 Science Research Funding

Replicating studies early usually gives much bigger returns because it can stop entire lines of follow-on work from chasing a wrong result, though some older papers that still drive current research can also be worth replicating.
Citation counts are an imperfect measure of influence, and once a paper's findings are deeply embedded across many follow-on studies, a single replication may not undo that influence—so sometimes it's higher impact to replicate key descendant papers instead of only the original.
The impact of replication can be increased by changing incentives and communication: funders and journals can publicize replication results, link them to original papers, and adjust funding or citation expectations to make replications matter more.

Exclusive Interview: NIH Director Details Crack Down on Fees Monopoly Publishers Charge American Taxpayers

The DisInformation Chronicle • 590 implied HN points • 09 Jul 25

🏥 Health Politics Research Funding

The NIH is working to make sure taxpayers can access research without high fees. Taxpayers currently pay twice for studies they funded, first through grants and then again through expensive publication fees.
Many science publishers have a monopoly and charge unfairly high fees for open access to research articles. This system makes it difficult for researchers, especially in poorer countries, to publish their work.
Some prominent science journals may promote certain narratives, which can influence public trust in scientific research. It's important to question the accuracy and motives behind studies published in these journals.

Innovations in Scientific Institutions

The Good Science Project • 100 implied HN points • 13 Dec 25

🔬 Science Research Funding

Governments are starting to fund independent, team-level labs with large, flexible grants so scientific teams can pursue ambitious work without constant grant-writing.
Public-private partnerships like the UK–DeepMind deal are building automated, high-throughput labs to speed materials discovery and tackle big practical problems.
There’s a push to create new applied R&D organizations to increase institutional diversity, and these programs must set clear tolerance for failure so teams can take real risks.

The BBN Fund

FreakTakes • 37 implied HN points • 16 Jan 26

🕹 Technology Research Funding

BBNs are small, engineering-first research organizations that pursue big, multidisciplinary technical goals by funding work with a mix of customer contracts and grants instead of typical VC or academic models.
Pilot funding has shown there is both demand from flexible funders and supply of founders for BBNs, with early BBNs already winning substantial support and proving the model viable.
The BBN Fund will seed and scale BBNs by deploying low-interest revolving loans, revenue-sharing investments, and modest undirected R&D grants, while a small Central Office will build pipelines of funders, customers, mentors, and contractors to make BBNs sustainable and investable.

Should Kentucky spend $42 million on ibogaine research? 5 Questions for drug abuse researcher William Stoops

The Microdose • 412 implied HN points • 16 Jan 24

🏥 Health & Wellness Research Funding

Ibogaine research proposal in Kentucky faces skepticism and concerns about effectiveness and safety.
Complications in ibogaine research include lack of rigorous scientific evidence and potential dangerous cardiac effects.
Alternative ways to spend $42 million to address opioid use disorder, including improving access to evidence-based treatments and behavioral interventions.

Alert: The Trump administration is quietly slashing new NIH grant awards, and it's not via the budget

Can We Still Govern? • 254 implied HN points • 28 Jul 25

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

The Trump administration's new multi-year funding policy for NIH grants is drastically reducing the number of research grants awarded. This change means many labs might not get funding at all, harming scientific progress.
Previously, about 10% of grant applications were funded, but now that number has dropped to around 4%. This makes it much harder for researchers to secure necessary funding for their projects.
Researchers and the public are encouraged to speak out against this policy. It's important to contact Congress members and local media to raise awareness about the negative impact on medical research and science.

Josh Wolfe on Elon and the Tech Right, R&D, and Parenting

ChinaTalk • 296 implied HN points • 10 Jun 25

🎙 Podcasts Research Funding

The US is losing its edge in basic research and innovation because companies are not investing as much in long-term scientific studies. This could hurt the country's future discoveries.
There is a need to attract smart immigrants who can contribute to science and technology in the US. Making it easier for them to come here can help us regain our competitive edge.
Parenting today requires adjusting how we communicate and support emotional resilience in kids. Teaching them to understand their emotions and handle challenges will help them grow up more balanced.

⤴⤵ Up Wing/Down Wing #25

Faster, Please! • 548 implied HN points • 16 Nov 24

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

AI is creating a big boom in US construction, especially for data centers. Spending on these centers has grown a lot since the launch of ChatGPT.
The US government has plans to triple its nuclear power by 2050. This is to keep up with the demand for clean energy as AI and industries grow.
There is a push for a new research initiative to support advanced science fields like quantum computing. This aims to keep the US ahead in technology against competitive countries.

A Good Science Manifesto

The Good Science Project • 26 implied HN points • 11 Dec 25

🔬 Science Research Funding

Science funding should prioritize producing reliable, useful knowledge and reward being right, supporting both risky exploratory work and goal-oriented projects.
Funders must cut heavy administrative burdens and require open sharing of data and methods so others can verify and build on results quickly.
The funding system should be more flexible and diverse: experiment with new funding models, provide stable support for infrastructure and staff scientists, and distribute support more evenly across career stages.

Indirect Costs at NIH . . .

The Good Science Project • 297 implied HN points • 08 Feb 25

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

The NIH has announced a big change, lowering the indirect cost rate for all grants to 15%. This move has raised many eyebrows because it seems to go against some existing laws.
Congress had previously banned the NIH from changing how indirect costs are calculated. This makes the new policy potentially illegal and could lead to court challenges.
To really address indirect costs properly, there needs to be a focus on reducing the red tape and regulations that universities face. This could help create more efficient funding and research processes.

What I would change at NSF

Heterodox STEM • 355 implied HN points • 01 Dec 24

🔬 Science Research Funding

The NSF should refocus on funding high-quality scientific research based solely on merit rather than identity politics.
Key reforms include changing their vision and core values to prioritize excellence in science.
Unnecessary offices and initiatives that do not contribute to scientific advancement should be eliminated to streamline the NSF's efforts.

When RAND Made Magic + Jason Matheny Response

ChinaTalk • 340 implied HN points • 25 Nov 24

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

RAND Corporation was once at the forefront of military and scientific research, making groundbreaking contributions in areas like game theory and defense strategy during the Cold War.
Over time, RAND has shifted its focus from cutting-edge scientific research to social and policy analysis, leading to a decline in its innovative output as it navigated new funding sources and political landscapes.
Despite its challenges, RAND continues to play a significant role in addressing modern security issues, adapting its research to tackle contemporary challenges like military capabilities and psychological impacts of war.

No, University Endowments Can’t Replace Federal Science Funding

Can We Still Govern? • 205 implied HN points • 24 Feb 25

🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Research Funding

University endowments are not a single pool of money. They are made up of many funds that come with specific rules about how they can be used.
Only a few universities have very large endowments, while most institutions struggle financially. So, using these endowments to compensate for federal funding cuts wouldn’t work.
The idea of taxing large endowments might seem fair, but it could harm universities. It's important to use those funds for broader access and support for smaller schools instead.

Accelerating American Scientific Enterprise

A Biologist's Guide to Life • 18 implied HN points • 13 Dec 25

🔬 Science Research Funding

Make grants faster, smaller, and easier by using short, sanity-check proposals and quick, staged payments so good ideas get funded fast and funders can adapt based on real results.
End the traditional journal bottleneck and create a public platform for immediate researcher-led publication, using that system's metrics for hiring and funding to remove delays, costs, and points of sabotage.
Reform intellectual property so scientists keep the majority of their inventions and share royalties with institutions, align business-developer pay with commercialization success, and tighten biotech patent rules with verifiable proof separating natural from engineered innovations.