January 25, 2025 • 34 mins
In a special edition of Change, Technically, Ashley and Cat get into the facts of the NIH: what it does, how it works, and the consequences of disrupting its essential work. The NIH creates enormous economic impact, 400,000 jobs across the US, and sets science in motion that touches all of us.
How to contact your representatives:
- Dial (202) 224-3121
- Tell autoresponder your representative name or zip code when prompted
- Speak directly to staffer or leave voicemail: “My name is ___, I’m a constituent in [town]. (If clinician/scientist, say so) The NIH freeze harms research and patients and must be lifted immediately. I also believe that it is important to maintain funding mechanisms that improve and diversify the NIH workforce, including those labeled as 'diversity or DEI efforts'”
Relevant executive orders:
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/initial-rescissions-of-harmful-executive-orders-and-actions/
Study on new drugs and NIH funding:
E. Galkina Cleary, J.M. Beierlein, N.S. Khanuja, L.M. McNamee, F.D. Ledley, Contribution of NIH funding to new drug approvals 2010–2016, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115 (10) 2329-2334, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1715368115 (2018).
United for Medical Research resource where you can look up NIH impact for your state along with many resources about NIH impact: https://www.unitedformedicalresearch.org/
News articles on pausing of NIH meetings and travel:
- https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00231-y
- https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-hits-nih-devastating-freezes-meetings-travel-communications-and-hiring
- https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/24/health/nih-scientists-purchase-supplies-trump-administration-pauses-communications/index.html
Information about STARTneuro:
- http://startneuro.ucsd.edu
- https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/transfer-students-triumph-class-2024#manuel
- Support the STARTneuro program directly: https://crowdsurf.ucsd.edu/campaigns/support-the-startneuro-prog
Learn more about Ashley:
Learn more about Cat:
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Cat (00:00):
We want to talk about the NIH paying off beyond our
dreams.
This is a hard episode to begin.
How are you feeling, Ashley?
Ashley (00:10):
Yeah, this is hard.
I mean, this is something that'sobviously really near and dear
to our hearts.
The National Institutes ofHealth is the funding for the
biomedical research that happensin this country and therefore
actually in most of the world,given the status of the United
States and the money that wehave here.
So it's not a small deal.
And this is something that'sreally personal to me as a
(00:31):
scientist.
It's personal to Cat as someoneamong scientists and a scientist
herself.
So yeah, here we
Cat (00:37):
Yeah, this has been a moment where almost every
scientist in our lives is beingimpacted right now.
So should we go over a couple ofthe facts that impact what we're
going to talk about today andkind of what we know at this
moment and why we're recordingthis episode?
Ashley (00:53):
Yeah, let's talk about what, what got us here.
Why are we so freaked out, Kat?
Cat (00:57):
So many possible answers to that question.
Here are some facts.
On January 20th, um, anexecutive order came out that
includes language that mayimpact many of the scientists we
know and many programs atuniversities, um, including the
program that Ashley is currentlythe co director of at UC San
Diego, which is the Start Neuroprogram.
Um, other things happened this,last week.
(01:19):
Um, Science.
org, for instance, reports onthis, that on January 22nd, the
NIH and many other agencies hada wide range of restrictions
imposed.
Um, this includes a freeze onmeetings, travel, communication,
hiring, um, and this is kind ofdetails still emerging about
what's going to happen and whatthis means, so there's a lot of
(01:42):
uncertainty.
Um, but one big thing that'shappening for, uh, America's
scientists are the studysections of the NIH and the
advisory committees of the NIHare part of this freeze.
So we wanted to focus a littlebit on, hey, what's the NIH?
What is this?
What does it do?
How does it work?
Um, and we think that this is areally important part of
(02:05):
America's scientific legacy andcurrent scientific capacity, and
we know a lot about it, don'twe, babe?
So we wanted to use our, our,our knowledge to sort of just
explain this more to people.
Ashley (02:17):
Yeah, I think people probably don't realize like that
so many drugs, probably all ofthe drugs you use, everything we
know about cancer, how the brainworks was funded at some point
or is still funded by the NIHfunding.
Yeah.
And one thing I want to say,too, is there's kind of like two
categories of things that arehappening here.
So, one, there's the, the stuffwhere there's this direct
(02:40):
targeting of the NIH in terms ofsaying, okay, no external
communication.
Uh, no study sections, we'll getinto what that means, um, in a
second.
But then there's a secondcategory of, uh, targeting of
DEI work specifically.
And that actually goes beyondthe NIH, but does impact to NIH
(03:01):
because they're federally fundedprograms.
Cat (03:04):
Yeah, absolutely.
Yeah.
So there's like a broad range ofthings happening here.
We don't have certainty aboutall of them, but we're going to
tell you a little bit about thethings that we do know here.
And one place I think it'suseful to start, we did a little
bit of research for thisepisode, which as two
researchers is our favoritething and our comfort in moments
of uncertainty.
And so let's go over a couple ofthings about How does the NIH
(03:28):
work, and what do we know aboutit?
So, there's some really goodinformation out there put
together by a group calledUnited for Medical Research.
This is a coalition of researchinstitutions, patient health
advocates, um, and this includesplaces like Stanford University,
the American Cancer Society,MIT, the Alzheimer's
Association, Harvard, and JohnHopkins.
(03:49):
Essentially, this is a bigcoming together.
of so many of America's entitiesthat work on science.
Um, so they are a greatresource, we'll link, uh, their
website in the show notes.
And some facts we get from them,NIH funding generates, they say,
2.
46 dollars in economic activityfor every one dollar of funding.
(04:11):
So right off the bat, it's amajor contributor to economic
output.
They estimate, um, nine, 92.
9 billion in economic output.
Um, and I think 2023 is thatstat.
The NIH funded research grantssupport, uh, like 400, 000 jobs
nationwide.
(04:31):
This drives economies.
You can look up how it drivesimpact for your specific state.
We live in California.
So we looked up, um, whathappens in California because of
the NIH.
In California, the NIH supports13.
5 billion worth of economicactivity, probably.
More than that, the Universityof California is, no surprise, a
(04:52):
really big, top funded NIHinstitute.
So those are some kind ofgrounding facts that I thought
were interesting to kind of justset the table on what level of
activity we're talking abouthere.
Ashley (05:03):
Yeah.
And I think it's important toremember that this funding is
not just directly, you know, toscientists themselves, but
there's an entire infrastructurethat is in place to support the
science.
And that includes things likeadministrators and includes
things like who's going to takecare of the animals or the cells
or buy the equipment.
Like all of this stuff, theseare, these are jobs.
These are real jobs.
(05:24):
And, you know, when I thinkabout like where I want society
to go and where I want us tolike, put people's efforts.
It's in stuff like this.
Like it's towards thisscientific enterprise, which is
getting us to discoveries andultimately improving our health
and helping us understand howthings work in our bodies.
And yeah, so it's like, youknow, we're not just paying a
(05:46):
bunch of like, you know,scientists, but like, you know,
these are, these are like, it'sa whole thing.
It's a whole system that thissupports.
And, you know, If you thinkabout your local university, for
example, you know, like, okay,we think of universities as
where students go and they payfor their education, and that's
all true, and that is a big partof what happens at a university,
but at a research university,something like where I work at
(06:09):
UC San Diego, we also get a tonof funding that's all grant
funding from places like theNIH, and that supports people in
their jobs working at theuniversity, so there's a whole
separate Part of the universitythat's not just like students
going to classes.
It's the research and all ofthat that's happening, too
Cat (06:28):
And there's just no controversy about the benefit
that it is to have a systemlike, you know, um, the UC
system, like, in terms of howmuch it transforms people's
lives, benefits the state, youknow, lifts society.
This is the mechanism of movingtowards the future, in my
opinion.
You know, one, Um, study that weread for this episode, which I
(06:49):
thought was, again, just a greatpointed example to have in mind,
um, NIH funding contributed toevery single one of the 210 new
drugs that were approved by theFDA between 2010 and 2016.
So you take a new medication inAmerica, NIH funding almost
certainly was part ofunderstanding that.
(07:12):
And a lot of that funding isbasic science that allows us to
develop like the biologicaltargets for drug action.
So you may hear of things, orthere might be a pharma brand
name associated from it, right?
But Ashley and I both live andwork in this world of the people
who are uncovering the basicmechanisms that allow us to
(07:33):
develop medicine.
Ashley (07:34):
Yeah, absolutely and like that's that's an amazing
statistic And then I thinkthere's a lot of things that are
even really hard to quantifyhere.
So for example You know, we havemany friends now who are out
working in industry, so theywork at places like Johnson
Johnson and Pfizer.
And guess where those peoplewere trained?
They were trained atuniversities on federal funding.
(07:56):
They couldn't do their jobs atPfizer and Johnson Johnson where
they're doing things likeuncovering cures for
schizophrenia or whatever itmight be, right?
They couldn't do any of thatwithout that training.
And that is not something we'vequantified, it's very hard to
quantify.
But that's where it all happens.
And so it is literally,literally impossible to do
(08:16):
science without federal funding,period.
Cat (08:19):
absolutely.
We have structured it this wayand it's working for our society
actually.
Now we can debate, people dodebate very fiercely, how we run
the NIH and how we allocatescientific funding.
There is, you know, a lot totalk about there.
But this has been paying off.
You know, it's so central to howAmerican science works.
(08:40):
And I think that point about youdon't just get scientists,
scientists are the result ofthis long pathway of many years
and investment.
And it's, it's such a communalnetworked kind of thing too.
And this is part of what we'reseeing in this moment is how
networked it is because look atyou and I, right babe, like all
of our friends in our textthreads are being impacted at
(09:03):
this moment.
Because, you know, this fundingis so tied together.
Ashley (09:08):
Yeah.
Yeah, absolutely.
And that it, it impacts peoplethat are, you know, directly
working at the NIH, but then allof these subsequent impacts that
we mentioned at the start of theepisode, like study sections and
insecurity about funding andeverything, it's impacting all
of them.
Cat (09:22):
So, so a couple things here, maybe to bring some
clarity to what a study sectionis, you know, you might be
seeing this in the news, okay,NIH freezes study sections, the
scientists are freaked out aboutit.
Let's break this down for peopleand explain.
Uh, so quoting from, again, aNature Press piece on this, and
we'll link this in the shownotes, um, these panels that the
(09:45):
NIH runs, they're called studysections and advisory councils,
those serve slightly differentthings, um, sometimes scheduled
a year in advance.
They can include more than 30participating researchers, so a
lot of these are external folks,they're experts in their fields,
and it takes time to reschedule,so the disruption to this could
be pretty significant.
(10:05):
Again, we have a lot ofuncertainty, but Researchers in
America currently waiting for agrant review decision are in a
very precarious, frighteningposition because of this.
So one thing we thought we'dshare with you, all our
listeners, is you might not knowhow precarious science really
(10:25):
is.
Even when you're a verysuccessful scientist in a funded
lab, you're still living insideof this calendar of funding and
this calendar of, um, grants,and, and they're, they're
carefully planned, likescientists organize their entire
lives around this.
Um, anything you would add tothis, Ashley, or like, you're,
you've lived, kind of livedthis, right?
Ashley (10:44):
Yeah, I mean, so, you know, the way that federally
funded science works is youapply for grants.
So, um, labs when, when say likesomeone like a scientist gets a
job at a university, they getlike a little bit of startup
funding and, you know, in manyways this is like starting a
startup.
Small business, right?
You get a little bit of seedfunding from the university so
you can kind of get going Butthen after that it's all grant
(11:05):
funded So every five years or soYou're kind of relying on this
like influx of funds that you'veapplied for you've thought about
like exactly what you're goingto do You write a plan for and
you submit that to this studysection.
And so that study section theyare the The powerful folks who
decide, who look at everybody'sscience, everybody's proposals,
(11:26):
and they say, here's what we'regoing to fund, and here's what
we're not going to fund.
Which I think is another, yeah,go ahead,
Cat (11:32):
sorry.
Sorry.
We're both really, reallypassionate about this.
I, you know, I think a thingthat sometimes is really helpful
for people to understand too islike, this isn't just like, we
hired some contractors.
Only people who are atop oftheir field sometimes can even
evaluate these proposals.
(11:53):
Like, that's how specialized itis.
You know, you are trying tofigure out what should America
fund in cancer, you need thecancer scientists there.
And that means you need thecancer scientists You know, to
organize them from acrossinstitutions and out in the
public.
And, you know, I know that itcan sound like, wow, y'all, this
(12:14):
is a lot of meetings, but Iactually want to draw attention
to how, what a beautiful,collaborative, open kind of
project this is, you know, thatscientists, you know, organize
their time in this way and comein.
And I know we can debate partsabout it, but I just want to
make that point that this is,Yeah.
A way that we feed into our ownaccountability to the public and
(12:37):
make sure that, you know, we'restudying and funding the right
thing.
We put a lot of work into itbecause it's that important.
Ashley (12:44):
yeah, this is central to the process of science.
And I think, you know, it's kindof interesting because we,
people will contrast like, oh,you know, the way like.
Industry works is so competitiveand it's cutthroat and we have
to worry about like every singledollar and like,
Cat (12:58):
Industry is not nearly as competitive.
I have been in both.
It's not nearly as
Ashley (13:03):
Right and then we and then we like talk about
government like oh, there's allthis like, you know Spending you
know, whatever and there's likea bunch of like people who are
getting free government money orwhatever Like if you knew how
intense it was around science,right?
And how every dollar isscrutinized and every one of
these grants it goes throughlike literally you are being
(13:25):
Critiqued by Nobel Prize winningscientists who are looking at
your science and saying Is thisgoing to work or not?
Do we believe in it or not?
And like, as you said, this isnot a perfect process and like
plenty of scientists willcritique this process, but
that's like internal baseball,right?
For the, for like the bigargument here, it's like, look,
(13:45):
this is a highly scrutinized,every dollar is thought through
and yeah, and,
Cat (13:51):
It's something we can be proud of.
It's something we can be reallyproud of as an American public
that we have this transparency.
We have this, like, it's laidout on the table and we try at
least our hardest to make your,your thing rises and falls based
on how good the work is, youknow, and based on, you know,
how powerful the science is.
And yeah, like all things areimperfect and we got all things
(14:14):
involve humans and we gotta, youknow, work to make it better.
But, but this is,
Ashley (14:19):
shoveling money into scientists mouths.
Like that's just not what'shappening, right?
It's extremely hard to be ascientist, even when we have all
this money, because you'recompeting for it, you have to
demonstrate that you can cut it,you can do it, right?
Cat (14:34):
Yeah, absolutely.
And, and I think an importantpart here is people often
imagine some single PI who'slike an egghead in a university
and they're just kind of sittingon their cash or whatever.
Um, those people, again, Thinkof them like small business
owners.
They train postdocs.
They run many, many studies.
(14:55):
They might be, at this point,group science, which we've
talked about in our podcast, isa rising thing that's necessary
to do cancer research again, todo neuroscience, to do cell
biology.
We're in a place in sciencewhere there needs to be highly
networked, large collaborations.
So, um, you know, the singlescientist alone is not really
(15:16):
the model anymore.
And what we have is instead thiskind of beautiful network of
trainees and students and, andthose people are at, really at
risk if funding cycles getdisrupted.
So, um, I, you know, we've,we've both lived this.
We were both postdocs, Ashleyand I, and the number one thing
on your mind is, can I, becomefunded.
(15:38):
You essentially scrap for yourown salary a lot of the time and
fund yourself.
That's how much of a meritocracyit is.
You're proving that you're wortha salary and we both lived
through that.
We've both won grants.
And then you might also bemaking these calculations that
are like, okay, my grant runsout at this time.
(16:02):
And if I have like a five monthgrant, a gap, and I don't have
any money to fill that gap, Imight have to leave science.
Ashley (16:10):
yeah.
And I've seen people leavescience because they can't get
the next round of funding, andthat is something that happens,
and, you know, it's, it's funnythat sometimes, like, government
spending gets characterized,like, it's not a meritocracy or
something, but, like, in thiscase specifically, and, and it's
actually problematic how much inscience it's thought of itself
(16:31):
as a meritocracy, like, and wecan talk about that separately,
but, like, it
Cat (16:36):
people argue we should have more like lottery disbursement
of funds,
Ashley (16:39):
right, right,
Cat (16:41):
it's keeping people from doing their lab work,
Ashley (16:44):
Right, exactly.
But
Cat (16:46):
a different topic.
Yeah, but it is again.
It's something I'm proud of.
I think of all of our friends Weare our dear friend Matt Lovett
Barron who's a reallyexceptional neuroscientist and
like every single day I talk tohim is right he's writing a new
grant and he's funding otherscientists and he's you know,
creating incredible value forsociety and This is what he's
(17:08):
spending his time on competingin these processes, right?
Ashley (17:11):
yeah.
And again, I think it'simportant that we remember these
are jobs, like, these are peoplewho have jobs, all the people
that work in these labs, like,if you want to talk about
employment in this country,like, you have to include the
people who are doing researchfor their jobs.
And those are great jobs.
But like,
Cat (17:29):
I'm going to say it again, NIH funding for every dollar we
get back 2.
46.
That is an amazing return and,and then if you get cancer,
these are the people who aregoing to help you.
Ashley (17:44):
yeah.
Cat (17:45):
So I want to talk to you, Ashley, about the STARTNeuro
program.
Which is related to this becauseit is an NIH funded program,
among other funds, but you'vewon a big grant from the NIH,
and this is part of what you'vebeen working on.
So can you tell us a little bitabout STARTNeuro?
Mm
Ashley (18:07):
the big picture here is like, you know, we've talked
about sort of, okay, people gettraining to have PhDs, um, and
there's been this.
recognition in science that thattraining is not accessible to
everybody.
And that's a problem, right?
And it's a problem for tworeasons.
Like the, the reason I oftencite is, is a problem with
equity.
Of course, I want everybody tohave a chance to be a scientist
(18:27):
in this country.
So that's one side of it.
But then it's also a problem forlike, you know, maybe a kind of
more practical thing, which islike, we know that.
diverse teams are better.
And so if we actually want thebest science, we want diverse
teams, right?
So for either of those reasons,it seems really important that
we get everybody into thiscareer path or at least have an
(18:48):
option, right?
To, to follow this career path.
So, you know, to that end, theNIH has, um, set up some amazing
programs.
to give access to more students.
And so I, in 2020 with, my codirector, Brenda Bloodgood, we
applied for a grant for this.
So this is, um, this mechanismis called ENDURE, which is a
(19:10):
appropriate, I think, name
Cat (19:12):
very topical
Ashley (19:13):
at the moment.
So this program, it stands forEnhancing Neuroscience Diversity
Through Undergraduate Research.
education experiences.
Um, it's funded by the NIH aswell as the brain initiative
now, which you might've heardof.
This is a thing that Obamakicked off to really throw some
more money into neuroscienceresearch, knowing how important
it was.
(19:34):
So
Cat (19:34):
a huge impact as well.
Ashley (19:35):
yeah, that and the brain initiative had a huge impact.
Um, definitely still going tosome degree.
Um, so yeah, so this is, this isa program to get.
more students from morebackgrounds into neuroscience
research.
And, um, you know, like when Igo to community colleges and I
talk about this program, likefirst and foremost, you know,
(19:56):
community college students who,who we are trying to serve in
our program, they, They oftendon't even understand like
everything we just talked about,like how research happens, like
what actually research is,right?
And so there's kind of thisfirst step for us of just like
telling people what it means todo research and it's like, Okay,
you know, everybody has someonein their lives who has
Alzheimer's or is strugglingwith Parkinson's.
(20:19):
Okay, how do we help thosepeople?
And for some people, you know,the answer is med school.
But then we go in and we want totell students that There's this
other amazing thing that happenswhich is like we just try to
understand how these things workand that's how we get to cures
or how we get to treatments.
Cat (20:35):
I think about, yeah, when I was a college student, I didn't
know how science worked.
I knew that you could be ascientist or something, but I
didn't know how you got there,you know?
And the whole path is soinvisible to so many people.
And that's a big problem that Ithink STARTNeuro sheds some
light on.
Ashley (20:53):
totally.
So, so then, so then for us, youknow, when, um, students
transfer to UC San Diego, so,um, at UC San Diego, like a lot
of big universities, we have alot of transfer students, which
means, you know, they started atcommunity college and then they,
um, come to UCSD for their lasttwo years.
And, uh, our goal is to helpthose students find labs and
(21:14):
fund them to work in those labs,because we know that.
Um, many of them need fundingelsewhere, like we work with,
um, predominantly students thatcome from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds.
They need a job on campus.
And so we say like, look, whatif the job we give you is
working in a research lab andgetting training and actually
opening this door into researchto be the someone who's, you
(21:36):
know, actually curing some ofthese things that we care about?
So
Cat (21:40):
it's like Um, you know, um, providing them directly with
money right now, which helpsthem in their persisting college
right now
Ashley (21:48):
again, these are jobs.
Cat (21:50):
yeah, their jobs and making sure that, you know, what they
actually are working on isleading them to on a career
pathway.
I think something that peoplemight not know outside of
California is like, you know,can you give us a little bit of
background about this wholecommunity college to UC thing
that happens?
Because I actually think it'spretty unique.
Ashley (22:10):
Yeah, I think we have this thing where we think about,
you know, oh, students incollege and we think about kind
of like what the default studentin college looks like.
And I think that that's wrong ina lot of cases.
So if you look, you know, acrossthe United States, for example,
and you just tally up how manypeople are in college, about a
third of those people are at acommunity college.
(22:30):
So, first and foremost, this isa huge mechanism for education
in this country, and it ispredominantly students who
maybe, you know, couldn't affordfour years at a college, um,
maybe are not sure if college isright for them, so they're going
to do it part time and kind ofwork on the side, right?
There's a lot of differentreasons people choose community
college.
It's a huge swath of students inthis country, but none of those
(22:53):
students, or I should say Veryfew of those people will be able
to get the training they need.
To become a scientist becausethat doesn't exist at community
colleges.
There's not research happeningthere.
Cat (23:03):
this blew my mind when you started Start Neuro.
I didn't know this, like that,you know, you could be a kid who
has made it in so many ways thatare so beautiful and important.
I'm like, Oh, I promise you Iwouldn't cry during this episode
and it's happening.
But here's what happens.
Imagine being a kid who gets tocommunity college, transfers to
(23:26):
the UCs, which is a structurethat many people fought for,
that is a huge mechanism forsocioeconomic mobility, and you
make it, and then you justbarely miss being able to get on
the pathway to become ascientist, because essentially
they're there on the campus toolate to ever get a lab job.
By the time they find out aboutit, or even realize what
(23:49):
science, you have to do to go toa science PhD program, they're,
they're just too late.
And that is so ridiculous.
Ashley (23:58):
Yeah.
And it's insane too, becauselike.
You know, for me, forneuroscience, San Diego is a
huge hub for neuroscienceresearch, arguably the biggest
hub in the world.
And the community colleges thatare two miles from campus don't
have access to that
Cat (24:16):
Yes.
Ashley (24:17):
happening literally down the street.
It's, it's, it is our
Cat (24:20):
These are, I'm crying again.
Stop.
Make it stop.
Make it stop.
Ashley (24:24):
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Cat (24:25):
These are, our neighbors.
These are our neighbor's kids.
And so you saw this need and youwere like, we need a program.
We need something that directlyhelps transfer students.
It's an unmet need and it's ahuge population.
And so it's like this magiclittle lever that you found.
(24:45):
So tell me about like the impactof STARTNeuro.
What's happened because of itfor
Ashley (24:49):
Well, I want to be super clear.
I didn't start this program.
So I, um, picked up the batonfrom a couple of amazing people,
one of whom passed away twoyears ago.
His name was Eduardo Macano.
He was a scientist at UC South.
Now I'm going to cry.
Cat (25:04):
Yeah, Eduardo.
So you picked up the legacy.
Ashley (25:07):
Yeah.
So he, he actually started whathe called, you know, the start
program with some NSF funding.
We could do a whole otherepisode on
Cat (25:14):
Oh, so this is how far back the scientific funding
Ashley (25:17):
Yeah, yeah.
So that program ran from 2015 to2018.
It was, he got, you know, athree year grant to do it.
Um, he was the one whorecognized that this was like a,
a need in our community.
Um, I was brought in in 2020when we applied for this new
mechanism.
So I, I want to give like fullcredit to him and also to Brenda
who really like laid thefoundation for this
Cat (25:37):
Absolutely.
Well, thanks for correcting mebecause that's just actually
like a beautiful example of howscientific funding that leads to
impact leads to more impact andthen like another program that
helped more people.
Like, tell me, I think somethinglike 40 students have gone
through this program.
Like, some people have gone tograd school.
Like, tell me about it.
Ashley (25:55):
Yeah.
So, you know, this iteration ofthe program, which started in
2020, every year we bring in 10students.
So, you know, um, half of ourstudents at this point have
graduated from UCSD.
The other half are still at UCSDfinishing up.
And those students are in PhDprograms.
So one of them, is actually inthe neuroscience PhD program
here at UCSD, which isincredible.
(26:18):
Um, another one is like veryclose to me.
I don't want to like cross myfingers too hard, but like, um,
so, you know, um, they're,they're on this path and, you
know, for example, the studentsthat.
that is here.
Um, you know, she was doingresearch when she was here
trying to understand, um, howAlzheimer's impacts these
particular cells in the brain,which are called astrocytes,
(26:38):
which do a lot of importantwork.
Anyway, um, so they, they'redoing amazing research.
Um, something I'm particularlyproud of is that, you know,
almost all of the students thathave gone through our program
are still in science in one wayor another.
So even if they're not in PhDprograms, they are continuing to
work in the labs that theyworked in either at the Salk
(26:59):
Institute or UC San Diego.
So they're still working inthose labs or they're working at
companies or they're kind oflike working as clinical
coordinators for differentresearch programs.
They're doing lots of amazing,amazing things.
And.
I think that having thefoundation with us was helpful
in that regard.
Cat (27:18):
Well.
That's under, that's so sweetlyunderstated.
I'm gonna embarrass you becauseI'm your wife and here's what
happens.
Like, these students come, theycome to a summer program.
Ashley spends hours and hoursand hours of her summer with
them.
They teach them not just aboutneuroscience, but they kind of
(27:38):
teach them how to be at a bigcollege campus, how to navigate
it.
Um, we had a park event withthese students and I was sitting
around with a circle of them andwe were talking about learning
how to do your laundry, know, wewere talking about learning how
to do your grocery shopping, um,third time cat's gonna cry, um,
(27:59):
you know, because I just, allthis stuff is happening at the
same time for these students,these are such brilliant, great
kids and they're also, you know,living away from home for the
first time and they're learninghow to be at college for the
first time and we don't wantthem to.
Not see themselves as scientistsjust because they're struggling
(28:19):
with something like laundry orgroceries or whatever.
So you meet with them all yearlong.
You've taken them to the bigneuroscience conferences.
You've taken a bunch of them totravel on a plane for the first
time.
Ashley (28:33):
Yeah.
Cat (28:33):
And, uh, teach them how to pack for that.
Ashley (28:36):
Yeah, yeah, there's a
Cat (28:37):
this is, this is how we change America's scientific
workforce through work likethis.
Compassionate human centeredwork like this.
Ashley (28:46):
Yeah.
Yeah, and I and I think youknow, the Sort of mentorship
that we give students throughoutand the sort of reminders about
yeah You belong here and and andworking with them really closely
on like how to navigateBalancing coursework and you
know doing your laundry orwhatever.
It might be like there's all ofthat side of things You know,
and that's all really important,but I don't want to understate
(29:08):
the impact of giving thesestudents financial support to be
able to choose to do this,right?
Because many of our studentslike would have been and and
like maybe spend the firstquarter Kind of working a job
also in addition to research andthen i've seen several students
say, okay That's too much.
So they they do the researchpart of it and then they get to
pour all of those hours intotheir own training.
(29:31):
Like we're basically helpingpeople leverage their own time
and the financial support isabsolutely necessary for
Cat (29:38):
You're a job creator in the American economy.
Yeah.
Ashley (29:44):
Yeah,
Cat (29:45):
So, this has been really cathartic and wonderful to talk
about, and what actions canpeople take at this moment to
show their love for science, toshow their support for a program
like STARTNeuro?
Ashley (30:02):
I mean, I think there's a few things, right?
I mean, you can call yourrepresentatives.
Um, I did this the othermorning.
We'll put the instructions inthe show notes.
It, it literally takes a fewminutes.
You call your, your, um, yoursenators and your congressmen.
You say, you know, I care aboutthe NIH.
I'm really worried about thefreeze on funding.
I, you know, want that to beknown.
(30:22):
doesn't
Cat (30:22):
Yeah, these calls actually matter.
I know it's just, soundsridiculous, uh, but it really,
really matters, um, to do thisand to do it to your specific
representative and they tallythis stuff.
And yeah, Ashley did it, um,which I was grateful for because
I hate making phone calls and wewere sitting there with our
coffee and we had this littlescript and it would really
(30:43):
matter at this moment if youwould do this.
Ashley (30:46):
Yeah, totally.
And I mean, I think, you know,so that's like specifically
maybe for NIH funding.
I, I think there's like a biggerbattle to be fought to try to
figure out, you know, what weneed to do to get people to, how
do I put this?
I don't know, to like,
Cat (31:06):
Hmm.
Ashley (31:08):
To like underline what DEI work is for and obviously,
you know, this, I think thething I struggled with this past
week was like, and I told you tothis when we were having dinner
the other night, sorry, my wordsare like at the
Cat (31:22):
It's okay.
Take a, take a beat.
It's okay.
This is hard to talk aboutbecause it matters so much to
us.
Ashley (31:29):
So I said this to you the other night, but I, when I
read those executive orders onTuesday morning, I felt like
this, like, floor fall out ofmy, like, gut.
Like my, my heart just, like,sank, like, to the floor.
And the reason for that is it'snot just STARTNeuro.
(31:51):
It's not just, like, the fundingfor science.
You know, these executiveorders, and there's two of them,
about DEI work.
Just Like cut through everythingwe believe in the way I teach my
classes the way everybody Iwould consider a colleague
teaches their classes is builton these values and You know, I
(32:14):
don't know how to call acongressman and tell him that
exactly But there's like somebattle on the home front that
needs to happen Where it has tobe really clear that this stuff
really matters in a way.
That's like even just deeperthan about funding right now.
It's like, and a recognition oflike what this country was built
(32:35):
on and, and the backs on whichit was built.
And that hurts so, so much.
So I don't know, this is not anote to end on, but I,
Cat (32:46):
it's no, you know
Ashley (32:47):
uh,
Cat (32:48):
Thank you.
Thank you for saying that.
Thank you for sharing.
I know I know that I've seen Youknow, I'm sorry.
It's really hard to talk aboutthis, but For years this has
been your whole life And itmatters.
It really, really matters.
I think it's like at the core ofmaking progress as a society.
So I think it is a note to endon.
Ashley (33:12):
yeah.
Cat (33:13):
is our, this is our stuff worth protecting.
And worth having hope about inthis moment.
Ashley (33:19):
yeah, yeah, absolutely.
And I think, you know, and I sawsomeone post something to this
degree, which is like that workof protecting the people In your
circle that you feel like youneed to protect that work that
needs to continue like that'snon negotiable Like I am still
(33:40):
teaching my classes in a waythat I try to invite all
students in I am still meetingone on one with students to talk
about how to apply to gradschool like all of that work
It's gotta still happen becausesome Stupid executive order is
not gonna tell me how to do myjob and what my values are
Cat (34:01):
Yeah.
This brings me back, right backto the NIH.
Because you know what?
You know what's alsointeresting?
And important here, people atthe NIH cannot talk about this
and we can,
Ashley (34:13):
Yeah.
Cat (34:14):
on us to, I don't think people necessarily know this,
but you know, you're not, youknow, there's lots of structures
in place that mean if you areinternal to this work, you know,
you don't get to be out thereand be an advocate and we have
to advocate For the, as thepublic, for the things that we
want.
We are the only ones who can.
It's on us to voice this.
(34:35):
It's on us to say we care aboutit.
It's on us to say, you know,this is something that matters
to us to keep this work going.
Ashley (34:45):
We're going to keep it going in the ways we can, right
now.
Cat (34:49):
Yeah.
For our community and neighbors.
We want to talk about the NIH paying off beyond our
dreams.
This is a hard episode to begin.
How are you feeling, Ashley?
Ashley (00:10):
Yeah, this is hard.
I mean, this is something that'sobviously really near and dear
to our hearts.
The National Institutes ofHealth is the funding for the
biomedical research that happensin this country and therefore
actually in most of the world,given the status of the United
States and the money that wehave here.
So it's not a small deal.
And this is something that'sreally personal to me as a
(00:31):
scientist.
It's personal to Cat as someoneamong scientists and a scientist
herself.
So yeah, here we
Cat (00:37):
Yeah, this has been a moment where almost every
scientist in our lives is beingimpacted right now.
So should we go over a couple ofthe facts that impact what we're
going to talk about today andkind of what we know at this
moment and why we're recordingthis episode?
Ashley (00:53):
Yeah, let's talk about what, what got us here.
Why are we so freaked out, Kat?
Cat (00:57):
So many possible answers to that question.
Here are some facts.
On January 20th, um, anexecutive order came out that
includes language that mayimpact many of the scientists we
know and many programs atuniversities, um, including the
program that Ashley is currentlythe co director of at UC San
Diego, which is the Start Neuroprogram.
Um, other things happened this,last week.
(01:19):
Um, Science.
org, for instance, reports onthis, that on January 22nd, the
NIH and many other agencies hada wide range of restrictions
imposed.
Um, this includes a freeze onmeetings, travel, communication,
hiring, um, and this is kind ofdetails still emerging about
what's going to happen and whatthis means, so there's a lot of
(01:42):
uncertainty.
Um, but one big thing that'shappening for, uh, America's
scientists are the studysections of the NIH and the
advisory committees of the NIHare part of this freeze.
So we wanted to focus a littlebit on, hey, what's the NIH?
What is this?
What does it do?
How does it work?
Um, and we think that this is areally important part of
(02:05):
America's scientific legacy andcurrent scientific capacity, and
we know a lot about it, don'twe, babe?
So we wanted to use our, our,our knowledge to sort of just
explain this more to people.
Ashley (02:17):
Yeah, I think people probably don't realize like that
so many drugs, probably all ofthe drugs you use, everything we
know about cancer, how the brainworks was funded at some point
or is still funded by the NIHfunding.
Yeah.
And one thing I want to say,too, is there's kind of like two
categories of things that arehappening here.
So, one, there's the, the stuffwhere there's this direct
(02:40):
targeting of the NIH in terms ofsaying, okay, no external
communication.
Uh, no study sections, we'll getinto what that means, um, in a
second.
But then there's a secondcategory of, uh, targeting of
DEI work specifically.
And that actually goes beyondthe NIH, but does impact to NIH
(03:01):
because they're federally fundedprograms.
Cat (03:04):
Yeah, absolutely.
Yeah.
So there's like a broad range ofthings happening here.
We don't have certainty aboutall of them, but we're going to
tell you a little bit about thethings that we do know here.
And one place I think it'suseful to start, we did a little
bit of research for thisepisode, which as two
researchers is our favoritething and our comfort in moments
of uncertainty.
And so let's go over a couple ofthings about How does the NIH
(03:28):
work, and what do we know aboutit?
So, there's some really goodinformation out there put
together by a group calledUnited for Medical Research.
This is a coalition of researchinstitutions, patient health
advocates, um, and this includesplaces like Stanford University,
the American Cancer Society,MIT, the Alzheimer's
Association, Harvard, and JohnHopkins.
(03:49):
Essentially, this is a bigcoming together.
of so many of America's entitiesthat work on science.
Um, so they are a greatresource, we'll link, uh, their
website in the show notes.
And some facts we get from them,NIH funding generates, they say,
2.
46 dollars in economic activityfor every one dollar of funding.
(04:11):
So right off the bat, it's amajor contributor to economic
output.
They estimate, um, nine, 92.
9 billion in economic output.
Um, and I think 2023 is thatstat.
The NIH funded research grantssupport, uh, like 400, 000 jobs
nationwide.
(04:31):
This drives economies.
You can look up how it drivesimpact for your specific state.
We live in California.
So we looked up, um, whathappens in California because of
the NIH.
In California, the NIH supports13.
5 billion worth of economicactivity, probably.
More than that, the Universityof California is, no surprise, a
(04:52):
really big, top funded NIHinstitute.
So those are some kind ofgrounding facts that I thought
were interesting to kind of justset the table on what level of
activity we're talking abouthere.
Ashley (05:03):
Yeah.
And I think it's important toremember that this funding is
not just directly, you know, toscientists themselves, but
there's an entire infrastructurethat is in place to support the
science.
And that includes things likeadministrators and includes
things like who's going to takecare of the animals or the cells
or buy the equipment.
Like all of this stuff, theseare, these are jobs.
These are real jobs.
(05:24):
And, you know, when I thinkabout like where I want society
to go and where I want us tolike, put people's efforts.
It's in stuff like this.
Like it's towards thisscientific enterprise, which is
getting us to discoveries andultimately improving our health
and helping us understand howthings work in our bodies.
And yeah, so it's like, youknow, we're not just paying a
(05:46):
bunch of like, you know,scientists, but like, you know,
these are, these are like, it'sa whole thing.
It's a whole system that thissupports.
And, you know, If you thinkabout your local university, for
example, you know, like, okay,we think of universities as
where students go and they payfor their education, and that's
all true, and that is a big partof what happens at a university,
but at a research university,something like where I work at
(06:09):
UC San Diego, we also get a tonof funding that's all grant
funding from places like theNIH, and that supports people in
their jobs working at theuniversity, so there's a whole
separate Part of the universitythat's not just like students
going to classes.
It's the research and all ofthat that's happening, too
Cat (06:28):
And there's just no controversy about the benefit
that it is to have a systemlike, you know, um, the UC
system, like, in terms of howmuch it transforms people's
lives, benefits the state, youknow, lifts society.
This is the mechanism of movingtowards the future, in my
opinion.
You know, one, Um, study that weread for this episode, which I
(06:49):
thought was, again, just a greatpointed example to have in mind,
um, NIH funding contributed toevery single one of the 210 new
drugs that were approved by theFDA between 2010 and 2016.
So you take a new medication inAmerica, NIH funding almost
certainly was part ofunderstanding that.
(07:12):
And a lot of that funding isbasic science that allows us to
develop like the biologicaltargets for drug action.
So you may hear of things, orthere might be a pharma brand
name associated from it, right?
But Ashley and I both live andwork in this world of the people
who are uncovering the basicmechanisms that allow us to
(07:33):
develop medicine.
Ashley (07:34):
Yeah, absolutely and like that's that's an amazing
statistic And then I thinkthere's a lot of things that are
even really hard to quantifyhere.
So for example You know, we havemany friends now who are out
working in industry, so theywork at places like Johnson
Johnson and Pfizer.
And guess where those peoplewere trained?
They were trained atuniversities on federal funding.
(07:56):
They couldn't do their jobs atPfizer and Johnson Johnson where
they're doing things likeuncovering cures for
schizophrenia or whatever itmight be, right?
They couldn't do any of thatwithout that training.
And that is not something we'vequantified, it's very hard to
quantify.
But that's where it all happens.
And so it is literally,literally impossible to do
(08:16):
science without federal funding,period.
Cat (08:19):
absolutely.
We have structured it this wayand it's working for our society
actually.
Now we can debate, people dodebate very fiercely, how we run
the NIH and how we allocatescientific funding.
There is, you know, a lot totalk about there.
But this has been paying off.
You know, it's so central to howAmerican science works.
(08:40):
And I think that point about youdon't just get scientists,
scientists are the result ofthis long pathway of many years
and investment.
And it's, it's such a communalnetworked kind of thing too.
And this is part of what we'reseeing in this moment is how
networked it is because look atyou and I, right babe, like all
of our friends in our textthreads are being impacted at
(09:03):
this moment.
Because, you know, this fundingis so tied together.
Ashley (09:08):
Yeah.
Yeah, absolutely.
And that it, it impacts peoplethat are, you know, directly
working at the NIH, but then allof these subsequent impacts that
we mentioned at the start of theepisode, like study sections and
insecurity about funding andeverything, it's impacting all
of them.
Cat (09:22):
So, so a couple things here, maybe to bring some
clarity to what a study sectionis, you know, you might be
seeing this in the news, okay,NIH freezes study sections, the
scientists are freaked out aboutit.
Let's break this down for peopleand explain.
Uh, so quoting from, again, aNature Press piece on this, and
we'll link this in the shownotes, um, these panels that the
(09:45):
NIH runs, they're called studysections and advisory councils,
those serve slightly differentthings, um, sometimes scheduled
a year in advance.
They can include more than 30participating researchers, so a
lot of these are external folks,they're experts in their fields,
and it takes time to reschedule,so the disruption to this could
be pretty significant.
(10:05):
Again, we have a lot ofuncertainty, but Researchers in
America currently waiting for agrant review decision are in a
very precarious, frighteningposition because of this.
So one thing we thought we'dshare with you, all our
listeners, is you might not knowhow precarious science really
(10:25):
is.
Even when you're a verysuccessful scientist in a funded
lab, you're still living insideof this calendar of funding and
this calendar of, um, grants,and, and they're, they're
carefully planned, likescientists organize their entire
lives around this.
Um, anything you would add tothis, Ashley, or like, you're,
you've lived, kind of livedthis, right?
Ashley (10:44):
Yeah, I mean, so, you know, the way that federally
funded science works is youapply for grants.
So, um, labs when, when say likesomeone like a scientist gets a
job at a university, they getlike a little bit of startup
funding and, you know, in manyways this is like starting a
startup.
Small business, right?
You get a little bit of seedfunding from the university so
you can kind of get going Butthen after that it's all grant
(11:05):
funded So every five years or soYou're kind of relying on this
like influx of funds that you'veapplied for you've thought about
like exactly what you're goingto do You write a plan for and
you submit that to this studysection.
And so that study section theyare the The powerful folks who
decide, who look at everybody'sscience, everybody's proposals,
(11:26):
and they say, here's what we'regoing to fund, and here's what
we're not going to fund.
Which I think is another, yeah,go ahead,
Cat (11:32):
sorry.
Sorry.
We're both really, reallypassionate about this.
I, you know, I think a thingthat sometimes is really helpful
for people to understand too islike, this isn't just like, we
hired some contractors.
Only people who are atop oftheir field sometimes can even
evaluate these proposals.
(11:53):
Like, that's how specialized itis.
You know, you are trying tofigure out what should America
fund in cancer, you need thecancer scientists there.
And that means you need thecancer scientists You know, to
organize them from acrossinstitutions and out in the
public.
And, you know, I know that itcan sound like, wow, y'all, this
(12:14):
is a lot of meetings, but Iactually want to draw attention
to how, what a beautiful,collaborative, open kind of
project this is, you know, thatscientists, you know, organize
their time in this way and comein.
And I know we can debate partsabout it, but I just want to
make that point that this is,Yeah.
A way that we feed into our ownaccountability to the public and
(12:37):
make sure that, you know, we'restudying and funding the right
thing.
We put a lot of work into itbecause it's that important.
Ashley (12:44):
yeah, this is central to the process of science.
And I think, you know, it's kindof interesting because we,
people will contrast like, oh,you know, the way like.
Industry works is so competitiveand it's cutthroat and we have
to worry about like every singledollar and like,
Cat (12:58):
Industry is not nearly as competitive.
I have been in both.
It's not nearly as
Ashley (13:03):
Right and then we and then we like talk about
government like oh, there's allthis like, you know Spending you
know, whatever and there's likea bunch of like people who are
getting free government money orwhatever Like if you knew how
intense it was around science,right?
And how every dollar isscrutinized and every one of
these grants it goes throughlike literally you are being
(13:25):
Critiqued by Nobel Prize winningscientists who are looking at
your science and saying Is thisgoing to work or not?
Do we believe in it or not?
And like, as you said, this isnot a perfect process and like
plenty of scientists willcritique this process, but
that's like internal baseball,right?
For the, for like the bigargument here, it's like, look,
(13:45):
this is a highly scrutinized,every dollar is thought through
and yeah, and,
Cat (13:51):
It's something we can be proud of.
It's something we can be reallyproud of as an American public
that we have this transparency.
We have this, like, it's laidout on the table and we try at
least our hardest to make your,your thing rises and falls based
on how good the work is, youknow, and based on, you know,
how powerful the science is.
And yeah, like all things areimperfect and we got all things
(14:14):
involve humans and we gotta, youknow, work to make it better.
But, but this is,
Ashley (14:19):
shoveling money into scientists mouths.
Like that's just not what'shappening, right?
It's extremely hard to be ascientist, even when we have all
this money, because you'recompeting for it, you have to
demonstrate that you can cut it,you can do it, right?
Cat (14:34):
Yeah, absolutely.
And, and I think an importantpart here is people often
imagine some single PI who'slike an egghead in a university
and they're just kind of sittingon their cash or whatever.
Um, those people, again, Thinkof them like small business
owners.
They train postdocs.
They run many, many studies.
(14:55):
They might be, at this point,group science, which we've
talked about in our podcast, isa rising thing that's necessary
to do cancer research again, todo neuroscience, to do cell
biology.
We're in a place in sciencewhere there needs to be highly
networked, large collaborations.
So, um, you know, the singlescientist alone is not really
(15:16):
the model anymore.
And what we have is instead thiskind of beautiful network of
trainees and students and, andthose people are at, really at
risk if funding cycles getdisrupted.
So, um, I, you know, we've,we've both lived this.
We were both postdocs, Ashleyand I, and the number one thing
on your mind is, can I, becomefunded.
(15:38):
You essentially scrap for yourown salary a lot of the time and
fund yourself.
That's how much of a meritocracyit is.
You're proving that you're wortha salary and we both lived
through that.
We've both won grants.
And then you might also bemaking these calculations that
are like, okay, my grant runsout at this time.
(16:02):
And if I have like a five monthgrant, a gap, and I don't have
any money to fill that gap, Imight have to leave science.
Ashley (16:10):
yeah.
And I've seen people leavescience because they can't get
the next round of funding, andthat is something that happens,
and, you know, it's, it's funnythat sometimes, like, government
spending gets characterized,like, it's not a meritocracy or
something, but, like, in thiscase specifically, and, and it's
actually problematic how much inscience it's thought of itself
(16:31):
as a meritocracy, like, and wecan talk about that separately,
but, like, it
Cat (16:36):
people argue we should have more like lottery disbursement
of funds,
Ashley (16:39):
right, right,
Cat (16:41):
it's keeping people from doing their lab work,
Ashley (16:44):
Right, exactly.
But
Cat (16:46):
a different topic.
Yeah, but it is again.
It's something I'm proud of.
I think of all of our friends Weare our dear friend Matt Lovett
Barron who's a reallyexceptional neuroscientist and
like every single day I talk tohim is right he's writing a new
grant and he's funding otherscientists and he's you know,
creating incredible value forsociety and This is what he's
(17:08):
spending his time on competingin these processes, right?
Ashley (17:11):
yeah.
And again, I think it'simportant that we remember these
are jobs, like, these are peoplewho have jobs, all the people
that work in these labs, like,if you want to talk about
employment in this country,like, you have to include the
people who are doing researchfor their jobs.
And those are great jobs.
But like,
Cat (17:29):
I'm going to say it again, NIH funding for every dollar we
get back 2.
46.
That is an amazing return and,and then if you get cancer,
these are the people who aregoing to help you.
Ashley (17:44):
yeah.
Cat (17:45):
So I want to talk to you, Ashley, about the STARTNeuro
program.
Which is related to this becauseit is an NIH funded program,
among other funds, but you'vewon a big grant from the NIH,
and this is part of what you'vebeen working on.
So can you tell us a little bitabout STARTNeuro?
Mm
Ashley (18:07):
the big picture here is like, you know, we've talked
about sort of, okay, people gettraining to have PhDs, um, and
there's been this.
recognition in science that thattraining is not accessible to
everybody.
And that's a problem, right?
And it's a problem for tworeasons.
Like the, the reason I oftencite is, is a problem with
equity.
Of course, I want everybody tohave a chance to be a scientist
(18:27):
in this country.
So that's one side of it.
But then it's also a problem forlike, you know, maybe a kind of
more practical thing, which islike, we know that.
diverse teams are better.
And so if we actually want thebest science, we want diverse
teams, right?
So for either of those reasons,it seems really important that
we get everybody into thiscareer path or at least have an
(18:48):
option, right?
To, to follow this career path.
So, you know, to that end, theNIH has, um, set up some amazing
programs.
to give access to more students.
And so I, in 2020 with, my codirector, Brenda Bloodgood, we
applied for a grant for this.
So this is, um, this mechanismis called ENDURE, which is a
(19:10):
appropriate, I think, name
Cat (19:12):
very topical
Ashley (19:13):
at the moment.
So this program, it stands forEnhancing Neuroscience Diversity
Through Undergraduate Research.
education experiences.
Um, it's funded by the NIH aswell as the brain initiative
now, which you might've heardof.
This is a thing that Obamakicked off to really throw some
more money into neuroscienceresearch, knowing how important
it was.
(19:34):
So
Cat (19:34):
a huge impact as well.
Ashley (19:35):
yeah, that and the brain initiative had a huge impact.
Um, definitely still going tosome degree.
Um, so yeah, so this is, this isa program to get.
more students from morebackgrounds into neuroscience
research.
And, um, you know, like when Igo to community colleges and I
talk about this program, likefirst and foremost, you know,
(19:56):
community college students who,who we are trying to serve in
our program, they, They oftendon't even understand like
everything we just talked about,like how research happens, like
what actually research is,right?
And so there's kind of thisfirst step for us of just like
telling people what it means todo research and it's like, Okay,
you know, everybody has someonein their lives who has
Alzheimer's or is strugglingwith Parkinson's.
(20:19):
Okay, how do we help thosepeople?
And for some people, you know,the answer is med school.
But then we go in and we want totell students that There's this
other amazing thing that happenswhich is like we just try to
understand how these things workand that's how we get to cures
or how we get to treatments.
Cat (20:35):
I think about, yeah, when I was a college student, I didn't
know how science worked.
I knew that you could be ascientist or something, but I
didn't know how you got there,you know?
And the whole path is soinvisible to so many people.
And that's a big problem that Ithink STARTNeuro sheds some
light on.
Ashley (20:53):
totally.
So, so then, so then for us, youknow, when, um, students
transfer to UC San Diego, so,um, at UC San Diego, like a lot
of big universities, we have alot of transfer students, which
means, you know, they started atcommunity college and then they,
um, come to UCSD for their lasttwo years.
And, uh, our goal is to helpthose students find labs and
(21:14):
fund them to work in those labs,because we know that.
Um, many of them need fundingelsewhere, like we work with,
um, predominantly students thatcome from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds.
They need a job on campus.
And so we say like, look, whatif the job we give you is
working in a research lab andgetting training and actually
opening this door into researchto be the someone who's, you
(21:36):
know, actually curing some ofthese things that we care about?
So
Cat (21:40):
it's like Um, you know, um, providing them directly with
money right now, which helpsthem in their persisting college
right now
Ashley (21:48):
again, these are jobs.
Cat (21:50):
yeah, their jobs and making sure that, you know, what they
actually are working on isleading them to on a career
pathway.
I think something that peoplemight not know outside of
California is like, you know,can you give us a little bit of
background about this wholecommunity college to UC thing
that happens?
Because I actually think it'spretty unique.
Ashley (22:10):
Yeah, I think we have this thing where we think about,
you know, oh, students incollege and we think about kind
of like what the default studentin college looks like.
And I think that that's wrong ina lot of cases.
So if you look, you know, acrossthe United States, for example,
and you just tally up how manypeople are in college, about a
third of those people are at acommunity college.
(22:30):
So, first and foremost, this isa huge mechanism for education
in this country, and it ispredominantly students who
maybe, you know, couldn't affordfour years at a college, um,
maybe are not sure if college isright for them, so they're going
to do it part time and kind ofwork on the side, right?
There's a lot of differentreasons people choose community
college.
It's a huge swath of students inthis country, but none of those
(22:53):
students, or I should say Veryfew of those people will be able
to get the training they need.
To become a scientist becausethat doesn't exist at community
colleges.
There's not research happeningthere.
Cat (23:03):
this blew my mind when you started Start Neuro.
I didn't know this, like that,you know, you could be a kid who
has made it in so many ways thatare so beautiful and important.
I'm like, Oh, I promise you Iwouldn't cry during this episode
and it's happening.
But here's what happens.
Imagine being a kid who gets tocommunity college, transfers to
(23:26):
the UCs, which is a structurethat many people fought for,
that is a huge mechanism forsocioeconomic mobility, and you
make it, and then you justbarely miss being able to get on
the pathway to become ascientist, because essentially
they're there on the campus toolate to ever get a lab job.
By the time they find out aboutit, or even realize what
(23:49):
science, you have to do to go toa science PhD program, they're,
they're just too late.
And that is so ridiculous.
Ashley (23:58):
Yeah.
And it's insane too, becauselike.
You know, for me, forneuroscience, San Diego is a
huge hub for neuroscienceresearch, arguably the biggest
hub in the world.
And the community colleges thatare two miles from campus don't
have access to that
Cat (24:16):
Yes.
Ashley (24:17):
happening literally down the street.
It's, it's, it is our
Cat (24:20):
These are, I'm crying again.
Stop.
Make it stop.
Make it stop.
Ashley (24:24):
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Cat (24:25):
These are, our neighbors.
These are our neighbor's kids.
And so you saw this need and youwere like, we need a program.
We need something that directlyhelps transfer students.
It's an unmet need and it's ahuge population.
And so it's like this magiclittle lever that you found.
(24:45):
So tell me about like the impactof STARTNeuro.
What's happened because of itfor
Ashley (24:49):
Well, I want to be super clear.
I didn't start this program.
So I, um, picked up the batonfrom a couple of amazing people,
one of whom passed away twoyears ago.
His name was Eduardo Macano.
He was a scientist at UC South.
Now I'm going to cry.
Cat (25:04):
Yeah, Eduardo.
So you picked up the legacy.
Ashley (25:07):
Yeah.
So he, he actually started whathe called, you know, the start
program with some NSF funding.
We could do a whole otherepisode on
Cat (25:14):
Oh, so this is how far back the scientific funding
Ashley (25:17):
Yeah, yeah.
So that program ran from 2015 to2018.
It was, he got, you know, athree year grant to do it.
Um, he was the one whorecognized that this was like a,
a need in our community.
Um, I was brought in in 2020when we applied for this new
mechanism.
So I, I want to give like fullcredit to him and also to Brenda
who really like laid thefoundation for this
Cat (25:37):
Absolutely.
Well, thanks for correcting mebecause that's just actually
like a beautiful example of howscientific funding that leads to
impact leads to more impact andthen like another program that
helped more people.
Like, tell me, I think somethinglike 40 students have gone
through this program.
Like, some people have gone tograd school.
Like, tell me about it.
Ashley (25:55):
Yeah.
So, you know, this iteration ofthe program, which started in
2020, every year we bring in 10students.
So, you know, um, half of ourstudents at this point have
graduated from UCSD.
The other half are still at UCSDfinishing up.
And those students are in PhDprograms.
So one of them, is actually inthe neuroscience PhD program
here at UCSD, which isincredible.
(26:18):
Um, another one is like veryclose to me.
I don't want to like cross myfingers too hard, but like, um,
so, you know, um, they're,they're on this path and, you
know, for example, the studentsthat.
that is here.
Um, you know, she was doingresearch when she was here
trying to understand, um, howAlzheimer's impacts these
particular cells in the brain,which are called astrocytes,
(26:38):
which do a lot of importantwork.
Anyway, um, so they, they'redoing amazing research.
Um, something I'm particularlyproud of is that, you know,
almost all of the students thathave gone through our program
are still in science in one wayor another.
So even if they're not in PhDprograms, they are continuing to
work in the labs that theyworked in either at the Salk
(26:59):
Institute or UC San Diego.
So they're still working inthose labs or they're working at
companies or they're kind oflike working as clinical
coordinators for differentresearch programs.
They're doing lots of amazing,amazing things.
And.
I think that having thefoundation with us was helpful
in that regard.
Cat (27:18):
Well.
That's under, that's so sweetlyunderstated.
I'm gonna embarrass you becauseI'm your wife and here's what
happens.
Like, these students come, theycome to a summer program.
Ashley spends hours and hoursand hours of her summer with
them.
They teach them not just aboutneuroscience, but they kind of
(27:38):
teach them how to be at a bigcollege campus, how to navigate
it.
Um, we had a park event withthese students and I was sitting
around with a circle of them andwe were talking about learning
how to do your laundry, know, wewere talking about learning how
to do your grocery shopping, um,third time cat's gonna cry, um,
(27:59):
you know, because I just, allthis stuff is happening at the
same time for these students,these are such brilliant, great
kids and they're also, you know,living away from home for the
first time and they're learninghow to be at college for the
first time and we don't wantthem to.
Not see themselves as scientistsjust because they're struggling
(28:19):
with something like laundry orgroceries or whatever.
So you meet with them all yearlong.
You've taken them to the bigneuroscience conferences.
You've taken a bunch of them totravel on a plane for the first
time.
Ashley (28:33):
Yeah.
Cat (28:33):
And, uh, teach them how to pack for that.
Ashley (28:36):
Yeah, yeah, there's a
Cat (28:37):
this is, this is how we change America's scientific
workforce through work likethis.
Compassionate human centeredwork like this.
Ashley (28:46):
Yeah.
Yeah, and I and I think youknow, the Sort of mentorship
that we give students throughoutand the sort of reminders about
yeah You belong here and and andworking with them really closely
on like how to navigateBalancing coursework and you
know doing your laundry orwhatever.
It might be like there's all ofthat side of things You know,
and that's all really important,but I don't want to understate
(29:08):
the impact of giving thesestudents financial support to be
able to choose to do this,right?
Because many of our studentslike would have been and and
like maybe spend the firstquarter Kind of working a job
also in addition to research andthen i've seen several students
say, okay That's too much.
So they they do the researchpart of it and then they get to
pour all of those hours intotheir own training.
(29:31):
Like we're basically helpingpeople leverage their own time
and the financial support isabsolutely necessary for
Cat (29:38):
You're a job creator in the American economy.
Yeah.
Ashley (29:44):
Yeah,
Cat (29:45):
So, this has been really cathartic and wonderful to talk
about, and what actions canpeople take at this moment to
show their love for science, toshow their support for a program
like STARTNeuro?
Ashley (30:02):
I mean, I think there's a few things, right?
I mean, you can call yourrepresentatives.
Um, I did this the othermorning.
We'll put the instructions inthe show notes.
It, it literally takes a fewminutes.
You call your, your, um, yoursenators and your congressmen.
You say, you know, I care aboutthe NIH.
I'm really worried about thefreeze on funding.
I, you know, want that to beknown.
(30:22):
doesn't
Cat (30:22):
Yeah, these calls actually matter.
I know it's just, soundsridiculous, uh, but it really,
really matters, um, to do thisand to do it to your specific
representative and they tallythis stuff.
And yeah, Ashley did it, um,which I was grateful for because
I hate making phone calls and wewere sitting there with our
coffee and we had this littlescript and it would really
(30:43):
matter at this moment if youwould do this.
Ashley (30:46):
Yeah, totally.
And I mean, I think, you know,so that's like specifically
maybe for NIH funding.
I, I think there's like a biggerbattle to be fought to try to
figure out, you know, what weneed to do to get people to, how
do I put this?
I don't know, to like,
Cat (31:06):
Hmm.
Ashley (31:08):
To like underline what DEI work is for and obviously,
you know, this, I think thething I struggled with this past
week was like, and I told you tothis when we were having dinner
the other night, sorry, my wordsare like at the
Cat (31:22):
It's okay.
Take a, take a beat.
It's okay.
This is hard to talk aboutbecause it matters so much to
us.
Ashley (31:29):
So I said this to you the other night, but I, when I
read those executive orders onTuesday morning, I felt like
this, like, floor fall out ofmy, like, gut.
Like my, my heart just, like,sank, like, to the floor.
And the reason for that is it'snot just STARTNeuro.
(31:51):
It's not just, like, the fundingfor science.
You know, these executiveorders, and there's two of them,
about DEI work.
Just Like cut through everythingwe believe in the way I teach my
classes the way everybody Iwould consider a colleague
teaches their classes is builton these values and You know, I
(32:14):
don't know how to call acongressman and tell him that
exactly But there's like somebattle on the home front that
needs to happen Where it has tobe really clear that this stuff
really matters in a way.
That's like even just deeperthan about funding right now.
It's like, and a recognition oflike what this country was built
(32:35):
on and, and the backs on whichit was built.
And that hurts so, so much.
So I don't know, this is not anote to end on, but I,
Cat (32:46):
it's no, you know
Ashley (32:47):
uh,
Cat (32:48):
Thank you.
Thank you for saying that.
Thank you for sharing.
I know I know that I've seen Youknow, I'm sorry.
It's really hard to talk aboutthis, but For years this has
been your whole life And itmatters.
It really, really matters.
I think it's like at the core ofmaking progress as a society.
So I think it is a note to endon.
Ashley (33:12):
yeah.
Cat (33:13):
is our, this is our stuff worth protecting.
And worth having hope about inthis moment.
Ashley (33:19):
yeah, yeah, absolutely.
And I think, you know, and I sawsomeone post something to this
degree, which is like that workof protecting the people In your
circle that you feel like youneed to protect that work that
needs to continue like that'snon negotiable Like I am still
(33:40):
teaching my classes in a waythat I try to invite all
students in I am still meetingone on one with students to talk
about how to apply to gradschool like all of that work
It's gotta still happen becausesome Stupid executive order is
not gonna tell me how to do myjob and what my values are
Cat (34:01):
Yeah.
This brings me back, right backto the NIH.
Because you know what?
You know what's alsointeresting?
And important here, people atthe NIH cannot talk about this
and we can,
Ashley (34:13):
Yeah.
Cat (34:14):
on us to, I don't think people necessarily know this,
but you know, you're not, youknow, there's lots of structures
in place that mean if you areinternal to this work, you know,
you don't get to be out thereand be an advocate and we have
to advocate For the, as thepublic, for the things that we
want.
We are the only ones who can.
It's on us to voice this.
(34:35):
It's on us to say we care aboutit.
It's on us to say, you know,this is something that matters
to us to keep this work going.
Ashley (34:45):
We're going to keep it going in the ways we can, right
now.
Cat (34:49):
Yeah.
For our community and neighbors.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.