Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Zoology and wildlife conservation

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Zoology and wildlife conservation

Clinton sketches out his 'ethical guideposts' for modern biology

Article Abstract:

It is the responsibility of human beings to determine whether science is used for good or evil purposes, according to President Bill Clinton. He has stated his belief that science does not have a soul of his own, and that the most significant truths about human life are still outside the realm of science. He has given details about four ethical 'guideposts' for scientific development, and has expressed wide-reaching views about scientific ethics. He has called on Congress to introduce legislation which bans health insurers from discriminating against clients on the basis of their genetic make-up.

Author: Wadman, Meredith
Publisher: Macmillan Publishing Ltd.
Publication Name: Nature
Subject: Zoology and wildlife conservation
ISSN: 0028-0836
Year: 1997
Science and technology policy, Ethical aspects, Science

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Clinton woos women's votes with cancer genetics funds

Article Abstract:

Critics attribute political motives to the President's announcement that the government will redirect US$30 million to breast cancer genetics research in 1997. The president is trying to impress women who are a potential source of votes. The major part of the money will come from the US Army, and the remainder from the National Institutes of Health. The money has been proposed to be spent on biomedical research and investigator-initiated grants to study breast cancer genetics.

Author: Wadman, Meredith
Publisher: Macmillan Publishing Ltd.
Publication Name: Nature
Subject: Zoology and wildlife conservation
ISSN: 0028-0836
Year: 1996
Political activity, Genetic research

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


NIH may drop special funds for 'new investigators'

Article Abstract:

The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) may drop special funds for new investigators, known as First Independent Research Support and Transition awards, or R29s. An NIH working group has suggested the abolition of the grants, which are worth an average $70,000/y for five years. The working party suggests that those applying for R29 should instead apply for standard NIH grants, or R101s. The argument is that R29s do not offer enough money to young scientists.

Author: Wadman, Meredith
Publisher: Macmillan Publishing Ltd.
Publication Name: Nature
Subject: Zoology and wildlife conservation
ISSN: 0028-0836
Year: 1997
Economic aspects, Economic policy, Scientists, United States. National Institutes of Health, Federal aid to research, Government aid to research

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Clinton, Bill, Finance
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Planning rejection leaves British nuclear waste plans in disarray. Nuclear blast from the past?
  • Abstracts: Nobel goes to T-cell pioneers whose work 'changed face of immunology.' Friends and believers bid farewell to Nobel laureate
  • Abstracts: Russian documents set out 'tectonic weapon' research. Russian miners add weight to protests by scientists. 'Poor security' blamed for loss of Russian fossils
  • Abstracts: Old head on young shoulders. Origin of patterning in neural tubes. The future of evolutionary developmental biology
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.