Howard Hughes: Patron Of Science?

Medical Research Institute Is America's Second Largest Charity

(CBS)  Hughes gives its investigators freedoms most scientists can only dream of. For instance, they're free of the crushing paperwork required to get money from the National Institutes of Health.

"The paperwork for a government grant is sort of like filing out your tax forms," says Cech. "In contrast, we want to free up people to think about their science, not think about filling out forms."

Hughes investigator Doug Melton, at Harvard, is thinking about a cure for juvenile diabetes. He's working with stem cells from human embryos.

"And I can think, as I do, most every waking moment of the day, ‘How am I gonna get those cells to become insulin-producing cells?’ And the Hughes makes that possible," says Melton, who wouldn't have gotten a federal grant at all for his research.

In 2001, President Bush imposed his stem cell ban, in which he tried to balance the objections of opponents of abortion against the wishes of scientists to work with collections of stem cells, called "lines."

"He drew this line at saying, ‘Well, if someone else has already created these stem lines, then it's okay for you to use them, but don't create any new ones,’" says Cech.

But critics say that's morally ambiguous and that the president is trying to have it both ways. Is Cech taking a swipe at the president’s policy?

“It's either ethical or it's not ethical. We decided that was not a place that we were comfortable,” says Cech. “And we don't think it's unethical. Therefore, we think that we have not just an opportunity to engage in this research, but perhaps a responsibility.”

Since the president's ban applies only to researchers using federal grants, Hughes, as a private institution, is free to plow ahead.

Using leftover embryos from a Boston fertility clinic, Melton has, in the last year, created nearly a dozen entirely new stem cell lines.

“We're trying to figure out how to tell them what to do. In our case, we want them to become these insulin cells,” says Melton.

Hughes money is also being used to solve all kinds of arcane scientific puzzles. For instance, Hughes has been funding Dr. Huda Zoghbi's lab at the Baylor College of Medicine since 1996.

“I'll tell you a very scientific story that would have never happened if not for Hughes,” says Zoghbi, who was interested in really understanding how balance and coordination are controlled in humans. She had the first go, looking in fruit flies, then in mice. That took years, and because it wasn’t focused on curing a specific ailment, nobody else was likely to pay for it.

“That really has nothing to do with disease. It's far out from disease, and hardly anybody - when we started this study in 1995 - would be attracted to funding something relevant to a fruit fly to study in a mouse and in a human,” says Zoghbi.

“So we found the gene and it turned out to be a very important gene. It turned out to be the gene that's essential for the little hair cells in the inner ear that allow you to hear and allow you to know where your head position is when you close your eyes. We would have never known how important it is and know nothing about it, if not for funding from Hughes and that I think has paid off in a big way.”

Hughes also allows its scientists to change course. When Melton first got funding 10 years ago he was studying the development of frogs. Then, his infant son was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes.

“I stopped working on frogs and asked my colleagues to join me in working on the problem of how to make cells that are absent in juvenile diabetics,” says Melton. “The Howard Hughes Medical Institute was perfectly fine with that. I told them what I was gonna do. They said, ‘Sounds interesting to us. Go for it.’"

Melton believes that the NIH would not have been as accommodating. And now, Melton has since become one of the leading diabetes and stem cell researchers in the world. Unfortunately, his daughter contracted diabetes last year, so Melton says he is very committed to try to solve this problem.

[npr_opoganda]

"typically used for building" NO. It is used for power acquisition. Harvard FAILS at following the spirit of those that donate. In light of the overwhelming need for wells in Africa, Harvard withholds, Harvard simply points the finger at others (the right). Harvard is an infestation of one point of view. Look at the Demography of the professors. Harvard is "arguably" the best University because it pays for the prestige, not for results. Founded as a Divinity School, Harvard now prides itself on developing the best ways to abort life and turn it into a product. Walking across the green (the mud) shows that they care very little for appearances, and looking at the broken sidewalks is more proof that they expect Cambridge to pay out, not them

[rational_1]

Harvard doesn''''t need it - it has 30 billion, but prefers to use it''''s wealth as political leverage as opposed to "pure" research. Why not paint the whole canvas? Why not disparage Harvard with equal enthusiasm as you rank on NIH?
Posted by NPR_OPOGANDA at 10:05 AM : Jun 09, 2008

University endowments are typically used for things such as buildings (infrastructure) and retention/recruitment packages for faculty, rather than yearly research costs. NIH isn''t going to pony up $100 million for a new biology building. The biomedical researchers are basically self-employed in a sense and are expected to compete for their research dollars at NIH (and other funding agencies) rather than expecting the universities to give it to them from their endowments. I think this is appropriate since all grant applications to NIH or NSF (for example) undergo rigorous peer-review, ensuring only the best proposals get funded (~10-15% these days). This wouldn''t happen if universities gave professors access to their endowments. So yes, Harvard is obscenely wealthy... but it also has a pretty good track record of accomplishment and is arguably the best university in the world.

[beehive21-2009]

Howard was an amazing pioneer, everyone loved Howard, and always will. He picked the Russians Atomic bomb off the ocean floor, no one else came close. He''s the only man ever licensed via the telephone , In Gaming. In the end, poor Howard was turned into a Zombie via drugs.

[npr_opoganda]

Secondly, and lastly, at the conclusion of the story there is a blurb about HHMI giving grant money to research how "Climate Change" affects Malarial and Choleral conditions worldwide. How politically and emotionally apropos! I would suggest that HHMI also fund research to FINALLY analyze the research that went into the manifesto "Silent Spring", and let the outcome speak for itself. We all should be aware that 6,000 children die of Malaria every day in Africa. We should also be aware that DDT and many of it''s cousins can stop these deaths. We have an immediate solution; but what we need now is the courage to truly and unemotionally evaluate it''s use and decide honestly whether it is better to let children die or to rely on the lack of proven science in the benchmark "Silent Spring". HHMI is political first, scientific, second; and nothing will change my opinion of that until it balances it''s research, just like 60 minutes should balance it''s rhetoric, if it is truly non-biased.

[npr_opoganda]

This story is unbalance rhetoric, creating a demon out of the NIH, but avoiding other enterprises that could easily fund research with ever more potency than HHMI. I speak specifically of Harvard''s endowment, which exceeds 30 Billion (as compared too HHMI''s 11 Billion). One of the researchers taking grants from HHMI works at Harvard, no? Why isn''t Harvard at the forefront? (To answer, because despite it''s vast wealth, it wants more and is willing to accept it from the NIH). Harvard doesn''t need it - it has 30 billion, but prefers to use it''s wealth as political leverage as opposed to "pure" research. Why not paint the whole canvas? Why not disparage Harvard with equal enthusiasm as you rank on NIH?