Jamie | Host of In Plain English
@plainenglishsci.bsky.social
Host of In Plain English, a science communication podcast that makes science approachable, open source, and jargon free (inplainenglishpod.org). Pain researcher & MD/PhD student in neuro at WashU in St. Louis. Nonbinary (they/them), Queer, polyamorous.
March 7, 2025 at 9:48 PM
“if academics want to take a sky is falling approach to every single thing Donald Trump does, they're only going to exhaust themselves.”
Pay no attention to the erosion of funding for research, attacks on good rigorous science, or the genuine advancements that will go by the wayside, he’s saying.
Pay no attention to the erosion of funding for research, attacks on good rigorous science, or the genuine advancements that will go by the wayside, he’s saying.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“if academics want to take a sky is falling approach to every single thing Donald Trump does, they're only going to exhaust themselves.”
Pay no attention to the erosion of funding for research, attacks on good rigorous science, or the genuine advancements that will go by the wayside, he’s saying.
Pay no attention to the erosion of funding for research, attacks on good rigorous science, or the genuine advancements that will go by the wayside, he’s saying.
“We have made no progress in Alzheimer's disease in part because of the NIH's dogmatism.”
“In part” is doing a lot of lifting there. The story of Alzheimer’s research is one of failure to detect frank fraud combined with a field-wide reluctance to challenge big names.
“In part” is doing a lot of lifting there. The story of Alzheimer’s research is one of failure to detect frank fraud combined with a field-wide reluctance to challenge big names.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“We have made no progress in Alzheimer's disease in part because of the NIH's dogmatism.”
“In part” is doing a lot of lifting there. The story of Alzheimer’s research is one of failure to detect frank fraud combined with a field-wide reluctance to challenge big names.
“In part” is doing a lot of lifting there. The story of Alzheimer’s research is one of failure to detect frank fraud combined with a field-wide reluctance to challenge big names.
“Jay has already been on record as saying he thinks the NIH is not willing to push the envelope.”
How would Jay the economist know what is “pushing the envelope”? he probably wouldn’t recognize actually transformative research if he saw it. Would he have funded bacteria research that led to CRISPR?
How would Jay the economist know what is “pushing the envelope”? he probably wouldn’t recognize actually transformative research if he saw it. Would he have funded bacteria research that led to CRISPR?
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“Jay has already been on record as saying he thinks the NIH is not willing to push the envelope.”
How would Jay the economist know what is “pushing the envelope”? he probably wouldn’t recognize actually transformative research if he saw it. Would he have funded bacteria research that led to CRISPR?
How would Jay the economist know what is “pushing the envelope”? he probably wouldn’t recognize actually transformative research if he saw it. Would he have funded bacteria research that led to CRISPR?
“He’s [Jay Battyachara] not a laboratory scientist. He’s an economist.”
“Guy with no relevant qualifications is perfect guy for the job.” Also ask Boeing how well replacing their well qualified engineers @ the exec level with business/econ guys went. Or Merck w/Vioxx. It doesn’t end well.
“Guy with no relevant qualifications is perfect guy for the job.” Also ask Boeing how well replacing their well qualified engineers @ the exec level with business/econ guys went. Or Merck w/Vioxx. It doesn’t end well.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“He’s [Jay Battyachara] not a laboratory scientist. He’s an economist.”
“Guy with no relevant qualifications is perfect guy for the job.” Also ask Boeing how well replacing their well qualified engineers @ the exec level with business/econ guys went. Or Merck w/Vioxx. It doesn’t end well.
“Guy with no relevant qualifications is perfect guy for the job.” Also ask Boeing how well replacing their well qualified engineers @ the exec level with business/econ guys went. Or Merck w/Vioxx. It doesn’t end well.
“The government cannot be a welfare program for everybody doing low quality […] research.”
evidence that that is currently happening? Also using racially charged word “welfare” to pit diversity vs good science. No evidence this is true. No evidence the pause is going to do anything to “fix” this.
evidence that that is currently happening? Also using racially charged word “welfare” to pit diversity vs good science. No evidence this is true. No evidence the pause is going to do anything to “fix” this.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“The government cannot be a welfare program for everybody doing low quality […] research.”
evidence that that is currently happening? Also using racially charged word “welfare” to pit diversity vs good science. No evidence this is true. No evidence the pause is going to do anything to “fix” this.
evidence that that is currently happening? Also using racially charged word “welfare” to pit diversity vs good science. No evidence this is true. No evidence the pause is going to do anything to “fix” this.
There’s a nugget of truth in that we need to challenge accepted ideas in science. But the sneaky thing here is that he worked it into an argument about “woke”, implying diversity is wasteful and that there is a dichotomy between “diversity” and “progress”.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
There’s a nugget of truth in that we need to challenge accepted ideas in science. But the sneaky thing here is that he worked it into an argument about “woke”, implying diversity is wasteful and that there is a dichotomy between “diversity” and “progress”.
“For the time being, prepare for cuts in diversity supplements.”
Why is he so gleeful about a major funding mechanism for trainees going away? Diversity supplements fund good scientists and good science. There’s a subtle implication here, a conflation of “diversity” with waste and stagnation…
Why is he so gleeful about a major funding mechanism for trainees going away? Diversity supplements fund good scientists and good science. There’s a subtle implication here, a conflation of “diversity” with waste and stagnation…
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“For the time being, prepare for cuts in diversity supplements.”
Why is he so gleeful about a major funding mechanism for trainees going away? Diversity supplements fund good scientists and good science. There’s a subtle implication here, a conflation of “diversity” with waste and stagnation…
Why is he so gleeful about a major funding mechanism for trainees going away? Diversity supplements fund good scientists and good science. There’s a subtle implication here, a conflation of “diversity” with waste and stagnation…
“There are many examples of woke science funding that will not survive in a Trump administration.”
It’s always about the “woke” bogeyman. The example he gives is PREVENTATIVE SCREENING FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE. maybe people’s health should be a priority in this country. More on “woke” to come.
It’s always about the “woke” bogeyman. The example he gives is PREVENTATIVE SCREENING FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE. maybe people’s health should be a priority in this country. More on “woke” to come.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“There are many examples of woke science funding that will not survive in a Trump administration.”
It’s always about the “woke” bogeyman. The example he gives is PREVENTATIVE SCREENING FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE. maybe people’s health should be a priority in this country. More on “woke” to come.
It’s always about the “woke” bogeyman. The example he gives is PREVENTATIVE SCREENING FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE. maybe people’s health should be a priority in this country. More on “woke” to come.
“Jay might decide to run a randomized trial testing the current study section structure against proposed alternatives, such as the modified lottery, and other ideas.”
Is there any evidence of this or is this just what Vinay hopes he’ll do? Most of next para. also just sounds like Vinays wish list.
Is there any evidence of this or is this just what Vinay hopes he’ll do? Most of next para. also just sounds like Vinays wish list.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“Jay might decide to run a randomized trial testing the current study section structure against proposed alternatives, such as the modified lottery, and other ideas.”
Is there any evidence of this or is this just what Vinay hopes he’ll do? Most of next para. also just sounds like Vinays wish list.
Is there any evidence of this or is this just what Vinay hopes he’ll do? Most of next para. also just sounds like Vinays wish list.
“This is completely normal and reasonable.”
THIS IS NOT NORMAL. Whether it’s good is (apparently) up for debate but it’s definitely not normal. New presidential administrations do have temporary hiring freezes but there’s never been anything (that I can recall) this drastic.
THIS IS NOT NORMAL. Whether it’s good is (apparently) up for debate but it’s definitely not normal. New presidential administrations do have temporary hiring freezes but there’s never been anything (that I can recall) this drastic.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“This is completely normal and reasonable.”
THIS IS NOT NORMAL. Whether it’s good is (apparently) up for debate but it’s definitely not normal. New presidential administrations do have temporary hiring freezes but there’s never been anything (that I can recall) this drastic.
THIS IS NOT NORMAL. Whether it’s good is (apparently) up for debate but it’s definitely not normal. New presidential administrations do have temporary hiring freezes but there’s never been anything (that I can recall) this drastic.
“Trump has paused study sections to allow future NIH director Jay Bhattacharya to revisit the priorities.”
Citation? Also which priorities? I haven’t seen anything from the administration that “transformative research” is a top priority of theirs.
Citation? Also which priorities? I haven’t seen anything from the administration that “transformative research” is a top priority of theirs.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
“Trump has paused study sections to allow future NIH director Jay Bhattacharya to revisit the priorities.”
Citation? Also which priorities? I haven’t seen anything from the administration that “transformative research” is a top priority of theirs.
Citation? Also which priorities? I haven’t seen anything from the administration that “transformative research” is a top priority of theirs.
Vinay starts out by citing Dr. Ionannadis to claim that “Study sections are groups of mediocre scientists”. The rationale: study section members are unlikely to be primary authors (1st or last) on papers with >1,000 citations. The conclusion: “conform and be funded”.
January 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
Vinay starts out by citing Dr. Ionannadis to claim that “Study sections are groups of mediocre scientists”. The rationale: study section members are unlikely to be primary authors (1st or last) on papers with >1,000 citations. The conclusion: “conform and be funded”.
TOMORROW In Plain English is resurrecting the debate about the All of Us project and their use of UMAP, an algorithm that reduces complex data to 2D.
Join us to learn why this mathematical model
sparked discourse, and how scientists can analyze and communicate large data sets more rigorously.
Join us to learn why this mathematical model
sparked discourse, and how scientists can analyze and communicate large data sets more rigorously.
December 10, 2024 at 3:28 AM
TOMORROW In Plain English is resurrecting the debate about the All of Us project and their use of UMAP, an algorithm that reduces complex data to 2D.
Join us to learn why this mathematical model
sparked discourse, and how scientists can analyze and communicate large data sets more rigorously.
Join us to learn why this mathematical model
sparked discourse, and how scientists can analyze and communicate large data sets more rigorously.