Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Science 27 November 2009:
Vol. 326. no. 5957, pp. 1176 - 1177
DOI: 10.1126/science.326.5957.1176
Prev | Table of Contents | Next

News Focus

Science and the Stimulus:

Science and the Stimulus

Jeffrey Mervis

The huge research windfall from the Recovery Act—the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was given $10.4 billion, the National Science Foundation (NSF) $3 billion, and the Department of Energy (DOE) received $2 billion for basic research—presented these agencies with a unique opportunity to catch up from previous shortfalls. But it also put pressure on them to find ways to avoid a disruptive boom-and-bust cycle. In a special package of stories this week, Science examines what NIH (see p. 1179), NSF (see p. 1181), and DOE (see p. 1177) did with that flexibility and how their choices will leave a deep imprint on U.S. research for years to come. The final story in the package examines a controversial area of research jump-started with $1.1 billion in stimulus money: comparative evaluation of medical treatments (p. 1183).

Read the Full Text

To Advertise     Find Products

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)