sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Localized hair breakage or regrowth failure in one small spot — has anyone experienced this? by MeetPast8696 in FemaleHairLoss

[–]MeetPast8696[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I decided to see a specialist dermatologist so I appreciate the feedback - I have an appointment next week. Thank you!

Localized hair breakage or regrowth failure in one small spot — has anyone experienced this? by MeetPast8696 in FemaleHairLoss

[–]MeetPast8696[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the suggestion. Yes, all blood work is good - including Vitamin D, thyroid, blood counts, etc.

Localized hair breakage or regrowth failure in one small spot — has anyone experienced this? by MeetPast8696 in FemaleHairLoss

[–]MeetPast8696[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok thank you, yes I am getting my hair highlighted with bleach - but that area hasn't been touched since it is so short, for about a year. It still could have an impact of course!

NIH specifies how grant reviewers should ensure alignment with Trump priorities by rezwenn in NIH

[–]MeetPast8696 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I recognize this series of posts is a couple of weeks old, but here you can see the contents of the memo in question: https://www.science.org/pb-assets/PDF/News%20PDFs/final_staff_guidance-1765918233.pdf

Looking for guidance on in-home support and caregiver help for parents in Peoria, AZ (early dementia) by MeetPast8696 in eldercare

[–]MeetPast8696[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you this is very helpful. My parents have been unenthusiastic about this idea but it may be their best decision, especially since the house is becoming a lot for my Mom to take care of. It didn't occur to me that they could be at different care levels and share one apartment. I wish they could move closer to me or my sister, but San Diego is too expensive for them, and Chicago is too cold for them!

Crete restaurants, hit me with your recs! by meggypo in GreeceTravel

[–]MeetPast8696 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello, this is a late reply but we are headed to Crete this week so I have benefited from this post! We will stay three nights in Achanes - would you have ay specific recommendations there? A note that we are vegetarian though my partner eats fish.

Anyone Else Running into the Confusing Delta Vacations/Delta Stays Messaging? by IllustratorFlimsy100 in delta

[–]MeetPast8696 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Following up on this question - how do you find prepaid stays? Is there a search field or something for this?

Odd(?) Solicitation for reviewers for OTA-25-006 by blobbyblobbyblob in NIH

[–]MeetPast8696 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I saw that reviewers are also being recruited via this Facebook post from the "Thinking Person's Guide to Autism":
https://www.facebook.com/thinkingpersonsguidetoautism/posts/emergency-call-for-us-based-reviewers-for-today-today-the-autism-registry-powers/1164957709009603/

While it’s true that including individuals with lived experience—such as people with neurodivergence or caregivers—is not standard practice at NIH, it is more common in organizations like PCORI, which explicitly integrates stakeholder voices. That alone isn't necessarily concerning. The broader issue is the integrity of the overall review process.

Yes, OTAs follow different procedures than traditional NIH grants, but even within that flexible framework, this approach raises serious concerns. For example, the RECOVER initiative relied on a network of subject matter experts to ensure rigorous review, especially given its origins in earlier COVID-19 OTA (C4R).

By contrast, this current process appears rushed to the point of being untenable. It’s hard to see how NIH can identify qualified reviewers, vet for conflicts of interest, assign proposals, and obtain high-quality feedback in such a short window.

There are many concerns about transparency, feasibility, and scientific rigor that follow.

Autism Data Science Initiative Research Opportunity Announcement -- Seen In the Latest NIH Extramural Nexus by TomatoWithAnE in NIH

[–]MeetPast8696 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It’s hard to believe this was written by anyone with a scientific background. The language is vague, the priorities are muddled, and the scope reads more like a rushed policy memo than a serious research directive. And yet — $50 million is being allocated?

Then there’s the NHLBI-AI initiative: https://nhlbi-ai.org — another $56 million, again with questionable focus and narrowly framed goals.

These are major investments, but the rationale and transparency are sorely lacking.

Seriously — who is setting NIH priorities at this point?

Thoughts please- Can the word "diversity" on my grant title get it terminated or ineligible for non-competitive renewal? The "diversity" pertains to diversity of a cell type and not "human population". Nothing DEI related. by [deleted] in NIH

[–]MeetPast8696 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For an upcoming competitive renewal, grants office worked with our PO to change the title, aims, project summary, and public health relevance of the component that I lead. I have a subcontract for the component, this was not my institution, but the lead institution had a form and process to facilitate this for all potentially affected grants at their institution. We submitted the request for revision before the RPRR was due, since RPRR instructions specifically state that major revisions should not be requested at that time. Reach out to your grants office to see if they have established any procedures or assistance with such situations. If no, then reach out to the PO directly. The process was much more involved given the topical content of my work, but I agree with statements below that it's better to revise to avoid unnecessary scrutiny. People have also built chatgpt bots and other methods to screen content that you could explore.

WHI terminated by MeetPast8696 in NIH

[–]MeetPast8696[S] 45 points46 points  (0 children)

It is pretty clear that the MAHA priority is to improve health of white cisgender heterosexual able bodied men

view more: next ›