David F. Warner

@dwarnersoc.bsky.social

Father, Husband, Scholar • GenX • Cornell & PennState Alum • History, Politics, Sociology, Demography, Population Health • Baking, Gardening, DIY, SciFi Movies • Yankee in the Deep South • Perpetually Tired • Cynic • Opinions My Own

The NIH just released a proposal that will apparently hide peer reviewers’ impact scores and percentiles from the research team, their institution, and NIH program officers. All the better to obscure how funding decisions will be made primarily via political review, I’m guessing.

NOT-OD-26-088: Request for Information (RFI) on Proposed Changes to Reporting Outcomes from NIH Peer Review

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Request for Information (RFI) on Proposed Changes to Reporting Outcomes from NIH Peer Review NOT-OD-26-088. NIH

grants.nih.gov

“Our system is grounded on checks and balances — the entire system — and right now we have a Congress, with a Republican majority, that isn’t really standing up to do its duties. We have a Supreme Court that’s pretty much in line with the executive.”

Aaron Rupar@atrupar.com · 2mo ago

New in PN: @jbf1755.bsky.social on why Trump is an affront to the Founders "But now, the president is openly profiting off the office while destroying and misusing the physical WH as though he owns it. I am angry, because what we’re watching right now isn’t what a president is supposed to be."

NIH grants have been under political scrutiny since early 2025. But what does the screening process actually look like? What is being flagged? I spent a month digging into leaked docs and emails. We've published the 235-word list that are being flagged by an internal AI tool. And so much more. 🧵

Inside the new political screening that’s stalling NIH grants

Mandatory reviews by top health officials and checks for 235 disfavoured terms have left hundreds of vetted grant applications in administrative limbo.

nature.com

Horrifying. Their 4yo kids taken away from them for a couple of days—interviewed without other adults present by people they didn’t know. This was all based on a bizarre accusation that could’ve been easily dismissed w/o involving the children. This is not how these processes are supposed to work.

Pete Buttigieg@petebuttigieg.bsky.social · 2mo ago

This week someone targeted my family for harm with a false report. We’re physically OK, but that doesn’t mean we weren’t harmed. I am beyond furious. Whatever your politics, this is awful, wrong, and can never become normal.

1. How common is LLM use in scientific publishing, and how does it vary across field, publisher, journal prestige, author demographics etc.? @kylesiler.bsky.social has new paper in PNAS that addresses this question on a massive scale: 7.3 million papers from Elsevier, PLOS, MDPI, and Frontiers.

The diffusion of large language models in published academic articles | PNAS

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly changing academic research, raising questions of who is adopting these tools and under what conditions. Th...

pnas.org

"The thing about semi-authoritarian states that many Americans don’t grasp, even though they’ve been living in one for nine years. Life goes on, collapsing in pieces instead of dramatic sweeps, acclimatizing you to horrors and destroying your expectations until survival becomes an aspiration."

Sarah Kendzior@sarahkendzior.bsky.social · 3mo ago

"The most important thing about the election is not that Trump was proclaimed the winner, but that he was allowed to run." I wrote that in 2024. I'm disgusted by those who ignore the institutional rot that enabled Trump and blame everyday voters instead. sarahkendzior.substack.com/p/the-end-of...

I need folks to understand that this proposed OMB rule change isn't just about science, or research. This is about asserting control. I see quotes that "at least it still allows indirect at expected amounts". First - this presumes you're getting grants which 👀 UNTIL WHEN YOU FOOLS. OVERTON WINDOW.

They buried the lede. *One of the Americans en route home has tested positive for the Andes Hantavirus* Fortunately, the receiving facility is equipped to handle this. But whoever wrote that someone tested “mildly positive” is an idiot. They are PCR positive. They have it.

Bild

What a pill to swallow after presenting in the “Public Policy & Population Health” session yesterday at #paa2026. One of the biggest challenges of doing work in this area has always been that institutions rarely provide researchers with evidence of their harms. Now they won’t fund it, either.

Elizabeth Wrigley-Field@wrigleyfield.bsky.social · 4mo ago

…For those who weren’t there, something I didn’t post about (because we pivoted from policy to pop centers and I wanted to listen closely) was Bhattacharya’s absolutely astonishing claim that research evaluating the health effects of public policy is out of scope for NIH-funded research.