Comment from Jillian Saunders

I am a graduate student in neurobiology at Duke University who receives NIH training grant (T32) funding, work in a lab that receives NIH funding, and plan to apply to the NRSA F31. I am commenting to oppose the proposed revisions to §200.205, §200.202, and §200.340. Approval of section 200.205 would require a senior political appointee to review/approve every discretionary grant, with authority to override peer review. My current training and long-term career goals depend on the principle that scientific funding decisions are made by qualified experts, not political officials. It is critical that scientific awards be left to field experts and scientific peers, as this ensures project and scientific integrity. Similarly, section 200.340 would allow grants to be terminated at any time. This is detrimental to myself, my peers, and my advisors for numerous reasons. Most importantly, the risk and level of investigation proposed in grant submissions are determined by the grant duration. Termination at any point not only jeopardizes the project's success but would also result in long-term waste of NIH funds, as partially funded projects would be unable to be completed. Building on that, section 200.202 states that a scientific proposal must align with the administration's views and interests. This fundamentally destroys the scientific infrastructure in the US that drives critical discoveries, particularly in academic research environments. This is particularly relevant for me as I am interested in understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying psychedelics as an antidepressant, which historically is misaligned with the US Administration's interest. However, this research has still been able to be conducted and has led to life-changing clinical trials for depression, anxiety, and PTSD, especially in vulnerable groups such as veterans. While I could talk about the harm caused by all the proposed policies, this subset directly affects my graduate training, my peers' work, and my long-term career goals as a scientist in the US. I urge OMB not to finalize this rule.