Don't Let Funding Caps to NIH Researchers Harm Highly Collaborative HIV Cure Research

As the first and unfortunately the ONLY person in the world confirmed to be cured of HIV, the importance of HIV cure research has been very dear to me. Since my university-based physician, Dr. Gero Hütter, and the German healthcare system gifted this status, I have always felt that it is my duty to support the efforts of the scientific community around the world, and particularly, those working diligently to find ways to cure HIV and create vaccines against the disease. As many of my friends and colleagues can attest, the negative health effects of living with HIV long-term, including the sometimes lasting side effects of harsh medications, decrease the daily quality of life for the friends and family of those infected with HIV. This hardship can be felt through all of society as the costs of treatment and medications can be a serious challenge to nations around the world for all people living with HIV.

It has recently come to my attention that funding for this important research is in jeopardy. The proposed plans for medical grant cap rules advocated by the current leadership at NIH have the potential of devastating effects on HIV research, particularly HIV cure research. HIV research that is managed correctly needs to be translational and collaborative. The proposed point system for awarding and managing grants will create a negative impact on collaborative research as a whole. This system will encourage scientists to NOT work together with their colleagues in collaborative projects because they will have “too many points.” The Delaney Collaboratory program toward HIV cures will be seriously damaged if this point system goes forward. Collaboration will be discouraged, and leadership of these teams will be penalized.

Although I understand the importance of efficiency and cost control, I believe, to allow correct responses to the proposed changes, the changes need to be more clearly formulated. The road for young, up and coming, researchers could be made much more difficult as collaboration decreases and they can no longer be supported by larger research teams. The data that show that the changes in grant caps will achieve the correct objectives need to be shared with the research community. The scientists actually doing the research should be involved and need to have greater input into the proposed changes. Finally, all changes made should be compatible with team science efforts that have been successfully used for many years in HIV research and most recently in HIV cure research.

With the pending changes to funding, HIV research is at a crossroad. One road leads to the potential decrease in the innovative collaboration currently utilized by the HIV research community. This isolation of ideas and approaches will add years to the discovery of a cure for HIV. The Delaney Collaboratories will be abandoned by the top researchers in the field. The other road, hopefully, will lead to increased efficiency as well as universal sharing of research and collaboration of new fresh approaches to this horrible virus. Reconfiguring the point system to reward and not penalize collaborative research is essential. I encourage all of you, scientist and non-scientist alike, to speak out to make sure any new changes do not harm the collaborative effort to develop a cure for HIV.