The importance of government funded research is extremely important considering its brought cures for countless diseases over the years. My research topic is discussing why the government should stop cutting funding for scientific and medical research. I am interested in this topic because I am interested in scientific and medical research. I am majoring in biology and plan to do research next year with the university, and the government contributes to funding university research. This research question does affect me slightly. Since I do plan to do research some time in my college career, it is important that the government continues to fund scientific research. Currently, I do not have a personal experience regarding this issue, but I do think I am qualified to write on this topic because I do attend a university that does participate in scientific research. Besides universities' research, medical and professional, scientific research is also crucial. Making advances in medicine are very important today with the constant discovery of new illness and diseases. 


The first article I looked at discusses how the US congress always has trouble agreeing on a yearly budget plan and ends up cutting funding for the NIH every year, without bad intentions. The NIH, is responsible for researching hundreds of diseases. Many scientists involved in research may change jobs or even fields because their project funds were cut completely. This article also looks at how this affects the economy. New research on medicine helps lower medical costs. Almost every medical center relies on government funding for the NIH, because most medical centers are supported by NIH research. Congress always cuts funding for the NIH. The author of this article, Steven Salzberg, is a credible writer because he is a biomedical scientists who receives funding from the NIH. Although, the article may be biased, Salzberg is well qualified to write on this topic. He is currently a professor of biomedical engineering, computer science, and Biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University. 


My second article is straight from the White House's website, and is based on a statement released by President Obama from his last State of the Union address a couple weeks ago. In this part of his speech to the country, he discusses the urge to diminish cancer, and by one billion dollars, plans for scientists to begin this research. The article explains how far we have already come with cancer research but how far there still is to go, until cancer is gone or at least treatable or preventable. President Obama began something called "Cancer Moonshot Taskforce" which will be led by the Vice President, Joe Biden. The purpose of this program is to focus solely on cancer research by using federal funds, targeted incentives, private sector efforts from industry and philanthropy, and patient engagement initiatives ("Investing in the National Cancer Moonshot"). Some may say that is program is ridiculous, and that the President should spend his time worrying about things other than medical research. I believe this program is a great leap forward towards the government continuing to fund medical research for other deadly diseases. The author of this article is clearly reliable, considering they were writing for the President of the United States. 


My third and final article discussed how the US government should be investing in science, and not war. It goes into specifics of how the US government spent over two trillion dollars for war. The article continues to bring up examples of the government wasting money on national defense that is never used. The author even brought up a couple of examples medical research progress made last year, "a breakthrough cure for some forms of leukemia; a new, less invasive prenatal test for Down Syndrome and other chromosomal abnormalities; stem cell treatments that can repair damaged hearts; a promising breakthrough in Alzheimer's treatment; and stem cells to treat blindness" (Salzberg). This list of advancements only makes my argument stronger because it is proof of the progress is being made by medical researchers. The author of this article is the same one from my first article. 

My research question is arguable because if the government continues to cut funding for research, advances in medical research will dramatically decrease, causing many people to suffer. Medical costs will continue to rise, and treatments will lack. There are no disagreements between the three of my article I chose. They all conclude with the fact that the US government needs to continue to support scientific research and that funding should be increased. Out of all my articles chosen, the sources come from very different places, giving me a good perspective on the topic. I've seen it from the government's point of view and from the scientists' point of view. My views have not only gotten stronger on the topic, but I feel much more educated on why this is such an important idea. I may need to revise my research question to be more specific on where exactly the funding is going to. Either specifically for universities for research, or straight to professional medical researchers.

