3 ms·
I was referring to spending in CA although the I think I misquoted the figure as $1.5-2B; think it's $3.7B in ca Total NIH budget is like $32B. Half of that go
by aaavl2821 9y ago
I was referring to spending in CA although the I think I misquoted the figure as $1.5-2B; think it's $3.7B in ca
Total NIH budget is like $32B. Half of that goes to basic research and some goes to non-life sci research. Life sci VC funding in 2017 was $15B. Some of that goes to admin costs obviously but not nearly as much as NIH if you look at headcount at companies
https://www.hhs.gov/about/budget/budget-in-brief/nih/index.html https://www.hhs.gov/about/budget/budget-in-brief/nih/index.h...
- Fomite 9y agoTo be honest though, CA is the best case for VC funding, and I'm willing to wager the number of states with significant VC funding of science can be counted on your fingers. In comparison, the NIH funding is nation wide, and specifically has mechanisms for underfunded states. What do you think the ratio of funding between the NIH and life sci VC funding is in say...Idaho?
- aaavl2821 9y agoI agree. Massachusetts is maybe the only other state like that. I admittedly used an outlier example as it illustrates a trend, and I know so many scientists who dont realize 1) how hard it is these days to get tenure and 2) how much opportunity there is to do cool science outside of academia, so I use this example to show them that there are other options For what it's worth, I know there are movements to attract more VC funding to places like Pittsburgh, NYC, San Diego, Texas, North Carolina etc. still early stages, but I think in 15 years things could be very different