A group of concerned universities put out a statement about how flat funding for the National Institute of Health “puts a generation of science at risk,” and the House Committee on Science and technology has been holding hearings. Naturally, science bloggers have some thoughts on this:

• Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science explains why non-researchers should care about this issue.
• DrugMoneky argues that the pipeline problem isn’t just due to funding amounts – cultural biases against younger investigators during grant review also play a role.
• At Respectful Insolence, NIH-funded surgeon/scientist Orac advocates for reforming the “used car salesman” model of how biomedical research is funded at universtieis.
• Sameer Yousef at Science Progress reports on the grilling of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Acting Director over proposed program cuts, and on Bill Gates’s testimony about keeping the U.S. competitive in the technology field.

Elsewhere:

Mike Hall at AFL-CIO Weblog, Workplace Kahuna at Weekly Toll, and Kane at OSHA Underground report on the House Education & Labor Committee hearing on combustible dust.

Shelley Batts at Of Two Minds considers the warnings about declining U.S. life expectancy, and the role obesity plays in life expectancy trends.

Merrill Goozner at GoozNews tells us what the re-use of needles and sedative vials at a Las Vegas clinic demonstrates about the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

At RH Reality Check, William Smith and Pamela Merritt explain what’s wrong with the PEPFAR prostitution pledge, using outreach to sex workers in Zambia and St. Louis as examples. 

Tom Philpott at Gristmill describes a group of college students’ campaign to get Smithfield pork out of their dining halls.

Robert McClure at Dateline Earth warns of an upcoming mining boom in the western U.S.

Jennifer Sass at Switchboard and Andrew Schneider at Secret Ingredients look at EPA and FDA activity on nanotechnology.