Rock Talk

Helping connect you with the NIH perspective

Two Years of Rock Talking!

Time flies when you’re having fun! I started Rock Talk on January 19, 2011 (see the first two posts here and here) and when Nature asked me to write about my adventures in blogging to commemorate Rock Talk’s two year anniversary I gladly agreed… check out my article here.

7 thoughts on “Two Years of Rock Talking!

    • Thanks for the feedback mat. We’re still working out some formatting issues since we added the new template to match the revamped grants.nih.gov website, but are trying to get some of the previously available features back online as we can.

  1. So Nature wants me to pay $32 to read your article. Doesn’t really seem in the spirit of blogging, does it? Or for that matter, NIH’s open access policies on research..

    • There were some technical difficulties on the Nature website which are hopefully permanently resolved now. So the article is freely available… and should stay that way in perpetuity!

  2. Two years of “Rock Talking” and nothing has changed. If anything, the previous situation for young PIs, postdocs, grad students, etc. has only gotten worse. Discussing issues and problems is good and healthy, but at some point the “Talk” part needs to end so that the “Rock” part can start.
    What is the point of this blog? To “talk” about NIH-related problems! Do a Pubmed search and you’ll see in less than 5 minutes that the many issues this blog “talks” about were already a being “talked” about back in the 80s. When is the NIH going to start “acting” about the issues being “talked” about? The NIH is killing science in the US and its leaders don’t even know it; or if they do, they clearly don’t care. Why “rock” the boat after all?

    • I agree with your frustration. The overall NIH budget is tight, but lack of money is not the problem, it is the way it is distributed.
      The rich get richer while the poor get poorer, and underrepresented minorities continue to get left behind.
      I think it is incredibly rude, and indicative of the blindness of the NIH that no one responded to your comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


9 − = four

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>