Overview
In November 2025, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) requested input on policies that could accelerate the American scientific enterprise. APS developed this response based on input from the APS Science Policy Committee to represent the perspectives of physiology researchers.
Key Concerns from APS
- Support the workforce. Training and workforce development programs that support early-career researchers and facilitate career transitions are essential for maintaining a strong scientific workforce.
- Fully fund basic research. Fundamental, curiosity-driven science is necessary for developing new life-saving treatments, but research at each stage of the basic to applied research pipeline should be supported in order for discoveries to translate into cures.
- Restore trust in science. To ensure that the benefits of government-funded research reach all Americans, there needs to be a public emphasis on the accessibility and trustworthiness of science.
Read the Full APS Comment
The following comments were submitted on behalf of APS
The American Physiological Society (APS) appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s (OSTP) Request for Information on Accelerating the American Scientific Enterprise (OSTP-TECH-2025-0100). APS represents more than 8,300 researchers and educators who work at academic institutions, government agencies, and private industry to advance understanding of health and disease. We offer our perspective on a selection of the questions posed by OSTP.
(2) How can the Federal government better support the translation of scientific discoveries from academia, national laboratories, and other research institutions into practical applications? Specifically, what changes to technology transfer policies, translational programs, or commercial incentives would accelerate the path from laboratory to market?
Basic physiological research produces results that generate foundational knowledge, advancing our understanding of the fundamental mechanisms of life and how they work in human health and disease. As defined in the code of federal regulations (32 CFR 272.3), “basic research is systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts without specific applications towards processes or products in mind.” The definition goes on to state that “it is farsighted high payoff research that provides the basis for technological progress.”
Over time, a body of basic research builds to the point where translational applications can be considered and new innovations take place. The Federal government plays a critical role in supporting basic research because without a foreseeable application and immediate return on investment, private industry cannot justify the investment of resources. Without basic research and the foundational knowledge it creates, translation and commercialization cannot take place.
In addition to robust funding of basic research, the Federal government can support commercialization of findings through the following mechanisms:
Provide resources to scientific societies for programs that accelerate the translation of basic research to application by fostering collaboration between researchers, industry and other stakeholders. Societies already have experience in bringing researchers together through publications, meetings and other convening activities. These could be adapted to develop interdisciplinary collaborations and public-private partnerships modeled on successful programs and activities from across the scientific enterprise.
Continuing to encourage research institutions to commercialize their inventions. Passage of the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980 created a research ecosystem that empowers research institutions to turn research results into practical benefits for the American people. A paper published in JAMA Health Forum in 2023 by Cleary et. al. showed that of the 356 drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration between 2010 and 2019, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) contributed funding to the development of 354 of those (99.4%). This data point demonstrates the remarkable contributions of federally funded research, and primarily federally funded academic research, to advancing the health of Americans.
A 2023 report from the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) assessed the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) program at NIH. The report found the program to be effective in fulfilling its mission but also made several recommendations for improving its efficiency. The recommendations of NASEM should be considered as OSTP seeks ways to foster translation and commercialization of the results of federally funded research.
Dissemination and implementation grants allow investigators to build on the results of federally funded research by identifying, developing and testing strategies for overcoming barriers to the successful adoption of evidence-based interventions. NIH currently offers three NIH-wide notices of funding opportunity (NOFO) for dissemination and implementation grants: PAR-25-144, PAR-25-143 and PAR-25-233.
Publishing is a critical step in the translation of research results. The Federal government can provide incentives for researchers to submit their work in a timely manner to trusted community-run purpose driven platforms like those provided by society publishers, which enable rapid, high-quality dissemination of research results.
Fully supporting the mechanisms listed above with robust annual funding will provide opportunities for federally funded researchers to build on the results of their research and develop new interventions, products and therapies that can improve the health of Americans and fuel the growth of the private sector through commercialization.
(6) What reforms will enable the American scientific enterprise to pursue more high-risk, high-reward research that could transform our scientific understanding and unlock new technologies, while sustaining the incremental science essential for cumulative production of knowledge?
Adjust peer review to enable identification of high-risk, high-reward research. Most grant review processes and criteria at federal agencies are tailored for assessing science proposals with considerable preliminary data. Although fundamental research is important and forms the foundation for later breakthroughs, proposals for groundbreaking research that are exploratory or field changing in nature should be evaluated by different criteria. The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) was established in 2022 with the mission of supporting high-risk high-reward research.
Support mechanisms that encourage commercialization. It is likely too early to evaluate the success of ARPA-H. However, the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grant programs provide critical funding for the initial stages of technology development. According to data from the National Small Business Association, between 1996 and 2020, these programs helped advance 99 new therapeutic drugs from the lab to the market. In addition to providing greater funding for programs like these, OSTP may consider working with agencies to revise exploratory and developmental grant mechanisms, such as the NIH R21, to tailor these awards toward high-risk high-reward research with translational potential.
(9) What specific Federal statutes, regulations, or policies create unnecessary barriers to scientific research or the deployment of research outcomes? Please describe the barrier, its impact on scientific progress, and potential remedies that would preserve legitimate policy objectives while enabling innovation.
Foster increased trust in the sciences. The successful deployment and acceptance of research outcomes depend upon Americans having trust in scientists and the scientific enterprise. Fostering a positive image of scientists and their work will help remove the barrier that currently exists when Americans are unable to trust those who develop and disseminate innovative technologies and products. Researchers who receive federal grants have had their work judged to be of the highest merit by their peers, and the impact of those grants is evaluated through regular progress reports and rigorously peer-reviewed publications. The Federal government should reflect this in its communications about federally funded research and the evidence-based discoveries of its funded scientists.
Improve access to research methods and models. Policies that restrict the use of certain research models, including animal models, or impose excessive administrative requirements, represent significant barriers to scientific advancement. Allowing scientists to propose and use the most appropriate scientific models and methods to answer the research questions at hand will lower barriers to scientific discovery.
Provide consistent support for research training. Sudden changes in federal support for programs that train early career scientists represent a barrier to research discovery. When early career scientists lose support for their training, it is destabilizing and risks driving Americans away from careers in science. Likewise changes to visa policies for international students serve as a deterrent to talented and qualified applicants from abroad who wish to study in the US and contribute to research in this country. Science is an inherently collaborative endeavor and there is value in working with researchers from around the world to advance scientific discovery.
Minimize administrative burden. Rapid changes in federal policies related to grant, research center and training program applications inevitably cause an increase in administrative burden when these changes are adopted. As agencies consider updates to administrative requirements related to grants, the overall landscape of administrative burden should be considered. Researchers report that the amount of effort required to prepare and submit an NIH grant application has increased significantly over the last 10 to 15 years. Three decades ago, grants were typically 50 pages in length, with 25 of those pages focused on science. Today, the sections focused on science total only 13 pages, but the grants for research, researcher centers of excellence, and training programs have ballooned to between 150 to over 500pages with the addition of documents peripherally related to the science or training program being proposed. This represents a significant administrative burden that detracts from time and resources that should be devoted to advancing science.
Guide decisions with science. Funding and policy decisions at federal research agencies should be guided by science. Restricting topics that can be researched risks stifling innovation and wastes resources that have already been invested in ongoing meritorious research, dimming hope for future innovations and breakthroughs.
(11) How can the Federal government foster closer collaboration among scientists, engineers, and skilled technical workers, and better integrate training pathways, recognizing that breakthrough research often requires deep collaboration between theoretical and applied expertise?
Support interdisciplinary research. Federally supported training programs, research initiatives, and grant mechanisms are the key tools for building a collaborative scientific workforce capable of advancing research across disciplines. Funding mechanisms that support interdisciplinary research teams provide a natural incentive for researchers to seek opportunities for collaboration and enable trainees to diversify their skillsets. As a current example, the BRAIN Initiative creates opportunities for trans-disciplinary research projects outside the established missions of individual NIH Institutes and Centers. Critically, the BRAIN Initiative training program builds trainees into multi-faceted and adaptable investigators by exposing them to a greater range of tools and mentorship opportunities.
Facilitate career transitions. The success of the nation's scientific enterprise relies on the strength of its training programs. The federal government should support these programs in connecting researchers at all career stages with the skills, knowledge and mentorship needed for a range of career trajectories. The focus of those training programs shapes the future areas of scientific excellence. The government should increase support for programs that better facilitate career transition, such as by incorporating both theoretical and applied research or matching early-career researchers with mentors from different disciplines and leveraging internship opportunities with the private sector.
Support pathways for applied research. Curiosity-driven fundamental research remains essential for driving discovery and can't be replaced by outcome-focused applied research. However, federal programs such as I-Corps and Small Business Program grants can help bridge the gap. The National Science Foundation's I-Corps program provides a pathway for researchers to explore the commercialization of a discovery, while Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grants support the early development stages of innovative research. The government should continue its investment in these types of programs.
(12) What policy mechanisms would ensure that the benefits of federally-funded research—including access to resulting technologies, economic opportunities, and improved quality of life—reach all Americans?
Support innovative publishing models that enhance access. A 2022 memo from the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) directed grantmaking agencies to require that the results of federally funded research be made available to the public without delay. APS has adopted a Subscribe to Open (S2O) publication program for 10 of its research journals, which commits to making articles open access once enough subscribers commit to participating each year. This publishing program aligns with OSTP's objective, offering broader access to results, lower publishing charges for researchers, and enabling community-funded open research.
Improve accessibility to science. Now that public access has been implemented, OSTP should take the next steps in elevating the accessibility of science. While research data can be accessed by anyone who knows how to find it, the results are often highly technical and challenging to interpret for non-experts. The lack of efficient science communication represents a barrier to improving health.
OSTP should consider actions that would reduce barriers to public understanding of science. This could include sponsoring direct community engagement by researchers and fostering dialogue between scientists and the public. Training programs and center grants could be encouraged to include robust public engagement as part of their funded mission. Nonprofit scientific societies such as APS support the research community by hosting conferences, providing affordable discipline-specific publishing solutions and creating training resources. APS encourages OSTP to work with scientific societies, researchers, and institutions to make the benefits of federally funded research accessible to all Americans.
(2) How can the Federal government better support the translation of scientific discoveries from academia, national laboratories, and other research institutions into practical applications? Specifically, what changes to technology transfer policies, translational programs, or commercial incentives would accelerate the path from laboratory to market?
Basic physiological research produces results that generate foundational knowledge, advancing our understanding of the fundamental mechanisms of life and how they work in human health and disease. As defined in the code of federal regulations (32 CFR 272.3), “basic research is systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts without specific applications towards processes or products in mind.” The definition goes on to state that “it is farsighted high payoff research that provides the basis for technological progress.”
Over time, a body of basic research builds to the point where translational applications can be considered and new innovations take place. The Federal government plays a critical role in supporting basic research because without a foreseeable application and immediate return on investment, private industry cannot justify the investment of resources. Without basic research and the foundational knowledge it creates, translation and commercialization cannot take place.
In addition to robust funding of basic research, the Federal government can support commercialization of findings through the following mechanisms:
Provide resources to scientific societies for programs that accelerate the translation of basic research to application by fostering collaboration between researchers, industry and other stakeholders. Societies already have experience in bringing researchers together through publications, meetings and other convening activities. These could be adapted to develop interdisciplinary collaborations and public-private partnerships modeled on successful programs and activities from across the scientific enterprise.
Continuing to encourage research institutions to commercialize their inventions. Passage of the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980 created a research ecosystem that empowers research institutions to turn research results into practical benefits for the American people. A paper published in JAMA Health Forum in 2023 by Cleary et. al. showed that of the 356 drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration between 2010 and 2019, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) contributed funding to the development of 354 of those (99.4%). This data point demonstrates the remarkable contributions of federally funded research, and primarily federally funded academic research, to advancing the health of Americans.
A 2023 report from the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) assessed the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) program at NIH. The report found the program to be effective in fulfilling its mission but also made several recommendations for improving its efficiency. The recommendations of NASEM should be considered as OSTP seeks ways to foster translation and commercialization of the results of federally funded research.
Dissemination and implementation grants allow investigators to build on the results of federally funded research by identifying, developing and testing strategies for overcoming barriers to the successful adoption of evidence-based interventions. NIH currently offers three NIH-wide notices of funding opportunity (NOFO) for dissemination and implementation grants: PAR-25-144, PAR-25-143 and PAR-25-233.
Publishing is a critical step in the translation of research results. The Federal government can provide incentives for researchers to submit their work in a timely manner to trusted community-run purpose driven platforms like those provided by society publishers, which enable rapid, high-quality dissemination of research results.
Fully supporting the mechanisms listed above with robust annual funding will provide opportunities for federally funded researchers to build on the results of their research and develop new interventions, products and therapies that can improve the health of Americans and fuel the growth of the private sector through commercialization.
(6) What reforms will enable the American scientific enterprise to pursue more high-risk, high-reward research that could transform our scientific understanding and unlock new technologies, while sustaining the incremental science essential for cumulative production of knowledge?
Adjust peer review to enable identification of high-risk, high-reward research. Most grant review processes and criteria at federal agencies are tailored for assessing science proposals with considerable preliminary data. Although fundamental research is important and forms the foundation for later breakthroughs, proposals for groundbreaking research that are exploratory or field changing in nature should be evaluated by different criteria. The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) was established in 2022 with the mission of supporting high-risk high-reward research.
Support mechanisms that encourage commercialization. It is likely too early to evaluate the success of ARPA-H. However, the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grant programs provide critical funding for the initial stages of technology development. According to data from the National Small Business Association, between 1996 and 2020, these programs helped advance 99 new therapeutic drugs from the lab to the market. In addition to providing greater funding for programs like these, OSTP may consider working with agencies to revise exploratory and developmental grant mechanisms, such as the NIH R21, to tailor these awards toward high-risk high-reward research with translational potential.
(9) What specific Federal statutes, regulations, or policies create unnecessary barriers to scientific research or the deployment of research outcomes? Please describe the barrier, its impact on scientific progress, and potential remedies that would preserve legitimate policy objectives while enabling innovation.
Foster increased trust in the sciences. The successful deployment and acceptance of research outcomes depend upon Americans having trust in scientists and the scientific enterprise. Fostering a positive image of scientists and their work will help remove the barrier that currently exists when Americans are unable to trust those who develop and disseminate innovative technologies and products. Researchers who receive federal grants have had their work judged to be of the highest merit by their peers, and the impact of those grants is evaluated through regular progress reports and rigorously peer-reviewed publications. The Federal government should reflect this in its communications about federally funded research and the evidence-based discoveries of its funded scientists.
Improve access to research methods and models. Policies that restrict the use of certain research models, including animal models, or impose excessive administrative requirements, represent significant barriers to scientific advancement. Allowing scientists to propose and use the most appropriate scientific models and methods to answer the research questions at hand will lower barriers to scientific discovery.
Provide consistent support for research training. Sudden changes in federal support for programs that train early career scientists represent a barrier to research discovery. When early career scientists lose support for their training, it is destabilizing and risks driving Americans away from careers in science. Likewise changes to visa policies for international students serve as a deterrent to talented and qualified applicants from abroad who wish to study in the US and contribute to research in this country. Science is an inherently collaborative endeavor and there is value in working with researchers from around the world to advance scientific discovery.
Minimize administrative burden. Rapid changes in federal policies related to grant, research center and training program applications inevitably cause an increase in administrative burden when these changes are adopted. As agencies consider updates to administrative requirements related to grants, the overall landscape of administrative burden should be considered. Researchers report that the amount of effort required to prepare and submit an NIH grant application has increased significantly over the last 10 to 15 years. Three decades ago, grants were typically 50 pages in length, with 25 of those pages focused on science. Today, the sections focused on science total only 13 pages, but the grants for research, researcher centers of excellence, and training programs have ballooned to between 150 to over 500pages with the addition of documents peripherally related to the science or training program being proposed. This represents a significant administrative burden that detracts from time and resources that should be devoted to advancing science.
Guide decisions with science. Funding and policy decisions at federal research agencies should be guided by science. Restricting topics that can be researched risks stifling innovation and wastes resources that have already been invested in ongoing meritorious research, dimming hope for future innovations and breakthroughs.
(11) How can the Federal government foster closer collaboration among scientists, engineers, and skilled technical workers, and better integrate training pathways, recognizing that breakthrough research often requires deep collaboration between theoretical and applied expertise?
Support interdisciplinary research. Federally supported training programs, research initiatives, and grant mechanisms are the key tools for building a collaborative scientific workforce capable of advancing research across disciplines. Funding mechanisms that support interdisciplinary research teams provide a natural incentive for researchers to seek opportunities for collaboration and enable trainees to diversify their skillsets. As a current example, the BRAIN Initiative creates opportunities for trans-disciplinary research projects outside the established missions of individual NIH Institutes and Centers. Critically, the BRAIN Initiative training program builds trainees into multi-faceted and adaptable investigators by exposing them to a greater range of tools and mentorship opportunities.
Facilitate career transitions. The success of the nation's scientific enterprise relies on the strength of its training programs. The federal government should support these programs in connecting researchers at all career stages with the skills, knowledge and mentorship needed for a range of career trajectories. The focus of those training programs shapes the future areas of scientific excellence. The government should increase support for programs that better facilitate career transition, such as by incorporating both theoretical and applied research or matching early-career researchers with mentors from different disciplines and leveraging internship opportunities with the private sector.
Support pathways for applied research. Curiosity-driven fundamental research remains essential for driving discovery and can't be replaced by outcome-focused applied research. However, federal programs such as I-Corps and Small Business Program grants can help bridge the gap. The National Science Foundation's I-Corps program provides a pathway for researchers to explore the commercialization of a discovery, while Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grants support the early development stages of innovative research. The government should continue its investment in these types of programs.
(12) What policy mechanisms would ensure that the benefits of federally-funded research—including access to resulting technologies, economic opportunities, and improved quality of life—reach all Americans?
Support innovative publishing models that enhance access. A 2022 memo from the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) directed grantmaking agencies to require that the results of federally funded research be made available to the public without delay. APS has adopted a Subscribe to Open (S2O) publication program for 10 of its research journals, which commits to making articles open access once enough subscribers commit to participating each year. This publishing program aligns with OSTP's objective, offering broader access to results, lower publishing charges for researchers, and enabling community-funded open research.
Improve accessibility to science. Now that public access has been implemented, OSTP should take the next steps in elevating the accessibility of science. While research data can be accessed by anyone who knows how to find it, the results are often highly technical and challenging to interpret for non-experts. The lack of efficient science communication represents a barrier to improving health.
OSTP should consider actions that would reduce barriers to public understanding of science. This could include sponsoring direct community engagement by researchers and fostering dialogue between scientists and the public. Training programs and center grants could be encouraged to include robust public engagement as part of their funded mission. Nonprofit scientific societies such as APS support the research community by hosting conferences, providing affordable discipline-specific publishing solutions and creating training resources. APS encourages OSTP to work with scientific societies, researchers, and institutions to make the benefits of federally funded research accessible to all Americans.
Why It Matters
Government-funded biomedical research drives nearly every major advancement in medicine, public health and quality of life. Physiologists rely on sustained federal investment from agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation to support discovery, train the scientific workforce and translate research findings into real-world benefits.
The Office of Science and Technology Policy coordinates research strategy at a national level—from workforce development and research funding to public trust and access to scientific knowledge. APS’ comments emphasize that strong, predictable federal support for basic research is essential to sustaining innovation, strengthening the biomedical research pipeline and ensuring that the benefits of federally funded research reach all Americans.
Stay Connected
Stay engaged with APS advocacy efforts.