Good afternoon, everyone.
Good afternoon.
I'm Jay Rothman, and I have the privilege of serving as President of the Universities
of Wisconsin, and we thank you all for being with us today.
Over the last 80 years, the United States has created and funded the most robust, most
consequential university research enterprise in the world.
And universities in Wisconsin have played a significant role in that process.
Here in Wisconsin, the research our universities conduct is critical.
It advances knowledge, improves lives, and helps bolster economic prosperity across our state.
But the way it touches most people's lives is through the pursuit of cures and treatments
for a range of debilitating diseases and afflictions.
Anyone who has cared for a patient with Alzheimer's or a nurse to child through cancer
or developed adult on-site diabetes knows that.
Today, we are standing in the Health Science Learning Center next door to laboratories
engaged in a range of exciting and life-changing research
that you'll hear more about from Chancellor Mnuchin and others.
Threatening to curtail federal research funding for these vital projects
has real implications for families and communities,
counting on us to find solutions to our most pressing needs.
So today, together with our R1 research universities and other partners,
I am sharing a letter we presented yesterday to our congressional delegation.
It is signed by business leaders and organizations across Wisconsin,
urging these elected officials to support continued research funding in Wisconsin
and to reverse the cuts proposed by the federal government.
And it's not just our R1 universities.
Universities across Wisconsin receive research funding from the federal government
to work to the betterment of our people and our communities.
Taking a meat cleaver to this funding is simply wrong,
short-sighted, and will cause harm to people across the state of Wisconsin and the country.
Our university research lab should be a hub of activity,
how many to provide life-saving research that families can count upon.
This impacts all of us.
Wisconsin should settle for nothing less.
And now it is my pleasure to introduce to you the Chancellor of UW-Madison,
Jennifer Mnuchin.
Chancellor?
Thank you.
Thank you, President Rothman, for your remarks and for your support and leadership
for our incredible universities that educate and serve Wisconsin and the world.
And thank you to our supporters and partners who have joined us today.
Here in this building, we're training future doctors, scientists, and other medical providers.
Nearby campus researchers are leading a major grant from the National Institutes of Health
to unlock the mysteries surrounding Alzheimer's disease,
in a quest for better treatments, and ultimately, a cure.
That's just one critical example of the tremendous research efforts taking place all across this campus.
Joining us today is Professor Sterling Johnson, a clinical neuropsychologist
and leader of a landmark study called the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention,
one of the world's largest and longest-running studies of individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease.
Joining him is one of the 1,700 individual volunteer participants,
Sigred Kanuti, who will also speak.
Thank you both for being here and for your commitment to this work.
This research, like so much research on our campus, builds on decades of critical innovation,
discovery, and expertise.
UW-Madison research has translated into billions and billions of dollars in economic impact
for our state and many thousands of jobs, including over 400 UW-related startup companies in Wisconsin
that help to improve lives.
These companies are tackling everything from blindness to improved survival rates for surgery patients.
In fiscal year 2023, every dollar of NIH funding across the country generated around $2.46 of economic activity.
This research fuels invention and discovery and fuels the economy here in Wisconsin and across our country.
Indiscriminate reductions in research funding, like those we're facing right now,
pose significant risk to our state and our nation's future.
These cuts harm our ability to make critical life-saving discoveries
and to train our students to be global leaders.
They will also damage our nation's innovation economy and our international competitiveness.
Let's work together to protect and preserve the vital research work around us
that's poised to make critical new discoveries and save lives here in Wisconsin and all across the nation.
With that, I'm pleased to introduce Professor Sterling Johnson to discuss the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention Study.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everybody. I'm Sterling Johnson. I'm in the Department of Medicine here at the School of Medicine and Public Health.
I'm one of the leaders in the Alzheimer's program here.
In addition to running the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention,
I'm part of the Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center,
which is an NIH-funded entity that provides the glue for much of the research that we do on our campus.
Alzheimer's Disease affects 7 million across our country here in Wisconsin.
There's about 120,000 people who are at the dementia phase of Alzheimer's Disease.
It's the seventh leading cause of death, and it's certainly one of the...
It is the only disease in the top 10 causes of death that continues to rise at an extraordinary rate.
By 2040, we anticipate the numbers that I just mentioned will be 44% higher.
I wanted to give you an idea of the way that UW is having an impact on this disease.
As I mentioned, the Alzheimer's Center is providing a lot of the glue.
It's helping us train the next generation of scientists who will be facing the future iterations of this disease.
It's providing key infrastructure for methodologies and for know-how
so that our investigators can ask cutting-edge research questions
without having to be an expert in every aspect of their studies.
Alzheimer's Disease is defined biologically by two proteins, amyloid and tau.
These cause the plaques and tangles that we think about with Alzheimer's Disease.
But what we often don't appreciate, and what we've discovered here at UW,
is that these proteinopathies, if you will, develop 20 or more years prior to the symptoms.
That gives us quite a range of time to intervene.
The insights along around this timing of events has largely come from the University of Wisconsin.
We're excited that we can provide some precision on this at a person level
so that cures and therapies can also be done at the person level as we translate this to the clinic.
Along these lines, also, the UW is participating in a number of clinical trials to prevent Alzheimer's Disease
and also to address it therapeutically in its symptomatic phase.
We're also looking at a number of other factors, health factors, lifestyle factors
that may slow this disease down.
The effect of exercise, the effect of medical management, of blood pressure and cholesterol in those things.
We know from research done here that health and lifestyle optimization
won't necessarily stop plaques and tangles from forming, but they will slow down the symptoms
that eventuate from this disease.
I want to mention two ways that the Alzheimer's Centers
and the Alzheimer's programs around the country are collaborating.
One is a consortium of all 36 Alzheimer's Centers across the country.
These are all NIH-funded entities that are now working together as a consortium
to understand the impact of other ideologies besides Alzheimer's on eventual symptoms.
It's called the Consortium for Clarity in Alzheimer's Disease Research Through Imaging.
It's a testament to these NIH-funded entities' willingness to work together
and create solutions faster so that we can respond to the current public need of this disease.
The other one I want to mention is a Down Syndrome Consortium
that the University of Wisconsin is highly involved with
in leading many aspects of this at the Weisman Center across the street.
We are discovering that although Down Syndrome is a developmental disease,
there's also an aging component to it that involves Alzheimer's disease.
And in fact, if individuals live long enough who have Down Syndrome,
nearly all of them will develop the plaques and tangles from Alzheimer's disease.
So this kind of insight would not be possible without the incredible infrastructure
and imaging and biomarker capabilities that the University provides.
I wanted to go back to the RAP study
and let you know that this study has been NIH-funded since 2006.
The longitudinal data that we are collecting is being shared all across the world.
It's providing key insights, and it's now speaking louder than ever as a study
and as a data set because we have all of this longitudinal data that we are sharing across the world.
One of our participants is here, and I want to introduce her.
Sigurd Konuti is a longtime participant in the study.
She joined in 2005.
You may have also seen her in the documentary on RAP called Determined.
She's one of the three women in that documentary that described their story
and explained how this disease has impacted them.
So proud of Sigurd for her longtime commitment to the study,
and I want to introduce her to you now.
Sigurd.
I was asked to speak about why it was in the study.
Well, I'm in the study because I'm a woman, and therefore I have a 50% chance higher rate of having Alzheimer's than a man.
I'm also in it because I'm a daughter of someone who had Alzheimer's, which increases my risk.
Not only did my mother have Alzheimer's, but her cousin, who was a first cousin twice because brothers married sisters,
so very closely related genetically, also died of Alzheimer's,
and most likely their grandmother because her death certificate states hardening of the arteries,
and they described her as being childish as she got older.
Over the last 20 years, I participated in a number of NIH-funded studies.
I have had cognitive tests, MRIs, PET scans, spinal taps, and even an endurance test on a treadmill.
I've also served on the first advisory board where I had the opportunity to actually see the research coming together
in a coherent process and showing a path to treatment and to prevention.
I've also been inspired by these studies and have adjusted my lifestyle to pursue my mental health, my brain health.
I exercise, I participate, I eat the mind study.
I don't know if you're familiar with that. It's very close to the Mediterranean diet, but it has little differences.
Anyway, I really feel like I've been honored to be a part of this. It's so big, it's so important, and it's very hopeful.
I don't know if many of you have seen or met or know anyone who's been in the last stages of Alzheimer's, but I will tell you, it's not very pretty.
You don't just lose your memory. Your brain is failing. You can't walk. You can't talk. You can't swallow.
In the late stages of Alzheimer's generally requires 24 hours a day, seven days a week of care.
Usually not one caregiver can deal with this person, and it often requires nursing home care, which is extremely expensive.
It's average about $82,000 a year after taxes for a family. Social security doesn't really cover that, does it?
I want to share a story with you. My son-in-law's aunt was diagnosed with Alzheimer's about 10 years ago, and her memory was progressively, she lost her memory progressively.
Her husband was her only caregiver. He was a college professor, retired college professor, and they had no children and no grandchildren, so caring for her was up to him.
Just a few weeks ago, in mid-January, my son-in-law received a text from his uncle, and it was very simple.
It said, I cannot do this any longer. He shot his aunt, and he shot himself, and that is how their 60-year-plus love story ended violently.
It was not necessary. It was unfortunate.
So I began by saying I'm in this study because I'm at risk, but clearly my family has Alzheimer's in it and for several generations.
So I'm a mother, and I'm also a grandmother, and I want Alzheimer's to be the last person, and I want this generation to end Alzheimer's.
And for that, I'm counting on Sterling and the University of Wisconsin to get it done.
I'm very proud of my university and very proud of what's happening here. Thank you.
Thank you, Sigurd. I'd like to now turn this over to Professor Karen Frick from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, who is a professor of psychology,
and chair in the neuroscience area, Professor Frick.
Good afternoon. On behalf of Chancellor Mark Monet, who was unable to be here this afternoon, I offer warm greetings from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.
I am Karen Frick. I'm a distinguished professor in the Department of Psychology, where I direct a research laboratory supported by funds from the National Institutes of Health.
In this lab, I train and supervise undergraduate research assistants and scientists from around the world who are pursuing their PhDs or conducting postgraduate research.
For much of the past 25 years, my research has been driven by the fact that, as you just heard, women aren't significantly greater risk of developing Alzheimer's disease than men, which we think is related to estrogen loss at menopause.
The NIH-funded research conducted in my lab is designed to understand how estrogen regulate memory on a cellular and molecular level so that we can use this information to develop new treatments to reduce memory loss in the risk of Alzheimer's in women as well as men.
The NIH funds my lab has received, benefit UW-Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and the nation in several important ways.
First, they provide our undergraduate students with unparalleled opportunities to engage in research, which not only provides invaluable hands-on experiential learning and skill development, but enhances academic success and graduation rates.
Moreover, undergraduate research experience helps students accomplish their career goals, as illustrated by my lab's graduates who have gone onto careers as physicians, veterinarians, scientists, mental health providers, occupational therapists, and genetic counselors.
Most of these graduates stay here in Wisconsin, benefiting our communities and our economy.
Second, NIH funds my lab have received have been instrumental in training the next generation of scientists at the doctoral level.
These scientists have made important and novel discoveries about how the brain makes memories that have laid the foundation for the development of next-generation drug therapies to reduce the epidemic of memory dysfunction and Alzheimer's disease in our increasingly older population.
My own NIH-funded research has led to the development of new therapies for reducing memory loss, alleviating hot flashes, and reducing the risk of Alzheimer's disease, which we hope will reach the clinic in the next five to ten years.
If you remember one thing from my remarks today, it's that federal funding for basic and clinical research is critical for training the next generation of scientists and health professionals, while developing new treatments for Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, addiction, as well as conditions such as cancer, heart disease, stroke, and diabetes, which are among the leading causes of death in the United States.
Simply put, these desperately needed treatments would not be possible without NIH funding.
Thank you.
I would like to next introduce Mr. Tom Still, President of the Wisconsin Technology Council.
Thank you, Karen.
Well, hello, everyone.
I'm Tom Still, from the Wisconsin Technology Council.
There's been a brought through Chancellor Mnook and others.
Thank you for being a part of this today.
It's interesting when you talk about Alzheimer's.
My own family has been touched by me.
And we've seen it in some fairly serious ways.
So it's more evidence of the kinds of things that are going on here.
Well, I think my role here today, because I'm President of the Tech Council.
By the way, I was a little bit late because it was a capital hearing on economic development where I had to testify.
I did sneak in the NIH cuts there.
The more audience, the better, right?
You know, when you look at the impact of NIH in Wisconsin historically, 2023 is about 654 million.
You divide that by roughly 6 million people.
You come up with about $110 per year capital.
That's a pretty small investment when you look at it in terms of what we're getting out of that.
Not only in this state, but in the research that's done here and well beyond that extends beyond our borders.
In the meantime, because of the ripple effect of that kind of research, you see it in construction jobs.
You see it in tech company jobs.
You see it in all kinds of things that are adding to the economy.
So those NIH dollars are contributing in ways that even go beyond what's going on here.
A couple of stories that I could talk about there that I think are pertinent.
Let's look at GE Healthcare.
Waukesha.
They have been making MRI machines for a long time.
They almost plateaued in terms of the construction of those kinds of jobs and need for those kinds of machines
because their MRI was limited to a few selective uses.
But thanks to the research done here and many other places, all of a sudden the use has expanded.
Vascular systems, stroke detection, tumors, head trauma, chronic liver diseases, a lot more.
So that company and the help that it provides through having those machines out in the world has expanded.
13,000 such MRI machines in the United States today, I think about 50,000 globally.
An example of a company that continues to thrive, continues to innovate, and continues to see the results of the kind of research that NIH pays for.
Another good example here in town, third wave technologies.
Third wave in some ways is the grandfather of biotech in Madison.
I can point to Permega for the same thing, and Permega is another great example.
But third wave is a place where they produce molecular diagnostics to help in reagents, to help in analyzing DNA and RNA.
And so it became really important as they moved along.
By the way, you can go back in time and you can look at some of the researchers here at UW and go back to Howard Timman in his Nobel Prize meeting week or years ago.
But third wave, my quick research on what they got in terms of NIH grants was about 1.6 million over time.
Not only was the research led to the creation of that, but then more beyond that.
Well, third wave was eventually acquired by a company called Hologic, and the story just grew.
I mean, a $580 million exit on that in terms of Hologic's purchase led to the rebirth essentially of exact sciences.
Many of you know exact sciences here in Madison, which makes kits for colon cancer detection.
Well, that was Kevin Conroy and Manisha Rora, who were a part of that, third wave, acquired exact sciences, brought it back.
There have been probably a dozen or so executives who came out of third wave, who have done other things in this community, in this state, over time, to build on that economy.
So obviously the NIH cuts are going to hit first in places like here at the UW-Madison, UW-Milwaukee where Professor Frick is.
The Marshall Clinic is actually number five in the state in terms of NIH dollars.
I'm on the board of directors there, so I know that they're doing great research.
And the medical college of Wisconsin, another great example, Marquette.
So it's not just here, it's statewide, and it's embedded in years of excellent, excellent research that have been translating in so many ways.
So it's a great story that kind of goes beyond what's happening here to what's happening around the state.
And I see Dean Goldin's here from medical school, and he's followed this intently and has done so much to build on this.
So thanks.
I know it will all be around later for questions, but I wanted to introduce Nicholas Parris.
Bio-forward.
He can talk, he's on the board there, he can talk more deeply, I think, about what it means in the bio-health industry in general.
And I think also maybe specifically the bio-health tech hub that's emerging in Wisconsin and where we need to go from there.
So thank you all very much.
Thank you, Tom, for a great introduction.
I'm Nicholas Parris.
I'm chair of Bio-forward, Wisconsin.
The voice of bio-health industry in Wisconsin, through its 250 members.
And as I mentioned, yes, we are the governance body for the newly created tech hub.
Bio-health industry in Wisconsin, it's a national leader.
Driving innovation and economic growth, but also contributing, of course, to health outcomes.
We have plenty of examples today.
It's a very wide ecosystem with not only bio-medical research and testing, digital health, drug and pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and a lot of manufacturing that goes with that.
Distribution, so it's all big ecosystem.
Bio-forward.
When we talk about drawing Wisconsin's bio-health industry, we are talking about a collaborative effort between industry leaders, research institution, of course, and policy makers.
Our state's institution, like VUW medicine, UWW working, medical college of Wisconsin, and all the others, play a critical role in advancing groundbreaking medical research.
Academics, yes, are indeed in Wisconsin, has grown faster than the average U.S. during the previous years.
NIH funding here, permanent enough GSP, as it's been under land, is higher here in Wisconsin than anywhere else in the U.S.
So, getting federal funding, particularly an H grant, would severely impact not only our ability to innovate,
but also our ability to improve lives and grow our economy.
So, Tom rightfully mentioned NIH investment, brought 654 million dollars to Wisconsin in 2023, and thousands of direct jobs and generate billions in economic activity for the state.
These funds from NIH don't just drive research.
They attract biotech companies, venture capital, they attract top scientists and talents to the state.
They drive manufacturing, they drive services, and even more.
So, if there's no research, there are no discoveries, no treatments, no new or fast-growing companies, and no ecosystem to support them.
So, there's no doubt that reducing NIH funding would be a direct threat for us in Wisconsin, but for the U.S. in general.
Its position as a global leader in bioeth innovation would be compromised, at a time where China is aggressively investing in research,
and biotech came into surpass the U.S.
In life science innovation, now is not the time for America to weaken its competitive advantage.
And you were mentioning the tech hub.
Yes, we are very proud about tech hub, but what's a tech hub without funding to innovate?
So, the proposed 15% gap on Indian cost would make it, of course, out of Wisconsin research institution to conduct work-class research.
It would be putting us at a serious, serious disadvantage globally.
NIH funding fuels the entire ecosystem that turns academic discoveries into life-saving treatments and thriving businesses.
It is not only a research problem, it is everyone's problem.
So, we must protect NIH funding.
To keep Wisconsin at the forefront of bio-health innovation, of course, investment and medical breakthrough.
And together, we must defend Wisconsin leadership in bio-health, and ensure we continue building the future of medicine.
Thank you.
Nicholas, thank you very much, and thank you to all of our presenters today.
I think what you can take away from this is that research has certainly enormous economic impact, but it has so much more than that.
It provides that opportunity for current researchers to do their work, to grow the next generation of researchers that will do great things.
But most importantly, it provides hope, and it provides the opportunity to improve lives.
It is that simple.
So, again, we thank you for being here.
We have a couple of minutes for questions, and a number of our presenters today will be able to stay a little bit longer and answer any other questions you may have.
So, are there any questions?
Kimberly?
I think there are a lot of things where the indirects go.
I view it as though you can have a car, but if you don't have gasoline in the car, the car is not going to move.
They are important to provide the laboratory space that is there.
They are important to provide regulatory compliance.
They are important to provide the issues around patient safety.
It funds all of that.
But the way I would step back and look at it as this is that there have been what we want to cut indirect costs, but there is no evidence that that money is going to be reinvested in research.
And that, I think, is the real serious issue here, because this goes to who we are as a society.
Are we going to invest in our future?
And I think that's the way we ought to look at this.
And ideally, if the indirect costs are cut, there has been no indication that that's going back to be reinvested in research.
Are universities, I think, universities across the country, this is watched very closely.
They invest that money wisely.
Yes?
I think some of the judicial actions have been taken are temporary pieces.
I think the bigger issue is when Congress deals with the reconciliation budget process going forward, and I think that's where this will really come to a head.
And I think that's why we are particularly concerned about the impact that these cuts could have on research funding.
But I would hope all of us would be concerned about not having those opportunities to have that hope and have those cures for ourselves, for our children, for our families.
Question to your left.
Yes, sir.
This week, Jason, we've been outlining some specific steps that you have announced in this meeting to prepare and respond to federal funding cuts and policy changes.
What specific steps have the universities in response to your level to get to address these changes that you're anticipating?
We are certainly looking at a number of things.
I have introduced a hiring freeze.
We have restricted travel, and we are looking at other contingency planning relative to how we would as the universities of Wisconsin administration deal with that, because that just applies to UWSA, not to our universities.
But our universities are going through a lot of contingency planning, and I'll let the Chancellor address how the actions that the current administration is doing at UW-Madison.
Thanks, President Rothman. I'd actually like to come back to Kimberly's question about indirects, because I know the numbers can seem big.
But the thing to understand is that indirect cost expenditures are real costs.
They're not there.
For example, in the Alzheimer's study, those big pieces of medical equipment that we're using to study people, that cigarette community is getting tested on, those are indirects.
Those are absolutely critical. Yes, they're the gasoline. They're a lot more than the gasoline.
They're all of the technology infrastructure and the big picture, big ticket items that help support the doing of research.
They are also all of the compliance costs that we have to do, that we're required to do, in order to do federal research and to do it safely.
So I think it's easy to sort of say, gee, are they just overhead, but they're actually very real costs.
And so if you took those away, even if you put them back into research, it would reduce the research we could do, because unless we could find otherwise we could pay for those very real costs, we couldn't do the research that we're doing all around the university.
And so I think it's very important to try to explain that.
We are taking a variety of steps. There's a lot of uncertainty right now about where all this will land.
And so we're trying to be cautious about how we spend money.
We're trying to scenario plan for a variety of futures.
And we're also trying to stay focused on our core missions of research, teaching, and service, and what we can do to protect those parts of what we need to keep doing for our students, for the state, for the Wisconsin idea.
Thanks.
Other questions? Yes, sir.
What does the proposed cap on NIH funding mean for undergraduate students who are looking to get their foot in the door at some of these research labs?
We're looking to sort of be in that experience, and could we see changes for students that are already in those positions if these caps are going to play professors?
That's a great question. I think we'll both have opinions on that.
It's certainly going to impact our ability to train the next generation of scientists.
Undergrads come into our labs. They gain crucial experience that then serves as the next stepping stone into graduate school or other professional opportunities.
If the labs aren't able to conduct the research, there'll be no basis, no projects for them to come in and learn on.
So it is a big concern for us.
I would just echo that as well. So, you know, undergrads are the lifeblood of our research enterprise, and without NIH funding, those opportunities for undergraduates simply won't be there, and so they won't be able to get that experience.
And for, you know, students come to places like UW-Madison, UW-Milwaukee for that research experience, so they would really lose a valuable aspect of their undergraduate experience.
We've got time for one more.
Last question, yes.
Yeah, can you talk about any changes to the graduated missions at UW as well as a result?
I think that would also be a good question for the Chancellor to address.
A number of schools around the country have frozen or paused graduate admissions.
We've taken somewhat lighter touch to this, at least so far.
In part, because graduate research isn't just a start and stop activity, if we have to pause and really have reductions, there'll be very long-term consequences.
We have asked departments and units to look carefully at their admissions and to be cautious, but we haven't had any university-level hard and fast rules about exactly what that looks like.
Again, thank all of you for being here today. I know a few of the presenters will be staying around to answer any additional questions you have, but again, thank you very much.
We'll also be able to take folks on a...