 So it is time for council initiated discussion. We do this at every council meeting. I think you're all veterans of this. And this is an opportunity for you to ask for reports, either about our research programs and projects that are supported by an NHGRI, or perhaps other more global issues such as the report we heard from Mike Lauer today that came out of council initiated discussion. We also view you as representatives of the research community. And if there are issues or problems bubbling in the field, can't imagine in an era of COVID that there'd be any problems and biomedical research, but we're happy to get feedback from you about that. And Sharon, I see your hand is up. Well, I do think by the February report, since you just brought it up, I think it would be good to maybe have a dedicated presentation on sort of impacts on COVID. And across the major consortia and just the two I'm involved with, for example, Clinton Jen hasn't had much of an impact because almost everything we do is virtual. Caesars had a very significant impact because we're doing a clinical trial. So it might be good to sort of hear, you know, sort of across our large consortia, what the major impacts were. The other thing that struck me, Rudy, when you did the introductions this morning was the very large number of program analysts. I actually find it very interesting. They were all or almost all women. And it leads me to think that really there are a lot of men out there that are missing out on great jobs. But I don't know that we all really understand sort of how the extramural program, we know about the divisions, but sort of just the layers of employees and what their general jobs are. I think might be actually really informative to counsel and, you know, an open session to sort of the broader community. Okay. We can internally we can discuss that we'll try to come up with something more imaginative than just having to look at organizational charts. But yeah, how labors and activities are distributed. Among the different divisions. We can work something out. Sorry. How dates and then Jonathan Haynes. So Rudy, I second Sharon's. Suggestion that we should hear more about the impact of COVID. I hear a lot of anxiety from young investigators about. The impact that this has had on their productivity and how that will be reflected in their performance. In review at NIH for renewal. And especially from. Women junior investigators who have a disproportionate additional burden of. Handling, you know, teaching from home for their kids and. I really think it's, it's something that we need to understand and potentially to address in a very directed way. So I think that there needs to be some formal mechanism. For, for assessment. So how can I, and I just enjoy these are great topics, but I would caution us that what I heard Sharon asked for were very specific to NHGRI programs. Especially big consortium and some of the examples that she gave. Whereas what you just asked for would certainly not be specific to NHGRI. It would be. Very relevant. And what it would be to address it. Sometimes. And I'm not saying we can't try to do both. Although I would imagine that might be harder for us to get our hands around because I think NIH is just in the process of trying to get its hands around and ears and eyes and brains around the scope of the problem and how to address it. Yeah. So that would have to be too different. I mean, you know, they're related presentations, but it seems like we just got asked for two very different But I also would stress that if the sense is that NIH as a whole is not taking an aggressive a sufficiently aggressive stance that NHGRI should instigate or, you know, survey their own young investigators. So just to reemphasize the point that Eric made if you're concerned here and it's totally legitimate what will happen when applications come back in for renewal and progress is judged. That's all taking place not the vast majority of that is taking place in the Center for Scientific Review in standing study sections and we have no input or influence on that the consortia on the other hand are almost always reviewed internally. And so that's a different story. I think I certainly think we can try to talk about each I mean the society that says that we are poised. Our program directors are poised to probably give some sort of an assessment what's happening with NHGRI programs. When I think about what Hal just asked is almost decided it says we should bring Mike Lauer back I mean it's that kind of a person that might be needed to be given a very high level. How is NIH holistically thinking about this and adjusting policies and routines to address this very obvious and real set of issues. We'll give it some thought how I mean we'll update you the best we can. And I'm sure we'll know more in February and I'm sure there'll be a lot we still don't know in February, who institutes have the prerogative of changing the timeline for review for giving extensions. I don't know how to what extent each Institute has the ability to address the situation individually. If it's in there if the activity is in their review branch, they have total control over that. But again the standing study sections are run by CSR. No, but I've seen talk about trying to give junior faculty like an extra year on an existing grant. Oh, and that kind of granting an extension you're talking about. Yes, there there we have control I thought you were talking about when the peer review was scheduled. Yes, we can grant extensions. I also saw last spring that we are acted very quickly to extend receipt dates to change the policy on when preliminary data can be submitted and how much preliminary data was required. So there were quick actions that were taken on things were relatively simple to adjust that was NIH wide. I mean, but that was when COVID was an acute largely unknown problem now it's the new normal. And I just want to make sure that a degree of urgency and consideration is maintained. Okay. And you know building building on on what Hal was saying, you know, my guess is that if NIH is going to do something they'll ask each Institute to give them data, which means you have to get the data together anyway. So why not start now and determining what investigators at all the different grant levels are at what you would consider to be at risk and then defining at risk is up to you. You have impact of COVID-19. And then you can get an idea of how many people are really involved or how many grant recipients are, are involved at the different levels, and that may be even help you prepare for what may be coming down the road. Just as a, as a way of thinking through what how was sort of proposing. I mean, this is not unrelated. In fact, it's completely related to one of the things I updated you on in my directors report related to restoration funding or whatever the special relief package whatever you want to call it that Congress is considering, which would be augmentation funds for NIH to help deal with these very issues obviously if we extend, we extend people because of the problems they had because the pandemic, that's not going to be very helpful if we have to use funds that otherwise we're going to go to new grantees or other grantees the whole idea is we need restoration was to sort of help us get over this very awkward period. I am quite certain that if those funds are forthcoming and that's an if, but if they're forthcoming it will come with a whole set of stipulations on how NIH is going to handle this corporately. And I don't think any Institute could just run with their money any which way they're probably some flexibilities, but I expect there's going to be a lot of discussion at the NIH level. I just haven't had those discussions because not entirely clear we're going to get such money. There's hope there's going to get that money. But as you know it's all tied up in congressional deliberations and politics which are very complicated at the moment. Would you have would you have an idea at some point of how much money you would need so that if the money comes in, whatever that NIH gives you, you actually are covered and if it doesn't come in, you know, you're sort of screwed but where does money come from. Well, I mean, that's the really hard questions if no additional money comes in I mean I think your question is do we really know the extent of money that is needed obviously the short answer is we don't. I mean, I'll ask a provocative question you you are all funded investigators do you at this moment in time have a full feel for your laboratory program. And if you were going to tomorrow ask NIH what was needed to get you back in some reasonable shape, but but be realistic about it could you articulate those I mean I'm actually asking I don't know if you yet know the full implications. School of Medicine Dean asked every laboratory PI for that information. Yeah, I would just echo the phrase the new normal. I think many of us feel like we're now in a period of whatever the, however, however much our lab is open, I think most of us think we're probably there for quite a while. And these drastic changes in policy week to week. Similarly with clinical research, you know, switching to telemedicine and send by phone and like that stuff's all sort of happened, and we were probably there for a long time. So I do think this might be a good time to sort of pin people on what is this doing to your level of productivity. Given, you know, the new normal sort of discussion, I think it's even. This is helpful to know because to be honest with at least for me I don't know if my, all my program directors agree with us maybe they have more insights than I do I just wasn't, it wasn't entirely clear to be how well the extra mural grantees would be in a position to be able to describe to us exactly what they need or whether they still are in a state of a lot of turbulence where they can't quite I mean obviously they need money they know that but can you really define it at some level of specificity, because obviously and obviously the problem is if you can always high ball you always come way high, but of course if you do that and then I you know it's going to be a hopeless situation for NIH so we really need to have some reasonably accurate assessment of what's going to be needed. You know so as an example we're locked in right now for the foreseeable future at 30% of senses, our animal colony is going to take at least another six months to get back to full swing. The clinical trial efforts are at a complete standstill, just non existent. You know I think that there is a new normal that has declared itself. And I also worry about the coven fatigue that comes along with the new normal mentality that you know the quick efforts to try to intervene and to help. I think some of that incentive is waned as there's lots and lots of competing interests. So, I do think it should be a topic on all of our minds. There's also a side of me to be honest with you that things, depending upon how the dominoes fall, you know February maybe too late to wait I mean we may not be able to afford at the next council meeting so what I what I might tell council members is that if we're going to start to fall in a positive way in that maybe we're getting money and we need input, we may be calling on you for some, you know, offline conversations or we'll convene some sort of a, of interaction to get input, I mean because again, at the moment it is a little bit of a hurry up and wait we're not poised I don't think to sort of know definitively what we're doing quite yet but you're making good points that maybe we could be some collecting data and the second we get a sense that that's going to be really important to have maybe we want to be touching base with you again to try to get input for you to guide what kind of questions we ask and how we get those answers. Okay, Jonathan you had your hand up, but you've taken it down did we wear you out or. Mostly what I was going to say has now been has now been pretty much said I was going to go back to Sharon's original point and say it's not just impact it's what can be done. And we've sort of talked about that. But I now that I have the floor. Another, another point is, it's not just money. If I have a project that is just covered is just not going to let me make much progress. What do I do with that another year of funding to not be able to make progress is a problem so what I mean can I suspend the grant for two years. You know, I mean, what else besides money, I think might be might be something there may be other ways of looking at things. Okay, Wendy Chung has had her hand up for quite a while. Go ahead. I'm just going to pile on to the coven theme, but highlight a couple things. So some of us and some programs that have tried to increase diversity just appreciate that those trainees and those individuals I think have been hardest hit by this so in addition to who how mentioned in terms of those who are caring for children. It's also those who are caring for the elderly who financially have difficulties who for instance in New York take public transportation. They were disabled and have health risks and are concerned, especially about things are even paralyzed and this affected even more more severely. Just what how said that I want to just highlight it clinical trials have either been ground to a halt or those that were midstream where we continued to for instance it spends medications from home. So many of those findings are very much in question for many things. And with this, even those that didn't have an intervention but what we're looked at for instance genomic medicine, and what people had in terms of anxiety or depression, even those outcome measures because they were collected during COVID situation or so much affected by everything else that was going on around again. How we're going to use those data I think are very much in question at this point. This has resulted in at least what I've seen and we'll be talking about it at global genes later this week. The rare disease community in particular is just extremely hostile is the word I'll use in terms of what's happened to for many of the rare diseases very little funds that they had initially to invest and then feeling as if they've lost their investment when they did invest in clinical trials with those clinical trials data going away. Many of the research being suspended. Many of the again shutting down colonies shutting down experiments, not being able to get back either that time or money. And for many of them that really feel like they're racing against time for certain degenerative disorders as I said there really is a sense of hostility now in the rare disease community. There's a lot to do about it except that people have thought about, for instance, even a distributed model where there might be cores or things in different parts of the country that for instance if we had to do science almost in a CRO type of way where things that there were safe spots where things could be done based on what the epidemiology of the viruses at the time. I don't know that that's the answer that sustainable but there is a sense of desperation out there for many communities and we're struggling to be able to be responsive and deal with it because we consider them our partners and we're as desperate as they are but but there is like I said this almost sense of hostility at this point. Okay. Thank you, Wendy. Other comments on this topic or other issues to bring to our attention. Any reports of our research programs that you'd like to hear. Comment, I would make really I would point out to council. I, I so much want council members to meet some of these new Institute directors five new ones coming in the next few months I still haven't gotten that sharpness here from NCI Council was asking for that about two years I, you know, based on the previous discussion we just had there just seems to be so much more urgent issues, and especially as we have these things virtually we just can't do 10 hour days, the way we sometimes do we do in person so you know I'm just sort of going to hold off for now inviting some of these new folks but if any of you have very strong feelings that you would love to hear from some of these new directors as they arrive. So let me know and we'll we'll we'll really and I'll figure it out but at least for now we're just trying to, I would also tell you similarly. You know we have some things going on that within the Institute and our intramural program you're overdue for an update what's going on intramurally there's other things going on we want to tell you about. We're just being very mindful of of zoom fatigue and so we're trying to keep these open sessions as as felt as we can. So we're just accumulating a list of, but of things to bring to you on the other hand if this is the new normal of we're still doing this a year from now. I don't want to not have you introduced to some things we want to tell you about so we'll just have to figure out what's the right way to balance all of these things. I to me it seems like, again, you can be strategic about which Institute directors that bring in, you know, one way of thinking strategically is which one has which Institute directors have the money that you'd like to get access to one and first another would be what who are the new Institute directors that might get a nice package of money to be an Institute director cause God knows who else wants to do it, but that maybe not know enough not to make a deal with you so I mean it's just a whole series of things that one could. I can tell you some of them have some considerable intellectual overall, you know, bear a lot of interest, both their own and what they want to move their institutes towards that would be of great interest to this Council, some more than others so yeah if we start bringing them through we will do it in a strategic way. You know like Lindsay Criswell has been doing genetics of lupus and RA forever and so I mean she'd be one I think would be a good partner. She'd be great Michael Chang the new head of the Institute is a very day and he's one of the incredibly intense data scientists expertise so he'll bring some things that are and including the use of electronic health records for for doing analysis there's some great overlap with things we're talking about. And I'll just warn you that we have a very large number of RFA and grants coming to February Council, so we'll have a much bigger expanded closed session. And it's just a time competition. Okay. Certainly stuff for us to chew on there so thank you very much. And I'm going to bring this council initiated discussion to close. The last thing we have to do an open session is for me to read you the conflict of interest statement. And this applies to all the grant applications that you'll be reviewing in the closed session tomorrow. In the room when applications submitted by your own organization are being individually discussed. In the case of state higher education or other systems with multiple campuses that are geographically separated own organization is intended to mean the entire system, except where determination has been made that the components are separate for the purpose of determining conflict of interest, you should avoid situations that could give rise to charges of conflict of interest whether real or apparent. For example, you should not participate in the deliberations and actions on any application from or involving your spouse, child, a recent student recent teacher, professional collaborator with whom you have worked closely. You should not participate in the deliberations and actions on any application from or involving your spouse, child, a friend or a scientist with whom you have had long standing, scientific or personal differences. NHGRI staff will determine the appropriate action based on recency frequency and strengths of such associations or interests, either positive or negative and will instruct you accordingly. In addition to this action being one such example, your vote will not apply to any application from any institution, fulfilling the criteria noted above. Please sign the conflict of interest and disposal of confidential materials form that comfort Brown has sent to you and return it to comfort with your signature by email please. This concludes the open session of the Council meeting. I'll just wait a few seconds to see if anyone has any parting words or last questions or anything from Eric. Otherwise, we will meet again tomorrow at noon in closed session to discuss applications and Eric you can gavel us to closure. Thank you everybody. We'll see you tomorrow. Bye everyone. Bye.