What would we call it?

[RxnMan]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I got into a conversation with one of the senior faculty here at the NIH about creating a home for EM at the NIH. Given that most institutes are based around diseases or an organ, researchers in a diverse field like EM would have to spread their efforts among many institutes (e.g. eye dz -> NEI, MIs -> NHLBI).

I don't know if this is a good solution - a separate center would allow us to create the intellectual capital needed for sustained research projects and research training within the constraints of clinical EM. This institute would also go a long way towards increasing the research support for EM scientists at the national level, which is lacking when compared to IM, Peds, and Path.

So the senior faculty member suggested: What unique factor(s) defines EM as a field?

What would we name this new institute?

What do you all think?

 

[southerndoc]

National Institute for Accident & Injury Prevention

That seems to be the only one missing. All the medical conditions can be covered under the other institutes.

However, I'm in favor of not forming such an institute. I believe in less government, not more. This is the reason our country is in so much debt.

 

[RxnMan]

National Institute for Accident & Injury Prevention...

This is covered under the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

...However, I'm in favor of not forming such an institute. I believe in less government, not more. This is the reason our country is in so much debt.

I think less government is better too, but when certain other centers exist, we could probably just rearrange existing budgets.

 

[iridesingltrack]

I think this is an interesting question. In all honesty, despite being a resident with a serious interest in a research career, I have mixed feelings about whether we truly need the formation of a new center. As a specialty, we've been successful in securing funding from the NIH, though to be sure less than our collegues in certain "more established" specialties. But, in the interest of playing along how 'bout, the National Center for Acute Illness, (Critical Care?) and Resuscitation.

I've suggested the consideration of the critical care componant as a two fold statement: 1. EM has a role in critical care and 2. CC also seems to be missing from the NIH centers and combining them adds buy-in???

iride