It was good to see Joan Beck join the debate about how to spend any possible federal surplus (“Earmark budget surplus toward medical research,” Op-Ed, Jan. 8). Hers is a consistently eloquent voice from both a humane perspective and good common sense.
She is right to emphasize the fundamental importance of health-care research to our society. But let’s be sure we don’t define it too narrowly.
Lasers, MRI and X-ray machines, radiation therapy and many of the other diagnostic and therapeutic advances at the heart of modern medicine came from research in the physical sciences and engineering. Many times, as in the case of lasers and the MRI, the medical benefits became clear only after a device had been invented for other purposes. Computers are useful for many things, but medical research depends on their ability to process immense amounts of data. (Think of the Genome Project.)
Much of the national debt, which we have created, will be repaid by our children and grandchildren. Surpluses not spent to retire the debt should somehow benefit them. Scientific research–and education–should be at the top of the list.
