Jacob Yount

🚨🚨 Our latest paper shows that IFITM3 deficiency lowers the minimum virus dose threshold for influenza and also enhances adaptation of the virus to a new species.🦠🫁 Major implications for preventing new pandemics. 😷 First author @ParkerJDenz 👨‍🔬nature.com/articles/s4146…

Influenza virus hitches a cellular ride to the heart: Cell Host & Microbe cell.com/cell-host-micr…

Excited to share our new review article published today in @mbiojournal discussing the role of viral toxins in pathogenesis and dissemination. We summarize our recent work and current literature on flavivirus NS1, SARS-CoV-2 Spike, CCHFV GP38, and EBOV GP. journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mb…

🎉Congratulations to #mBio Editors Jorge Vidal (@JorgeEVidal1), Jacob Yount (@YountLabOSU), and Birgit Scharf (of @VT_Biology) and Senior Editor Tom Coenye (of @LPM_UGent) on their election to the American Academy of Microbiology! 👏 asm.social/2OC

@SutharLab Congratulations!! 🎉

I am honored to be elected as a Fellow of the American Academy of Microbiology Class of 2026. Deep appreciation to my collaborators and mentors, who helped shape this journey. Especially grateful to my former mentor, Mark Heise, who was also elected. asm.org/press-releases…

IFITM3 deficiency drives SARS-CoV-2 adaptation while preserving variant-specific traits @NatureComms @YountLabOSU @OhioState @adforu @ParkerJDenz nature.com/articles/s4146…

Please sign science community letter to congressional appropriations leaders requesting 1) a funding boost for NIH; and 2) hindrance to changes to indirect cost reimbursement. deadline: noon ET tomorrow Read the letter: smartmailerclick.bisglobal.net/act_linkClick.… and sign: smartmailerclick.bisglobal.net/act_linkClick.….

@ArrayManta I was agreeing with you. Was referring to huberman's thinking.

@ArrayManta @hubermanlab @NIH 💯 Costs for using core facilities will go up and other costs will be passed along. So I'm not sure you'd end up with more money for research in the way that you're thinking.

Academic researchers (who rely on @NIH funds). Would you rather see indirects to your university kept at the new 15% flat rate & modular R01s increased from 250K to 300K per year & pay lines move to ~20th %tile or reinstate the old indirect rates & %tile cutoffs of recent years?

mGems are short, thought-provoking reviews on high-interest topics in microbiology. Read the first 3 papers in this series: on #H5N1, viral entry, and the damage-response framework. #mbio journals.asm.org/journal/mbio/m…

A great new mBio mGem from @Lakdawala_Lab on transmission and exposure risks of dairy cow H5N1 influenza virus journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mb…

@putnamhornstein @johnarnold I have no problem with some cuts but what has been done is catastrophic

@YountLabOSU @johnarnold That is true. But it is also true that universities have had every incentive to drive up their federally negotiated IC rate.

There is a lot of fat at many universities, evidenced by 60%+ indirect rates some get. That said, 15% doesn’t work and breaks research and reserch universities. That would be incredibly destructive. I have supported & think schools can live with cap of 40-50% by cutting expenses.

@RBamh1 Complete nonsense. Contract Research Organizations charge 10x for what I can do in my lab. University research is the heart of innovation in the US.

@YountLabOSU I have done hundreds of studies across universities, Institutes and CRO. Similar studies in a CRO is a often a 1-page contract cover everything you listed, in $10~100K range. With universities, more pages and signatures and cost $3~5X. NIH or Tax payers are get a lousy deal.

NIH indirect costs fund the backbone of research: maintaining labs, ensuring safety, and supporting admin work. These are essential for groundbreaking discoveries. Drastic cuts to NIH indirect rates are detrimental to academic biomedical research.

@putnamhornstein @johnarnold Foundations benefit from systems NIH pays for. Grants require accountants, payroll, HR, biosafety officers, hazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

@johnarnold My work requires little beyond secure servers, so I am always thrilled when foundations impose indirect caps vs. paying for unrelated infrastructure! But I think the same should apply to federal awards. Foundations have been quicker to figure this out…

@R_H_Ebright @ClausWilke Like what?

@ClausWilke The claim "most...overhead...is used to support research activities" is misleading It may be true, at least at institutions with IDC rates under 60%, that "most" IDC charges support research, but, even at those institutions, large fractions are used for non-research purposes.

@JustinPerryPhD @jaypgreene @ATabarrok foundations get the benefit of the systems paid by nih dollars. Grants require accountants, payroll, HR, biosafety officers, biohazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

As someone who receives both, I can speak to this. Foundation funds are like the spearhead of an arrow. They are never enough to run a whole lab, but often enough to try something especially high risk. Foundation money is short-term and non-renewable. But it can give you important data that forms the foundation of long-term grant funding that is less likely to waste taxpayer dollars.

Here is how indirects work. A portion of a scientist’s NIH grant goes to the university—not as a slush fund, but mostly to support research. Some of it even comes back to the researcher. Why? Because grants cover specific expenses, and science often requires general funds. For example, if a centrifuge breaks and wasn’t budgeted in the grant, it can’t be replaced with grant funds—even if the research depends on it. Indirects cover such essential costs. More broadly, indirects fund lab operations—electricity, security, maintenance—and help hire new researchers. They also support early-stage projects not yet ready for grants. Is some of this money wasted? Sure. But funding cancer, infectious disease, and neuroscience research is hardly where DEI ideology takes hold.

@TheMattBeebe @HariDas1958_ @florian_krammer Grants require accountants, payroll people, HR, biosafety officers, chemical safety officers, biohazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

In the 50% overhead example, the direct costs of $1 will equal a grant price of $1.50. That “extra” comes out of the budget. That “extra” is paid by taxpayers. That “extra” is money that is not spent on research. It’s myopic views that is the problem: I guarantee on your vitae you use the grant total, not the direct total. Stop playing games with numbers.

1) Since there is a lot of confusion about the reduction of the overhead rate on NIH grants to 15% (see here: grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/n…) I'll do a little tweetorial (or X-torial?) about it.

@RBamh1 Grants require accountants, payroll people, HR, biosafety officers, chemical safety officers, biohazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

@VirusesImmunity If your institutions DON'T have safe and well maintain labs and facilities you should not apply for NIH grants. You have to have something to get something. Basic stuffs

@channelsmart Grants require accountants, payroll people, HR, biosafety officers, chemical safety officers, biohazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

@VirusesImmunity the reduction is in indirect costs - if a university isn't for example maintaining their own facilities that is now on them. PS with the endowments many have I find this whole discussion irrelevant.

@dank_herbert Grants require accountants, payroll people, HR, biosafety officers, chemical safety officers, biohazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

@bava23 Grants require accountants, payroll people, HR, biosafety officers, chemical safety officers, biohazardous waste removal, compliance officers, animal facilities, veterinarians, animal care staff, and on and on… this is what indirect costs pay for.

@brailemom @cspramesh @VirusesImmunity Is that an invitation?