Thank you for taking the time to think about,
and to comment on, my extravagant ideas. My 
initial reactions to your comments (which are very
persuasive to me) is that the project itself, if
pursued conscientiously is labor intensive enough,
and the financial rewards are so marginal, that the
bureaucratic obstacles make it not worth the struggle.
Besides, the "peers" who would review and approve any 
application are so deeply committed to the status
quo, that they would be prejudiced against my ideas
and seek to scuttle them. I've been there, done that.

=======================================================

As I contemplate the situation in which _you_ find yourself
I am reminded of the "research" project from which I
launched my surgical practice. When I finished the residency,
there was available for my use a slit lamp camera, and it
occurred to me that I might obtain useful information
about the evolution of cataracts by obtaining serial photographs
over a period of months. I didn't learn much about cataract
development, but in the course of my efforts, I established
relationships to several patients who, when it came time for
surgery, thought that since I had taken the photographs of their
cataracts, I should be the one to do the operation.

In the light of this experience, my worms eye view of
dialysis nephrology suggests to me that if I were DCI
I would take the government up on its offers to fund
"prevention" research in a big way, - by organizing
prospective studies on nephrology patients, - some of
whom might already be on dialysis elsewhere, - advertising
for patients, "inducing" them to participate in these
studies with generous payments from Federal funds, -
of course with Federal blessing. Human nature being what it is,
participants in such research, especially if they were treated
courteously, would identify with DCI (and NEMC), would populate
your dialysis clinics and become your patients.