What the heck is a “War on Cancer”?

In the coming months, President Donald Trump’s administration will try to end a decades-long war on cancer by directing agencies to spend $1 trillion to create an infrastructure to help combat the disease.

The effort, which will also include new efforts to boost access to cancer screenings, has been dubbed the “War On Cancer.”

As the president prepares to unveil the budget proposal for fiscal year 2019, we asked a panel of experts to weigh in on the war on Cancer, and what the details of the plan might look like.

The War on Cancer panel: What’s the plan?

The White House budget proposal calls for $1.2 trillion in new money to create a “cancer infrastructure.”

That includes a $500 million grant to the National Institutes of Health to fund cancer research.

That grant is aimed at improving the quality of cancer screenings and reducing the costs of care.

But the White House is also proposing a $1 billion boost to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which would be funded through cuts to the agency’s budget.

The proposal would also add $100 million for the National Cancer Institute to “support advanced research on the biology of cancer.”

These additional funds would go toward new technologies, like imaging, and new methods to diagnose cancer early and prevent its spread.

But they also could create a bureaucracy that would be more difficult to navigate, according to Andrew Smith, a research fellow at the University of California, Davis.

The president wants to spend an additional $400 million on the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, or NIH, and $350 million on research on a “new generation of diagnostic tests and tests for detecting the cancer-causing agents that cause cancer.”

In other words, these proposals could increase the cost of testing and testing for cancer.

“This is a war on the very foundations of science, not the science itself,” said Smith.

In fact, there is good evidence that the increased costs of testing could be leading to overdiagnosis, which could be costly for patients and cause long-term harm.

In a 2016 study, researchers at Johns Hopkins University found that patients were underdiagnosed for cancers like breast cancer and colon cancer.

While it is not a perfect science, the researchers concluded that increased costs could have “unintended consequences that may affect the long-range health and economic status of American families.”

A 2015 study published in the journal Lancet found that cancer patients and their families were overdiagnosed at an average of 10.4 percent annually.

These costs could be compounded by the fact that cancer treatments are often only effective when they are given at a relatively early stage.

The White White House also wants to create $1,000 grants for research on stem cells.

But that could be expensive.

While some research has shown that stem cells can be used to create human organs, the White White Congress says that these stem cells “can be turned into the cells needed to repair cancerous tissue and cells of the immune system.”

The proposal is also calling for $200 million for new grants to develop a vaccine for “virus-borne” cancers.

The proposed program would create a $25 million fund to develop the “cell-based vaccine,” which is meant to be used in conjunction with vaccines against HIV and hepatitis C. This vaccine could be made with cells taken from the skin of patients, but scientists hope that the technology could also be used for other types of cancer.

The idea is to use cells from the body of a person to create the vaccine.

It could be used as a vaccine against cancer, but the White administration says it will not be able to make this vaccine on its own.

The final part of the proposal is $300 million for research into the role that stem cell research plays in the development of therapies for cancer, including “stem cell therapies” to treat various cancers.

These therapies are still a long way off, but a study published last year in Cell found that stem-cell therapies could be effective in treating leukemia, pancreatic cancer, lymphoma, and other cancers.

Scientists also say that a new type of stem cell called pluripotent stem cells could be a better alternative to a traditional chemotherapy approach, because they are more versatile than chemotherapy.

These stem cells are the cells that can grow into any type of cell, and they have the ability to grow into many different types of cells.

That is why the Trump administration is pushing for more funding for these stem cell therapies, which the NIH is currently funding with about $800 million in grants.

These research projects will take years to develop, but Smith said that a vaccine would be a more likely way to start this process.

“A vaccine is very risky, but I would expect that the White Houses research into stem cell therapy could lead to more and better treatments,” he said.

What is the “cancer-fighting” infrastructure?

Trump has made clear that the U.S. government wants to focus on cutting down on the use of expensive, toxic chemicals and to make our lives better through cleaner,