One of the most noteworthy moments of President Obama’s State of the Union address earlier this week was the announcement that Vice President Joe Biden would be leading the administration’s efforts toward its “moonshot” of curing cancer.

“Last year, Vice President Biden said that with a new moonshot, America can cure cancer,” Obama said. “Last month, he worked with this Congress to give scientists at the National Institutes of Health the strongest resources they’ve had in over a decade. Tonight, I’m announcing a new national effort to get it done. And because he’s gone to the mat for all of us, on so many issues over the past forty years, I’m putting Joe in charge of Mission Control.”

Biden—who lost his own son, Beau, to brain cancer in 2015—followed this news up by sharing a long blog post on the subject.

“Over the course of the past few months, I’ve met with nearly 200 of the world’s top cancer physicians, researchers, and philanthropists,” Biden wrote. “And the goal of this initiative — this ‘Moonshot’ — is to seize this moment. To accelerate our efforts to progress towards a cure, and to unleash new discoveries and breakthroughs for other deadly diseases.”

Biden explained that he plans to do two things: increase resources for the cause and “break down silos and bring all the cancer fighters together .”

“Over the next year, I will lead a dedicated, combined effort by governments, private industry, researchers, physicians, patients, and philanthropies to target investment, coordinate across silos, and increase access to information for everyone in the cancer community,” Biden wrote. “Here’s what that means: The Federal government will do everything it possibly can — through funding, targeted incentives, and increased private-sector coordination — to support research and enable progress.”

Rapid reactions

The president’s announcement grabbed its fair share of headlines these last few days, with numerous writers investigating what exactly Biden’s assignment means for the future of scientific research.

Jocelyn Kaiser of Science Magazine noted that cancer researchers are eager to hear more about the vice president’s plan.

“They have tossed out some of their own thoughts on what the plan should entail, while tempering expectations for a single cancer cure,” Kaiser wrote. “Their overall hope, they say, is that it will mean steady funding increases for the National Institutes of Health (NIH).”

Kaiser added that, generally, most scientists dislike hearing such cut-and-dry rhetoric about “curing” such a complex disease. She also pointed out that this is all reminiscent of President Nixon’s “war on cancer,” which many say began when he signed the National Cancer Act of 1971.

Eric Niiler wrote about the announcement for Wired, pointing out that the fight to cure cancer will need more than just additional research.

“Research alone won’t be enough,” Niiler wrote. “One idea is to have Medicare cover genetic cancer screens, something now only covered by a few top-shelf insurance plans. That might take an Apollo-sized line-item, but it will also yield tons of genetic data that might give clues about potential drug targets and other treatments.”

Niiler added that Biden should look into providing additional money into research that has already started. A lot of important research is going on right now, and giving those research teams more resources and more public attention could be a big step forward.

Meanwhile, Jeffrey Kluger of Time pointed out that the administration’s efforts are most definitely not a “moonshot.”

“Of all of the metaphors that have gotten shiny at the elbows, it’s the beleaguered ‘moonshot’ that may be the worst,” Kluger wrote.

By misusing the term, Kluger explains, President Obama and Biden actually sell the challenge of curing cancer short.

“The audience applauded as audiences always do at moonshots, and it’s hard not to,” Kluger wrote. “The term evokes one of America’s finest and boldest moments, when the Soviet Union beat us into space with Sputnik, the first artificial satellite, and we responded with men on the moon less than 12 years later. But the problem with using that real moonshot to call for metaphorical moonshots is that it misunderstands both the stakes and the difficulty of actually accomplishing what it is you’re trying to do—making hard things seem easier than they are.”