Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 293 posts

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#51

Post by idrios »

thayne wrote: post #29

I am a casualty of this. I was originally intending to follow an academic career, until I discovered that my career would be dependent on my ability to secure grants. Something that if I was not bad at (which I think is unlikely), would at least be extremely stressful for me. It isn't the only reason I decided to to switch to being a software engineer, but it is a major reason.

Biomedical engineer with a 2.977GPA. Lots of extra curriculars, volunteered in labs, 160 credit hours of mostly STEM classes, lots of grad-level courses, relevant work experience, but GPA was 0.023 too low to pass the automated filters and I didn't get into any of the grad programs I applied for.

I ended up doing fine in software development though. Also, the Wright Brothers didn't need a research lab to invent flight. Biology-focused hacker spaces are on the rise so there are still ways to do research.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#52

Post by LeanderK »

I have been thinking recently how to reform the science system here in germany, which is somewhat similar to the system in the US. What I think is impossible is to completely eliminate the grant chasing for the early career scientist. It's just that there's more supply than demand in a lot of sciences and not everyone can make it, if we try to give everyone a grant we end up with grants that are not really paying for anything.

What I think would be an improvement would be a different system where there's a clear path from grant-based funding to a continuous stream of funding, with different funding levels, where one gets periodically reviewed and demoted/continued/raised, so your funding does not completely dry up after a few year (I imagined it like the sports leagues, where you play in different levels and depending on your performance you get relegated from the league) and you can really plan long-term. So one can continue the competitiveness and the role of funding bodies/institutions where the scientist work at while giving them the ability to plan long-term and maybe pursue more risky ideas.

There will always be the ones that fall through the cracks. We somehow need to figure out who to give the money to and we will end up with someone who deserved but did not get the money. I don't know who reviews the grant in the US, but here at least with some funding bodies the scientist manage it themselves (dfg) and I don't think one can easily improve on it.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#53

Post by vinay427 »

weinzierl wrote: post #49

This reminds me if the story of Biontech cofounder and CEO Uğur Şahin. Being an immigrant child in Germany his teacher would no recommend him for high school despite his good grades. Şahin said that he only ended up in high school because a neighbor of his intervened at the school.

For those who are unaware of the German system, "high school" here presumably means the "Gymnasium" or similar track that prepares students for higher education, as opposed to the vocational dual education track that includes vocational schooling and apprenticeships.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Germany

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_education_system

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#54

Post by dmitryminkovsky »

idrios wrote: post #51
thayne wrote: post #29

I am a casualty of this. I was originally intending to follow an academic career, until I discovered that my career would be dependent on my ability to secure grants. Something that if I was not bad at (which I think is unlikely), would at least be extremely stressful for me. It isn't the only reason I decided to to switch to being a software engineer, but it is a major reason.

Biomedical engineer with a 2.977GPA. Lots of extra curriculars, volunteered in labs, 160 credit hours of mostly STEM classes, lots of grad-level courses, relevant work experience, but GPA was 0.023 too low to pass the automated filters and I didn't get into any of the grad programs I applied for. I ended up doing fine in software development though. Also, the Wright Brothers didn't need a research lab to invent fligh…

> Biology-focused hacker spaces are on the rise so there are still ways to do research.

I am very interested in this concept. Are you thinking of any in particular? I really wish people invested in public spaces people could go do science, particularly chemistry.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#55

Post by capitol_ »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #47

Wow, there is a lot of negativity towards science in this thread. Um, yeah, it could be better. But it's mostly a matter of personal courage. Of course institutional funding is not the best incentive for the best science. Good science comes from courageous individuals in courageous communities. Not financial incentives. Good science takes courage.

This is a really horrible statement about why we don't pay scientist a fair wage for their work.

I really hope that at some point in the future people stop internalize this sort of abuse regarding their careers.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#56

Post by odyssey7 »

Is it counterproductive that we expect researchers to work in universities and become professors? It seems like there should be more outlets for the calling. Our universities are proving to be a bottleneck.

I see how there is an often-natural relationship between cultivating knowledge and disseminating it to students. However, we need and have more prospective researchers than universities are willing or able to support.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#57

Post by bernulli »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #47

Wow, there is a lot of negativity towards science in this thread. Um, yeah, it could be better. But it's mostly a matter of personal courage. Of course institutional funding is not the best incentive for the best science. Good science comes from courageous individuals in courageous communities. Not financial incentives. Good science takes courage.

I agree with 'courage', but the problem is that it all depends on the courage of the people with money rather than the courage of the researcher. Someone has to take the risk and hire you for a tenure track position, and someone has to choose you over someone else (from a better school? with a more en-vogue topic?) for giving out grant money. Ideally it should be a meritocracy, but how do you prove in advance what is good research? And I guess, then it often boils down to 'no one ever got fired for buying IBM'.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#58

Post by bernulli »

throwaway316943 wrote: post #41
sega_sai wrote: post #2

I think it is a fair question how to organize science for best results (maximum productivity ?). I am no fan of pressure to apply for grants, which is particularly strong in the US. Also the amount of pressure/effort needed to get permanent/tenured position is very large. While this is clearly a big drain on people, and some people cannot handle it, either because they don't play the game well, or just live/work bala…

Put meaningful bounties on the things you want solved.

The thing is that we often don't even know it. Einstein did not solve a pressing problem with his theories of relativity.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#59

Post by diego_moita »

Dr. Katalin Karikó, the scientist mentioned in the article, is now a senior vice-president at BioNTech, the German company that developed the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

She is also adjunct professor at the same University of Pennsylvania, where these events happened.

Re: Our brutal science system almost cost us a pioneer of mRNA vaccines

#60

Post by ampdepolymerase »

odyssey7 wrote: post #56

Is it counterproductive that we expect researchers to work in universities and become professors? It seems like there should be more outlets for the calling. Our universities are proving to be a bottleneck. I see how there is an often-natural relationship between cultivating knowledge and disseminating it to students. However, we need and have more prospective researchers than universities are willing or able to supp…

The issue is that there are too many barriers to commercialisation and the current stakeholders have too much power. The profitable fields like medicine strictly limit the number of people accepted (the official explanation is that there aren't enough residencies, the unspoken reason is that the American Medical Association wants to keep salaries up) and FDA drug approval laws err on the side of caution; better to have 10 people die due to disease and lack of access to treatments than to have one person die due to a faulty drug that the FDA let through. This attitude and approach means that the time to market is huge and highly resource intensive. The COVID vaccines were designed in less than a day. It took a year to reach market even under the ridiculously accelerated approval pace.
Post reply on HN