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

161–170 of 293 posts

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

#161

Post by neltnerb »

rsfern wrote: post #154
neltnerb wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call myself a casualty, but I was definitely considering being a professor and definitely decided not to after seeing how ridiculously hard my adviser had to work despite her being famous and well funded. It just didn't seem like a job that one could do for decades without ruining their health. I'm amazed by the people who do manage to do it, but I'm confident that my decision was the right one. Instead, s…

If you’re looking to get back into the materials research industry doing applied ML, now is a great time — no need to wait five years. In my experience there’s a lot of demand for people conversant in both fields, a lot of interest in adopting this kind of work, and a growing set of interesting opportunities. I work in this field at a national lab, but in my experience there are a lot of industry players trying to fi…

Assuming you are working at PNNL I agree they have a great program. One of the few places I've collaborated with that understood the upsides involved.

I do see more and more educational opportunities and attempts to be forward looking with this. They just always seem super undercooked like setting up an institute to encourage collaborating (but good luck working there at an early stage unless you're already a professor somewhere). Or more often only really open to current PhD students or postdocs if you're not already a professor.

I'll figure it out eventually, I just wish it didn't feel like I have to bootstrap the whole thing to get anything to happen.

I'm just sad that now that it might finally be possible for anyone to lead such an effort I don't have the stamina to do it.

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

#162

Post by raziel2701 »

mattkrause wrote: post #135
raziel2701 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the best part is that all this public money results in research papers that lie behind a private paywall. How have we allowed for this fraud to go on and on?

That's no longer true. From 2013 onward, the results of all federally-funded research needs to be publicly available. Here's the memo mandating it: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2013/02/22/expandi... People do generally take this seriously and there are consequences (e.g., can't use publications in NIH grants if they haven't been deposited).

I have continued to publish and never have I been instructed to make the papers be open access. No one is enforcing that mandate. The research I've been a part of is wholly funded by the taxpayer and papers that I published after the mandate continue to not be freely available.

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

#163

Post by rtkaratekid »

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.

I had this shift as well. I met a prof who did some really cool research I was interested in but ultimately lost funding. His lab and basically his entire career went down the drain.

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

#164

Post by letitgo12345 »

Flip side -- the pioneering research may not have been possible without govt funding of science through a grant based system. Imo the right conclusion here is to increase govt funding massively. Unclear to me how to not do it based on a grant system. Even in the industry you need to do project proposals to keep your team funded.

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

#165

Post by tomcam »

benibela wrote: post #127
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.

I have been writing a grant proposal for months I am also supposed to have finished it months ago, but I really have no idea what I should write there. The current grant from my PI expires in two weeks, and then I have no funding

I have absolutely nothing to contribute, other than to say I’m sorry you’re in that position I’m pulling for you. My very best to you.

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

#167

Post by s1artibartfast »

burntoutfire wrote: post #102
renewiltord wrote: post #3

Well, it's no surprise that people optimize to the metric that's available, right? Private labs aim to make production things. Public labs aim to collect grants. The only real hope for modern science is a business with a long-term view. That's because that business is only rewarded if their thing works. If there was ever a time when public academics worked for science, it is no longer that today. Now it is occupied b…

> The only real hope for modern science is a business with a long-term view. That's because that business is only rewarded if their thing works. There are limits to that logic though. For example, the business can spend billions on researching more addicting cigarettes or can direct money to drugs which merely manage the disease instead of curing it (as disease management makes you a customer for life).

With respect to the products developed, this is an issue where the incentives of business and industry need to be aligned. Resolving the problem can be as simple as paying more for drugs That cure opposed to treat.

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

#168

Post by crawfordcomeaux »

ramraj07 wrote: post #133
dekhn wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too; I had my first NIH R01 turned down without a score and left for industry (which has allowed me to do more scientific work than academia ever did). I only realized later that most PIs don't get their first NIH R01 approved until ~10 years older than I was at the time. What's ridiculous is the amounts of these basic grants that beginning scientists are trying to get are tiny- basically 1 person-year salary.

So surprisingly, many of my friends got their first R01s approved in the last year or two. Some actually didn't even have a good publication record or pedigree or institutional position. One even got 3! But was told that the committees are being lenient with first time appplicants. Somehow that feels worse? Like a heroin dealer giving the first shot at a discount? Glad I got out. I'm still hell bent on finding a way…

I'm working to create a community model with a communal research lab. It's meant to meet my needs as a researcher while also removing pressures/norms from capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism. What do you want to research and what's in your way?

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

#169

Post by JadeNB »

alpineidyll3 wrote: post #114
laretluval wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stop rewarding "I wrote the grant" With authorships. How could this work? If you have more grant money you have more resources to write papers.

Many faculty getting the most funding are never involved in writing the papers attributed to them. (Source: years spent at the top five universities and my own faculty experience) Would work simply: fund students directly. If faculty contribute training or ideas students can grant authorship. Faculty/postdocs still peer review papers.

> If faculty contribute training or ideas students can grant authorship.

I don't know a particularly good way to get around this issue and still reward faculty for collaboration with students, but, in this situation, faculty are just going to pressure students to 'recognise' their (the faculty's) contributions with an authorship—say, by threatening to withhold a recommendation letter.

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

#170

Post by nextos »

TheWaywardProf wrote: post #79

I am in the middle of this right now; new professor at top-10 university in CS (with a PhD in biomedicine). Funding science is a frequently-debated topic and everyone is aware there is a problem, but one part is that in the US we have combined four different organizations: federally-funded scientific research organizations, post-highschool education, vocational training (doctors, lawyers), and professional sports. Pe…

Great summary. DARPA is very forward thinking. E.g. recently they funded PPAML, which helped probabilistic programming to take off.

I'm curious as I have a similar profile but I'm in Oxbridge, what top US universities have good CS departments interested in biomedicine?

Post reply on HN