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

131–140 of 293 posts

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

#131

Post by lumost »

SCUSKU wrote: post #116
lumost wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how much of the rise of modern "pop-sci" as a genre in writing, film, and tv is due to the current academic incentives. If you're so good at selling yourself and field why not take the pitch directly to a paying audience rather than grant committees?

While at first I balked at this idea, I suppose what you're proposing is crowdsourcing academic research funding. Naturally, the first thing that comes to mind is how accountability can be managed. One of the major pitfalls of the crowdfunding model seems to be that the fundraisers can make like bandits with the money, with seemingly little recourse, or incentive for the crowd.

I don't think that I was proposing crowdfunding for science, but rather that the incentives in modern academia would give rise to modern popular science figures as those most able to secure funding. It's likely not the healthiest situation for actual discovery.

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

#132

Post by saboot »

raziel2701 wrote: post #128
saboot wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We may not have a Bell Labs, but we have the entire complex of national laboratories which have pivoted from solely developing nuclear weapons towards more basic science. I work in them .. it's really strange how much of the public is unaware of all the work we do, thousands of PhDs are employed through them currently doing basic science funded by tax payers.

I'm employed in one of them and it is a very bureaucratic, political environment. Our facilities are dilapidated despite the billions in funding, resources are so wastefully spent, there's a lot of siloed equipment, a lot of unused equipment, and it's not unusual to see the lab fund the same project twice but run by different people. I would be so curious for an audit to be done to the lab just to see how misspent th…

I've worked at a few .. there's one that immediately comes to mind from your description, but some are much better than others at giving freedom to their staff to pursue their own ideas.

There is funding like LDRD which is meant to support ideas from the bottom up.

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

#133

Post by ramraj07 »

dekhn wrote: post #32
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.

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 to do research (garage lab? Startup?) But f*k academia and universities. No way in hell I'm going to tacitly condone their ways by being part of it whether I can be successful or not.

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

#134

Post by raziel2701 »

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…

That's a pretty accurate description of the national labs complex. It is part of the military industrial complex and it offers financial security in exchange of personal and professional freedoms. It is very difficult for one to get their ideas funded unless they align with research directions that come from the top, which are rarely inspiring.

I wish the legacy of the nuclear stewardship program could be separated into its own thing and fund the creation of a separate, open campus that can attract and recruit more talent to work on more innovative research directions. A place of greater transparency and openness. It's never gonna happen but I can dream!

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

#135

Post by mattkrause »

raziel2701 wrote: post #129
phobosanomaly wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The research part is often funded by public grant money. > They aren't paid to get the PhD. PhD students are often paid salaries/stipends derived from (often public) grant money.

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).

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

#136

Post by exporectomy »

suc_syn wrote: post #73

I am in the same position. First completely self driven research project end in two different academic spend about 80k each fighting over which of them controlled the IP (the decided to share it), and totally fail to commercialize it (the both kept asking me how to do it while I had zero financial incentive). Second after a successful grant funding project which I was told I could not PI because I had not yet complet…

Maybe if someone's passionate enough they can fund their own science? Surely you could have earned 80k quickly enough in your private sector job. Similar to poets and artists who usually get paid nothing for a long time/ever.

Oh, maybe I misread you. They spent 80k just on fighting for IP rights?

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

#137

Post by mattkrause »

Fede_V wrote: post #16
tensor wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The follow on from this is rather more problematic. If you are prioritizing production things, then it means you'll severely limit the topics you explore. Anything that would take too long to get to market, or is too risky, or is too theoretical, will never be prioritized. This is the reason for the tenure system, to give true freedom to explore novel and future oriented work. Things that won't pay off for decades, i…

The other problem with the tenure system is that professors - even the ones that want to try cutting edge research and have tenure - cannot risk the career of the PhD students in their lab on some very speculative and high risk research that might backfire terribly.

Or worse, they do and 10% of the lab goes onto fame and glory, while the others bash their heads against the wall.

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

#138

Post by ginger_beer_m »

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…

Could you share what are these bio hacker spaces, for example?

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

#139

Post by [deleted] »

jseliger wrote: post #71
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 met other casualties of this, and meeting them when I was teaching undergrads inspired me to write https://jakeseliger.com/2012/04/17/how-to-think-about-scienc...

[deleted]

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

#140

Post by papa_reton »

saboot wrote: post #108
bnralt wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like this is exactly the kind of thing that a government is useful for. Why not have more publicly funded research institutions that employ them, and put them to work on useful research without having them worry about grant considerations, teaching classes, or the publishing treadmill?

We do .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_funded_research_and_...

Unfortunately they are US-only, have small funding and deliver little publicly available results.

And sometimes they do nasty stuff:

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

Post reply on HN