Mirror, Mirror On the Wall: Which Recent College Graduates Have the Highest Unemployment Rates of All?

It is no secret that recent college graduates are having a tough time finding work. However, not all college majors are created equal and the unemployment rates among different disciplines are likely to vary. To answer this question, a group of researchers at the Georgetown Center on Education and Workforce analyzed employment data for recent college graduates from an in-depth US census study entitled the American Community Survey conducted in 2009 and 2010. In the study, recent college grades were defined as workers (with college degrees of course) between ages 22 and 26.

The results of the study are shown in the graph below.

The data clearly show that among recent college grads, those who studied architecture have the highest unemployment rate at 13.9%. This finding was not that surprisingly given that the collapse of the housing and construction markets were mainly responsible for the ongoing recession that began in 2007. 

Unemployment rates were lowest among college graduates with training in education and healthcare. Again, these results are not that start. Again, these results were not startling because the US population continues to age (healthcare-related jobs) and the number of school-aged children skyrocketed in the past 20 years (education jobs).

Interestingly, the unemployment rate among engineering graduate, 7.4% is relatively high despite the fact that HR and employment experts contend that there is a shortage of engineers in the US.

Finally, unemployment rates among graduates with art degrees and those who possess degrees in the humanities and liberal art are still very high at 11.1% and 9.4% respectively. That said, maybe getting that MS or PhD degree in the life sciences was not such a bad idea after all!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Biotech Update: Samsung Biologics And Biogen/Idec To Compete In The Global Biosimilar Market

While Samsung is mostly know for flat screen televisions and other electronic appliances, one of South Korea’s largest companies has been quietly evaluating a play in the protein engineering and manufacturing space. For those of you who may not know, Korea possesses one of Asia’s most vibrant biotechnology industries. At present, there are over 600 Korean biotechnology companies in existence. In April 2011, Samsung created a business units called Samsung Biologics which specializes in biopharmaceutical manufacturing.

Today, Samsung formally announced that it would create a joint venture with America’s Biogen/Idec to develop market and manufacture biosimilar molecules. Under the terms of the agreement, Samsung will invest $255 million and garner a 85% stake in the venture which will be located in South Korea. Biogen/Idec will invest $45 million for a 15% stake in the joint venture. Samsung will take a leading role in developing and marketing the joint venture’s products whereas Biogen/Idec will contribute expertise in protein engineering and biomanufacturing. The joint venture will not develop biosimilar versions of Biogen/Idec’s proprietary, branded protein-based drugs which include Avonex (MS), Rituxan (oncology) and Tysabri (MS).

Biogen/IDEC is the first “big biotech” company to jump on the biosimilar train. The company joins Merck BioVentures and Sandoz (Novartis) as major players in the biosimilar marketplace. Teva, which began looking at biosimilars about eight years ago, is also widely believed to be a biosimilar player. While the financial fate of biosimilars is still uncertain in the US, these molecules are generally perceived as having a much higher financial upside in large emerging markets such as China, Korea, Brazil and Russia which are susceptible to government pricing controls.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 

Demand for Patent Agents and Attorneys Continues to Grow

Times are tough for many in the legal profession these days. However, the demand for patent experts including attorneys and patent agents is skyrocketing. According to an article in today’s NY Times, openings for patent attorneys account for more than 15 percent of law firm job openings while only 3 percent of lawyers in the US specialize in this area. The bottom line: it is a great time to be a patent attorney or agent in today’s tough economy.

Not surprisingly, many patent attorneys (and agents) usually have a background in science or engineering. And, because of the scarcity of qualified applicants many law firms are doubling their recruiting spending to meet the growing demand for specialists in intellectual property (IP) and patents.

One of the reasons for the growing demand is passage of the America Invents Act, the largest overhaul in the US patent system in the past 60 years. The legislation which changes how patents are reviewed and process is spurring competition between firms to higher IP specialist to ease the transition pain. At present, there are over 230 IP openings among more than 1400 lawyer positions nationwide. Many of the openings have been unfilled for over 90 days and more are added daily.

Currently, there are about 40,000 patent attorneys and agents registered with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In order to register with the USPTO agents and lawyers are required to pass the patent bar examination. While registered patent agents have taken and passed the exam, they are not lawyers who are required to pass state bar examinations to become licensed attorneys. For those of you who may not know, you don’t have to go to law school to take the patent bar exam nor is a law degree required to take individual state bar exams (however, person who are not law school graduate are likely not to pass the state tests). Patent agents can prepare patents and prosecute cases with the USPTO but cannot litigate in court or draw up contracts. There are roughly 1.2 million licensed patent attorneys in the US according to the American bar association.

The greatest demand for IP attorneys and agents is in information and computing technology and the life sciences. Persons with PhD degrees in the life sciences can sometimes find work at IP and patent law firms. Also, you may be able to find work at a patent examiner with the USPTO! PhD degree holders who have passed the patent bar are even more desirable. However a law degree plus a PhD degree will almost certainly guarantee you employment at most IP firms. That said, before you decide to go to law school, I high recommend that you talk with IP professionals or read a few dozen patent applications (they can all be found at www.uspto.org) in your spare time. If you find the reading interesting or manage to stay awake after reading the fifth application than patent law may be a good choice for you. If not, I suggest that you consider other alternate career options.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

 

The 25 Best Biomedicine And Healthcare Informatics Blogs

William Hooper author of the HealthTechTopia blog which focuses on biomedicine and healthcare informatics compiled a top 25 list of the best biomedicine blogs on the web. 

While BioJobBlog failed to make the list, BioCrowd was listed at number 14. This is what the HealthTechTopia blog had to say about BioCrowd, the online networking site created by Vincent Racaniello and me.

“So where can you get blog entries from tons of biomedicine enthusiasts? With a stop here. The site was built to help bioscience professionals build relationships, exchange ideas, find jobs, and identify exciting new career opportunities.”

Best Blogs on Biomedicine by an Individual

These experts in biomedicine take it on at all angles.

  1. Biotech/ Biomedical
    Join Dr. Theresa Phillips as she uses her experience to provide her readers with tools, tips, strategies, and information about the industry. She has a broad background in a number of different areas of biotechnology and biomedical research, including having worked for two biotech companies in the environmental remediation industry. Must reads include a career in biotech and six approaches to phytoremediation.
  2. Terry Etherton Blog on Biotechnology
    Dr. Etherton is a Distinguished Professor of Animal Nutrition and Head of the Department of Dairy and Animal Science at Penn State University. His research specialty is the area of endocrine regulation of animal growth and nutrient metabolism. Genetically modified crops and cloned livestock are the latest blog topics.
  3. Eye on DNA
    Dr. Hsien-Hsien Lei is a PhD-trained epidemiologist and biotech consultant, as well as a Stanford and JohnHopkinsUniversity graduate. One of her focuses is on how both genome and internet technology are going to change the world. Popular articles include DNA toys and “100 Facts About DNA.”
  4. Gary Rabin
    He is the Chairman of Advanced Cell Technology. They are a biotechnology company that specializes in the development of cellular therapies for the treatment of rare and common diseases that impact millions of people worldwide. The blog often lists their accomplishments as well as related items in biotech.
  5. Building Confidence
    Blogger Russ Altman is also a professor at StanfordUniversity. His writings are a way to share commentary on issues related to his professional expertise, which is biomedical informatics, genetics, medicine, and bioengineering. He also has a quick tutorial on the subject of bioinformatics.
  6. Gene Expression
    Razib Khan’s degrees are in biochemistry and biology. He has blogged about genetics since 2002, previously worked in software development, and is an Unz Foundation Junior Fellow. A standout choice for often integrating pop culture and news items into bio-learning.
  7. Biotech Blog
    Yali Friedman lives in Washington, DC and is the author of “Building Biotechnology” and other books. He is also the founder of DrugPatentWatch and chief editor of the “Journal of Commercial Biotechnology.” Check out his blog for thoughts and news on the commercial, legal, political, and scientific aspects of biotech.
  8. Expression Patterns
    Proving again that biomedicine isn’t just for men is Eva Amsen. She recently moved from research to editing and from biochemistry to developmental biology. In addition to science, she also blogs about the arts.
  9. Public Rambling
    What sounds like a blog for the latest commentary on the latest scandal is actually a scientific one. Pedro Beltrao stops here to write about what he thinks on bioinformatics, science, and technology. Omics was the topic of a recent post.
  10. Science Roll
    Bertalan Meskó graduated from the University of Debrecen, Medical School and Health Science Center in 2009 and started PhD studies in the field of personalized genomics. His blog is now a journey through genetics and medicine. Biomedicine in the news and his reaction are often the topic of posts.

Best Blogs on Biomedicine by a Group

Check out these groups and sites for a collective view of biomedicine and related areas.

  1. The Daily Scan
    Part of Genome Web, there are several blogs on biomedicine to choose from. They include entries on cancer and informatics. The main site has more for those interested in biomedicine such as news, careers, and a magazine.
  2. ISAAA
    Click here for the official blog from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. They have a newsfeed that is constantly updated and divided by crop biotech, biofuels supplement, and more. There are also other learning resources offered.
  3. Fierce Biotech
    Get just the news with a visit here. Several stories a day are on all the advancements and announcements in the field. You can also choose by biomarkers, events, whitepapers, and much more.
  4. BioCrowd
    So where can you get blog entries from tons of biomedicine enthusiasts? With a stop here. The site was built to help bioscience professionals build relationships, exchange ideas, find jobs, and identify exciting new career opportunities.
  5. Growers for Biotechnology
    Their mission is to promote and facilitate the research, development and acceptance of biotechnology in agriculture. The news stream has the latest in developments in biology for food. You can also get other biotech info such as why growers use biotech and reports.
  6. BMC Biotechnology
    This is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed articles on the manipulation of biological macromolecules or organisms. Use in experimental procedures, cellular, and tissue engineering, as well as in the pharmaceutical, agricultural biotechnology, and allied industries are also shared. Current featured articles are on glucosinolate engineering and cytokine inhibition.
  7. Biotechnology Journal
    Can’t make it to the library to read the latest issue or shell out a subscription fee? Then click here to get many issues offering free articles as a PDF. There are also other biomedicine items available.
  8. Colorado Bioscience Association
    The CBSA is a not-for-profit corporation providing services and support for Colorado’s growing biosciences industry. Their blog contains news releases, links to articles, and other related information of interest. Maggie Chamberlin Holben of their marketing department has more.
  9. Biomedicine on Display
    This is the blog of Medical Museion, University of Copenhagen. They focus on the display of visual and material culture in museums, laboratories, and clinics with a goal of promoting contemporary biomedicine. Materialism was the subject of the latest post.
  10. BioSpace
    Finally, stop here to get items on life, science, and the community with the biologist in mind. Top breaking news and featured stories are often included. You can also search by biotech, medical, clinical research, and academic entries.

Best Blogs on Specific Biomedicine

Learn more about a specific area of biomedicine below.

  1. The Spittoon
    Get the writings from the pro’s at 23 and Me here. They specialize in using saliva to analyze the nearly one million locations in a person’s genome. Readers of the blog are given a deeper understanding of DNA and related areas.
  2. Genetic Future
    So how will all this biomedicine and such affect us in the future? That is the very question that genome researcher Daniel MacArthur strives to answer. Part of Wired Blogs, he focuses on the fast moving world of human genetics and why companies will sell you info on your own DNA.
  3. OnBioVC
    But can all this biomedicine talk be used to turn a profit? With a visit to this blog, the answer can be “yes.” They specialize in reporting on bioscience venture capital data.
  4. Blog,Bioethics.net
    As with any science, ethics is going to come into play. Get a blog especially for the ethics surrounding biology here. The editors of “The American Journal of Bioethics” use it to inform and discuss more on the subject with the public.
  5. Bioethics Discussion Blog
    Because one view on anything ethical isn’t enough, click here. Dr. Maurice Bernstein is a physician and medical school teacher who moderates the discussion. With entries dating back to 2004, make time for tons of bioethics.

No matter if you are a student studying for a PhD or just a fan of science, there is loads to learn on the above 25 best blogs on biomedicine.

 

Careers: The Ten Fastest Growing Fields?

I am not a big fan of top ten lists but I decided to take a look at the list compiled by Cecilia Capuzzi Simon in a recent article that appeared in the April 13, 2011 New Times Education supplement. Entitled “Top Ten List: Where the Jobs Are.” The article was extremely well written and based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ list of the fastest-growing occupations. 

The Bureau gleefully announced that it expects there to more than a million new jobs by 2018, and a “worker pool that may not be trained to fill them.” While this may seemingly appear to be great news—given the almost 10 percent unemployment rate that has been plaguing the US for the past three years—I was puzzled by appearance of biomedical engineering (#1), medical scientists (#6) and biochemists and biophysicists (#9) on the lists mainly because I know that persons who are trained in these fields are having extremely difficult times finding jobs in the current economy. That said, with most life science R&D being shipped over seas or outsourced, it hard to see that any of these jobs will be in great demand in the US over the next seven years. Maybe the bureau knows something that I don’t? Or maybe, it is the US government’s way of gently nudging people into careers that they anticipate will be highly valued in the future? Whatever the reason, it is going to be tough to convince college freshman to major in these fields if the current job market for these professions is currently so bleak.

What is even more puzzling then the ranking of these three career choices list is the actually numbers of new jobs that are anticipated to be created. The total number of new jobs expected in these fields by 2018 is roughly 65,000 (biomedical engineers-12,000; medical scientists-44,000; and biochemists and biophysicists-9,000). Compare this with the number of jobs anticipated by 2018 for network systems and data communication analysts (156,000), home health aide (461,000), personal and home care aide (376,000) or physician assistants (29,000) and you will get a better idea about the urgency for biomedical engineers and other life scientists.

There is no question that life scientists will command higher salaries and wages than home health aids or possibly a physician’s assistant but life sciences jobs typically require a minimum of a MS or PhD degree. Moreover, the economic theory of supply and demand suggests that it will be much easier for healthcare informaticists or home healthcare aides to find a job as compared with a biomedical engineer or PhD biochemist—even by 2018. In other words, don’t expect the US job market for life scientists to get better any time soon. 

While it is unfortunate that the US is beginning to seriously lag behind much smaller countries in science, math and engineering preparedness, the current demand for these types of jobs is waning and undergraduate college students—who lived through the recent financial meltdown—will likely (and rightly) choose to pursue careers where the likelihood of future employment is greatest. Unfortunately, the life sciences isn’t one of them.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

 

Pharmaceutical R&D Continues Its Eastward Migration

For the past three years or so, Eli Lilly CEO John Lechleiter has publicly criticized America’s lack of math, science and engineering preparedness. Further, he has lamented that this lack of preparedness has resulted in a lack of innovation and that it threatens the US standing as a leader in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. Finally, Lechleiter squarely places the blame on American science educators. 

Therefore, it came as somewhat of surprise to me when I learned that Lilly (and many other pharmaceutical companies) are outsourcing an increasing amounts of drug discovery and development to Chinese contract research organizations (CROs pharma companies continue to outsource drug R&D to ostensibly lower development costs and get drugs to market faster. According to Chuan “Joe” Shih, a former Eli Lilly employee of 25 years and executive vice president of integrated drug discovery at Crown Bioscience a Shanghai-based CRO, the total annual cost for one researcher at Lilly might run $300,000 to $350,000 a year. The figure at Crown is one-third of that. Shih also disclosed that Pfizer was one of Crown’s clients.

In addition to Crown, Eli Lilly has outsourced R&D to other Chinese CROs that includeWuXi AppTec and ChemExplorer. It also operates its own research-and-development center in Shanghai and is building a diabetes research center here. Like Lilly, big pharma companies like Roche, Novartis and others have also established research centers in China.

Some analysts contend that the reasons given for the current R&D outsourcing trends—lower costs and faster market times—are red herrings. They suggest that establishing R&D in China helps position companies to sell into the huge, emerging Chinese market. Within the next decade or so, the Chinese market may eclipse the US as the major pharmaceutical market in the world.

Interestingly, in an interview in Shanghai Lilly’s Lechleiter said that he believed that CROs in China have more to offer than cost savings. “The skill level and the quality and the increasing availability of high-skilled and high-quality operations in the contract-research space render these firms globally competitive,” he said. Further, he added that in recent years, Lilly has had difficulty getting green cards or permanent resident visas for some of the Chinese people graduating from American universities it wants to hire. “So we need to follow the talent, and I expect there will be people recruited to the U.S. who will want to stay in the U.S. And there will be Chinese people and others who want to come back here. Our research center in Shanghai gives them a place to land.”

Does this mean that Lechleiter has given up on his quest to improve American science preparedness and American innovation? And, what will become of the 100,000 or so American pharmaceutical scientists who were laid off in recent years or those new minted American PhDs who cannot find work in the US? Is that the fault of the American education system or pharmaceutical companies that are trying to maintain profit margins at any cost or improving the likelihood of success in emerging markets in developing nations?

Until next time…

Good Look and Good Job Hunting (try the BRIC countries)

 

Participation in High School Science Fairs Declines As The President Acknowledges American Science Competitiveness is At An All Time Low

In his State of the Union Address last week, President Obama acknowledged that US global competitiveness in science, technology engineering and math is at an all time low and that now may be America’s “sputnik moment” to turn this trend around. While I was pleased to hear the President say that we have a problem, neither political rhetoric nor turning the lack of science literacy into a challenge that resembles an arms race is going to solve the problem. What is needed are better trained science teachers who can engage science-minded students and a repeal of the No Child Left Behind Act that forces schools to focus limited financial resources on bolstering math and reading scores to maintain public funding. Sadly, neither of these things is going to happen any time soon. But I digress...

Historically, an option for science-minded students who wanted to be “engaged” was local, regional and national science fairs where students competed with one another for recognition of innovative scientific achievement. According to an article in the NY Times, science fairs grew in popularity after World War II and were intended for those who may not have considered themselves science fanatics but were interested in general science. Michele Glidden, director at the Society for Science & public, a nonprofit organization that administers 350 regional fairs contends that “Science fairs develop skills that reach down to everybody’s lives, whether you want to be a scientist or not. The point is to breed science-minded citizens.” Unfortunately, the number of high school students and high school participating in science fairs is waning. For example, in Indiana participation in the state’s science fairs plummeted 15 per cent in the last three years.

Experts contend that declining participation may be linked to competing demands placed on high school students for other extracurricular options like sports, music, and volunteering. Yet many science educators contend that meeting mandated state standards that usually require teaching fact-based knowledge rather than the scientific method leaves little time for them to stimulate students who may be interested in participating in science fairs. Further, many high school teachers lack the training or subject matter expertise to help students who want to enter science fear. Some have reached out to scientists in industry or local colleges and universities to help interested students but these types of connections are frequently difficult to make. 

Yet, despite these challenges, several hundred thousand American high school students will participate in over 350 science fairs during the next three months or so. If now is truly a “sputnik moment” for America, than President Obama and perhaps more importantly Congress ought to “put its money where its mouth is” and provide support to improve US science literacy.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

 

Promoting Science Literacy Among Undergraduate Humanities Students One Student At A Time

In 2005, The National Academy of Sciences issued a worrisome report entitled “Rising above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future” that warned that America is slipping in competitiveness in all areas of science.

While this ought to have been a wake-up call for all Americans, in 2010, the Academy issued an update entitled “Rising above the Gathering Storm: Approaching Category 5." Not surprisingly, the findings in the update indicate that the US is still lagging in its capacity to innovate and compete and that the trend continues to move in a downward direction. For example, in 2006 (the most recent year for which data are available) 16 percent of American college students received undergraduate degrees in natural sciences or engineering as compared with 47 percent in China, 38 percent in Korea and 27 percent in France. Recommendations in the original report called for creation of 25, 000 undergraduate scholarships per year in math, science and engineering. Although the updated report indicated that Congress had taken some steps to implement the recommendation, progress has been severely lacking in this area.

Almost all US colleges and universities require that undergraduate students have some instruction in science. Unfortunately, most of these courses are lecture driven and lack a laboratory component (mainly because laboratory instruction is costly and time intensive). This is problematic because science is a laboratory driven discipline that requires data collection and analysis; neither of which is taught in most lecture settings. Recognizing the growing lack of science literacy among American undergraduate students, Leon Botstein—music director and conductor of the American Symphony Orchestra and President of Bard College an artsy liberal arts college in NY—decided to do something about it. To that end, he created a program at Bard called Citizen Science; a mandatory science course conducted during winter break that all Bard freshmen are required to take for graduation.

Citizen Science is a two and a half week long program in which students spend six hours per day immersed in laboratory science. The 2011 program taken by 480 students focused on the molecular biology of infectious diseases. Using laboratory equipment, computer modeling and classroom discussions, student explored various aspects of infectious disease research including bacterial and viral detection, creation of vaccines and techniques that can be used to manage global disease outbreaks. The students were taught by two dozen scientists who were recruited from all over the country. There are no grades or credits received by program participants. This was done to promote learning for learning sake according to Brooke Jude an assistant professor of biology and the director of Citizen Science.

Botstein, who incidentally is the brother of David Botstein a world renowned geneticist at Princeton University, has been an outspoken critic about deficiencies in American education. He previously has taken many of his colleagues to task for “shirking their responsibility to create a well-rounded citizenry.” Botstein, with help from his brother, decided to “put his money where is mouth is” by creating Citizen Science. 

According to Botstein, “The most terrifying problem in American university education is the profound lack of scientific literacy for the people we give diplomas to who are not scientists or engineers.” He added, “The hidden Achilles’ heel is that while we’ve found ways to educate scientists in the humanities, the reverse has never really happened. Everybody knows this, but nobody wants to do anything about it.”

Not surprisingly, the Citizen Science Program has received mixed reviews from the 480 Bard freshmen who participated in the inaugural program. After all, a majority of the students who chose to attend Bard have a decided bent toward music and the arts, not science. Nevertheless, many students suggested that their two and half week scientific sojourn has taught them to think more critically about science. Next year’s theme for the Citizen Science program may be energy or climate change.

While Bard’s Citizen Science program is a fantastic idea, not all colleges or universities have the financial largess or scientific connections necessary to create similar programs at their institutions. Perhaps Congress ought to establish funding mechanisms (in addition to the 25,000 math and science scholarships each year) for post secondary institutions interested in replicating the Bard program.

Government officials can no longer deny what the data are showing them; science literacy in the US is plummeting and we are REALLY at risk of losing our competitive and innovative edges in math, engineering and science. Put simply, it is no longer a question of “if” but “when.”

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

 

The Cacao Genome (Chocolate) Sequencing War Revisited

Previously, BioJobBlog reported on the race between two groups led by the Mars and Hersey companies to sequence and decode the cacao (chocolate) tree genome. It should come as no surprise that the world’s two largest chocolate companies have pitted themselves against one another to decode the wonders of the cacao bean. After all, chocolate is big business and learning how to maximize yields, improve flavors and optimize the levels of cacao bean chemical components would be a boon to the company that was able to obtain the genetic information first!

Currently, most cacao farmers earn about $2 per day, but producers of fine cacao earn more. Increasing the productivity and ease of growing cacao can help to develop a sustainable cacao economy. The trees are now also seen as an environmentally beneficial crop because they grow best under forest shade, allowing for land rehabilitation and enriched biodiversity. Today, many growers prefer to grow hybrid cacao trees—rather than the original variety Theobroma cacao, Criollo)—that produce chocolate of lower quality but are more resistant to disease. Roughly five percent of the world’s current cocoa production is derived from Criollo cacao beans because of increased susceptibility to fungal diseases which results in higher costs and lower yields.

At the last installment of this ongoing saga, the Mars group, September 2010, released a statement that that they had beat the Hershey group and unraveled DNA sequence of the most common cacao bean variety that is used to manufacture most commercial chocolate.

The Mars researchers constructed a preliminary genomic map that covered over 70 per cent of the total cacao bean DNA sequence which is distributed over 10 chromosomes. These data were uploaded to The Cacao Genome Database which is publicly available as long as persons who access the data sign an agreement that stipulates that they “will not seek any intellectual property protection over the data, including gene sequences contained in the database. The Information Access Agreement allows any cacao breeders and other researchers to freely use the genome information to develop new cacao varieties.”

While the Mars group may have beat the Hersey group to the popular press, their research has not yet appeared in an academic journal for scientific scrutiny. Interestingly, the Hersey group yesterday announced that their version of the cacao genome was published in the most recent edition of Nature Genetics. According to the authors,

We sequenced and assembled the draft genome of Theobroma cacao (Criollo), an economically important tropical-fruit tree crop that is the source of chocolate. This assembly corresponds to 76% of the estimated genome size and contains almost all previously described genes, with 82% of these genes anchored on the 10 T. cacao chromosomes.

Analysis of this sequence information highlighted specific expansion of some gene families during evolution, for example, flavonoid-related genes. It also provides a major source of candidate genes for T. cacao improvement.

While Theobroma is often used to manufacture gourmet chocolates that particular variety of cacao tree often remains vulnerable to disease. Information gleaned from this study could be used to breed bioresistant varieties of Theobroma.

Further the authors noted:

Our analysis of the Criollo genome has uncovered the genetic basis of pathways leading to the most important quality traits of chocolate--oil, flavonoids and terpene biosynthesis […] It has also led to the discovery of hundreds of genes potentially involved in pathogen resistance, all of which can be used to accelerate the development of elite varieties of cacao in the future.”

Other genes that were identified include those for the production of cocoa butter, natural antioxidants, hormones, pigments, and aromas. BTW, for those of you who may be interested, cocoa was thought to be domesticated about 3,000 years ago in Central America; making it one of the world’s oldest domesticated tree crops.

It isn’t clear yet how the cacao genomes deciphered by the Mars and Hersey groups match up against one another. Regardless, the big winners here are chocolate lovers. What to you think the world stance will be on genetically engineered chocolate? 

Oy!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Eating!!!!!

 

A Day in the Life at a Genome Engineering Company

Cellectics, SA, a French genomic engineering and genetic surgery company is a great example of a biotechnology company that “gets” social media. 

The person, who manages the company’s Twitter account, posted a video on YouTube called a “ A Day at Cellectics. While not quite Avatar, it is short, fun to watch and if nothing else, it shows prospective employees that Cellectics may be a cool place to work! 

While I can’t vouch for Cellectics’ science, it is a company that knows how to leverage social media for better business outcomes! 

Until next time…

 

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!

 

Spurring Innovation

American competitiveness in engineering, technology and science. Unfortunately, while American competitiveness and innovation in these areas continues to wane, little has been done (except talking) about it! Yesterday, Intel and 24 venture capital funds announced that they plan to invest $3.5 billion in American startups and early stage ventures over the next two years. Further, in addition, several of America’s leading technology companies including Google, Cisco Systems, Intel Microsoft and 13 others pledged to add as many as 10,500 jobs into 2010—mainly by hiring Americans graduating from colleges with degrees in computer science and engineering.

The initiative, named the Invest in America Alliance was formed in response to “steadily declining long-term investments in education, technology and human capital” that has been taking place in the US for past 20 years or more. Put simply, the American education system is not training enough qualified individuals to allow the US to compete with other emerging technology and engineering powerhouses that include China, India Finland, Korea and the Netherlands. 

According to Robert Compton, a venture capitalist, entrepreneur and education enthusiast “Fewer than 10 percent of college graduates in the US have engineering degrees, compared with more than one-third in India and China and more foreign-born graduates of US universities are returning to their home countries.” For those of you with degrees in math and science (and you base your calculations on population size), the magnitude of the problem (for Americans anyway) is glaringly obvious. Compton went on to say what many others have been thinking for a while, “Early indicators are that we are not the center of innovation anymore. It is shifting to the East.” And he may be right! Based on surveys conducted by the World Intellectual Property Organization in the last year, patent filings increased 30 percent in China while declining 11 percent in the US.

While the Invest in America Alliance appears to be a great public relations opportunity for the companies and venture firms that are participating in it, its critics doubt whether investing more money in technology startups is going to fix the ongoing problem. Education analysts contend that a better and cheaper solution may be changing US immigration laws so that foreign students who train in the US are allowed to remain in the country after they complete their training. Other naysayers contend that most of the venture money committed by the alliance would have likely gone to American startups anyway (US based venture firms already invest 70 percent of their money in American start ups) and that 10,500 new jobs isn’t enough to make a dent in the US unemployment rolls.

Like the technology industry, a decade of wrong-head immigration policies coupled with a waning American interest in science has begun to jeopardize the US dominance in the life sciences. Further these trends are largely responsible for the massive layoffs and unrelenting outsourcing of pharmaceutical R&D jobs to foreign countries.

Toothless or not, the Invest in America Alliance shows that engineering and technology industry leaders are willing to cooperate with one another and get behind an initiative that raises public awareness about America’s waning competitiveness in these fields. Perhaps,   pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices and diagnostic companies ought to take a page out of the Alliance’s play book to similarly insure the future innovation and competitiveness of the American life sciences industry.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

 

Improving Science Literacy and American Innovation

Politicians, educators and business leaders love to complain about the America’s dwindling competitiveness in math and science and the growing lack of innovation that seems to be pervasive among many American high school and college-aged students. This is the same mantra that I have been hearing for the past 20 years. Unfortunately, while the powers at be like to complain about these things, no government agencies, educational groups or private sector businesses seem to be able to come up with approaches or solutions to these problems (talk about lack of innovation!). 

Luckily, as Thomas Friedman pointed out in an Op-ED in this past Sunday’s New York Times, there are individuals and not-for-profit entities that have come up with two possible approaches to improve science and math preparedness and American innovation. 

The first of these novel ideas is called National Lab Day (NLD). It was introduced last November by a coalition of educators and scientific and engineering associations. NLD’s goal is to inspire future scientists, engineers and innovators by pairing experienced scientists and engineers with students in grades K-12 to work on hands-on science project around the US. Participating organizations that have pledged support for NLB include pledged support for National Lab Day are the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the National Science Teachers Association, the National Science Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Jack D. Hidary Foundation, the American Chemistry Society, the National Institutes of Health; and the Business Roundtable.

Conspicuously absent from the list are large organizations like the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Medicine, the American Society of Microbiology and others. Moreover, no academic institutions or research foundations or life sciences companies have offered to participate. See what I mean about lots of complaining and no action? To learn more about the program or offer support visit NationalLabDay.org

Another program that Friedman mentioned was the Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship or NFTE. NFTE works with middle and high school teachers to help them teach entrepreneurship. The centerpiece of the program is a national contest for start-ups with 24,000 low-income students participating. Each student has to invent a product or service, write up a business plan and then implement it.

While the scope of NFTE is limited to only low income students, I learned first hand what an important skill entrepreneurship is on the world stage. In the early 2000s while working as a management consultant, I was invited to dinner by the CEO of an Australian life sciences company. During dinner, I candidly asked her why an Australian biotech company was interested in hiring an American as a management consultant. She told me that while Australians do great science they are awful when it comes to translating the science into a viable business. “We simply don’t have the entrepreneurial understanding and spirit that most of you Americans seem to have. Our society doesn’t focus on individualism and innovation, we like to maintain the status quo” she said. After the meeting, I realized that we Americans take our entrepreneurial skills for granted and if we can no longer excel in this area than the US is truly doomed.

Finally, since this post is about science literacy and improving the public understanding of science, I wanted to mention a cool website called Sense About Science that you ought to check out. Although it is a UK-based organization, what it is trying to promote has global relevance. According to the website:

“Sense About Science is an independent charitable trust promoting good science and evidence in public debates. We do this by promoting respect for evidence and by urging scientists to engage actively with a wide range of groups, particularly when debates are controversial or difficult.

We work with scientists to

  • respond to inaccuracies in public claims about science, medicine, and technology
  • promote the benefits of scientific research to the public
  • help those who need expert help contact scientists about issues of importance
  • brief non-specialists on scientific developments and practices

Sense About Science is governed by a Board of Trustees and run by a small office staff. We are supported by an Advisory Council and over 2,000 scientists and other specialists, ranging from Nobel Laureates to postdoctoral fellows, who are signed up to our database, Evidence Base. We also work with younger scientists in our VoYS (Voice of Young Science) programme, which you can read more about here.”

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Learning!!!!!!!!

Share/Bookmark

 

What's In a Name?

William Shakespeare wrote: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." While Shakespeare apparently believed that names aren’t important, David Anderegg, a professor of psychology at Bennington College in Vermont feels otherwise. He contends that the mere mention of the words geek or nerd tend to perpetuate a stereotype. “The words are damaging, much like racial epithets and should be avoided” he said in a recent New York Times interview. He suggests that while the words are often used interchangeably, the connotations are a bit different. In today’s lexicon, the word geek usually suggests a person with special expertise, e.g., a computer geek, whereas the word nerd suggests social ineptness. Nevertheless, he contends that neither is perceived as a “cool” moniker.

Anderegg further asserts that in the US, math, science and computer science are courses that younger people too often associates with nerds and geeks. He adds that the negative connotations of these words are taking a toll on the US workforce. And, he may be right! Fewer college-aged Americans are majoring in science and engineering and US competitiveness in math and science has been steadily declining for the past 20 years or more. According to Dr. Anderegg the best way to combat these trends is to attempt to eliminate the words geeks and nerds from the American lexicon and “banish them to the linguistic dustbin.” To that end his most recent book, “Nerds: Who They Are and Why We need More of Them” may be a step in the right direction to convince young Americans that more engineers and scientists will be required for the US to remain competitive in today’s rapidly changing global economy. 

Not surprisingly, I think that science, engineering and technology are pretty cool and mistakenly get a bad rap because of the way in which science and math are taught at the primary and secondary educational levels. Put simply, many of the teachers’ currently teaching math and science don’t have sufficient breadth or depth to teach the subjects that they are asked to teach! One way to begin to change this is to convince some very hip, newly minted PhDs (you know who you are) that pursuing careers as high school biology and biotechnology teachers is—despite assertions to the contrary—a pretty cool thing to do! Call me crazy but I think this is what it is going to take to reinvigorate America’s competitiveness in science and technology! After all, nerds will be nerds, geeks will be geeks and scientists will be scientists....not that there is anything wrong with that!

Hat tip to David Anderegg!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Teaching!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Restoring Science to Its Rightful Place: The Obama Administration Addresses the Visa Issues Plaguing Foreign Life Sciences Researchers

After months of complaints by university officials and scientific organizations, the US State Department announced on Tuesday that it is taking action to speed up the delay-plagued visa process for foreign graduate students and post-doctoral researchers.

For the past few years, foreign science and engineering graduate students and postdoctoral seeking to obtain or renew visas have routinely experienced long delays sometimes taking as long as several months. The problem became so acute that students and researchers who left the US often found themselves stranded abroad, not knowing when their visas might be approved.  Not surprisingly, the delays have caused enormous problems for American universities, which heavily rely on foreign nationals to fill slots in graduate and post-doctoral science and engineering programs. Over the last year or so, visa difficulties having discouraged many scientific organizations from holding meetings in the United States. Some life sciences researchers said the apparent reluctance of the United States to accept them encouraged them to seek work in other countries.

The State Department has hired additional personal to deal with the visa backlog but will not say how long it will take to correct the problem. A state department official indicated that they hope to handle routine visa requests within a two week time frame.

While never officially acknowledged, the Bush Administration intentionally slowed the visa process for foreign researchers to “guard against proliferation of science and technical information.” In other words, the visa backlog was likely intentionally created to prevent foreign drug companies and national scientific agencies from infringing on American intellectual property and patent rights—an ongoing practice that clearly frightened many of the jingoistic officials running the Bush State Department.

However, what the Bush administration failed to understand was that a majority of foreign students who train in the US want to remain here after completion of their studies. The visa backlog and its protectionist intent forced many foreign nationals to forgo their US training and return to their home countries to seek employment. This was beginning to threaten scientific and technical innovation in US laboratories because for the past decade or longer American students have shied away from science and engineering to pursue careers in business and computer science. Ironically, the Bush Administration’s protectionist leanings may have contributed—more than they care to admit—

 to the massive job cuts that have taken place at American life sciences companies in the past few years because of availability of a US-trained work forces in countries like India and China. This provides American life sciences companies with reasonable assurances that preclinical and clinical research outsourced to these countries will be conducted according to US standards. Further, it also provides foreign companies with unbridled access to a growing cadre of US-trained scientists that will enable them to compete on a head-to-head basis with American life sciences companies.

Fortunately, the Obama Administration, unlike the previous one, delivers on its promises and appears to be willing to work hard to restore science and technology to its rightful place in American society.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (it may now be possible for many foreign students!)

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Immigration Policies are Hurting American Science and Engineering

For the past decade or so, I have worked as a career counselor at national scientific meetings where I present seminars about resume writing, interviewing techniques and other career related issues. About two years ago, I started to hear about the fierce competition for H-1 and J-1 visas that foreign students must obtain to remain in the US to continue their studies and research. Many of the foreign students that I talked with sounded more like immigration lawyers than graduate students or postdocs—I was amazed at how well informed they were about visa availability and the changes and loopholes in US immigration law that can be exploited to obtain visas.

Since that time, it has become increasingly apparent that the visa problems experienced by most foreign students are beginning to wreak havoc on US science and engineering. Curiously, nobody at the US State Department seems to know why these visa problems exist. According to an article in today’s NY Times, a State Department official claims that visa delays can be attributed to “unfortunate staffing shortages.” Many of the students (and some immigration lawyers) that I talked with believe that it is annual visa limits and quotas not staffing issues that make it so difficult to obtain them.

It is no secret that American middle and high school students are no longer interested in pursuing careers in science and engineering. Because of this, American universities have come to rely on foreign students to fill open slots in graduate and postdoctoral sciences and engineering programs. With this in mind, it should come as no surprise that, over the past decade or more, foreign talent has been largely responsible for much of the technical and scientific innovation in the US.  Finally, and perhaps most importantly, American universities can no longer assume that the US is the first choice or destination for many foreign undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral students—teaching and research at many foreign universities have vastly improved in recent years and can now compete with the best research institutions in the US.  In the past, it was largely assumed that when given a choice foreign student would choice a US university over all others. Together these findings beg the question: “If foreign students and postdocs are largely responsible for maintaining America’s competitive edge in science and technology, why would the US government make it so difficult to recruit the world’s best and brightest?”

There is no doubt that the US government, in a post-September 11th world ought to carefully scrutinize foreign students before they are issued visas to study or work in the US. But, why has it become increasingly difficult for foreign students to renew their visas to continue to study or work in the US? Interestingly, visa availability and renewal problems are not only restricted to foreign nationals from likely places like China, India, the Middle East or Russia.  Many students and postdocs from Australia, Europe and elsewhere are also experiencing major delays and difficulty obtaining student or work visas.

While the visa issues facing foreign students may not seem like a big one to most Americans (most of who are not involved in science and engineering), its effects on American science and engineering are beginning to become apparent. For example, conference organizers are reluctant to hold international meetings in the US because they fear that many students and scientists will not be able to attend because of limited visa availability. Further, many talented foreign nationals, who want to remain and work in the US, are frequently forced to return to their home countries (to find employment) because they are unable to renew or extend their US visas. There is no question that America has grown increasingly dependent upon foreign students to conduct research in science and engineering.  I contend, that without these students, America’s competitiveness in science and engineering will continue to wane as it has over the past 20 years.  I believe that America has two choices to prevent this from happening. First, we can somehow convince larger numbers of American high school students to pursue careers in science and engineering. Second, the US government can improve and simply the visa process so that talented foreign students can continue to study and do research in the US. Nevertheless, something must be done soon—the future competitiveness of American science and engineering depends on it!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Visa Hunting!!!!!!

 

A Novel Proposal to Reinvigorate the Economically-Troubled Life Sciences Industry

In the February issue of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, J. Leslie Glick a former CEO of Genex and veteran of the biotechnology industry put forward a novel solution to financial crisis that is currently gripping the life sciences industry and the rest of the US economy. Dr. Glick proposed that the US government ought to consider injecting taxpayer monies into venture capital firms (VC) which, he believes, would foster creation of new companies, create more jobs, stimulate the ailing economy and also provide the government with an outstanding return on its investment.

According to Dr. Glick, “historical results reported by the National Venture Capital Association for the 20 year period ending December 31, 2007, show an annualized return of 16.7% to investors in some 1,860 U.S. venture capital and private equity partnerships. If the U.S. government had made annual investments of $10 billion in VC firms throughout the U.S. during that 20year period, the $200 billion total investment would have yielded a total return of almost $1.5 trillion.” Further, he asserts that according to the  International Trade Administration of the Department of Commerce, from 1970 to 2000, U.S. VC firms invested over $270 billion in more than 16,000 companies. In 2000, the surviving VC-backed companies employed 7.6 million people, representing 5.9% of all U.S. jobs, and generated sales of $1.3 trillion, accounting for 13.1% of the U.S. GDP.

This financial upside sound enticing but who is going to keep track of the money and keep an eye on how and what the VCs are investing in? Dr. Glick proposes creation of a non-partisan funding mechanism, possibly overseen by an independent panel of business people that would disburse $10 to $25 billion annually of taxpayer’s dollars to vetted and certified VC firms. Because of its investment, the US government would become a limited partner in these firms and could direct them to invest in technologies that would help to reduce health care costs, develop energy alternatives or improve food production capacity. While this proposal is unprecedented and controversial, we are living in extremely uncertain financial times that may necessitate innovative and out-of-the-box solutions to restore normalcy to the US economy. That said, all proposals—no mater how unconventional or outrageous—ought to be carefully evaluated and vetted to determine whether or not they have merit to help overcome our deepening recession.

Kudos to Dr. Glick!

Until next time,

Good Luck and Good Investing!!!!!!

 

July 2008--Around the Web

This month Kevin has reviewed an eclectic bunch of websites. Continuing with his “down under” theme from last month, Kevin offers the Australian National Herbarium and the Darwin Correspondience Project websites (okay so Darwin was English but he did visit Australia!). The Darwin site complements an interesting site called the Origin of Life Prize (check it out).  

Another Australian website called the Sea Snake Homepage covers everything you ever wanted to know about sea snakes (and then some) but as Kevin put it may not be for everyone. There is a technical site called Microscope-Microscope.org which has some terse but valuable information on well—microscopes.

My personal favorite is the Biomedia Associates Educational Biology site. Although it is a commercial site, it is an education website and offers some valuable resources for biology teachers and students.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Surfing!!!!!!!!

A Sign of the Times--Siemens to Layoff 17,000 Workers

Siemens, the Germany engineering, electronic and healthcare company is planning to layoff more than 17,000 workers worldwide.  Although primarily known for its engineering and electronic products like cellphones, Siemans has a large healthcare practice primarily in medical devices and diagnostics. A good portion of the layoffs are likely to take place in Germany and elsewhere in Europe.

The loss of this many jobs at one of the world's largest and most reputable companies may unfortuantely be a harbinger of things to come.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

 

Home Brewing DNA

Have you ever felt like mixing up a few batches of DNA in your  spare time? Well, for those of you who sometimes get the urge I found an easy-to-use recipe to make your own custom designed DNA sequences. Of course I was joking about doing it at home but if you happen to be at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Biotechnology Center you can give it a whirl.

Of course, the ability to build DNA sequences nucleotide-by-nucleotide has been available for over a decade or more.  That said, the relatively simple system devised by scientists at the UW Biotechnology Center allows even the neophyte molecular biologist to do it successfully.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Genetic Engineering!!!!!!