Is money deciding the future careers of our pupils? – A biology week experience.

The second annual Biology week established by the society of biology took place last week from the 13^th – 19^th of October 2013. There were lots of exciting events happening across the nation. My favourite of these was the 24hr lecturethon on ants and bees given by Professor Adam Hart from the University of Gloucestershire. I personally tuned in to the live webcast about 2am on the Monday morning and there he was passionately talking about giant ant hills, the intricate homes of wasps and honey facts. He even had an international audience skyping in from Singapore and South Korea despite a few glitches with the connection.

As a member of the society I thought I may as well do my bit in support of biology week. I arranged a visit with my local Basildon academy to give a talk to the year 10’s about biology careers with the help of my fellow keen biology volunteers.  

Pupils in awe of the diverse careers in Biology

We were allocated a double period to excite our pupils and we came away with a mutual feeling of content. The pupils were very engaging and gave positive feedback about the talk.  

The Wellcome trust has some great resources on Biology careers which we adapted for the day. Although the video itself doesn't do justice to the subject matter, it showcased some unconventional choices which was good.  In the video, the curious student chats to a handful of professionals and the issue of pay arises. None of the interviewees gave a clear succinct answer though which made me wonder why? I concluded that they probably didn't want knowledge of their income in the public domain. Still a rough estimate or range would be useful. 

During the course of the talks, the one question that kept arising was the pay grade of the various roles that were exhibited. Although some of these questions may have been an attention seeking ploy, truth is, it helps to know. Nonetheless these questions stirred up a worrying concern in me.  

I worried because the keen desire to know the pay scales made me wonder whether money was becoming the motivation for our youngsters in contemplating future careers.  I may be the odd case but money was certainly not on the table when I stepped into science. I chose science because it was and still is the only subject that makes sense to me.  A role based on facts not theory (although arguably maths is the only factual subject) and I could relate to the subject in real life scenarios.

With the direction the world economy is heading and the rising cost of education I suppose one has to be wise in making decisions that will impact directly on ones future status.  After all, every investment deserves a positive return. So next time we go enticing the next generation of scientist, let’s be sure to mention the price tags.   

It doesn’t hurt to know and I have made note to provide this information in my future talks.  I do however think that it is important to point out to our young ones that roles evolve and the primary motivation to pursuing a selected path should be interest rather than wealth.  Adapting the famous quote, if you care for animals like Picasso painted you have a pretty good chance of being a wealthy zookeeper.  

I'm keen to hear your thoughts on the matter and to find out if my fellow STEM ambassadors have had similar experience.

Press Release

OBR to launch the 2014 OneStart £100K business competition for Life Sciences

Applications are invited from young enthusiastic Life Science Entrepreneurs for an opportunity to turn cutting edge research into a business plan. The winner receives a £100K no-string-attached start- up funding and free lab space to turn their innovative idea into a business.

Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable (OBR) has once again partnered with SR One to launch OneStart, a £100K biotech business competition. OneStart is the biggest competition of its kind and aims to launch the next generation of bio-entrepreneurs.

This year, there are two parallel competitions running in Europe and the Americas. The competition will be run in stages and covers four tracks: drug discovery, medical devices, diagnostics and health IT.  

Applications for the first round of submissions are now open and close on the 15^th of December 2013 at 11:59 PM Pacific Standard Time.  

Entrants must be under 35 years old as at 1^st January 2014 and can be individuals or a team.  The idea should be innovative and have an impact on health care. 35 Semi-finalist will be selected to attend an intensive business start-up workshop with the help of industry professionals. 10 finalists will be invited to pitch their business plan to a panel of experience biotech investors and the winner will be awarded the £100K prize investment.

Launch events for OneStart Europe are scheduled to take place in London, Cambridge, Oxford, Manchester, Glasgow and Liverpool.

Further information including launch dates, entry requirements, building a team and the application process is available at http://www.oxbridgebiotech.com/onestart/

Contact

onestart@oxbridgebiotech.com

Notes for editors

Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable is a campus led initiative established to bridge the gap between academia and industry. It seeks to strengthen communication channels between the two sectors through a mutualistic relationship of networking, education and consultancy.

SR One is the venture capital arm of GSK investing globally in promising emerging Life Science companies working on innovative science which will significantly impact health care.

Why I support the #AllTrials Campaign and you should too.

Did you know that about half of clinical trial data have not been published? 

In January this year, Ben Goldacre together with sense about Science launched the #AllTrials campaign to persuade pharmaceutical companies to register and publish the data collected from clinical trials. This initiative is to equip clinicians and other health professionals to be better informed when prescribing/ recommending medications. Researchers, patients and doctors need to know what was done and what they found, to make decisions about which treatment is best. Without registering trial data, vital information on the findings could be lost forever. If health professionals had access to this information patient centric treatment can be better enhanced.

Listen to Ben Goldacres’ TED talk on "what doctors don’t know about the drugs they prescribe".

There are lots you can do to support the campaign. Get Involved

1. If you have not signed the petition, please do here http://www.alltrials.net/

2. You can also donate to the campaign here http://www.justgiving.com/alltrials

This is a global movement and we need more international organisations to sign up. So spread the word to your friends, employers and colleagues and help get all trials registered and results published.

Ada Lovelace - Female English Mathematician

Ada Lovelace is the perfect role model to showcase to our young ladies today who may be wondering why on earth anyone should bother with maths. Born in an era where women around the world were fighting for equal rights in many aspects of daily living including education, Ada had the privilege of being privately tutored and she developed an interest for mathematics from an early age.

Married at 19 and mother of three, she sadly passed on at the age of 36 after battling uterine cancer.

Arguably the world's first computer programmer for her work on 'notes', Ada Lovelace day is celebrated today to recognise the achievements of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths.

Find out about Ada here and join in the selection of events around the world.

You're all different: Creating your own career

Its 2013 and the economy is not that great. These were the familiar words from Eva Amsen of F1000 research at the recent NatureJobs Careers Expo as she showcased the successful career stories of fellow scientist. Her point being that you may have a plan in mind but the reality is not as straight forward. With her talk themed, 'You're all different: Creating your own career', Eva gave a gripping and engaging presentation on the diversity in science careers.

From academia to science writing to self-employment, Eva shared the journeys of selected scientist and the diverse routes their paths had taken as they embarked on their careers.  Speaking about herself, she told of how her specialty in science and culture looked dim after her PhD when cuts were being made and freelancing opportunities dried up. She had to readjust and ended up in publishing.   

However you interpret this, it summarises how bad things have gotten from as far back as 2006 and the challenges some graduates are still facing today. (Image by byJasonVarney for TheScientist, 2006)

A story that stands out is that of Douglas Prasher who seemed to be on a fairly stable academic path until he could no longer secure funding for his research. He left academia for industry and was doing quite well until he lost his job and ended up as a shuttle bus driver. He made a significant contribution to research during his time in academia but unfortunately missed out on receiving the noble prize in medicine for a discovery he pioneered. He has since been invited back to research. The full story may be accessed here. 

As extreme as Dr Prasher’s story may sound a lot of graduates can relate to this from their own experiences.    

On the flip side Ethan Perlstein of perlstein lab decided to take matters into his own hands when efforts to secure funds for his research after his time at Princeton and Harvard was becoming difficult. He took the bold initiative of crowd funding to run his own research project on 'the location of methamphetamine on the brain'. He now has an independent lab where he’s researching on various diseases.

For all the attentive attendees the message was clear. We are all different and your career path lies in your hands. People have secured jobs today that were non existent yesterday and some more will do tomorrow just from doing what they love. Eva did an excellent job of highlighting opportunities to create your own career from the success stories of ordinary people. Her talk set the atmosphere for the day as she ended by saying... 

“At a conference the most important things happen in the coffee break. (…) The most important things happen in interstitial spaces, they happen in between, and they happen when we least expect it.” -Hans Ulrich Obrist (art curator)

so off we went networking 

Full lecture slides below 

You're All Different - Creating your own career from Eva Amsen

Why the current science degree needs a revamp

A study by Vitae on the destination of doctoral students showed that about half of doctoral graduates are employed outside higher education (HE) ^{1, 2}.

The report stated that only 19% of doctoral graduates were employed as research staff in HE and that only 22% were teaching or lecturing in HE. On the other hand,13% were in research roles (not in HE), 6% were in wider teaching occupations outside HE, 27% were in other common non-teaching doctoral occupations outside HE, for example, working as health professionals, and 14% were categorised in other occupations e.g. sales roles ².

With less than 50% of doctoral graduates working in higher education, be it as research or teaching staff, it comes as no surprise that at almost every science careers focussed conference I attend, there are talks on the lack of professors and how many PhD graduates stray from the field of academia. The number of professors continues to diminish while the latter (PhD graduates) is growing exponentially.

Although the number of PhD places has increased worldwide over the years³, desire among undergraduates and professionals for doctoral qualifications has also increased substantially, making places in reality even more competitive. With such highly competitive PhD places and so many applicants, are schools offering the right career advice and are supervisors picking the right candidates?

The idea of the intense PhD process is to groom one into the world of research and academia. Over the three – five-year period, students find a niche area of interest whiles developing valuable skills necessary for a life of teaching and research. With the increasing number of doctoral graduates however, universities lack the capacity to employ them all. Where positions are available there is no job security due to precarious funding opportunities.

The industry and other sectors however, also value and appreciate the transferable skills possessed by PhD graduates. As such, a significant percentage of industrial job adverts now consider having a PhD as essential. With the job crisis lurking over employment these days, I believe PhD graduates have no choice but to be flexible and hence cast their nets wide and across board. The tedious process of grant applications, the lack of job security and funding play a key role in deterring the once enthusiastic PhD academics from pressing on in this field⁴. There are only a few handfuls who remain persistent in securing an academic position. 

But how does one identify our future professors? I believe the answer lies in the structure of the Science degree.  I have come across a few individuals who have shared their experience of starting a PhD and deciding it was not their cup of tea after all. Although there is no official published data on PhD drop outs, studies have suggested attrition rates of up to 50%^5,6.

Transiting from a degree to a PhD is almost like going from cycling to driving a truck. The change in experience is sharp and there is the danger that inadequate preparation can lead to a traumatic experience.

It is for this reason that I believe the science degree needs a revamp from three to four years to incorporate a research rotational year. This will ensure that the right candidates, who have the desire for hours of teaching, countless submissions of papers, presentations, proposals and grant applications, will be offered a chance to gain the appropriate experience. This way, students get to have a feel of independent research as opposed to the shadowed research experience generally gained at the undergraduate level now.

Although there are the four-year rotational studentships that serve this purpose, they are offered as post graduate options,  places remain highly competitive and are limited to a handful of institutions.   Some students go through the Masters / MPhil route and although these play a role in bridging the gap, positions are rarely funded and only accessible by the select few who can afford the cost.

What is therefore required is for the general undergraduate science program to be updated to four-years across board to include the rotational research year. This way, students are better placed to make informed choices with regards to pursuing an academic /industrial career.  Aspiring PhD students will subsequently have clearer intuition on their research area of interest, thereby reducing the dropout rate and the overflow of graduates seeking academic positions.

I hereby conclude that to tackle the problem of declining academics, it is imperative that experts look back at the root cause and consider a revamp of the current science degree system.  

#Culturedbeef

#culturedbeef has been trending on my timeline and I could not help but blog about it. So what is all the excitement about? Well, If you missed it a Dutch scientist (tissue engineer to be specific) by name of Mark Post has produced meat in the lab and here’s how.

Image from nature

This is not the first time scientist have grown something out of nothing (to use the term loosely) but only this time #culturedbeef had its own special air time where the public could witness a burger being made from #culturedbeef. A pretty dear media spectacle but let’s not get moral about how Sergy Brin wishes to spend his billions because I for one enjoyed watching the Monday episode of Saturday kitchen. I did however wonder if the pair were neighbours or perhaps belonged to the same golf club. (Random thoughts).

Here’s a recap of the verdict.

Am I excited by it, ofcourse! This is yet again another scientific advancement which could be applied to several other processes. But is there any point to this? Considering the cost of production is much higher than rearing cattle that is enough reason to mark it down as low priority and perhaps try growing limbs instead. And if you want to argue the risk of disease wiping out a whole herd of cattle then you have no idea what a contaminated culture batch cost. 

As Mark Post rightly said his intention was to prove it could be done and not to create a cultured meat aisle in our supermarkets.

So the next time you 'google' Mark Post he’ll be known for trending with his #culturedbeef. 

Would I buy it if a pound sold for a penny, NO CHANCE!

1.  View conversation
2. 1. James Logan ‏@Dr_JamesLogan5 Aug

      Burgers made in a lab: would you eat it? What do you think about the concept??

      Expand
   2. hephziangela ‏@hanat_akordor5 Aug

      @Dr_JamesLogan no chance. Artificial meat!!!!!!! That's just wrong.

      Expand
   3. James Logan ‏@Dr_JamesLogan5 Aug

      Why? Genuinely interested to know RT “@hanat_akordor: @Dr_JamesLogan no chance. Artificial meat!!!!!!! That's just wrong.”

      Expand
   4. hephziangela ‏@hanat_akordor5 Aug

      @Dr_JamesLogan wldnt eat my diner in d lab, never mind meat. Surely itl be cultured aseptically? Lets say I'm a butcher so I dnt eat meat.

       Hide conversation

      •  Reply 
      •  Delete 
      •  Favorite 

      1:40 PM - 5 Aug 13 · Details
      Tweet text

      Reply to @Dr_JamesLogan 

      Image will appear as a link
3. hephziangela ‏@hanat_akordor5 Aug

   Fat free burger - isn't that suppose to be a good thing? Not if its grown in the lab. #culturedbeef

   Expand
4. hephziangela ‏@hanat_akordor5 Aug

   Close to meat but not that juicy. #culturedbeef

   Expand

Jumping through hoops with a light flash

Whoever thought the time would come when the mind could be controlled with the flick of a light switch. Pretty cool huh! And I’m not talking about hypnotherapy.  Think “opto” and think “light”, think “genetics” and think “DNA”. Put them together and you give birth to the concept of “optogenetics”.

Optogenetics is the exciting new area of research where specific brain cells (neurons) can be manipulated to respond to light thereby linking the cell function to a light flash.

Imagine the concept of a football game on a console. Push a button on the controller and a player passes the ball. Push another button and it’s a shot. Such is the concept of optogenetics. Flash a blue light and the neuron responsible for signalling movement kicks the ball flash a yellow light and the neuron is activated to trigger a throw.

The brain is a complex network of cells known as neurons with each neuron having a unique role. The role of each of these trillions of neurons is yet to be deciphered. Put these neurons together and we have the ability to multi task; - Coordinate movement, listen and speak, read and write, sing and dance. The processing of this information in the brain occurs as a result of electrical impulses that travel between neurons. Like a 4 x 4 relay race, one neuron ignites the baton from the start line, passes on the baton to the next athlete and the last neuron finishes the race. If a member of the team drops the baton along the way, the race is lost. Each neuron has its own genetic composition and it is the genes that tell the neuron how to function via gene regulators. These gene regulators switch themselves on or off to control the neuron.  In the same way scientist can influence these regulators such that the ability to switch a neuron on or off is controlled externally, in this case the trigger is via a light flash. 

With optogenetics, a light sensitive protein known as channelrhodopsin which is originally found in unicellular green algae and responds to blue light by moving towards it, is engineered and injected into a chosen neuron. When blue light is then shone on neurons, the cell containing the channelrhodopsin is activated and it sends signals to other neurons in its team to perform a designated function. Light pulses are sent within milli - seconds of each other thereby allowing scientists to monitor the sequence of events with precision. This way when the baton is dropped along the way it is easy to pinpoint the culprit.

Opsins is the umbrella term describing light sensitive proteins. Others include halorhodopsin which is sensitive to yellow light.     

So of what benefit is this to mankind. If we can understand how each of these neurons controls brain function and we are able to identify and isolate the neuron responsible for a specific brain disease be it Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, Cerebral palsy and so on, that one defective gene can be corrected to perform its original function. Basically assuming loss of speech is caused by the breakdown of gene X in the brain, Channel rhodopsin can by inserted into the neuron containing gene X and when this gene shuts down blue light pulses can be sent to reactivate its speech function thereby bringing back ones speech.

Other methods exploring this concept of manipulating neurons include therapeutic gene manipulation and gene therapy.