Action Potential

I recently attended the Alzheimer's Disease Keystone meeting in Keystone, CO and became more acutely aware of something than ever before: academia and drug companies really like one another. Sure, the latter always loved the former, since collaborating with university-based scientists often made the publications arising from the private sector look a little more legit. On the contrary, the reciprocity in this relationship has not always been there. There is without a doubt some sub-disciplinary differences in this complex relationship, but in the basic science departments that I lurked around, if you were associated with a company (or worse, left academia for a position there, succumbing to the power of the Dark Side), there was always talk of whether or not you could be trusted. Because companies need publications to prove the legitimacy of their product, right? And the legitimacy determines how much money everyone makes, right? So with such conflicts of interest, could the scientist, or the data being produced by these people, be trusted?

Continue reading "Big Pharma and academia becoming more and more cozy" »

Posted by Noah Gray at 05:22 PM on April 14, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)
Categories: Noah Gray, Science Policy, Random Thoughts

I would say no. Grant proposals are a precious commodity, especially in this day and age of reduced funding and evaporating money. However, in a recent Nature correspondence, Dr. Noam Harel describes his vision for a centralized grant repository, ideally open to the public, where researchers could place their best ideas, allowing various funding agencies to discover the plans most-suited to their respective agendas. Dr. Harel likens this potential web manifestation to something like eBay, Facebook or Google, but for scientists and funding agencies. A more apt analogy might be Monster.com, with both sides searching for their ideal match, and a long-term relationship (perhaps I am now making it sound more like eHarmony.com...).

When it comes to the integration of scientific communication and technology, I am extremely optimistic, and although I don't reject Dr. Harel's idea entirely, I just don't see it taking off in its presently-proposed form.

Continue reading "What to do with your unfunded proposals - place them in a centralized repository? " »

Posted by Noah Gray at 05:34 PM on April 01, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Categories: Noah Gray, Science Policy, Random Thoughts

[This is the inaugural post for a new feature at Action Potential. Periodically, we will provide insights from a regional correspondent on the interesting news, changes, or issues particularly affecting neuroscience in a particular location. Today's post is from one of our Asian correspondents, Haihong Ye of the Institute for Biophysics in the Chinese Academy of Sciences. She reflects on the dramatic changes that have occurred within Chinese neuroscience during her decade-long absence from this now-flourishing community. We examined these issues in our March editorial, but now invite you to provide your opinion. - N.G.]

Over the past 10 years, especially the last five, the whole world has been amazed by the Chinese economy. To me, however, the improvement in biological science research in China is much more amazing. In the summer of 1998 I left Beijing and went to the US to pursue a Ph.D. in neuroscience. In 2007, after nine years of graduate study and post-doc training abroad, I came back to Beijing, seeking opportunities for further career development. What a difference some strong funding and visionary directives, not to mention a decade, can make.

Continue reading "Haihong Ye: Amazing changes in Chinese neuroscience over the past decade" »

Posted by Noah Gray at 01:47 PM on March 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)
Categories: Correspondents, Science Policy, Random Thoughts

In mid-January, the Science and Engineering Indicators 2008 was released by the National Science Board. The goal of this report is to provide quantitative information about US science for private and public policymakers, as mandated by law.

This study is full of interesting information, and feel free to point out any gems that you dig up. For now, let's focus on a couple of sections, namely science education and the section entitled "Public Attitudes and Understanding." In science education, there are both reasons to cheer and be alarmed; as for the public understanding of science....be afraid...be very afraid.

Continue reading "Science and Engineering Indicators 2008 = Scary Stuff" »

Posted by Noah Gray at 05:08 PM on February 05, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)
Categories: Noah Gray, Science Policy

Anyone who follows the sports world is well-aware of the concept of doping, in which athletes participate to establish an edge over the competition. This goes back a long ways and includes more famous examples like the East German Olympic machine, and the sprinter Ben Johnson, but also the more recent examples of Todd Landis, Marion Jones and, of course, Barry Bonds.

Competition seems to do that to people, clouding their judgment, confusing their ideals, pushing them to a point where it seems almost immoral not to give yourself any and every possible advantage. Well, doping is extending beyond the physical and entering the realm of cognitive capacity. A new commentary in Nature, written by Barbara Sahakian and Sharon Morein-Zamir of Cambridge, argues that the increased use of "cognitive-enhancing drugs" poses a number of serious ethical issues that can no longer be ignored.

Continue reading "Brain doping" »

Posted by Noah Gray at 01:51 PM on December 19, 2007 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Categories: Noah Gray, Science Policy