Get that Pfizer out of my CIHR

I was surprised to have been so much out of the loop when I learned on the CBC radio show "The Current" that one of the Pfizer VPs had been appointed to the governing council of CIHR (our main health funding agency). Now I love to hate on Pfizer as much as the next guy, especially since one of my good friends works there, and I'm not a huge fan of off-label uses of drugs. But this really made me raise an eyebrow. The thinking behind the decision to appoint Dr Prigent was to bring "much needed" commercialization expertise to CIHR and to help "align the interests of CIHR with those of the pharmaceutical industry". This is not my interpretation of the facts but a direct quote from Dr. Prigent. Now I was under the impression that the mandate of CIHR was to improve the health of Canadians by promoting scientific discovery, not to commercialize products or post better quarterly results. I fully understand that discoveries need to be turned into products in order to reach patients, but I'm not sure that this is the imperative of CIHR. Now most people sitting on the governing council have a conflict of interest, because they stand to gain from getting more funding to their home institution, but I'm afraid this is the beginning of a shift towards more corporate regency over funding focus. Even our neighbours to the south don't allow that. I'd love to hear arguments for increased focus on commercialization in the comments, but If like me you think there is too much potential for conflicts of interest you can sign this petition...

Canadian Mathematicians Stand Up for Biomedical Research

G&M reports on an open letter to the Canadian government protesting cuts to science funding in the recent budget, now signed by over 2,000 scientists. Basically the gist is that it's not enough to just fund building construction and PhD scholarships, but that grant money is also needed to RUN actual research programs. So that all those students in all those buildings can actually do something useful. Apparently the effort was initiated by a group of mathematicians led by Nassif Ghoussoub from UBC.

A number of points made in the letter, posted on the website, "Don't Leave Canada Behind". An excerpt:

"Whereas the U.S. administration is proposing to boost the funding of the National Institute of Health (NIH) by 30% ($8.5 billion in addition to its current $29 billion), our “stimulus budget” is cutting CIHR’s by 5%, while essentially ignoring the needs of Genome Canada."

More interesting stuff here re PhD student funding:

"The funding of an additional 500 doctoral scholarships is great news...however, it seems this funding is coming at the expense of the highly qualified personnel (HQP’s) that could have been recruited more efficiently by our senior researchers through their Tri-Council grants. We believe that a more efficient strategy for ensuring a successful HQP policy is to give our leading researchers the flexibility to manage the selection, recruitment, and support of their own graduate students through their peer-reviewed research grants, and via well-established leveraging procedures with the universities and the private sector."

and,

"we also regret that the $17.5-million assigned to SSHRC for graduate scholarships have been earmarked towards students in business and finance."

also,

"President Obama is proposing to double federal funding for education over the next 10 years, and pledging to “restore science to its rightful place” with billions in new investments. To advise his government, he has appointed leading scientists to his cabinet and as his advisors (including a Nobel laureate as energy Secretary). The Obama administration has also involved the directors of NIH and NSF in federal budget discussions about the future of research. We need a similar approach in Canada, where top research scientists and humanists can help shape directions in Ottawa for research funding."

Interesting. Will it have any impact?

Unbalanced Funding of Canadian Medical Research Trainees

We have recently discussed some of the funding voids in science, mainly the issue of the dwindling number of permanent science jobs available for the comparably massive and growing number of PhDs being churned out by universities, at least based on the oft-cited data from the US system.

How does the situation compare here in Canada? My gut sense is that things are better here, and personally I've found the availability of funding more than adequate throughout my grad studies. But in considering my prospects for post-doctoral studies in the near future, the ability to secure independent funding seems of paramount importance. In my line of work, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research would be the first agency to look to for funding. And as it turns out, looks like the competition is pretty damn intense. The success rates for the last CIHR fellowship competition were a meagre 13.1% (68/520). Interestingly, the success rate of a concurrent competition for Master's level CIHR graduate scholarships was a whopping 61% (218/357).

This data would seem to suggest that the CIHR funding scheme encourages 5-fold more students to enter into medical research training than the system can ultimately support at later stages. Is this a good thing? Surely this drives competition as trainees ascend through the hierarchy of science, and perhaps it is best to fund a minimal number of post-docs if there's a similar shortage of full-fledged scientist positions once post-doctoral training is complete. And maybe not all Master's students need to or are interested in continuing their training to become professional scientists. Perhaps it is valuable for students to obtain Master's degreee in research in preparation for other careers such as medicine, law, business or used-car sales. Then again, is it really the CIHR's responsibility to fund these students when it seems many qualified post-doctoral candidates are falling through the cracks?

With only 68 awards given to 520 post-doctoral applicants, either Canada is producing way too many PhDs who still aspire to being professional scientists, or the CIHR is not giving out enough fellowships.

But hey, Canadian junior hockey also produces a lot of players who wish they could make it in the pro ranks of the NHL but never get the chance. Great for the ones who make it, but maybe it kind of sucks for some of the guys who left home and school at 14 to do nothing but play hockey and then return home to suddenly discover they are adults without a lot of skills they can use to make a living. Anyway, I guess Canada probably has enough pro hockey players, but do we have enough big-league scientists?