The hamster wheel called science

An interview was recently published in Lab Times with Peter Lawrence, who discusses what is wrong with science research - a subject that I've been talking about a fair bit at work, where the majority of other writers have done the PhD/postdoc thing then had nowhere else to go. Its quite an amusing article if you've been in the science game, with observations such as that papers in Nature, the most esteemed journal which everyone wants to get into, are so dense as to be actually unreadable. And that scientists have become little more than paper-spewing machines, where the publication becomes the end in itself rather than any idea of a pursuit of knowledge.

The basic challenge is this - get at least one first author paper out in the 2 (3 if you're lucky) years of your postdoc or thats it, you're out of science. And if you do get it, you get another 2 years (well, more like 18 months if you're going to start work on the next grant). And so on. The ultimate aim is to get your own lab group to manage, at which point you will never see the lab again and instead become buried under paperwork, meetings and bureacracy.

No wonder I, and the majority of people I did my PhD and postdoc with, have come out of science.

The other side of the problem as far as I can see it, is that there are far too many people now in science, in particular biology (especially molecular biology - my ex-field). More PhD's than there are interesting things to study, or at least when they have graduated.

Of course, I was a bit foolish in concentrating almost solely on my studies, and later my research, without really thinking where I was going, what the job scene was likely to be, and whether I was picking up enough competitive skills. Fortunately I wrote a couple of reviews during my postdoc, which must have at least helped my current job as a medical writer; my ability to do PCR and subcloning blindfolded and plate out thousands of yeast transformations couldn't even get me a maternity-leave technician job in a hospital genetics department, never mind another research post.

I don't blame anyone though, I was too focused on small things without seeing a bigger picture. Actually, I would criticise the sciences for that - I might have had much more interesting ideas for my PhD if I'd had more contact with the physics/technology/mathematics department for instance and we'd come up with a design for an artifical pancreas. It would be nice to have a bit more confidence to go an make contacts like that, but unfortunately most researchers are so absorbed into their own fields that such cross-discipline collaboration (or even awareness, at all, at what is going on - the splintering of science into ever-more ridiculously obscure fields - compare to the polymaths of old who knew a bit about everything).