Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Clarification from A*Star over AcidFlask incident
I have received an official clarification from A*Star about the defamatory remarks in the AcidFlask incident in 2005, and I have decided to reproduce their reply below. This is because in this official reply, A*Star has granted permission for the defamatory remarks to be reproduced (under certain conditions), so the issue can now be openly discussed and objectively judged by everyone.
———————————————————————————————————————–
The Truth about the postings on A*STAR by Chen Jiahao/AcidFlask and those parts of the postings that were defamatory have been reproduced here in the interest of showing the gravity of these untrue allegations and the damage that they had caused to A*STAR, its officers, scholars and partners.
To this day, Chen Jiahao/AcidFlask appears to have taken the position that he was not aware of the defamatory statements made by him, but he nevertheless apologized on 9 May 2005. This was notwithstanding the fact that his attention was specifically drawn to his blog of 3 March 2005 in which the defamatory statements were made, when A*STAR sought from Chen/AcidFlask the retraction and apology.
Contrary to suggestions and reports that the statements complained of by A*STAR pertained to his criticisms of A*STAR’s GPA requirement before its scholars could apply for PhD funding, it is clear from the excerpts published below that the statements were indeed defamatory and went well beyond fair comment.
The defamatory statements made in Chen/AcidFlask’s posting have no basis in fact, are wholly untrue, and completely damaging to the good name, reputation and integrity of not only A*STAR and its officers but also its scholars, the universities attended by our scholars and their faculty members.
A*STAR therefore has no option but to set the record straight.
On the statement that -:
“…a*star feels justified in bribing universities for taking in PhD students.â€
Fact: A*STAR has never offered to pay or actually paid any university bribes or any other form of incentives to admit our scholars. All our scholars gain admission on merit and in accordance with the usual admission requirements applicable to all other applicants who apply to pursue PhD studies at the universities. A*STAR has neither asked for nor have our scholars been offered or given any special dispensations in this regard. Through our scholarships, and like any other scholarship body, we fund the applicable tuition and other compulsory fees charged to the students by the universities. We have no need to offer any bribe – our scholars apply to the best universities and with their outstanding credentials and the strong undergraduate academic performance our scholars are able to gain admission to these universities without special favours. A*STAR’s GPA benchmark ensures that only the best and scholars who show real potential to be able to undertake the rigors of PhD studies are given the privilege (and not an entitlement) of fully funded public scholarships.
On the statement that -:
“…a*star gives out generous funding grants to specific faculty members (to the tune of us$150k/yr or so) for accepting up to three a*star scholars into their labs,…â€
Fact: A*STAR does not provide any such funding grants to overseas based universities, and certainly not as incentives for them to admit our students to their labs for PhD studies. A*STAR funds the local universities and locally based entities under our extra-mural grant programmes but these grants are unrelated to our students and our scholarship programmes.
On the statement that -:
“…giving out gobs of honey to universities who will sign back-door agreements for taking in scholars without going through the formal application procedure.â€
Fact: A*STAR has not signed any agreement with any university to permit our scholars to be admitted without going through the formal application procedure – all our scholars are required to apply to the universities and subject themselves to that university’s usual application procedure. If they are not accepted by a particular university, then they will simply have to gain admission to another through the usual admission process. A*STAR has no “back-door†arrangements with any university nor has A*STAR paid any university in order to by-pass the usual admission criteria required by the university.
On the statement that -:
“A fellow alumna of UIUC once attended a Chemical Engineering class…suddenly the professor remarked: Oh, by the way, if any of you are in need of money, you should consider applying to this agency called A*STAR in Singapore. They offered my $150,000 for my research with no strings attached, plus an extra $35,000 for every one of their students that I accepted into my group.â€
Fact: A*STAR has never offered to or actually funded any professor or research lab in any overseas university. Neither has A*STAR offered professors of universities cash payments to take our scholars into their labs.
On the statement -:
“…that “a certain high-up†in a*star has a tendency to recommend scholars to go to some institutions, like UIUC, U of Wisconsin, and UCSD.. perhaps it is those very schools that a*star has those connections with? and perhaps the reason for asking scholars not to go to the top universities is that they tend to be awfully expensive when it comes to tuition fees too (like Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Princeton).â€
Fact: A*STAR has a list of selected universities. Our scholars are free to choose to go to any of them.
http://www.a-star.edu.sg/astar/studentsandscholarships/action/scholarship_info_grad_biomed.do
http://www.a-star.edu.sg/astar/studentsandscholarships/action/scholarship_info_grad_sciengr.do
The details of the distribution of A*STAR PhD scholars at US universities can be found at our web-site at
http://www.astar.edu.sg/astar/attach/textlet/0e44d2035bWE/(US)NSS(PhD)_Scholars’_Choice_of_Uni_20062007_US.pdf
One only needs to look at the statistics and it will be clear that A*STAR only has 2 scholars at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1 at University of Wisconsin-Madison and 3 at University of California at San Diego. On the other hand, A*STAR has 25 PhD scholars at Stanford, 18 at MIT, 5 at Harvard, and 4 at John Hopkins, 2 at Princeton.
The statements made in Chen/AcidFlask’s blog mean or would be understood to mean that A*STAR has acted corruptly in its dealings with universities and that it’s Chairman and officers have procured it to act corruptly or condoned such acts. The statements also cast serious aspersions on our scholars to the effect that they were not admitted to their universities on merit but only because their universities were bribed by A*STAR to do so.
All these allegations are totally false and as a result, A*STAR had no but option to require Chen/AcidFlask to remove these postings and apologise.
A*STAR did not at any time require Chen/AcidFlask to shut down his entire blog-site. We had asked that the offending and defamatory postings in his 3 March 2005 blog be deleted. Chen/AcidFlask chose to shut down his entire blog-site on his own volition. Any imputation that A*STAR had demanded that Chen/AcidFlask shut down his blog is untrue and misleading.
The above clarification is made for the purpose of setting the record straight and because there have been lingering impressions that A*STAR had taken exception to comments about A*STAR’s GPA requirements. This is not the case and serious defamatory statements were made that damaged A*STAR’s good name and reputation. A*STAR has agreed to the disclosure of the defamatory postings for this purpose alone. Any or all of the defamatory postings must not be reproduced except in their entirety and must be accompanied by the whole text of the apology dated 9 May 2005 from Acid Flask as well as the full text of the clarification above. Selective reproduction of any part of the defamatory postings outside of their full context and without the full apology and the above clarification may constitute separate and actionable libel, thereby exposing the person publishing the same to the risk of potential legal action by the person or persons whom may be defamed and suffer damage as a result.
================================================
The Truth about the postings of Chen Jiahao/Acid Flask.
Postings by Chen Jiahao/Acid Flask at http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~chen6/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=318 (now defunct).
caustic.soda by AcidFlask
liminal musings of a graduate student
this is “a*star in parliament†by AcidFlask at 03 03 05 – 13:03. please leave a comment.
a*star in parliament
-03 03 05 – 13:03
Science, Singapore
which is perhaps why a*star feels justified in bribing universities for taking in PhD students. staggeringly enough, the cost quoted is very likely to be grossly understated, since I have been told that a*star gives out generous funding grants to specific faculty members (to the tune of us$150k/yr or so) for accepting up to three a*star scholars into their lab, as well as giving out gobs of honey to universities who will sign back-door agreements for taking in scholars without going through the formal application procedure. to the cash-strapped universities in America, the unbelievable godsend that visiting a*star contingents herald is something they can’t get enough of/f. after all, who else would be so incredibly naive and stupid as to throw money at other people instead of investing money to fund their own local research and developing their own r&d communities?
to quote a certain high-up in a*star: “if you don’t like it, then leave!†which perhaps explains the quiet turnover of more than one a*star scholar within the last twelve months. but at last, perhaps quiet no longer.
I would gladly do so, except that my sources are very likely to suffer the kind of spiteful retributive backlash that characterizes the public service. Therefore they can only remain hearsay and rumour under the current circumstances.
[AcidFlask] (email) (link) – 03 03 05 – 17:39
Lest I set myself up for libel, let me state what I know about this.
I do not recall the exact sums involved but this is the gist of what I had been told.
A fellow alumna of UIUC once attended a Chemical Engineering class in this university sometime in 2003. The subject of the lecture somehow went on to funding crunches faced by researchers in the US due to post-9/11 budget cuts when suddenly the professor remarked: Oh, by the way, if any of you are in need of money, you should consider applying to this agency called A*STAR in Singapore. They offered me $150,000 for my research with no strings attached, plus an extra $35,000 for every one of their students that I accepted into my group. Singapore seems to be a very rich country; they have money to throw at you, all you have to do is ask for it!
[AcidFlask] (email) (link) – 03 03 05 – 20:30
going further down the list.. a*star scholars seem to know that “a certain high-up†in a*star has a tendency to recommend scholars to go to some institutions, like UIUC, U of Wisconsin, and UCSD.. perhaps it is those very schools that a*star has those connections with? and perhaps the reason for asking scholars not to go to the top universities is that they tend to be awfully expensive when it comes to tuition fees too (like Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Princeton).
[AcidFlask] ( email) (link) – 04 03 05 – 11:30
==============================
Mon 9th May 2005
http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~chen6/blog/
APOLOGY
I recognize and accept that a number of statements that I made on my on-line journal “Caustic Sodaâ€, in particular the blog post of 3 March 2005, were defamatory of A*STAR, its Chairman, Mr. Philip Yeo and its executive officers.
I admit and acknowledge that these statements are false and completely without any foundation.
I unreservedly apologize to A*STAR, its Chairman Mr. Philip Yeo, and its executive officers for the distress and embarrassment caused to them by these statements.
I undertake not to repeat the statements, or make further statements of the same or similar effect in this or any other forum or media. I further undertake to remove any such posting anywhere that has not been deleted.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 09/03/2007 at 11:11 pm, and is filed under Others. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |


about 4 years ago
Dee
GPA is a statistical device for the scholarship system to work. I think it was mentioned that in going on to PhD, it’s not just the GPA that is taken into account. I understand wat u mean that it is not straightforward.
I may digress …..:-
My greater concern is, to cut the chase, if scholars come back and end up merely ‘pushing paper’ drying up the research zest and losing independent minded creativity along the way, and spend their life trying to charge up the corporate ladder as administrators and bureaucrats, then it will be sad.
Will the scholars be properly mentored? Is there potential for this to happen? Will they be given freedom to pursue, to be mavericks? Or will they have to comply or conform? Is it fair or not fair to pursue idealism or temper it? Who wants to be the chicken (that only lays eggs), who wants to be the pig (that is sacrificed for ham)? No saying chicken is right or not etc .. it depends on management n policy. As long as we dun worship failures, then dun blame the population to be largely chickens. btw, wat abt the rest?
So I really do not know and I hope I am wrong. The prognosis is not great given the historical landscape here. All I am saying is tat life after scholarship can be very different. Other than saying life in general can throw all sorts of spanners at you, I am perhaps not qualified nor authoritative to say all this after all – it will depend on the overall shape of IHL, academic and R&D landscape.
One can instrument rather than institutionalize and let fly all sorts of fundings from the top … how the $$$ flows, how it is spent, how it is used, how it is accounted for, how it can be properly leveraged … I dunno.
I mean DARPA funding from the start has one overriding given – they are prepared for 90 over % of research work to come out with nothing, to ‘fail’ to speak, but to learn from. What do we have here? We may have centre-led, Principal Investigator-led, thematic-led etc etc, but really, what do we expect, n how do we expect it? If we are spending so much time and effort running paperworks n operating like a listed company by the quarter – izzit optimal?
So wat’s the point of taking ppl in without appropriate resources, priorities and systems to facilitate? We will onie end up shooting at our own toes after all the sponsorship. Like I said, I am not authoritative, and my value system and world view may not apply but let’s not hv talent leak.
__________________________
Dr Dee UNITED STATES // Mar 30, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Dear James:
Actually Starlet is right in the sense that looking at raw GPA itself isn’t a straightforward matter.
about 4 years ago
Dee
I tink there is a need for some closure, to be fair.
__________________
Dr Dee UNITED STATES // Mar 30, 2007 at 3:31 pm
On to the other issues, I cannot help but notice the recent volley of articles on the Acidflask VS A*STAR affair.
about 4 years ago
Dear Tadpole
I hope I dun offend u, let us also remind ourselves that we were not created at day one, we were given birth to.
FUTURE is impossible w/o PRESENT n PAST. This time dimension or sequence started with the Greeks, if I am not wrong.
Cheers
____________________
Tadpole SINGAPORE // Mar 30, 2007 at 3:54 pm
The young is the FUTURE of SINGAPORE
about 4 years ago
I mean the Greek interpretation of time is facing forward to the future, whilst past is behind the ‘head’
________________
James SINGAPORE // Mar 30, 2007 at 6:04 pm
FUTURE is impossible w/o PRESENT n PAST. This time dimension or sequence started with the Greeks, if I am not wrong.
about 4 years ago
Dear James:
I agree that the actors involved are entitled to their closure. Just that I cannot help but notice the timing of the volleys when A*STAR is undergoing a leadership change. Not that I am disagreeing against the need for a closure, but I cannot help but notice the timing of these volleys.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 4 years ago
Dee
timing … u mean it’s neither incidental or coincidental … it is Mr Yeo I tink who started the ball rolling. Perhaps spurred on by the “clash of the titans” episode with I heard, the “leave it to my family to do due diligence” remark. incidental? it’s lidat lah. With no disrespect intended.
All said and done, the results will take time, subject to any thing of value that was talked abt in this blog. I see the NRF shaping up to take overall charge of R&D, again subject to anyting of value that was talked abt in this blog.
well … we are not the “gods”. But really I do tink that bottom up, leave it to the specialists, the domain ppl, the ones in the trenches etc etc, why pick winners when risks can be spread and diversified. Dun anyhow ask for $$$ to spend just to look good or help the economy. The human capital is far more impt.
Tat is why I implied earlier abt HR – if we hv 1000 PhDs returning, it is not a small number. Other places like Beijing etc – they hv big numbers. Help your own family, your own kind lah, build internal strengths. It is nationalistic but not xenophobic
_____________
Dr Dee SINGAPORE // Mar 30, 2007 at 7:38 pm
but I cannot help but notice the timing of these volleys.
about 4 years ago
Dear Mr Yeo,
Today’s ST article lead me to this blog. To be honest, I’ve never held a positive opinion of you for years, due to the reports in the ST about yourself. Always thought that you were aloof and quick to shoot people down unreasonably.
After I read through the exchanges you’ve had in this blog, I find myself understanding why you defended your beliefs and principles so strenuously.
Repeating many of the bloggers here, I have NEVER seen a single senior government official be this open and sincere to an unrestricted debate amongst an un-policed audience.
My respect for you as a leader has gone up several notches. (I am not boot licking, and I have no reason to do so.)
I also publicly stand corrected from my years of biasness against you. You have done a great job for Singapore. I co-incidentally work in the pharmaceutical industry in Singapore, one which bears your fingerprint and the result of your efforts. My sincere thanks to you.
about 4 years ago
Paul,
Thank you.
philip
about 4 years ago
I don’t think anyone is denying that Philip Yeo has done a lot for the nation. Just that as a (one of the life science-related majors) phd student in the United States, I can’t help wondering the possibilities and opportunities available in Singapore and viability of going back…
about 4 years ago
If you don’t come back, have to import more non-Singaporeans. Sad. :’(
If you don’t come back, Singapore does not make the grade to the right hand side of the normal distribution curve your fault. Not mine.
_________________
Starlet UNITED STATES // Mar 31, 2007 at 5:18 am
I don’t think anyone is denying that Philip Yeo has done a lot for the nation. Just that as a (one of the life science-related majors) phd student in the United States, I can’t help wondering the possibilities and opportunities available in Singapore and viability of going back…
about 4 years ago
To clear the A*STAR desk for my successor.
Frogs and toads and all. Ha!
_________________________
James SINGAPORE // Mar 30, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Dee
I tink there is a need for some closure, to be fair.
__________________
Dr Dee UNITED STATES // Mar 30, 2007 at 3:31 pm
On to the other issues, I cannot help but notice the recent volley of articles on the Acidflask VS A*STAR affair.
about 4 years ago
Dear Philip,
hehehe…If one person can make that huge a difference…although it is true that I do have a huge interest in the pharmaceutical/biotech industry and being in the United States have strengthened my interest in that industry. There are indeed many interesting scientific and medical problems to be solved in that industry, even in the US.
Although that being said, it does take a long time(10-20 years) to develop a drug and I am not sure if that is the amount of time, Singapore can wait. That being said, there r of course other ways of being profitable without having to develop a drug from scratch. Except that one has the industry well enough to know when to hop in and out or to provide auxillary services that is demanded in that industry. :p
I did see some opportunities in Astar that could have been tapped but was not but I do not know enough to be able to make a fair comment.
Starlet
about 4 years ago
“If you don’t come back, have to import more non-Singaporeans. Sad. :’(
If you don’t come back, Singapore does not make the grade to the right hand side of the normal distribution curve your fault. Not mine. ”
While pple r the key ingredients to success, I still believe that needs to be a good plan and good infrastructure to facilitate success.
For instance, I am not even sure if there is enough support for start-ups in this area because many a times, having a patent doesn’t mean much unless u have enough resources to carry the patent through to show effective results…Especially in the drug industry where clinical trials are animal models are expensive…
about 4 years ago
Dear Philip,
By the way, knowing where Astar is coming from, I do support your stand in your “arguement” with Lee Weiling. Noting the investments that have been poured into biomedical sciences, we have to aim for areas that will truly reap real profits instead of little areas that we have a niche in. Not to say that those areas shouldn’t be pursued but I feel that those areas should be funded by public health whereas Astar should focus on more profitable and bigger questions in life science.
Guess that is my rambling for now…:p
about 4 years ago
Mr Yeo
With all due respect, the problem of no. of ppl in Singapore, talent or no talent, is a bigger compounded problem than this context
The right side of the curve has many other necessary conditions, beyond this context.
____________________
philip yeo SINGAPORE // Mar 31, 2007 at 9:44 am
If you don’t come back, have to import more non-Singaporeans. Sad. :’(
If you don’t come back, Singapore does not make the grade to the right hand side of the normal distribution curve your fault. Not mine.
about 4 years ago
I have “lobbied” my best for new funds for MOH.
S$1.5 billion for translational/clinical sciences from 2006 till 2010.
Being implementing by MOH.
Problem: translational/clinical scientists do not grow on coconut trees. Especially in Singapore today.
———————————————————————
Starlet UNITED STATES // Mar 31, 2007 at 11:29 am
Dear Philip,
By the way, knowing where Astar is coming from, I do support your stand in your “arguement†with Lee Weiling. Noting the investments that have been poured into biomedical sciences, we have to aim for areas that will truly reap real profits instead of little areas that we have a niche in. Not to say that those areas shouldn’t be pursued but I feel that those areas should be funded by public health whereas Astar should focus on more profitable and bigger questions in life science.
about 4 years ago
Dear Sir:
Isn’t Duke-NUS medical school the one to provide translational scientists?
At least, its aims is to train clinician scientists, if I didn’t read wrongly.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 4 years ago
Duke-NUS medical school first intake for the 4 years US MD program in July 2007.
First batch of 25 students who had done their BS (4 years at NUS, 3 years in US).
And if some chaps go on to the PhD program at NUS, another 4 years.
2016 before a new mint MD-PhD in translational/clinical science “pops out”.
A Singapore male MD-PhD will be 36 years old.
about 4 years ago
Duke-NUS medical school first intake for the 4 years US MD program in July 2007.
“First batch of 25 students who had done their BS (4 years at NUS, 3 years in US).
And if some chaps go on to the PhD program at NUS, another 4 years.
2016 before a new mint MD-PhD in translational/clinical science “pops outâ€.
A Singapore male MD-PhD will be 36 years old.”
Which is one thing I don’t really understand about system given that NUS does train MBBS students. Wouldn’t it be more straightforward if the MBBS students go on to do a PhD since they already have the medical training to boot? That will be faster to begin with.
I think the Duke program will be a better complement if it is like the Harvard-MIT Health Science Technology program. U get an MD in name but it is actually more like a compressed MD/PhD…
about 4 years ago
http://www.a-star.edu.sg/astar/studentsandscholarships/action/scholarship_NSS_mbbs_phd.do
———————————
Wouldn’t it be more straightforward if the MBBS students go on to do a PhD since they already have the medical training to boot? That will be faster to begin with.
about 4 years ago
Am familiar with this as I have met up with HST chaps.
The chaps applying to Duke really wants to be medical doctors.
Expect a small number will be “mad enough” to do the PhD leg and sacrifice the 3-5 years medical specialization route.
_______________________
I think the Duke program will be a better complement if it is like the Harvard-MIT Health Science Technology program. U get an MD in name but it is actually more like a compressed MD/PhD…
about 4 years ago
Well…I am aware of the MBBS-PhD scheme that Astar has but I am also aware that there had not been that many takers either…
about 4 years ago
I think even in the larger context, few are “mad enough” to do PhD.
__________________
philip yeo SINGAPORE // Mar 31, 2007 at 10:53 pm
… a small number will be “mad enough†to do the PhD leg and sacrifice ….
about 4 years ago
That is more an effect of the Singapore tertiary education system…It is less of a problem here since most professional jobs require a degree beyond the bachelor’s degree…
That aside, if the point of the duke-NUS program is just to provide another medical program that is similar to the NUS medical program, then why can’t NUS just increase its intake?!?
Just wondering if Astar has ever considered letting a given percentage of its scholars pursue an MD-PhD after their bachelor’s degree…
about 4 years ago
Case by case.
Every scholar who meets the A*STAR academic threshold has the privilege of funding support for the BS-PhD (UK/US) or MBBS-PhD (UK or Spore) for up to 8 years with a 6 years service obligation.
After the 3 years BS, the remainder funding is 5 years only. If a BS scholar wants to pursue say the Duke MD-PhD (4 plus 4 years) then he/she has to find his/her own OR third party funding for the MD part.
The third party say MOH may require additional service obligation.
____________________________________
Just wondering if Astar has ever considered letting a given percentage of its scholars pursue an MD-PhD after their bachelor’s degree…_
about 4 years ago
Thanks for satisfying my curiosity.
Not that I am intending to pursue an MD for that matter since I am happy just working in the lab. In fact, some times I wonder the necessity to have both MD/PhD in order to do translational research.
Of course a proportion of these type of pple is necessary but personally, I have seen translational research being carried out by MDs or PhDs only…And of course I have seen multiple collaborations between pple with either of the degrees…
about 4 years ago
Agree. I know of several with US MD degrees who have given up on patients (ha!) and focused on research.
__________________________
In fact, some times I wonder the necessity to have both MD/PhD in order to do translational research.
about 4 years ago
Yep Yep…see that a lot in hms related institutes and hospitals…
about 4 years ago
Arthur Kornberg, M.D.
Emeritus Pfeiffer Merner Professor of Biochemistry
Nobel Laureate, Medicine, 1959
Department of Biochemistry
Stanford University School of Medicine
about 4 years ago
Yep yep…i think the nobel genes run in that family…his son won the nobel prize for chem this year…
about 4 years ago
Dear Sir:
One of my idols in science, Prof Bert Vogelstein, M.D. of Johns Hopkins is one example. He was a doctor but subsequently hit the lab bench to work on tumor progressions.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 4 years ago
Dear Starlet:
You are right. If you trawl through journals like Lancet or any other journals that publish paper on clinical/translational research, or faculty positions on university websites, a fair amounts of M.D.s are involved in clinical/translational research.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 4 years ago
There is a p53 Nature paper in my library jointly written in 2000 (I think) by Bert Vogelstein, David Lane (IMCB) and Arnold Levine (Chm, IMCB SAB.)
http://www.imcb.a-star.edu.sg/about_imcb/scientific_board_and_reviewers/index.html
about 4 years ago
Dee,
335. Vogelstein, B., Lane, D. and Levine, A.J. 2000. Surfing the p53 network. Nature 408: 307-310.
about 4 years ago
Wow…I am amazed at how often u read Nature…and actually remember the articles…:p
about 4 years ago
Though old, my neurons are still alive.
I use my readings to look for Whales to hunt.
about 4 years ago
That is good to know…
I tend to just read to know if there are any interesting targets where I can design targets against…and yeah, just for fun…
about 4 years ago
actually tend to like Nature Medicine for that purpose…
about 4 years ago
Actually, on a side and unrealted note, I was wondering if Astar ever thought of commercializing BTI? I believe the protein processing function of it will definitely be something well-sought after…Just a thought…
So what other science journals do u read?
about 4 years ago
http://www.a-bio.com was spun out from BTI.
Science, Nature, Nature Immunology, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Medicine, New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, Lancet, Blood.
Expensive! Free PLOS.
______________________
Starlet UNITED STATES // Apr 2, 2007 at 6:23 am
Actually, on a side and unrealted note, I was wondering if Astar ever thought of commercializing BTI? I believe the protein processing function of it will definitely be something well-sought after…Just a thought…
So what other science journals do u read?
about 4 years ago
S’pore gets its own stem cell bank
SINGAPORE’S very own stem cell bank, one of only a few in the world, is now up and running, meaning researchers both here and abroad will be able to get their hands on frozen cells by next month.
The facility, located in the Biopolis research complex, will make top grade cells available for research into anything from growing new skin cells to regenerating diseased hearts.
Also in the works is the Cell Therapy Processing Facility (CTPF), which will collaborate with local hospitals to expand the use of stem cells for treatment.
Both facilities will be run by the Agency for Science, Technology and Research’s (A*Star) Bioprocessing Technology Institute (BTI).
By next year, CTPF will work with local hospitals to provide stem cells for bone cartilage replacements in people with sports injuries, said Dr Andre Choo, a research scientist with the A*Star’s Stem Cell Group.
Stem cells are the unprogrammed cells that can transform into any tissue the body needs, and hold promise for curing a whole range of diseases.
Professor Miranda Yap, executive director of BTI, told The Straits Times on Friday that the 1,100 sq m CTPF building, located in the Nueros building within the Biopolis research complex in Buona Vista, will be ready by the end of this year.
Speaking on the sidelines of a meeting with reporters at BTI’s premises at the Biopolis, Prof Yap said: ‘The facility will help to provide stem cells to patients who need them for their treatment.’
These developments will help anchor Singapore’s place in the biologics industry, a high-tech field in which living cells are used to produce cures and vaccines.
According to the BTI, the industry today is worth about US$52 billion (S$78.9 million) and is expected to grow to about US$70 billion in the next three years.
But such initiatives, though lucrative, are not simple. Research and manufacturing can be very expensive and not as predictable in their outcomes as more traditional pharmaceutical fields, Prof Yap said.
However, research in emerging fields like stem cells and viruses could hold the answer to cures for diseases like Aids and avian influenza, she stressed.
And for Singapore, the added benefits of the growth of the industry here lie in creating new industries, new medical discoveries and new jobs.
Prof Yap estimated that each biologics plant, which will need about 300 to 400 staff, can be expected to provide employment both for graduate and higher degree holders, as well as the clutch of life sciences students from the polytechnics, who will make up about 70 to 80 per cent of each plant’s workforce.
These employment opportunities are poised to grow even more. Next week, Lonza, one of the world’s leading biologics companies, will break ground on its second manufacturing plant here. It started building its first just last year.
The first plant, also in Tuas, was snapped up by Genentech, one of the world’s most successful biotech companies , as part of a deal between the two firms.
The two plants built by Lonza amount to a total investment of US$600 million and will provide employment for about 1,000 people.
about 4 years ago
Thanks for the wealth of information. That was exactly what I was thinking of when i posed the question on BTI. Yeah, there are definitely a lot of challenges facing developing biologics as drugs but I was thinking that BTI could just have just sell itself as a high-tech manufacturing service to both academia and industry without having to get itself involved directly in marketing any drugs whatsoever…
about 4 years ago
Dear Sir,
I am one of the scholars that you personally picked
I still remember vividly your 40-min interview with me and the shocked look on my friends’ faces after I came out of your room…
I have been following the discussion here pretty closely. Certainly it has helped me clear up a lot of points regarding A*Star’s policies; really thank you very much
Though just one more thing; since this is brought up here, might as well
Over 2004, 2005 and also 2006 initially, A*Star seemed to have suspended the MBBS/PhD scheme. Some of us, including me, would have put MBBS/PhD as our first choice if that is available. However, knowing that there is no one who will be funding us if we were to do a MBBS/PhD overseas, gave up the idea altogether and took up the BS/PhD scheme to pursue our primary interest in research. Though when we realised that A*Star resumed the scheme last year, it was kind of, too late…
I understand that A*Star will fund us for 8 years altogether; so in this case, provided we can get our PhD in 3 years (in the case of us working very hard now and then going to the UK), would it be possible for A*Star to fund us partially if we were to do a MD in Duke-NUS, because we would have completed our PhD in 6 years altogether? I know this might be asking for a bit too much, but would there be a possibility that A*Star fund us partially for a MD/PhD overseas?
Thank you very much for your time!
Best regards,
Hiu Yeung
about 4 years ago
BTI does not market drugs.
Public infrastructure for development of biologics manufacturing capability.
Also does graduate and hands on biologics training. No company does that.
BTI-> A*BIO -> LONZA, Genentech, etc etc.
Each commercial plant has 80,000 litres.
Goal: 5 plus biologics plants = 500,000 litres capacity.
Employment: 2000.
_______________________
but I was thinking that BTI could just have just sell itself as a high-tech manufacturing service to both academia and industry without having to get itself involved directly in marketing any drugs whatsoever…
about 4 years ago
NUS could not tie up with Cambridge for the local MBBS-UK PhD. Abandoned.
2006, gave out 3 UK MBBS-PhD awards.
All girls. Boys have NSF issue.
Go to UK for PhD. 3 years.
Cannot do Duke MD in 2 years!
MD plus clinical and specialty!
At least 5 years.
Need not do MD to be clinician scientist.
Better to go to a US lab after UK PhD for a translational exposure of up to 2 years.
_______________________
I understand that A*Star will fund us for 8 years altogether; so in this case, provided we can get our PhD in 3 years (in the case of us working very hard now and then going to the UK), would it be possible for A*Star to fund us partially if we were to do a MD in Duke-NUS, because we would have completed our PhD in 6 years altogether?
I know this might be asking for a bit too much, but would there be a possibility that A*Star fund us partially for a MD/PhD overseas?
about 4 years ago
MD plus clinical and then specialty!
At least 6 years for MD plus residency alone.
Specialty another 3 to 5 years.
Grow very OLD fast!
about 4 years ago
“Better to go to a US lab after UK PhD for a translational exposure of up to 2 years.”
But wouldn’t it be more straightforward to get that translational exposure doing a phd in the US? The US does have many medical schools with PhD programs.
about 4 years ago
“BTI does not market drugs.
Public infrastructure for development of biologics manufacturing capability.
Also does graduate and hands on biologics training. No company does that.
BTI-> A*BIO -> LONZA, Genentech, etc etc.
Each commercial plant has 80,000 litres.
Goal: 5 plus biologics plants = 500,000 litres capacity.
Employment: 2000.”
Sounds like a great plan…:)
about 4 years ago
Dear Sir,
Haha thank you for your VERY FAST reply
I still have a long way to go, so it is good to consider all alternatives
Currently I am working in a lab in JHMI; my PI is a MD/PhD and there are a lot of MD and even DVM postdocs around. Quite a bit of chances to get exposed and make informed decisions…
Haha and thank you for the Nature citation
I am currently starting on a mini historical research project on p53, hoping to carry it forward to the next semester as a class…
Best regards,
Hiu Yeung
about 4 years ago
Dear Starlet,
I guess it will be different if I return to the US as a postdoc? I know Hopkins does offer a lot of pretty lucrative programmes, just that I don’t think it is a good idea to stay there all the way. I guess quite a bit of the seniors are in or considering to go to Duke though.
I do know that Cambridge is in fact quite a good place to go, given that MRC-LMB is there and quite a few of the pioneers and leaders in the field are still there, and in fact some of the departments in their school of clinical medicine offers PhD programmes too.
Anyway, keeping my options open…
Haha and am honoured that Prof Vogelstein’s lab is in the building next to mine
Best regards,
Hiu Yeung