0
0

The decline of science and technology in America


 invite response                
2013 Nov 9, 12:05pm   14,564 views  64 comments

by tovarichpeter   ➕follow (6)   💰tip   ignore  

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304073204579170023892274000

If the early years of the 21st century often feel like a retread of the 1970seconomic anxiety, turmoil overseas, American leaders who don't seem to understand what the problems are much less how to fix themthe geneticist Francis Collins suggests less dispiriting resemblances. The "arrow of progress that we're riding in biomedicine" took flight 40 or so years ago but is traveling faster and further now. "You could see that maybe this field of genetics had something to offer to human medicine," Dr. Collins recalls of the scientific mood when he began his career, "although in the 1970s most people...

Comments 1 - 40 of 64       Last »     Search these comments

1   Mark77   2013 Nov 9, 2:29pm  

Indeed. We have huge numbers of scientists who can't even obtain responses to their resumes, even when they're perfectly qualified for the positions they apply for. Scientific compensation that is a mere fraction of the pay in the FIRE industry. It is no wonder that we've lost our way. Even our system of scientific financing has been usurped by those Wall Street types, rather than scientists making investments of their own capital. It was said that many of the great inventions of the 20th century came out of garages -- our young scientists can't even afford garages!!

2   thomaswong.1986   2013 Nov 9, 2:43pm  

Mark77 says

Even our system of scientific financing has been usurped by those Wall Street types, rather than scientists making investments of their own capital.

no.. the media and public has glamorous so called new tech "google face

book and now twitter" none are actually tech companies but mearly

' new media companies'... look at the recent twitter IPO... but no mention of other

far more important industry creations...

we are not interested in real ICKY STUFF like Chemicals and Manufacturing

process to create new scientific inventions... like Semiconductors...

it takes "toxic chemicals" extensive "mining of raw materials" for that.

Just the mention of such would bring out the Environmentalist and Labor Unions

to stop creation of such business/industry...

3   John Bailo   2013 Nov 9, 2:47pm  

I was just recalling that in 1977 I was selected by my high school to attend a regional outing to Bell Laboratories in New Jersey along with my physics teacher. There were attendees from all over the NYC Metro area. We were there to tour the Labs, and get inspired by technology.

Among the technologies being featured that were in the lab but ready to be productized were voice recognition and optical fibers. Now, what technologies are we maybe, sort of just getting around to using in the market...nearly four decades later? Yes, optical fibers and VR!

And how about medical technology. These things can't be cured:

Cancer
Diabetes
Obesity
Leukemia
Major Limb Loss
Malaria (Malaria for crying out loud)
Forms of Tuberculosis
Flu (FLU!!!!)

Medical research may be "advancing" but actual real world cures for diseases were were supposed to have solved half a century ago are non-existent!

This is why Death Panels make sense. We're just charging a lot of money for false cures anyway. Why not just tell it like it is. If and when we get cures for these things, they will be cheap and easily applied and 100% effective. Not like now.

4   thomaswong.1986   2013 Nov 9, 2:50pm  

John Bailo says

I was just recalling that in 1977 I was selected by my high school to attend a regional outing to Bell Laboratories in New Jersey along with my physics teacher. There were attendees from all over the NYC Metro area. We were there to tour the Labs, and get inspired by technology.

Yes.. that would be very inspirational for many... im sure many found interest and success in their fields...

5   John Bailo   2013 Nov 9, 2:53pm  

thomaswong.1986 says

Yes.. that would be very inspirational for many... im sure many found interest and success in their fields..

Many are leaders, but few are Lederhosen .

6   thomaswong.1986   2013 Nov 9, 2:53pm  

John Bailo says

Cancer

Diabetes

Obesity

Leukemia

Major Limb Loss

Malaria (Malaria for crying out loud)

Forms of Tuberculosis

Flu (FLU!!!!)

Medical research may be "advancing" but actual real world cures for diseases were were supposed to have solved half a century ago are non-existent!

up to the point some research hubs actually have samples of Malaria and Ebola virus in their neighborhood...then all hell break lose.... NIMBY

7   thomaswong.1986   2013 Nov 9, 2:56pm  

John Bailo says

Many are leaders, but few are Lederhosen

just isnt glamorous to work in Bell Labs today... everyone wants to be programmers

data drilling consumer taste from advertising programs... thats the meal ticket..

8   Tenpoundbass   2013 Nov 9, 11:12pm  

John Bailo says

This is why Death Panels make sense. We're just charging a lot of money for false cures anyway.

John Bailo says

Major Limb Loss

It's just a flesh wound for crying out loud, I might not be able to fight back when you come to roll me into the the Pelosi 2000 cadaver grind and incinerator, but I'll still fight back with my one good tooth.

The problem with death panels is, the human spirit and will to live and survive is different from person to person. There are perfectly healthy people who are ready to call it quits, while people like Steven Hawkins is prepared to sit in front of a thousands and give inspirational digital speeches on the cosmos.

9   Rin   2013 Nov 12, 10:00pm  

anonymous says

Big Pharma and related businesses

Just using some out-of-the box practical MD thinking, fatty tissue derived adult stem cell treatments are already going on in Japan, Thailand, and a host of other countries for heart disease, tissue regeneration, etc.

To sit around in the states, while heart disease wastes away your coronary tissues, instead of going abroad for a ~$6K treatment every few years, is Waiting for Godot.

Don't wait for US technologies to save the day anymore.

thomaswong.1986 says

we are not interested in real ICKY STUFF like Chemicals

I'd studied Applied Chemistry/Chemical Engineering and can vouch that the US is no longer interested in these areas. Most ppl who'd studied or worked in those areas have left for health care/biotech, business (like MBA), IT, or finance.

10   MisdemeanorRebel   2013 Nov 12, 11:20pm  

According to Forbes, Chemistry is among the top 10 least lucrative majors.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efkk45ifij/no-6-worst-masters-degree-for-jobs-chemistry/

Chemistry ain't English or Business, you can't bullshit your way to a diploma and pass by outsourcing essays discussing the "other" in Jane Austen novels or regurgitating management theory.

11   Rin   2013 Nov 12, 11:29pm  

thunderlips11 says

According to Forbes, Chemistry is among the top 10 least lucrative majors.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efkk45ifij/no-6-worst-masters-degree-for-jobs-chemistry/

Yes, both chemistry and applied chemistry vis-a-vis chemical engineering are useless MS degrees with one caveat.

And we all know what that caveat is ...

If you get the MS in [ fill in dept ] at a name school like the Ivies, MIT, Duke, Chicago, Hopkins, Stanford, you can still use it to find work in finance (like supporting a quant desk or a risk group), or management consulting, since with a masters degree, you don't need to later go back for an MBA for a promotion to senior associate/consultant, provided you have one post-graduate brand name degree.

12   zzyzzx   2013 Nov 12, 11:49pm  

thomaswong.1986 says

just isnt glamorous to work in Bell Labs today...

Especially with all the layoffs...

13   zzyzzx   2013 Nov 12, 11:51pm  

Mark77 says

We have huge numbers of scientists who can't even obtain responses to their resumes, even when they're perfectly qualified for the positions they apply for.

The problem is that they need to move to Asia and apply there.

14   New Renter   2013 Nov 13, 12:05am  

anonymous says

Why would Big Pharma and related businesses have the slightest interest in really finding a cure for some of these things that can't be cured? I suspect the "non-existent cures" have been achieved in some cases but successfully buried, the scientist(s) discredited, paid off etc. to keep the profit machine rolling along. Profits and shareholder value do much better when stringing patients along ad infinitum with a dribble of hope here and there than to actually announce a cure for something.

OK lets take a look at what historically have been the biggest nasties:

http://list25.com/25-deadliest-diseases-in-human-history/2/

25 Cholera
24 Yelllow Fever
23 Smallpox
22 Tuberculosis
21 Influenza
20 Lung Cancer
19 Diarrhea
18 Perinatal Complications
17 Whooping Cough
16 Ebola
15 Avian Influenza (Bird Flu)
14 Tetanus
13 Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
12 Ischemic Heart Disease
11 Meningitis
10 Influenza A-H1N1 (Swine Flu)
9 Syphilis
8 Lower Respiratory Infections
7 Cerebrovascular Disease
6 Bubonic Plague
5 SARS
4 Leprosy
3 Measles
2 HIV
1 Malaria

So how many of these lethal diseases do YOU have to worry about dying from on a daily basis?

Probably not:

Tetanus
Rabies
Polio
Yellow Fever
Rinderpest (not a human disease but does affect the food supply)
Whooping cough*
Measles*
Smallpox
Cholera (still a problem in countries without adequate sanitation but very uncommon in countries that do)

Nor do you probably worry about:

Diphtheria
Guinea worm (not lethal but damn painful and now well on its way out thanks to science)

*Its true that Measles, Mumps and Whooping Cough are making a comeback. The reason? "Parents not vaccinating their kids.
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/11/07/alarming-trend-more-people-coming-down-with-deadly-diseases-like-measles-and-mumps/

15   tatupu70   2013 Nov 13, 12:20am  

Rin says

I'd studied Applied Chemistry/Chemical Engineering and can vouch that the US
is no longer interested in these areas. Most ppl who'd studied or worked in
those areas have left for health care/biotech, business (like MBA), IT, or
finance.

I have to disagree with this statement. There are plenty of jobs for chemical engineers right now. I work in that industry and know nobody who has left for health care--there's no reason to.

16   HEY YOU   2013 Nov 13, 12:40am  

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says

THE BIBLE!

THE BIBLE!

The only book anyone needs to read!

Scientific innovation! Just pray & it shall be given.
We don't need no steenkin education.

Why have people lost faith?

17   New Renter   2013 Nov 13, 1:10am  

tatupu70 says

I have to disagree with this statement. There are plenty of jobs for chemical engineers right now. I work in that industry and know nobody who has left for health care--there's no reason to.

Show me the jobs!

19   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 1:25am  

New Renter says

tatupu70 says

I have to disagree with this statement. There are plenty of jobs for chemical engineers right now. I work in that industry and know nobody who has left for health care--there's no reason to.

Show me the jobs!

Basically, in the fracking areas, related to petrochemicals in the midwest. We all know that this is a niche area, and in reality, more mechanical than chemical engineering. Most of my friends had left ChemE within the prior decade. Today, you're better off in mechanical or petroleum engineering, and gaining a CO-OP at an energy company, if you want to be in this field.

When I'd graduated, now more than a dozen years back, fracking was mostly a non-existent area and at the same time, Dow, DuPont, Honeywell, Shaw, and others were laying off chemical process engineers in droves and building facilities with their partners in Asia-Pacific. A lot of design work was also automated by software. This is when I'd landed in biotech and discovered that much of the field was run by cell biologists and a handful of biochemists in the separation technology areas.

Then, the art of maintaining old plants (nuclear, ordinary power, or what have you) are typically destination spots for those, who'd let's say done the Navy nuclear program, gained tons of experience in high pressure situations, and now, want a civilian career outside of the military.

And yes, I do recommend the Navy Nuclear program if you're interested in a military career and have an engineering background. If you start at let's say 22 years of age, you'll get a full pension at 42 and then, you can work at one of these civilian plants, and basically be living rather well with a guaranteed pay from the Navy, even if your plant gets eventually shutdown.

20   zzyzzx   2013 Nov 13, 1:50am  

tatupu70 says

I have to disagree with this statement. There are plenty of jobs for chemical engineers right now. I work in that industry and know nobody who has left for health care--there's no reason to.

Other types of engineering jobs left the country decades ago. I used to be an Electrical Engineer, but got tired of being unemployed and work for log pay ($35K - 45K in the DC area).

21   tatupu70   2013 Nov 13, 1:52am  

Rin says

Basically, in the fracking areas, related to petrochemicals in the midwest. We
all know that this is a niche area, and in reality, more mechanical than
chemical engineering

That is a good industry to be in, but it's far from the whole pie. The low natural gas prices in the US because of fracking is leading to a good deal of new manufacturing returning to the States. I think there are at least a half dozen large PE plants scheduled to go online this decade. Catalyst manufacturing is doing quite well also.

22   New Renter   2013 Nov 13, 2:17am  

tatupu70 says

http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=chemical+engineer&l=

Sorry, job postings alone don't mean much. I've found many postings are illlusionary:

* Internal candidate already selected - job posting is a formality
* Fishing expedition - no immediate need but if the "ideal" candidate applies and is willing to work for peanuts maybe, just maybe there's job.
* Funding for position evaporates before screening even starts
* HR demands candidates who match 100% of ALL criteria even if impossible (like 3 yrs experience in a language which has only existed for 6 mo)
* Job postings are added to look make company look good to investors
* Job postings exist only to give the appearance of a shortage to justify H1B hiring.
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/16986

23   tatupu70   2013 Nov 13, 2:26am  

New Renter says

Sorry, job postings alone don't mean much. I've found many postings are illlusionary:

lol--do you want me to show you a vacant office with a "help wanted" sign on it?

There were 13K listings.

24   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 2:41am  

Couple of points tatupu70, my cohort (plus one generation above it) are now, mostly out of that line of work for 10-15 years. There was a huge contraction in the process engineering fields starting in the mid-90s.

In order to fill a req on a plant/facility engineer, companies need to get former ex-pats, working in let's say Saudi, South Africa, Brazil, or other facility oriented societies, as the mainstay US crowd is too old (55+) for those roles.

Then, there's the crew leaving the military positions, who're well qualified for any role in power engineering. These are typically the best candidates, see my bit on the Navy Nukes.

As for newcomers, a young chemical engineer working on tuning an Aspen/Automated software designer tool, is clearly not 7+ year hands-on experienced to work a large facility. He's better off transitioning into IT work or bioinformatics.

25   New Renter   2013 Nov 13, 2:43am  

tatupu70 says

There were 13K listings.

And how many applicants for those listing?

Signs of a true shortage:

* Recruiters actively recruit new graduates of average skills

* Vast majority of new graduates find employment in the areas for which they were trained

* Badly paid post-docs fade into history

* Companies bend over backwards to provide needed training

* Skyrocketing compensation packages

The latter is how the corporate world has approached the shortage of highly skilled C level executives. For STEM workers they just lobby for more cheap imported labor.

26   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 2:45am  

New Renter says

And how many applicants for those listing?

There could easily be 100-300 per slot, however, how many can say that they recycled catalysts for a SASOL facility outside of Johannsburg for 12 years? Exactly, maybe 1 or 2 applicants.

27   tatupu70   2013 Nov 13, 5:02am  

Rin says

There could easily be 100-300 per slot, however, how many can say that they recycled catalysts for a SASOL facility outside of Johannsburg for 12 years? Exactly, maybe 1 or 2 applicants.

So, if there are 200 applicants/slot, that would be 2.6MM chemical engineers looking for work. Needless to say, that's a bit ridiculous.

As somone in the chemical industry, I can say that we have a very hard time finding people to fill open engineering positions. I'm not sure I'd call it a "true shortage", but it's definitely a job-seeker's market.

28   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 5:52am  

tatupu70 says

So, if there are 200 applicants/slot, that would be 2.6MM chemical engineers looking for work.

Not true, anywhere from 100-300 ppl can apply for similar sets of jobs. Your 2.6M is based upon no combinations.

Those who make it for a 2nd callback, have had, as I said, an exact experience of 'Recycled Catalyst for SASOL'. It's not enough for a ChemE, working a spray dryer or a biomass reactor, to move into an area, different from that prior unit operation.

This is why I'd left that field, years ago. First for IT, then for hedge fund work.

29   New Renter   2013 Nov 13, 5:53am  

Itatupu70 says

Rin says

There could easily be 100-300 per slot, however, how many can say that they recycled catalysts for a SASOL facility outside of Johannsburg for 12 years? Exactly, maybe 1 or 2 applicants.

So, if there are 200 applicants/slot, that would be 2.6MM chemical engineers looking for work. Needless to say, that's a bit ridiculous.

how many of those jobs can only be performed by a chemical engineer? Would a chemist or physicist do?

How about a mechanical engineer?

As somone in the chemical industry, I can say that we have a very hard time finding people to fill open engineering positions. I'm not sure I'd call it a "true shortage", but it's definitely a job-seeker's market.

Just how hard are you looking? Are you visiting college campuses, trade shows or just putting a "help wanted inquire within" sign in the front lobby?
How flexible are you in your hiring criteria?
How much are you willing to pay?

Awhile ago there was a thread posted here on PatNet regarding how a small company in Stockton was bitching about how how they couldn't' find STEM talent. I visited their web page and found they had not a single job posted!

I suppose they expected talent to also be telepathic .

EDIT Found the link:

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=23543

Here is their website - 5 months later and they STILL have no careers section.

http://amdsinc.com/

30   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 6:04am  

New Renter says

Just how hard are you looking? Are you visiting college campuses, trade shows

Here what I needed, when I was entering the field, all those years ago.

Cut/Paste from the PhD thread ...

"I'd actually published as an undergrad and can tell you one thing, if I were to specialize in that topic (meaning applied for a PhD in that facility) aside from gaining my undergrad research experience (for the sake of the old R&D resume parachute), I would have been too specialized for an entry level job. In effect, I'd be a so-called master of the kinetics of spin traps and other intermediary stages which would make me more or less, a PhD job candidate for a few national labs or perhaps a postdoc in a drug company looking to calibrate various analytical equipments, in one day, out the other.

In contrast, as an undergrad, I was dubbed *just right* to be a research assistant/pilot studies engineer to a biopharma R&D center, since I also did some CO-OP work on membrane filtration & ion exchange columns and obviously, the undergrad paper showed that I was 'capable' of digging into issues at hand, pushing my resume above other BS holders with similar backgrounds."

The above, along with the magna cum laude GPA, was needed to get a plant visit. Thus, even an entry level person is kinda specialized & experienced for a job of 0-2 years experience.

31   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 6:08am  

Rin says

The above, along with the magna cum laude GPA, was needed to get a plant visit. Thus, even an entry level person is kinda specialized & experienced for a job of 0-2 years experience.

So my advice ... take the Patent Agent exam a/o apply for a quant job at a hedge fund.

32   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 6:12am  

Rin says

So my advice ... take the Patent Agent exam a/o apply for a quant job at a hedge fund.

Ok, once more piece of advice, if you want to stay in the field ... join the Navy Nuclear program or apply for work in a Saudi field operation firm, like SABIC, and you can normally get twice your US salary.

33   tatupu70   2013 Nov 13, 8:06am  

New Renter says

how many of those jobs can only be performed by a chemical engineer? Would a chemist or physicist do?

How about a mechanical engineer?

Sure-- mechanical engineers could probably apply. But then I should also find the number of mechanical engineer jobs that chemicals could apply for to be fair.

New Renter says

Just how hard are you looking? Are you visiting college campuses, trade shows or just putting a "help wanted inquire within" sign in the front lobby?

How flexible are you in your hiring criteria?

How much are you willing to pay?

Hey--I'm not trying to prove that there is a shortage. I'm just telling you my experience is that good chemical engineers have no trouble finding jobs right now. We pay well and use many avenues to find engineers--and we eventually get someone. But, I guarantee you that we don't get 100 applicants for each ad.

34   Rin   2013 Nov 13, 10:43am  

tatupu70 says

Hey--I'm not trying to prove that there is a shortage. I'm just telling you my experience is that good chemical engineers have no trouble finding jobs right now.

Again, it's not as simple as that. Are you in management or do you actually work in the field, itself?

Realize this, I have a degree in that field, with honors (and publication), and I've known at least three classes worth of graduates from my school and others.

Chemical engineering is specialized as well as compartmentalized. So a good chemical engineer, who knows about spray dryers or biomass conversion processes, typically won't find work outside of either food (General Mills, Krafts) or biopharma (Smith-Kline or Eli Lilly) sectors. When I used to be a member of AIChE, every one of those process engineering job ads would generate 100s of responses. My company even made the mistake of advertising there and they had to have someone shift through a thousand resumes for a simple bioseparations dept.

And yes, eventually, ppl would leave for careers in business/management, medical school, finance, or IT, when they realize that chemical engineering careers leave them pigeonholed and unable to move laterally into other fields. In fact, chemical engineers at Proctor & Gamble or Unilever are famous for laterally moving into marketing and sales positions from production support and engineering. I remember one company, just outside of NYC, where all the bright stars were taking the ferry into Manhattan for their MBAs at NYU at night. The idea was that they were leaving tech for management.

I'd moved from biotech into IT. Then working on boundary condition triggers in IT, I'd transitioned into hedge fund work. If I didn't choose those mobile careers, I may have been laid off and then, been underemployed, as I wouldn't have enough *petrochemicals* on my resume to move into an energy company. At the same time, I'm not flexible enough to move to Saudi Arabia to get in on a petrochemical support contract.

35   Rin   2013 Nov 14, 3:40am  

New Renter, Thomas... anyone want to add to this thread?

36   tatupu70   2013 Nov 14, 6:02am  

Rin says

Are you in management or do you actually work in the field, itself?

I'm in operations management so I'd call that in the field--at the plant every day. Worked at various levels of engineering positions prior to that.

Rin says

Realize this, I have a degree in that field, with honors (and publication), and I've known at least three classes worth of graduates from my school and others.

Not sure what that proves... As someone who graduated a top 5 engineering school myself, color me unimpressed.

Rin says

Chemical engineering is specialized as well as compartmentalized

Only if you let yourself become compartmentalized. If you spend 7 years plus post doc doing only research on atomization studies of a particular formulation and you can't tell a ball valve from a butterfly valve, then yes, your job possibilities are somewhat limited.

Rin says

When I used to be a member of AIChE, every one of those process engineering job ads would generate 100s of responses

Are you basing your posts on what things were like in the past? I'm talking about the situation now--not 10 or 20 years ago.

Rin says

I'd moved from biotech into IT. Then working on boundary condition triggers in IT, I'd transitioned into hedge fund work. If I didn't choose those mobile careers, I may have been laid off and then, been underemployed, as I wouldn't have enough *petrochemicals* on my resume to move into an energy company. At the same time, I'm not flexible enough to move to Saudi Arabia to get in on a petrochemical support contract.

Sounds like you made a good career move for your situation then. But--advising people not to get a chemical engineering degree because of lack of job opportunity now is just plain wrong.

37   Rin   2013 Nov 14, 7:00am  

tatupu70 says

As someone who graduated a top 5 engineering school myself, color me unimpressed.

I think you know that this isn't a phallus contest (GPA/Class Rank/Pub record) but more of the notion that if someone is allegedly bright but wants out of the field, how would you expect to find candidates, from outside of the SABICs or SASOLs of the world , to fit the experience base [ 10-15 years ] you require?

tatupu70 says

and you can't tell a ball valve from a butterfly valve, then yes, your job possibilities are somewhat limited.

How they're used in biopharma, like micro or ultrafiltration unit ops with residue/LDL studies, is significantly different from petrochemicals. Thus, a person from my former firm [ despite all the academic accolades, yes, some had better grades than me ] is not place-able in your sector without spending a year or two abroad, in some large chemical operational facility.

tatupu70 says

Sounds like you made a good career move for your situation then. But--advising people not to get a chemical engineering degree because of lack of job opportunity now is just plain wrong.

Yes, because one, they won't have the necessary experience base, outside of doing let's say the Navy Nuclear program but then, they won't be available for you until they hit their early 40s, if they want the full benefits of the military.

38   MisdemeanorRebel   2013 Nov 14, 7:53am  

If our training sucks, how come everybody and their mother sends their kids to US colleges - including the non-top-5% schools, and many state schools that US News and World Report considers "Meh" for STEM?

39   B.A.C.A.H.   2013 Nov 14, 7:56am  

to get that student visa, then the h1, then the green card, then that anchor grandchild.

40   Rin   2013 Nov 14, 8:44am  

On a more positive note, none of my friends have a blog about their experiences but here's one from someone who'd at least started in the Navy Nuclear program.

http://www.squidoo.com/u-s-navy-nukes

If I were to recommend chemical engineering as a major to someone, it would be so that he'd be academically prepped to be in the Navy Nuclear program.

The program provides not only training but also experience.

Comments 1 - 40 of 64       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions