Nobody quite knows what Homi Jahangir Bhabha had in mind when he hired biologist Obaid Siddiqi in 1962 at the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), the hub of India’s nuclear programme. Perhaps he wanted to create a more well-rounded ethos by bringing in biology in an environment of physics and math—a routine practice in good institutions today, but a rarity in India then.
Rockstar researchers everywhere get market-based salaries, but NCBS, bound by Indian pay scales, can’t pay such salaries. So, it has found ways to get around this sticky issue. In some cases, the parent universities pay the salaries, and NCBS provides research grant and infrastructure—for which there is enough money in India now, whereas the West is facing a crunch. Researchers here are raising handsome grants from various national and international bodies. Being part of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), a well-funded agency, allows NCBS to be ambitious.
(This story appears in the 02 March, 2012 issue of Forbes India. To visit our Archives, click here.)
Unlike Scienceforsociety, I don't mean to, in any way, compare the accomplishments of the scientists mentioned in this article with anyone else. But I am always a little saddened to hear platitudes like '""So, what is XYZ"'s approach? Assemble top quality people and allow them creative freedom, and the rest becomes easy.'" And ""whereas the feeling here was exactly the opposite. People said we need to grow, expand, experiment, and do things that no one else has done. People here were thinking ahead. What should any organization"'s motto be if not this? Is this really revolutionary? Scientists everywhere, but especially in India, have been clamoring for freedom from suffocating bureaucracy and shameless backstabbing politics. Regarding the statement, 'we are not doing it in the Singapore model' - pour in big money to get big names. Our intellectual environment and teams get the global collaborators, from Milan to Kyoto, Montana to Los Angeles'" says Vijayaraghavan. For instance, the cardiomyopathy programme here is led by Jim Spudich of Stanford. Similarly, some of the leading Japanese scientists from Kyoto University, including the famous stem cell technologist Kouichi Hasegawa, are now running labs at in Stem.'" Are these leading scientists working for free? They must get their salaries in their own universities plus other emoluments for traveling to and fro, money to do the collaborative research, manpower etc. Did the Singapore model not have an intellectual environment to attract big names? 'Another significant collaboration is with Ashok Venkitaraman, director of the MRC Cancer Cell Unit at the University of Cambridge, and one of the world's leading experts in chemical biology and therapeutics. India doesn'""t have this expertise. His lab at NCBS will develop a pipeline of therapeutics - look at molecules, from screening to synthesising, and then test out the possibilities in breast cancer in collaboration with the industry. Companies like Biocon, Aurigene and Jubilant Life Sciences are already hooked up. 1) Who says that India does not have any expertise in chemical biology or therapeutics? 2) What does drug discovery involve if not drug design, screening, synthesizing, testing etc? Certainly, many researchers in India (including these companies that have 'hooked up' have been working in these areas for a long time now. How effective they (and researchers worldwide) have been in anticancer drug discovery is another story. But then again, I will be looking forward to hearing about the strides that all these people will be making in these presumably virgin areas of research.
on May 6, 2012The biggest turnaround is to know that: "In some cases, the parent universities pay the salaries, and NCBS provides research grant and infrastructure for which there is enough money in India now, whereas the West is facing a crunch."
on Apr 3, 2012InStem or NCBS are doing good but no way comparable to the contribution made by Prof. Lalji Singh (CCMB, Lacones, CDFD) Prof. Samir Brahmachari (IGIB) or Prof. Partha Majumdar (NIBMG)in the country. See the contribution of these scientists and also the contribution by their team. NCBS had been enjoying too much of an autonomy but Prof. Lalji Singh (CCMB, Lacones, CDFD) Prof. Samir Brahmachari (IGIB) or Prof. Partha Majumdar (NIBMG) inspite of the beuracratic hurdles had been able to contribute to health science and also motivate great achievers like Dr. K.Thangaraj, Dr. G.R. Chandak, Dr. D. Bharadwaj, Dr. Mitali Mukherjee etc. Even the best in the world would be ashamed of the scientific contribution by Dr. K. Thangaraj or Prof. Lalji Singh.
on Mar 22, 2012@Scienceforsociety - Thank you for expressing your views. I think a story on NCBS in no way undermines the work of other people. They are not mutually exclusive, are they? The idea here was to write about an institution that is trying out new things which are the norm among good practitioners of science and innovation around the world. Since you've mentioned some individual scientists, let me answer them at my individual level. All of them are outstanding scientists and leaders and I have followed their work and written about them in the appropriate forums in recent past. Like Lalji Singh, K Thangaraj and their team's bold attempt to rewrite population history (I even remember the headline: All Indians have some north, south in them), or their pan Asian effort to understand human migration or mutations that make Indians prone to heart muslce disease, or Dr Brahmachari's various initiatives including the open source movement. Incidentally I was the first one to write about it in the biomed journal Cell, even before the project was officially launched. You will read more about these scientist's work in Forbes India now and in days to come.
on Mar 23, 2012awesome and inspiring story, i like the zeal and courage.i wanna do the same.
on Mar 7, 2012Very informative!
on Mar 7, 2012Fascinating story. This can serve as inspiration for many: be the change you want to see!
on Mar 2, 2012