IT Spending in Life Sciences
dano1992 writes "From Cnet: Computers replace petri dishes in biological labs. "The life sciences field is poised to spend billions on IT due to a need to manage an explosion in biosciences data, and a desire on the part of drug companies to streamline drug development." But the folk who'll catch the best part of the wave are those who can work with clusters, databases and storage on a massive scale."
Are the drug companies evil this week or not?
The goatse guy for president. Win one for the gaper!
will go to those who ask their databases clever questions. Getting the answers takes skill but is not at the same level.
More massive than the largest MySQL cluster in the world?
Leave it to CNet to revive Bill Joy's spurious fear of gray goo taking over the world. Get over it, Bill. To paraphrase Stephen Jay Gould, It's here, it's bacteria, get used to it!
That isn't very realistic. Data collection is still the major driving force in life science discovery. Good IT infrastructure enables large screens, but only in conjuction with robotics, microfluidics, sweat, and a lot of disposable plastic, including petri dishes.
Modeling biological systems is a difficult task. As Hiroaki Kitano points out, "[in biological systems] large numbers of functionally diverse, and frequently multifunctional, sets of elements interact selectively and nonlinearly to produce coherant rather than complex behaviours". There are still a huge number of elements and relationships to discover.
First entomology, then virology, and finally bioinformatics systems. Bugs follow me wherever I go.
While these programs are very helpful, they often contain shortcuts that reduce compute time. More compute crunch essentially means that these shortcuts can be removed and deeper/wider/more accurate analysis results. Which is good.
That said, more raw crunch and capacity brings in other issues such as capacity, I/O, network, concurrence, version control, security, recovery, UPS, climate and so on and so forth. The new iron, in other words, needs looking after. So some of the new hardware is there simply to look after the other hardware, if you get my drift.
Remember, there is more to drug discovery than meets the eye. Living systems are extremely complex. Drugs or hypotheses that look great in silico do not always pass muster in vitro never mind the real world. Moreover, FDA approval still relies on squirting compounds into cells, rats, humans etc. Until the FDA permits in silico proof of efficacy, toxicity, LD50 etc, we will need to maintain "traditional" avenues for experimentation.
It is good stuff, though and I for one welcome the investment in new compute capacity. I am keen however that no-one is seduced by the headlines; a lot of hard work has to be done in the lab to corroborate the evidence uncovered by the computers. In my experience the data is academically interesting but is only the beginning in terms of delivering an effective therapy to the patient.
Not knocking it - merely a reality check!
I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
A lot of the molecular biology software is open source. Much of it is unlicenced. Alot of the software available is bereft of software licences. Some has weird licencing conditions, and can be difficult to obtain for non commercial purposes. Many molecular biologists have a gap in their computer literacy. I think that there's definately a market for a knoppix style cd that includes a large suite of molecular biology tools, database software (probably postgresql) and good documentation, so that the poor molecular biologists who've been suffering from using windows all these years can return to a real scientific computing environment. There are many good analysis tools available for unix, but few good presentation tools. A nice genome drawing package that outputs [encapsulated] postscript, as well as documentation explaining what these weird file formats are for would be really good. The combination of a self documenting self configuring linux distribution with built in clustering support would be very well received if the scientists could be eased into changing their computing platforms.
"...we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that." B.Spears 2003
I know of a technician opening in this exact area, the pay is low by san jose standards but then so it the cost of living in new mexico: 60-80K$/year for someone with LARGE linux cluster sys admin, and bio-tech experience. Preferably a US citizen who did a pHD level work in molecular dyamics or biological structure modeling and is now burned out on the paper chase and grant writing and now wants a cozy technician job in a scenic part of northern new mexico in a very large government lab. Needs to be able to do scientific programming, not get upset when asked to use fortran, and have initiative in self training to meet new tasks. Main task would be as needed cluster sys admin and research writing and maintianing protein structure analayis code. c e m s @ NO SPAM.lanl.gov
Disclaimer: I work there.
--jdp Maintainer of VisEmacs