Chief Scientific Adviser post abolished

The decision by the Irish government to effectively remove the post of Chief Scientific Adviser (CSA) brings to an end some months of speculation about the post. However, it may not be the end of the story.

The Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation announced the abolition of the stand-alone post last Friday, saying that the role would be absorbed into that of the Director General of Science Foundation Ireland.

Dr. Stephen Sullivan, an Irish scientist working in the US and Chief Scientific Officer at the Irish Stem Cell Foundation told Communicate Science that the government was making two mistakes at once here: "The first mistake is removing a whole office charged with making sure decision makers in Government understand Science, its use, and what it needs to be competitive, of societal benefit, and, in the present climate, good value for money for the taxpayer and the country", said Sullivan. "The second mistake is making a civil servant responsible for formulating how we spend taxpayers money, now responsible for assessing his own decisions. This is quite simply a very poor management structure and is in fact a huge and obvious conflict of interest".

Prof. Patrick Cunningham, former CSA

The CSA is tasked to provide advice on scientific issues to government; to input into the development of the government's Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation; and to input into the work of the Advisory Science Council. Prof. Patrick Cunningham was appointed to the role of CSA on January 1st 2007 and his contract expired in August of this year.

One of Cunningham's major successes had been to help attract the Euroscience Open Forum to Dublin this year. He also contributed to the debate over such topics as GM crops and stem-cell research.

In a recent interview with the Irish Times, Cunningham told Dick Ahlstrom that contact with the current government had become less frequent but that “both governments are firm in their belief that Ireland needs to advance as a technological society”.

This latest change means that Prof. Mark Ferguson will take on the role of CSA in addition to his existing role as head of Science Foundation Ireland. A cost-effective, money-saving move, the government might argue? Stephen Sullivan disputes this notion:

"What does this say about Ireland's commitment to Science?" asked Sullivan, "What does it do for the morale of an already beleaguered Science community. In 2009, we closed the independent council for bioethics, we don't have a Minister of Science. While this might constitute a short term saving to a bureaucrat in the Dail, it weakens Irish Science and makes the country less attractive to invest in".

Coincidentally, I enjoyed reading a piece by Senator John Crown (a consultant oncologist) in last weekend's Sunday Independent. In it, Crown referred to the recent jailing of six Italian scientists for making "falsely reassuring" comments before the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake. What the article was really about, however, was the problems of scientific ignorance when it comes to public policy.

CSA Patrick Cunningham at the launch of ESOF2012

From Galileo to creationists, eugenics to vaccines, Crown outlined just some of the pitfalls a scientifically illiterate society may fall into. "How do we inoculate ourselves against the potentially dire societal consequences of widespread scientific ignorance?" asked Crown. "A first step is to acknowledge that science is not just for egg-heads in white coats. An understanding of science is a fundamental requirement of living."

There are a host of things which combine to create a scientifically literate society: a broad, universal curriculum at primary and secondary level; a world-class third level scientific community; a place for science within the public sphere, in art, on TV; a thriving science-led economy; etc. A key factor in all of this is the presence of an individual who can champion science at the highest level. In the absence of a designated government minister for science, the CSA was that person. Not even the government can deny that downgrading that post - notwithstanding the good work of Prof. Ferguson at SFI - is a retrograde step.

"The Office of the Chief Science Adviser is a pivotal office of any Government that understands the societal and economic benefits of Science", concluded Sullivan. "If political short term interests are always prioritized, it is not surprising that a good long term strategy for Science cannot be developed."

You can listen to Stephen Sullivan speak about this issue on RTE Radio's Morning Ireland here.

Update (12th November 2012): You can read my piece on this subject in the Cork Independent here. This article was quoted by Forbes here.

Cutbacks in Science Subjects at Second Level

Some Irish secondary schools are being forced to stop teaching chemistry and physics because of cutbacks to staffing levels. However, those subjects are easy targets because we don't do enough to promote the study of science in general.

According to an ASTI survey published today (conducted by Millward Brown):

• 47% of schools surveyed (151 took part in the research) had dropped one or more subjects at Leaving Cert level since 2009.

• Of those schools which dropped subjects, 23% dropped Accounting, another 23% dropped Economics.

• 21% of schools have stopped teaching Physics at Senior Cycle level.

• 15% have stopped teaching Applied Maths.

• 11% have stopped teaching Chemistry.

• 32% of schools report significant levels of overcrowding in Biology classes at Leaving Cert level.

• 48% of schools say they will drop one or more subjects at Junior Cycle in 2012.

• 64% say they will drop one or more subjects at Senior Cycle.

• The top three subjects to be dropped? Accounting, Chemistry, Physics.

At a time when we are trying to promote the study of science at 2nd and 3rd level, funding cuts are making it more likely that students will attend a school where they will not be able to study all of the sciences. While Biology remains available to most students (although increasingly in overcrowded classrooms and labs), it is only because of its relative popularity when compared to Phyisics and Chemistry.

According to figures released by the State Examinations Commission, 30,349 students took Biology Leaving Cert exams (at either level) in 2011. This compares to 7677 for Chemistry and 6516 for Physics.

While cutbacks in funding are undoubtedly part of the equation, the popularity of these subjects is also relevant. If 30,000+ students were studying chemistry and physics they might not have been dropped as readily. We need to do more to make science in general an appealing subject choice at 2nd level and certainly, cutting availability of the subject is not the way to go.

The survey doesn't go into it, but it would be interesting to see the gender breakdown. Are chemistry and physics being dropped across the board or are they more likely to be dropped in girls-only schools? It would be interesting to find out.

Has your school dropped science subjects? Let us know by adding a comment below

GM Potato set to be planted in Ireland

A major new EU study is set to examine the effects of growing GM, blight-resistant potato plants on biodiversity and the environment in agricultural ecosystems. It will also see the first GM crops being grown in Ireland since the late 1990's.

In a statement issued at the end of February, Teagasc (the Irish agricultural development agency) announced that they are to seek a license to carry out field trials of GM potatoes as part of the AMIGA consortium - a group including representatives of research bodies from 15 EU countries.

Late Blight, caused by the fungal-like organism Phytophthora infestans, decimated the Irish potato crop  in the 1840s leading to the Great Famine. Since then, it has remained a problem for Irish farmers, requiring chemical fungicides to be used to maintain Irish potato yields. GM potatoes have the potential to protect the potato plant from Late Blight attack without the necessity for large amounts of fungicide to be applied.

The potato variety Desiree was transformed withe the Rpi-vnt1.1 gene which confers broad spectrum resistance to Phytophthora infestans. That gene, along with its own promoter and terminator regions were taken from the wild potato species Solanum venturii and inserted into the cultivated potato using Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation.

While there are indications that public concern over GM crops has declined in the UK, the news that field experiments will be carried out in Ireland for the first time since the late 1990s has drawn some criticism here.

In a statement released last week, Irish Organic Farmers and Growers Association (IOFGA), called the experiments planned for Teagasc's Oakpark headquarters a waste of taxpayers money. "In light of the fact that Teagasc has lodged an application with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) for a licence to grow GM potatoes at its headquarters in Oakpark, IOFGA are demanding that Teagasc be held accountable for their decision to waste taxpayers money on this project."

File Photo: Minister Ruairi Quinn at an Anti-GM event last year

Grace Maher, Development Officer with IOFGA said that considering growing GM in Ireland is "economic suicide" and that the move would put at risk an export market worth 9.1 billion: "Ireland has an excellent reputation internationally as a clean green island that is also a GM free region, and we need to build on this reputation not destroy it”.

The statement ends by accusing Teagasc of pedalling an "unwanted technology":
"In this austere economic climate we need to end wasteful public spending immediately and enforce accountability on those who continue to do so."

Unfortunately, it seems the lobby group for the organic industry, is jumping the gun a bit here.

The funding comes directly from the EU's FP7 research programme - a €50 billion fund specifically designated for research and technological development. There is no question of further money coming from Irish taxpayers.

No matter where the money comes from, there is also a wider issue. Teagasc is Ireland's agriculture and food development agency. It is that organisation's role to carry out research leading to a better understanding of agriculture and new agronomic techniques. To accuse such a body of "wasting" money by doing the very thing is was set up to do, is ridiculous. Any arguments for or against GM crops need to be based on firm scientific evidence and that does not simple fall out of the sky.

The field tests to be carried out at Oakpark will look at the impact of GM plants on the surrounding ecosystem and John Spink, Head of Crops Research at Teagasc was keen to point out that the research is "not about testing the commercial viability of GM potatoes".

"The GM study is about gauging the environmental impact of growing GM potatoes in Ireland and monitoring how the pathogen, which causes blight, and the ecosystem reacts to GM varieties in the field over several seasons.”

Mindful of the controversy surrounding trials of GM sugar beet in Ireland in the late 1990s by Monsanto, these new experiments will use a potato developed at Wageningen University in the Netherlands and there will be no biotech or GM company involved. The sugar beet trials ended with a number of the sites being destroyed by a group styling itself the Gaelic Earth Liberation Front.

According to documents submitted to the EPA as part of the licence application, the field experiments are designed to measure the impact of GM potato cultivation on bacterial, fungal, nematode and earthworm diversity in the soil compared to a conventional system; to identify positive or negative impacts of GM potato on integrated pest management systems; and to use the project as a tool for education in order to engage and discuss the issues surrounding GM with stakeholders and the public.

As Teagasc researcher Dr. Ewen Mullins put it: “It is not enough to simply look at the benefits without also considering the potential costs. We need to investigate whether there are long term impacts associated with this specific GM crop and critically we need to gauge how the late blight disease itself responds. This is not just a question being asked in Ireland. The same issues are arising across Europe.”

Speaking to the Irish Examiner, Dr. Mullins remarked: "People are asking about the merits of GM potatoes.At Teagasc, we have a remit to inform people. We haven’t had GM field trials here since the late 1990s. The goal is to look at all of the environmental impacts, and to fill the vacuum that exists currently in terms of impartial knowledge."

An edited version of this article appears on the Guardian's Notes and Theories blog. You can read it here.

Irish Research Priorities

Today sees the launch by the Government of its Research Prioritisation Plan.

The plan aims to target the majority of the Government's core €500m budget for scientific research on 14 specific areas of greatest opportunity.

To be prioritised, the area had to represent a global market in which Irish-based companies could compete. Ireland must have strengths in related areas already and have the capability of conducting public R&D to exploit the area. Also, a national or global challenge must exist which Ireland needs to respond to.

The 14 priority areas of focus are:

Future Networks & Communications
Data Analytics Management, Security & Privacy   
Digital Platforms, Content & Applications
Connected Health & Independent Living
Medical Devices
Diagnostics
Therapeutics - synthesis formulation, processing and drug delivery
Food for Health
Sustainable Food Production and Processing
Marine Renewable Energy
Smart Grids & Smart Cities
Manufacturing Competitiveness
Processing Technologies and Novel Materials
Innovation in Services and Business Processes

Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Mr Richard Bruton, T.D.said at the launch “In recent years we have built up a very substantial base of world-class scientific research taking place in Ireland. The challenge now is to ensure that this activity is translated into commercial outcomes and sustainable businesses and sustainable jobs. With determined implementation of the recommendations of this report we can make sure that this happens”.

As an example in my own field, one of the priority research areas is "Sustainable Food Production and Processing". The report concludes that "global demand for food is projected to increase by 70 per cent over the next 40 years" and that Ireland is ideally placed to exploit such a demand.

"Alongside the need to increase food production is the challenge of doing so in a manner that does not impact on greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, biodiversity or fish stocks. The focus of this priority area is on sustainable, competitive and efficient agri- & marine food production and processing."

"Growth in global population and changing diets in emerging countries are projected to bring about a 70 per cent increase in food demand to feed 9 billion people by 2050. The greatest challenge faced by agriculture is to meet development and sustainability goals, while increasing production. Over the coming decades, there will be increased global competition for land use. This is the ‘food, energy and environment trilemma’, where increased demand for food and energy combine, pressure on land conversion is increased, leading to further climate change, which in turn may affect productivity and availability of land."

Are there areas missing that you would have liked to see included? Let us know by adding a comment below.

You can read the report in full here (pdf).

In search of the White Coat Vote

Is there such a thing as the science vote? We've heard of the green vote, the pink vote and so on, but do political parties take any notice of the White Coat Vote?

A recent survey of UK scientists by the science journal Nature, has shown that an overwhelming number of scientists surveyed think that the Liberal Democrats (31%) and Labour (33%) would give scientific research the best chance of thriving in the UK. Just 10% thought the Conservative Party would provide such a boost.

The survey of 262 scientists, the majority (64%) of whom worked in academia, also asked which party was most likely to use science or scientific advice to formulate their policies. The Lib Dem's were the clear winner on this point with 36% of scientists opting for them, 24% saying Labour and again, just 10% saying Conservative.

A massive 36% of respondents asserted that none of the main contenders for the PM job, Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have any grasp of science.

And, with spending cuts high on the agenda, 71% of scientists polled thought the Conservatives most likely to cut science funding. Just 18% suggested Labour and 2% suggested the Lib Dem's. Given the reality of the economic situation in the UK and elsewhere, it seems odd that there was no "all of the above" option for this particular question.

The full results of the poll are available here.

Some citizen-scientists felt so let down by conventional parties that Michael Brooks and Sumit Paul-Choudhury founded The Science Party in April of this year and Brooks himself will contend the parliamentary election in the constituency of Bosworth.

Brooks has made clear who's seat he is aiming for - that of the Conservative David Tredinnick. According to The Science Party, Tredinnick has  little grasp of science and claimed more than £700 on MP's expenses for astrology software and training.

Tredinnick has also recently stood by a comment he made recently that those who rubbish facets of eastern medicine (including homeopathy and astrology) are being racist.

“David Tredinnick is the thick end of the wedge, but there are plenty of MPs who dismiss scientific results,” Brooks says. “When you are making decisions about what kind of healthcare our country can offer its people, that is potentially disastrous.”

Brooks is a writer and broadcaster who is a consultant with the well-known science magazine New Scientist.

In June of 2009, it emerged that Tredinnick had sought to claim expenses for his attendance at a seminar on how to "honour the female and also the male essence and the importance of each". The course was designed to teach those attending about "polarity and neutrality" and the "deep passions of our intimate relationships".
An official in the Commons fees office wrote to Mr Tredinnick to explain that "costs relating to Intimate Relationships courses do not fall within the remit of this allowance" and the claim was turned down.

***Update Friday 7th May***

With the results now becoming clearer, it seems that the scientists' choice for government (if the Nature poll is to believed), the Liberal Democrats, will not make anything like the gains which Nigel Clegg's popularity throughout the campaign suggested. The Science Party also performed badly, if the result from Bosworth (see below, via The Guardian) are anything to go by. So much for the White Coat Vote!

Our Woman in Brussels

When was the last time you heard some really good news coming form the EU?

 
It seems, despite the EU being very good at extolling its own virtues, some media outlets and indeed the man or woman on the street love to focus on the European Project's mistakes.
But I'm not here to convince you one way or another on Europe and thankfully all that Lisbon business is now behind us.