A*STAR, John Hopkins Research Facility To Close

last SG · 2006-07-25T20:34:54+00:00

Basic rule of research: get your facts right. Maybe you ought to think about walking before you try running.

LazerLordz SG

SINGAPORE (Dow Jones)--A research collaboration between Johns Hopkins University, and Singapore's Agency for Science, Technology and Research or A*Star is likely to end soon, with the joint facility at Singapore's biomedical center, Biopolis, to close in a year, the Straits Times reported quoting researchers and officials.

The newspaper said four local students who were awarded doctorate scholarships to study at the university in Baltimore were also told last month the research division won't fund their studies.

An A*Star spokesman told the newspaper the decision was taken by the leadership of the U.S. university and the state funded agency to replace the current "operating model of collaboration" with a "new model of partnership" that is still being developed

However John Hopkins University had a different view.

A spokesman for the university said it had done its part to recruit faculty and graduate students under its agreement with A*Star. The university maintains that its Singapore partner has not kept up its end of the deal in meeting its "financial and educational obligations".

"Although Johns Hopkins University has attempted to be as collegial as is possible during this very difficult phase, the displacement of outstanding junior faculty recruited from throughout the world, and the intense disruption of graduate student education, cannot be underestimated or dismissed," the spokesman told the newspaper.

Johns Hopkins came to Singapore in 1998 to carry out research, education and patient care activities. It also set up a medical center here, designated as Johns Hopkins Singapore's clinical arm for patient care and clinical research, which is still expanding, the newspaper said.

Singapore is trying to attract investment in the biomedical sector in an effort to diversify its manufacturing sector from a bigger reliance on electronics.

http://framehosting.dowjonesnews.com/sample/samplestory.asp?StoryID=2006072202090011&Take=1

InnoHippo SG

no Guaranteed Risk-free Career Laughing

Gedanken SG

No big surprise there. I've heard that 3M and IBM got screwed on projects by a certain government body that spent ages rejecting said company's proposals and then going on to complete the projects once said companies pulled out (to the extent that they even had the gall to patent 3M's idea for themselves).

Also, a while back I had a chance to speak to a neurologist who was rated as one of the world's top three researchers in his field. He came to Singapore, apparently did not kiss a certain Dr Lee's ass to satisfaction, and ended up being accused by NUS of falsifying his data, all only after he had completed laying down the foundation for the research to be carried out by local doctors.

It seems the SG government has learnt well from mainland China. We'll wine you and dine you until we've gotten what we've wanted. After that, you can get f***ed.

blueheeler SG

I think that the article does not report many things critical to that pull-out. I got a feeling it’s partially got to do with S’pore’s love for bureaucracy that pissed off a world-class research lab. Sometimes, S’pore must learn that $$$ cannot buy everything.

LazerLordz SG

You think we have learnt? The insufferable arrogance and know-it-all attitude plus actual inability to back up words with results is always the deal-killer.

Gedanken SG

Lordz, whatever gave you the idea that they were interested in producing results? Why do that when you can con somebody else into doing it for you, and all you have to do is rip them off?

sgheartland SG

I think this issue is far more than bureaucracy.

The university maintains that its Singapore partner has not kept up its end of the deal in meeting its "financial and educational obligations".

This means that we did not honor an agreement if John Hopkins is right.

Let's stop criticizing the govt.

They are doing so much for Singapore that they are now going down the path of dishonorable acts. You lot are not appreciative...

Gedanken SG

If the government is openly cheating a world-renowned organisation like Johns Hopkins, what substance are you on that you fail to see how they can rob little old you blind? Laughing

will4 SG

I wonder later what will happned to the four students?

harrow SG

Being a vendor for JHS, I’m extremely sadden that things went this way… Hopefully, they will find a better and collaborator soon!

Gedanken SG

They're going to be really unappreciative of all that the government has done for them. Laughing

Gedanken SG

Good chance of that. After all of this, the bar's been set pretty damned low.

will4 SG

It is really sad cause study partially met this kind of thing. Neutral

lionnoisy SG

pl be a fair judge. Hear the stories from both sides before u air
your views here.

ASTAR's letter appear in 25.07.2006 tue ST.It hits back very hard into JH.

pl post links of ASTAR and JH's view here.

ndmmxiaomayi SG

Astar says one thing, John Hopskins says another. There's definitely some lies somewhere.

Gedanken SG

Sure, JH could be lying, but I’ll speak for myself because I’ve personally heard the neurologist, as well as people from 3M and IBM relating how they’ve been burned by the SG government on IP issues. From what I do know from these cases, Singapore’s just not ready to enter research partnerships because they’re too greedy and too busy tripping over their own egos.

LazerLordz SG

I'd take the words of JH much more than A*Star anyday, given their style of operations and all the stuff that they got involved in, with the hooha over scholar selection etc.

JH is an established institution, A*Star is a freshie. Something's gotta give.

Gedanken SG

I do like the "but we didn't get any brand names" bit in A*STAR's defence of their actions.

JH has a long-standing reputation with the American National Institute of Health. Now I don't know if any of you guys have ever dealt with the NIH, but I've worked on three NIH-funded projects out of Washington University in St Louis, and those guys don't screw about. We're talking about the big boys here and if you're going to get their funding, you'd jolly well not only have some seriously credible researchers behind you, but you'd damned well better have thought all the way through your research design.

But wait, here we have mighty A*STAR saying that it's still not good enough for them. Well, well, well - NIH obviously are a bunch of fools who hand out million-dollar wads like lollies. Laughing

A*STAR sounds like a four-year-old going, "Eeeee, mummy, I dun like Burger King - I want Mehdoner!".

What a crock. Bucks to your aunt's cherry that in a few years, after the dust has settled, A*STAR's going to come up with some great results based upon research started by JH, of course conveniently omitting JH's role altogether. Any takers?

macjoe SG

I think the real (tricky) issue is who owns the IP out of the research work - the researcher, JH and/or A*STAR.

Better to fully own the IP than share it among 3.

Gedanken SG

Now you're thinking like A*STAR. We'll tempt them with deals that are too good to be true, and once we've gotten the basic concepts from them, we'll make life difficult and drive them out, and then take all the goodies for ourselves.