Corante

About this Author
DBL%20Hendrix%20small.png College chemistry, 1983

Derek Lowe The 2002 Model

Dbl%20new%20portrait%20B%26W.png After 10 years of blogging. . .

Derek Lowe, an Arkansan by birth, got his BA from Hendrix College and his PhD in organic chemistry from Duke before spending time in Germany on a Humboldt Fellowship on his post-doc. He's worked for several major pharmaceutical companies since 1989 on drug discovery projects against schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, diabetes, osteoporosis and other diseases. To contact Derek email him directly: derekb.lowe@gmail.com Twitter: Dereklowe

Chemistry and Drug Data: Drugbank
Emolecules
ChemSpider
Chempedia Lab
Synthetic Pages
Organic Chemistry Portal
PubChem
Not Voodoo
DailyMed
Druglib
Clinicaltrials.gov

Chemistry and Pharma Blogs:
Org Prep Daily
The Haystack
Kilomentor
A New Merck, Reviewed
Liberal Arts Chemistry
Electron Pusher
All Things Metathesis
C&E News Blogs
Chemiotics II
Chemical Space
Noel O'Blog
In Vivo Blog
Terra Sigilatta
BBSRC/Douglas Kell
ChemBark
Realizations in Biostatistics
Chemjobber
Pharmalot
ChemSpider Blog
Pharmagossip
Med-Chemist
Organic Chem - Education & Industry
Pharma Strategy Blog
No Name No Slogan
Practical Fragments
SimBioSys
The Curious Wavefunction
Natural Product Man
Fragment Literature
Chemistry World Blog
Synthetic Nature
Chemistry Blog
Synthesizing Ideas
Business|Bytes|Genes|Molecules
Eye on FDA
Chemical Forums
Depth-First
Symyx Blog
Sceptical Chymist
Lamentations on Chemistry
Computational Organic Chemistry
Mining Drugs
Henry Rzepa


Science Blogs and News:
Bad Science
The Loom
Uncertain Principles
Fierce Biotech
Blogs for Industry
Omics! Omics!
Young Female Scientist
Notional Slurry
Nobel Intent
SciTech Daily
Science Blog
FuturePundit
Aetiology
Gene Expression (I)
Gene Expression (II)
Sciencebase
Pharyngula
Adventures in Ethics and Science
Transterrestrial Musings
Slashdot Science
Cosmic Variance
Biology News Net


Medical Blogs
DB's Medical Rants
Science-Based Medicine
GruntDoc
Respectful Insolence
Diabetes Mine


Economics and Business
Marginal Revolution
The Volokh Conspiracy
Knowledge Problem


Politics / Current Events
Virginia Postrel
Instapundit
Belmont Club
Mickey Kaus


Belles Lettres
Uncouth Reflections
Arts and Letters Daily
In the Pipeline: Don't miss Derek Lowe's excellent commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry in general at In the Pipeline

In the Pipeline

« India's Research Culture | Main | Albany Molecular Cuts - In the US, Anyway »

May 26, 2010

"Better Educated" in China?

Email This Entry

Posted by Derek

The Boston Globe has an interview with James Foster, the CEO of Charles River Labs, about their acquisition of WuXi. It's an overview of the whole outsourcing/consolidation story in the industry, which will be familiar to readers here. But an e-mail pointed me to one particular quote:

“For some period of time, there’ll be a wage benefit to using Chinese labor,’’ Foster said. “The labor is plentiful, cheaper, and better educated than in the States. It pains me to say so, but it’s true.’’

I assume that it doesn't pain him so much to say that the labor is plentiful and cheaper - rather, it's the "better educated" part. And that pains me, too, to be honest. Is it true? I'm sure that opinions are going to vary widely on that question - I've sent an e-mail to the people at Charles River asking if Foster's willing to go into more detail.

Update: I've heard back from them; through a spokesperson, Foster declines to comment further, citing the demands on his time during the WuXi merger. Good thing the Globe was able to talk to him, I guess!

Comments (68) + TrackBacks (0) | Category: Business and Markets


COMMENTS

1. Mark on May 26, 2010 8:31 AM writes...

Better education for the price maybe?

Mark

Permalink to Comment

2. Ed on May 26, 2010 8:32 AM writes...

Maybe he meant it in the Stalinist sense - "Quantity has a quality all its own"

Permalink to Comment

3. fungus on May 26, 2010 8:34 AM writes...

More obedient?

Permalink to Comment

4. darwin on May 26, 2010 8:41 AM writes...

If better educated means mass printing of degrees available for the right price, then yes, better educated.

Permalink to Comment

5. HelicalZz on May 26, 2010 8:42 AM writes...

It could well be. How do you want to define 'educated'? Viewed from the right angle, I see that this post has a lot of synergy with the previous one on India's culture of reverence.

If educated means creative, innovative, and broadly skilled, then perhaps China is not as educated as the US. But, if the intent is to be educated for the task at hand, a more focused vocational training, then the statement may well ring true. I don't honestly know if that is correct, but there are likely some culture biases embedded in just asking the question.

Zz

Permalink to Comment

6. expharma on May 26, 2010 8:59 AM writes...

just take a look at where these people were educated.
http://www.wuxiapptec.com/com_mngmnt.html

Permalink to Comment

7. expharma on May 26, 2010 9:04 AM writes...

just take a look at where these people were educated.
http://www.wuxiapptec.com/com_mngmnt.html

Permalink to Comment

8. CroppyBoy on May 26, 2010 9:05 AM writes...

The question to ask is how well able is Mr Foster to assess the educational abilities of the staff at WuXi. Only a fraction will be english speaking and therfore able to be assessed directly, and then only in informal ways. There is probably some incentive on the part of WuXi to overstate the capabilities of their employees.

Permalink to Comment

9. Hap on May 26, 2010 9:06 AM writes...

If you take the top 0.1% of any group, it ought to look pretty good - since there are so many Chinese people, and probably a lot of chemists, and you get a significant portion of the top ones, they might very well be better educated then the people hired in the US (since US chemists are probably drawn from a more representative slice of their corresponding population). Also, the lack of more lucrative opportunities means that the top 0.1% of chemists in China might be better than the top 0.1% in the US, let alone the fraction of US chemists actually hired.

Of course, the rank-and-file of Chinese chemists may not be better than the US rank-and-file, and at the rate companies are going, that'll be all they'll have. Good luck with that.

Permalink to Comment

10. CroppyBoy on May 26, 2010 9:07 AM writes...

The question to ask is how well able is Mr Foster to assess the educational abilities of the staff at WuXi. Only a fraction will be english speaking and therfore able to be assessed directly, and then only in informal ways. There is probably some incentive on the part of WuXi to overstate the capabilities of their employees.

Permalink to Comment

11. RandChemist on May 26, 2010 9:21 AM writes...

It's a fairly strong statement to say the least.

To me, since there is a good amount unknown about the Chinese system, how do you begin to assess it? By publications? Patents? Number of Ph.D.'s? To me those metrics only tell part of the story. Especially since the US and China have remarkably different cultures.

I've run across some phenomenal Chinese chemists. I've also worked with some obedient hacks. It's a small sample size though, and only my own.

It takes all kinds and there are all kinds.

Permalink to Comment

12. anchor on May 26, 2010 9:39 AM writes...

In my years of experiences in pharmaceutical industry, I had in the past interacted with many friends of various nationalities. If anything, I have learnt this. The people from China are very hard working, strict disciplinarian and regimental in nature. They can hunker down and get the job done (can do several columns, prep TLC etc. in a single day that some of us can only envy). They are almost robotic. My interaction with people from India suggests to me that they can be very innovative but are lazy and lack discipline. As for my American colleagues they are more like Indians with some lackadaisical attitude as well. Any success will require all the measures discussed herein.

Permalink to Comment

13. wei on May 26, 2010 9:46 AM writes...

i think Chinese education has been doing terrible in physical education, communication education and psychological education. There has been no emphasis on intriguing the interest of students and asking the question: what do you want to do in the future?

I am not blaming this. Resources are much more scarce per capita in china than US. Education is tied to exams, and exams will decide how much resource you will get for the future.

as for "creative, innovative, and broadly skilled", I think the system just does not reward these abilities enough and we have little chance to demonstrate them. When there is a chance, things can go beyond your imagination. For example, adding melamine to milk to increase the nitrogen and fool the government QC tests

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal

Permalink to Comment

14. CMCguy on May 26, 2010 9:48 AM writes...

Perhaps Foster is speaking to relative decline in Math and Science education in the US verses rest of the world that has occurred over the last few decades. I have no knowledge of what the average Chinese student is taught in these areas however have observed in North America spotty emphasis and teaching that seems to be fairly systematic in barely providing the basics. Although exceptions in teachers and schools/programs exist, thankfully to support those who do wish to pursue more advanced aspects, I view general deficiencies are present in a culture that proclaims to value science & math however appears to provide greater rewards and incentives to other occupations.

Permalink to Comment

15. MedChem on May 26, 2010 10:02 AM writes...

Well, as much as Americans would hate to believe. In physical sciences (chemistry, physics, and math), generally speaking your average Chinese student is much better educated than his American counterpart, from grade school all the way up to colleage. I'd go as far as to say that the depth of learning in the Chinese system is so far superior to the American system that these two are nowhere near being on the same level.

But, before you let your blood boil, there's a big but here. The advantage quickly vanishes as graduate school starts. The learning curve is so steep in American graduate schools (I can only speak for Chemsitry) that the Chinese advantage disappears after the 1st year of a good US chemistry PhD program.

And also, as someone else has pointed out, the Chinese education system over values physical sciences and does a terrible job at all other aspects of learning.

Permalink to Comment

16. billyziege on May 26, 2010 10:18 AM writes...

During my attempt to pursue theoretical high energy physics, a large portion of my graduate year came from the same university in China. Compared to my contemporaries, most of these students had been introduced to more physics and more mathematics and tended to perform better on tests. Having also pursued mathematics, I find that American's do not tend to have a very deep or broad exposure to this field and are socially discouraged from deepening and broadening themselves therein. Furthermore, most American students focus on what is required for their major and then take the "easy" electives to fill out their liberal arts and sciences education. I personally see fault with such thinking, and this thinking was reflected in my contempories' performances. However, this being said, the Chinese' good performance may have been confounded by their tendency to work together on examinations where we were expected to do our own work. Despite this issue, I'd still say that they had had a more serious pre-graduate experience compared to us Americans.

On the other hand, the Americans who stick with science seemed to be happier on average. A number of the Chinese students I talked with felt as if they had been forced into pursuing physics by their government. The American's main complaint was lack of knowledge. The Chinese governmental pressure, I believe, may partially manifest as a more dogmatic approach to science. However, I have also met a number of creative Chinese scientists since then who love what they do, so maybe these observations pertain only to that small group of Chinese students.

Permalink to Comment

17. Edward on May 26, 2010 10:26 AM writes...

In the narrow topic of outsourcing to China in the pharmaceutical industry, "plentiful" and "cheaper" definitely describe what's available. But concerning the individuals doing the work there that used to be done by individuals in the United States, they are definitely less educated and less knowledgeable and less creative. You pay less, but you get less.

Permalink to Comment

18. john on May 26, 2010 10:53 AM writes...

I had this thought. Maybe the definition of education, in the context of a modern, knowledge driven economy, is one that should be debated at the highest levels of policy maker. Thus new generations would better prepared for the new economy. Essentially graduate educations, along with the way MDs are being educated, has not changed in a long time. Maybe all these academic innovators should spend some time innovating in the class room as part of their jobs.

Permalink to Comment

19. Hap on May 26, 2010 11:04 AM writes...

#17: Do those advantages also exist wrt Europe? I was under the impression that European (German, particularly) high school and (general) undergrad was significantly more advanced than US schools, and yet I thought that their jobs were being outsourced as well. There, if European education were better, it would have to be a cost (and labor flexibility) advantage causing the outsourcing rather than an education difference.

Permalink to Comment

20. anam on May 26, 2010 11:11 AM writes...

YET ANOTHER JUSTIFICATION PROPAGANDA.

This guy has decided to outsource labour to china, for the reasons of it being cheap there. Plentiful and 'better educated' are all the SPIN he is trying to put on the real story, in the first sentence.

It is always easier to justify to the public (not that, unlike in China or India, he has to fear the Govt or pitchfork/stone waving ex-employees in the USA) and simply looks more polished if he claims that he is not outsourcing to the cheap, but availing the services of a bunch of undiscovered geniuses.

It is like India's outsourcing industry, usually employing students from tier III or unranked colleges there, discovering that IITs of India have a good name in the USA, mostly thanks to the diaspora. There were only 5 a few years back. Thanks to some lobbying efforts and Govt support, the number has increased to 15 in five years and is stated to be 30 in the next 5, and renamed many other colleges to sound similar - NIT, IIIT, CIIIT, etc. This has increased to the level that every student out of high school is almost assured of an Engineering/IT admission in India these days. Makes it very easy to claim 'all our staff hold a bachelor degree in electronics or computer science'.

Permalink to Comment

21. silicon scientist on May 26, 2010 11:17 AM writes...

What Mr. Foster is relating is the new public perception, and it can be traced to the bad research behind "The Gathering Storm." That report has been giving American science (and scientists) a bad name for years while simultaneously hiding the fact that there's a glut of scientific talent in this country.

It's about time that industry, Congress, and the public is made aware that it's been fed a lot of hooey on this issue. Whatever good the "falling behind in science" meme did for increased federal spending is far outweighed by the diminished respect for American science its created.

Permalink to Comment

22. silicon scientist on May 26, 2010 11:24 AM writes...

A counter-point to the meme...

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411562_Salzman_Science.pdf

Permalink to Comment

23. Todd on May 26, 2010 11:41 AM writes...

I'm with comment #13, but I think the reasons for the difference in the quality of BS-level talent has to do with the way scientific education is structured in both countries. In China, scientific education is much more likely to be tied to either medical schools or the "post universities", which are the equivalent of American polytechnic institutes. On the flip side, in the US, it's not that difficult to go to school, major in a technical subject, take the bare minimum of courses and spend the rest of your time taking fluff classes. (We've all seen the Biology/History double majors.) Realistically, I would say the worst Chinese student is better than the worse American student to the point that the lower-tier American students pull the average down.

Also referring back to comment 13, I think that's what makes the huge difference in the quality of American post-grad students. I know that in China (as well as a number of countries), it's not that hard to move up the food chain into grad school, while in the US, a lot of the chaff gets knocked out.

Simply put, I think for a Charles River, who probably uses up a lot of BS-level scientists in their day to day work, they probably do get a better deal in China. For other companies, I'm not so sure. I think it's all a matter of figuring out the right mix.

Permalink to Comment

24. xfz on May 26, 2010 11:42 AM writes...

I generally agree with #14, #17 and #18’s observations, although I should remind that Chinese scientists who working in US pharmaceutical industry are also very creative and innovative.

I believe it is an unavoidable trend that China will have more and more “better educated” scientists in the future. About 25 years ago, only 2.5% lucky ones can access higher education, that includes university, community college or two-year program. Today, that number is over 60%. China has 1.3 billion people, so you can figure out how big China’s talent pool will be.

Permalink to Comment

25. xfz on May 26, 2010 11:52 AM writes...

I generally agree with Aanchor,Medchem & Billyziege's observations......(The rest of my comment is unchanged).

Permalink to Comment

26. toxchick on May 26, 2010 12:04 PM writes...

I suspect that he is not referring to the management level, but rather the technical staff. I would guess that a technical job at WuXi (dosing rats, prepping test articles) would attract BS or MS levels in China. At many CROs in the US, a BS is the top degree, except for a few Ph.D. Study Directors. Many of the technical staff have GEDs, high school degrees or sometimes Associates. I am not commenting on quality of work or intelligence. I have certainly known more than my share of useless Ph.D.s, and some really great people with Associates degrees.

Permalink to Comment

27. partial agonist on May 26, 2010 12:05 PM writes...

The link provided by #6 is revealing:

6 of 8 executives were trained in North America (75%)

and

17 of 23 managers (74%)

Maybe its the worker bees who are Chinese and received better educations in their homelands, but it isn't their bosses, their boss's bosses, or their boss's boss's bosses!

Permalink to Comment

28. expharma on May 26, 2010 12:20 PM writes...

wonder if we can justify the 'green house gases' produced with the shipment of compounds as a cost of buisness?

Permalink to Comment

29. Chinese American Scientist Business Woman on May 26, 2010 12:22 PM writes...

Well, I'm Chinese---grew up in Smalltown China and went to college in Beijing (followed by PhD in the US, and then jobs in science and business). I spent 22 years in China and 11 in the US---so can probably speak to this subject better than most (I hope). Here are my two cents:

First of all, there is no perfect education system, not even in the US. Having said that, I do believe the one in China has its advantages and disadvantages over the one in the US. Specifically, I think the Chinese system is better in the following ways:

1. Students are (in general) more hardworking. This is probably a result of the culture and history combined with today's reality. Chinese people have always valued education greatly, perhaps above everything else. If one asked any random chinese parent (educated or not, urban or rural), what's THE most important thing they wanted for their kids, they'd probably say "I want them to do well in school". People believe (and it's largely true anywhere in the world): if you do better in school, you will be better off later in life. It's been that way in China for thousands of years---even in the Confucious days government officials were selected through a rigorous exam system, and the only way to get ahead was by studying harder. In today's China the competition is only more fierce by many magnitudes. For example, the only way of getting into a decent college is by scoring high and beating millions of others on a standardized national test (well I'll touch on that point later). The acceptance rate of my alma mater (one of the best universities in China) was WAY less than ANY college in the US. I personally spent most of my highschool days preparing for this single test, not the prom. I constantly dreamed about going to my dream school, not being voted the prom queen (not that we had a prom anyway). In order to get accepted by a PhD program in the US, I had to compete with the American students. I studied the GRE day in and day out for 4 straight months (not a single day off), and ended up scoring 99th percentile in every category---I had hardly even practised reading/speaking English at all before that. I'm not trying to glorify myself, but just to illustrate a point: Chinese students (in general) work harder, because they have to. It's so engrained in them (us!), and they go onto become a more hardworking workforce. And that in and of itself, is worth a price premim, not discount, to any international employer in my opinion.

2. Chinese students are more "outward looking" than American ones. By that, I mean they are more aware of and have more exposure to what's around them internationally and work hard to adapt to that. How many Americans (except 2nd-generation immigrants) even try to study another language? Yet all Chinese students know too well that English is critical and spend a lot of time studying it. How many of you took WORLD history and geography classes in middle school?---we have 3 years of them, all mandatory too. In college we routinely used foreign textbooks---not just American ones, but also European ones---basically whatever the professors believed were the best. Even culturally, chinese students like to watch foreign movies, wear foreign brands, eat foreign foods. While excessive gravatation towards foreign stuff can also be dangerous, there IS something to be said about looking outward and preparing yourself for the WORLD, not just the country.

3. Chinese students build a more solid knowledge ground. I can say with confidence that an average Chinese graduate from middle school probably knows more about science and literature than an average american graduate from high school. In Chinese schools, classes are more rigorously (and rigidly--which is a downside) structured, such that you have to learn more stuff better and faster. For example, my high school classes included calculus and quantum physics, Confucious and Shakespear. Did yours?

There are many other points I can think of but these three are the most relevant in my view. Of course one disadvantage is that the system is so rigorous and rigid that there is less room (or time!) left for creativity, which is what I think the American students are much better at. Although one may make the argument that creativity outweighs everything else, I'd say that creativity built on a solid foundation is the best---which both countries need to get better at. Additionally, historically China hs significantly undervalued humanity majors such as law and economy---look no further than all the members in the current Chinese administration who are all engineers, in contrast to the likes of Clinton and Obama.

Now the Chinese government have realized these problems and are working hard to address them. Meanwhile I also hope that the American government, and more importantly the american people, can realize and appreciate that other countries/cultures can (and do) do better than us in some respects, and the only way to stay "the best" is by humbling ourselves and learning from them.

Permalink to Comment

30. processchemist on May 26, 2010 12:41 PM writes...

@17
We're not in a knowledge driven economy, but in a financial economy backed by a little of techological hype and some legends (chinese world class technologists that cost 1/5 of their western counterparts).

Permalink to Comment

31. John on May 26, 2010 12:51 PM writes...

"It is not enough to teach man a specialty. Through it he may become a kind of useful machine but not a harmoniously developed personality. It is essential that the student acquire an understanding of and a lively feeling for values. He must acquire a vivid sense of the beautiful and of the morally good. Otherwise he- with his specialized knowledge- more closely resembles a well-trained dog than a harmoniously developed person. He must learn to understand the motives of human beings, their illusions and their sufferings in order to acquire a proper relationship to individual fellow-men and the community.....
.....Overemphasis on the competitive system and premature specialization on the ground of immediate usefulness kill the spirit on which all cultural life depends, specialized knowledge included."
Albert Einstein
Education for independent thought, from the New York Times oct 5 1952.
some content skipped over

Permalink to Comment

32. aman on May 26, 2010 1:06 PM writes...

mostly agree with the previous poster (30/31), but disagree on the following points: I am not a born american, btw. but went to gradschool in US>

>>How many Americans (except 2nd-generation immigrants) ever try to study another language well?

Well, they do get the opportunity to learn several languages in school (french, spanish etc). And they do it out of interest, not necessity, unlike chinese students who have to learn English if they want to get out for studies etc.

>>It's so engrained in them (us!), and they go onto become a more hardworking workforce.

Yes, and while no one is questioning their hard-working nature, this preparation for exams becomes all-consuming. All they care about would be doing well in an exam, and the 'hard work' can just be rote preparation. If you do the past 10 years question papers well, you will probably do well in the exam tomorrow as well. Btw this is something that I have seen Chinese grad students in the US routinely do. Question is, can they approach an exam just based on the concepts they have learned and applied? Right, not all exams are designed in that manner, and even for the supposed competitive exams like GRA and GMAT, rote preparation by doing past questions will help

Now, while your english writing skills are certainly beyond reproach (I am leaving out accents, we all have our own), The majority of chinese students whom I have seen do not have any advanced skills in that area. Maybe they did not have time left over to work hard in that too, given that for anyone, time is indeed finite.


As for preparing themselves for the world, well, Americans of an earlier generation used to travel more etc, but face it, IN reality chinese students are NOT preparing for the world, they are just preparing for the USA. (how many chinese students know anything much about INdia? Africa? European countries *without* good universities? etc etc. As for Aemrican students, Granted, the typical American attitude, one of some barely disguised we-don't-need-you-and-I-don't-care- will not help them much longer, but as things stand, they do not need to be aware of much outside unless they have business interests in that part of the 'outside'.

Now, i agree that American system has a lot to improve if it wants to survive. First, the school culture has to change. The current culture encourages disdain against anyone who does not fit into the jock/sportstar/rockstar mould, and that will be the real undoing of science here in USA. Kids with some promise( and largely a fraction of immigrant kids) will not keep up the effort if they find that it only leads to them getting beaten up. Second thing is that the disastrous effects of teenage concerns taking centerstage - dating and prom being more a concern than SAT and college - will be another.

So, while stressing that doing well in some exams by rote preparation is not indicative of anything, I completely agree with the poster that creativity on solid foundation is the ticket. Even the most creative, genius kid will be no good if he has no knowledge of fundamentals and has to rely on his fingers to add, or her skills are mostly in the area of cutting up craft paper (unless, of course, that is the career chosen).
All that said, still, the periodic public revelations by some business leader about the discovery of geniuses hidden away in a cellar in a country which just happens to be ultra cheap is nothing other than hogwash.


Permalink to Comment

33. Anonymous on May 26, 2010 1:11 PM writes...

@28

"For example, my high school classes included calculus and quantum physics, Confucious and Shakespear. Did yours?"

I'm not american and, yes, something like this (your classes for sure didn't include ancient greek, latin, non chinese philosophy). I entered at the university with about 35 other students in my class. At the end, only 8 obtained the degree. Currently, in my social context, an average academic researcher is paid beetween 800 and 1000 euros/month (less than an automotive industry worker). So, in an aspect for sure your educational system works far better than some western ones: in *motivating* the students with a real promise of improvement in wages and lifestyle for the succesful ones.
By the way, the few contacts I had (Shui-Hu-Chuan, Hónglóu Mèng, Lieh Tzu) inspired in me a great admiration for the classic chinese culture. But I have many perplexities about the currently dominant one.

Permalink to Comment

34. biotech investment paradigm on May 26, 2010 1:30 PM writes...

Per one of the "Management Teams" Bios: Ph.D. in Natural Product and Analytical Chemistry from Columbia University...I was unaware of Columbia's Analytical Chemistry Program.

Just my two cents, but I think graduate education in the US has been stagnant if not devolving, especially as institutions "retool" requirements. For instance, a while back, the requirement for translating a German paper was taken away. I'm not complaining, as I think that requirement was a bit out-dated, but introducing something in its place (management course, conference attendance, other language requirement) would have certainly added value.

Permalink to Comment

35. pc on May 26, 2010 1:50 PM writes...

To #28:

Amen!

Permalink to Comment

36. NoCHinaChemistryForMe on May 26, 2010 3:01 PM writes...

I had a research project with chemists in both the US and China. They are now ALL in the.... USA. Why, you ask? The China based 'chemists' had to not only be be told what to do, but HOW to do it, WHERE to buy common intermediates, and WHY being late / making the incorrect compound / not making anything / was not acceptable. You get what you pay for.

Permalink to Comment

37. anon the II on May 26, 2010 3:03 PM writes...

Let's face it guys, Chemistry is the new Art History.

Permalink to Comment

38. Margaret Thatcher on May 26, 2010 3:34 PM writes...

Let's face it, medicinal chemistry is the new coal mining industry. Why pay top dollar when you can destroy communities, encourage the breakdown of society and nobody cares if foreign workers get paid a low hourly rate to do what you used to do for a lot more dollars.

Permalink to Comment

39. dearieme on May 26, 2010 3:51 PM writes...

"foreign workers get paid a low hourly rate to do what you used to do for a lot more dollars": why do you think the world owes you a living?

Permalink to Comment

40. Vader on May 26, 2010 4:37 PM writes...

Ditto Mark. They're better educated for the price.

Permalink to Comment

41. cynical1 on May 26, 2010 5:42 PM writes...

One question: If Chinese scientists are better educated, harder working, bilingual and highly abundant; why have they not demonstrated their superiority in the scientific literature? One would expect that the scientific literature should be flooded with innovative top-notch science from these Chinese groups, whether academic, institutional or industrial.

Permalink to Comment

42. xfz on May 26, 2010 6:37 PM writes...

To Cynical1,

It will happen, but it takes time.

About 15 years ago, there are very few papers published by Chinese scholars in ACS journals. Now there are quite a few in every issue.

Permalink to Comment

43. provocateur on May 26, 2010 7:46 PM writes...

#35, #37, #40
These ppl are the loudest part of the American public that is to blame for the state of the USA.

"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"
You still think there is a doubt that China is a force to reckon with????!

Permalink to Comment

44. maybe on May 26, 2010 8:55 PM writes...

42 - China is indeed a force, but certainly not the only force. I will NOT quietly slink away while we (US / Europe) still clearly prevail in creativity, discovery, medical and healthcare advances, human / animal rights, IP protection, regulatory compliance, and enforcement of law. The business risk of working in / with China must be well understood to balance against the short term (and possibly short sighted) price decisions.

Permalink to Comment

45. Mike on May 26, 2010 9:09 PM writes...

Being part of of a med chem group that last year laid off all our non-PhD chemists in order to have their work done in China, we have found that the quality of talent is much much lower. But we're saving lots of money!

Permalink to Comment

46. Mike on May 26, 2010 9:09 PM writes...

Being part of of a med chem group that last year laid off all our non-PhD chemists in order to have their work done in China, we have found that the quality of talent is much much lower. But we're saving lots of money!

Permalink to Comment

47. provocateur on May 26, 2010 9:12 PM writes...

#43
I agree with you.And I agree that means China is not the only force
One of the biggest strengths of the USA that helped it to prevail against the USSR is the moral as well as the scientific and intellectual capital this country had to counter it..
And yet here we owe/depend on China our day-to-day existence and yet we are debating whether its a force to reckon with???
Fear is a great motivator..we feared the USSR and it helped us overcome it.We are still making fun of China and still are not convinced that its a real threat??!

Permalink to Comment

48. WasteCan on May 26, 2010 9:13 PM writes...

Better educated? Must... not... laugh... :D (opps)

Hmmmm... I wonder how many north american PhD chemists are doing their post docs in China...

Permalink to Comment

49. provocateur on May 26, 2010 9:25 PM writes...

#44
We kind of over hype ourselves as being great in terms of quality?Alas, medicinal chemistry is still a bit of a gamble..See the n umber of asian postdocs in Nicolau/Corey or any synthesis papers??Where do those post docs go???Where will they go in the future?They are prepared and willing to work hard?Are we?!
We seem to have slowly withered away our lead and they seem to be catching up??We seem to talk too much and do little lately!?

Permalink to Comment

50. provocateur on May 26, 2010 9:32 PM writes...

#47
IN s/w India I know of Americans in India doing research.Lots of Europeans. Wipe that smirk of your face.Have you heard of Biocon, India??It was started by an Indian women Kiran Mazumdar Shaw..Wake up guyzzz!The time for arrogant ignorance is over..

Permalink to Comment

51. akila on May 26, 2010 9:41 PM writes...

#47
I wonder how many north american PhD chemists are doing their post docs in the USA?!

Permalink to Comment

52. Erik on May 26, 2010 10:41 PM writes...

I don't know how different my field ($engineeringdiscipline) is from chem, but I am cracking up about the last few doom and gloom comments. I don't know any US folk who felt profoundly disadvantaged in their graduate work compared to whatever foreign national you choose to name, and in the professional world I don't see outrageous productivity coming from China et al. They certainly seem to excel in quantity, but most of my collaborators have 100% given up on (eg) attending conference talks from researchers at Chinese etc institutions. Nothing has yet been gained by attending these talks (sample size in the dozens).

I work with a number of intelligent, productive hardworking Chinese and Indian natives, but they are all products of US graduate education. None of them claim to feel cheated.

Permalink to Comment

53. chemist on May 27, 2010 12:44 AM writes...

The CEO's comments are pretty fare not because he just bought a Chinese company. He speaks of his mind w/ sincerety. Better? Depends on what it means. From the science point of view, mnay Chinese students are probably better educated. They have a better understanding of their work. They normally have a good scientific background. They also practiced very hard during their graduate school. When I was in graduate, I used to work from 9:00 am to 12:00 pm. And most of the chinese students do like this. On the other hand, you won't see that many US students in the lab during the weekend or at night. When you walk by a lab, you will always see some Chinese studnets. The reason why they work so hard is because they wanted to be educated better. They are some disadvantages for them too. They are not as open as their US counterparts. They might not be as knowledgeable as the US coworkers as of the general things. But is there is a project that needs to be finished in certain frame of time period, I would certainly choose a Chinese company. As a CRO organization, the most important thing is to get the job done in a efficient way without sacrificing the quality. It doesn't matter how well you can talk. At the end of the day, you will be judged how much you have accomplished. This is the reason why he mentioned that the chinese students are better educated. I totally agree with him.

Permalink to Comment

54. Design Monkey on May 27, 2010 6:44 AM writes...

11. anchor on May 26, 2010 9:39 AM writes...
My interaction with people from India suggests to me that they can be very innovative but are lazy and lack discipline.

========

Somehow also, cases, when I've encountered outright fake, fabricated syn chem articles, tend to be, umm, indian. Virtual innovation in the head without bothering with boring lab experiments, probably.

Permalink to Comment

55. provocvateur on May 27, 2010 6:51 AM writes...

#53
I agree, but thats not fair to characterize it as dominant(not that you said it).Usually it has been done in inconsequential journals to get up in the ladder with not-so-important work.
In important journals like JACS and others I guess the percentage will be the same as the western counterparts.

Permalink to Comment

56. RandDChemist on May 27, 2010 7:19 AM writes...

#28 I greatly appreciate your perspective on things. Very helpful.

"For example, my high school classes included calculus and quantum physics, Confucious and Shakespear. Did yours?"

Well, except for the quantum physics, yes, my high school education did. Why? I busted it in order to prep for college. I even took a psych class that was taught like a college course. I also took four years of German in high school.

This preparation served me well. Very well. But I was not the norm. Sure, there were others like me, but not as many as there should have been.

I college I took as many chemistry courses as I could that fit with where I wanted to go. The basics were not enough for me. There were also some tough electives too.

I agree with the fact that before college non-US students have a better education. Once you get to college, things start to even out. Grad school seems to be stronger here. Are things changing? Yes. Much if comes down to access. That is where the US fails. Thomas Jefferson made the University of Virgina free since he knew that an educated populous was the key. For any higher education, we need better access for people. If you are not wealthy or poor, then it's tough to pay for college.

Teaching to tests (No President Left Behind)is not the answer. Standardized tests are caught be prepared for so as beat them. Applying the learning is the true challenge for students and teachers

Things are undoubtedly changing and China will be an integral part of the future. How exactly this all plays out is not as simple as anyone thinks.

Outsourcing is not the fix. Keeping everything in one country is not either. There are different strengths and weaknesses for all involved. Some are real, and some are perceived.

In the long run, people are happier when they choose what to pursue. Then they will be more productive.

Permalink to Comment

57. Hap on May 27, 2010 8:31 AM writes...

#38: That's fine, but I wouldn't be expecting too many more chemists to come where the last batch came from. Why spend ten years in school to do what failing out of high school could have equipped one to do (be unemployed)?

Expecting people to spend lots of time and effort on education when it gets them no benefit (and in some cases hurts them financially and makes them less employable) seems like the kind of magical thinking in which financial and pharma management seems to excel. Lots of fixed costs plus significant job uncertainty plus not so great pay adds up to what exactly?

Permalink to Comment

58. fred on May 27, 2010 11:33 AM writes...

In view of AMRI making cuts-- next article in your blog-- a company with a deserved reputation as being the cream of the crop for CRO's--during a period when the recession *theoretically* is ending, I'm finding it really, really difficult to push electrons in such a manner that we arrive at a situation where chemistry in the developed world is BETTER 5 years from now than it is now.

Time for B-school, I guess.....

Outsourcing, in the long term, could -- and SHOULD-- be determined to be an unproductive fad, like combo chem. But, no one ever went broke underestimating the stupidity of Enterprise CEO's. It could take 10 for them to arrive at this conclusion.

Permalink to Comment

59. cynical on May 27, 2010 8:53 PM writes...

I don't think China is a dominant force yet, but it will be. Students are going to go where the jobs are. Why would the best and brightest burn 10 of the best years of their life to accomplish the same result by quitting High School (#56). The bottom line is they won't. China is cranking out scientists, and employing them. American Universities will be using non Americans for their slave labor. These American trained scientists will go back to their own countries, futher continuing this cycle. I think it is only a matter of time.

Permalink to Comment

60. David on May 27, 2010 10:46 PM writes...

Better than CRL scientists? Maybe. I've actually used both WuXi and CRL in my project management days. They both stink.

I now use small shops in the Midwest and Canada.

Permalink to Comment

61. China Bonding on May 27, 2010 11:41 PM writes...

Well, having lived here for a year, one thing for certain, the students coming out of the Chinese education system certainly speak better Chinese than anyone else.

Permalink to Comment

62. MedChem on May 28, 2010 9:32 AM writes...

Anyone who sneers at the "lack" of creativity of the Chinese need only look back in history. What's holdin gthe Chinese back is their political system, which is changing albeit very slowly. Economically China's lawless wild-wild-west way of doing business will slowly change into an orderly captalistic economy. It may take another 100 years for this transformation. But it likely will occur. The Chinese are inherently incredibly entrepreneurial when the system is not holding them back.

On the other hand here in the west, the dumb, devoid-of-common-sense, purely academic wishful thinking of the liberal idiology is quickly sinking the great ship of America morally, socially and economically.

Permalink to Comment

63. provocateur on May 29, 2010 8:56 AM writes...

amen to #61.

Permalink to Comment

64. Hap on June 1, 2010 10:23 AM writes...

1) Maybe if conservatives could do math (yes, you can't cut taxes without cutting spending, and if people don't want to cut both, you can't do either), had actual principles and stuff (ones that perturb their actions, like talking about limited government without adding a whole bunch) and, like, read the Constitution (you know, like when you say your oath of office), you might have a point, but...you don't. Oh, and it would also help if merit in capitalism wasn't determined by what color you are, or how much money your parents had, or who your friends were, all systems conservatives tried to hold on to as determinants of economic and social status) but by what you can do. If you want people to trust your judgements on good and evil, not saying that black is white for the better part of a hundred years (and saying the world will end and authority will cease if everyone doesn't agree that black is white) might help. I'm not really worried about that happening, though.

2) China's been effective recently because its government has been able to quickly and remorselessly commit people and resources to its economic improvement. That probably isn't possible if people get to determine what they want to do, particularly if the social systems that might do so in the absence of massive government force aren't there or aren't effective. It's going to be hard to tell people that they are solely responsible for their success or failure while telling them that they aren't smart enough to choose their own government, and what comes from that combination might not be stable. Like everything else, it's an experiment that hasn't been done before. Having that many people, I hope it works out, but I don't think anyone knows that it actually will.

Permalink to Comment

65. GreedyCynicalSelfInterested on June 1, 2010 9:52 PM writes...

In 18 of the past 20 centuries, India and China accounted for about half of the world's GDP. The "Rise of China and India" is not so much a rise as a return to the normal state of affairs. Why is it astonishing that so many middle class jobs are being created there/eliminated here?

The post World War II credit expansion is coming to an end in the United states and other western welfare states. After the hyperinflationary collapse of the dollar/euro, the wage difference between the western welfare states and China and India should disappear. Jobs will return.

Permalink to Comment

66. anon on June 2, 2010 11:28 PM writes...

"In 18 of the past 20 centuries, India and China accounted for about half of the world's GDP."

Not a valid argument pre- vs post Industrial revolution.

"the wage difference between the western welfare states and China and India should disappear."

World natural resources are finite. China CAN NOT adopt a western lifestyle.

Permalink to Comment

67. Anonymous on June 6, 2010 9:06 PM writes...

"World natural resources are finite. China CAN NOT adopt a western lifestyle."

I concur. Only white people are entitled to a first world lifestyle.

Permalink to Comment

68. Chemist (empolyed!) on June 9, 2010 11:01 PM writes...

The CEO mispoke, what he meant to say was "at the wage we are willing to pay in China, we can get more educated workers than at the wage we'd be willing to pay scientits in the US". The guy doesn't know or care about how well educated the average chinese or american citizen is. The sad thing is that this CEO's observation must mean that there's alot of well educated underemployed Chinese sceintist willing to work for cheap.

Permalink to Comment

POST A COMMENT




Remember Me?



EMAIL THIS ENTRY TO A FRIEND

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):




RELATED ENTRIES
How Not to Do It: NMR Magnets
Allergan Escapes Valeant
Vytorin Actually Works
Fatalities at DuPont
The New York TImes on Drug Discovery
How Are Things at Princeton?
Phage-Derived Catalysts
Our Most Snorted-At Papers This Month. . .