- Email: [email protected]
Yes, we need PhD immunologists!
TREIMM-1171; No. of Pages 3
Scientific Life
Training the next generation
Yes, we need PhD immunologists! Gail A. Bishop Departments of Microbiology & Internal Medicine, Graduate Program in Immunology, The University of Iowa and the VA Medical Center, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
Constrained research funding prompts some to advocate training fewer PhDs. However, PhD immunologists are critically needed for future health challenges. Rather than discouraging promising young scientists from pursuing doctorates, we should ensure that such training is relevant to many different career possibilities to which PhD immunologists can make valuable contributions. The Issue – the future of graduate training in immunology Are we training too many PhDs in the biomedical sciences, including immunology? This question is the subject of oftenpassionate debate in recent years, particularly since completion of the highly-circulated NIH Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group Report in June 2012 [1]. This study presented data showing that the growth in PhDs in the biomedical sciences over the past 10–15 years has clearly outpaced the growth in tenure-track faculty positions in academia. These findings led some to advocate limiting or reducing the number of students offered doctoral training in these scientific areas (although the report itself did not advocate training fewer scientists). The situation has been greatly exacerbated by the inconsistent and stagnating levels of Federal funding for scientific research, including immunologic research, particularly as costs of performing such research have increased faster than overall inflation rates. As NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins testified in hearings on the fiscal year 2014 NIH budget request (held on 5/17/13), NIH lost 22% of its purchasing power between 2003 and 2012 from these combined trends. Thus, competition for research funding has reached the point where our national peer-review system can no longer consistently identify the best research proposals, particularly in the case of projects with less-predictable outcomes [2]; http:// arstechnica.com/science/2014/09/is-there-a-creativitydeficit-in-science/. The majority of researchers in academic and non-profit institutions, who depend upon Federal funding, spend inordinately many and often fruitless hours writing unfunded grant applications instead of pursuing important new discoveries [3]. Why would the immunology community want to encourage our most promising young people to enter such a career? My answer is that new discoveries in immunology, both basic and applied, are critical to addressing key public Corresponding author: Bishop, G.A. ([email protected]). Keywords: immunology; careers; training.. 1471-4906/ ß 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2015.03.003
health problems in the US and around the world. PhD training in immunology, if designed for both future societal needs and employment options, can teach key skills applicable to a much wider and more varied range of careers than working as a Federally-funded Principal Investigator at a University or Research Institute. Interestingly, in this regard I largely agree with the major points made in a recent report from the Future of Research Symposium (F1000), held to provide junior scientists with a forum to influence discussions about the future of biomedical research in the US [4]; see Box 1 for a summary of key relevant points from the report. Immunology and global health challenges The mammalian immune systems we have today were shaped by past evolutionary forces to protect us from one of the greatest threats to passing on our genes – infectious disease. The discovery of antibiotics and widespread effective immunization to pathogens such as polio, smallpox, and measles viruses, as well as bacterial toxins such as tetanus and diphtheria, created an assumption in the developed world that we had largely conquered infections. However, multiple factors are converging to once again bring infections to the fore as a major cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. As the global human population increases and we thus begin to live in environments previously uninhabited by humans, we encounter new microbes that evolved to co-exist with animal or insect hosts, but are pathogenic to us. As the world becomes more connected, such microbes can spread with increasing speed and range. The warming of the world’s climate also allows insect vectors of both plant and animal microbes to thrive in locations previously too cold for their survival. Our over-use of antibiotics in both humans and livestock has enhanced the emergence of drug-resistant strains of bacteria, contributing to an alarming rise in untreatable bacterial infections (http://www.cdc.gov/getsmart/antibiotic-use/antibioticresistance-faqs.html). Our future survival depends upon development of new responses to these challenges, including approaches to rapid design of effective and safe new vaccines. The past several decades have also seen an increase in allergic and autoimmune conditions such as asthma and food allergies [5]. The understanding of mechanisms of immune activation and tolerance developed by immunologists are crucial to designing more effective and durable treatments for these conditions, with fewer side-effects. Additionally, a key role is now appreciated for chronic inflammation of affected tissues in pathogenesis of disorders Trends in Immunology xx (2015) 1–3
1
TREIMM-1171; No. of Pages 3
Scientific Life Box 1. Recommendations emerging from the Future of Research Symposium The F1000 report emerged from a symposium planned by a group of Boston-area postdoctoral fellows, held on 2–3 October 2014. The focus was how junior scientists want to shape the culture and practice of science in the future, including responding to the challenges of constrained research budgets, changing models of evaluating and communicating science, and – of particular relevance to this commentary – changing needs for training and career development. Below are summarized the organizers’ conclusions relevant to the latter topic. (i) Junior scientists should have greater involvement and a greater voice in discussions and debates about reforms to the scientific enterprise, particularly those involving graduate and postdoctoral training. (ii) The goals of the postdoctoral fellowship should be more clearly and consistently defined, with explicit guidelines and a defined training period. (iii) There should be greater transparency on outcomes of training, with widespread and accurate collection of data on numbers and career paths of trainees. (iv) Training needs to lessen its focus on academia as a career goal. To achieve this, trainees need more and better information on non-academic career options, and more training in skills that can be applied to multiple career paths. Additionally, PIs and training programs need to be rewarded rather than penalized for preparing students and fellows to enter a diversity of posttraining careers, rather than just faculty positions at major research institutions. (v) The Federal government and other stakeholders should make an increased investment in funding mechanisms for trainees that provide support independent of PI research grants, and should make the quality of the training program – not just the number of dollars and publications of the PI – a greater factor in determining awarding of such funding.
once believed to be caused almost entirely by fat intake – atherosclerosis and type 2 diabetes. As the latter is approaching epidemic proportions in the US [6], the knowledge immunologists possess becomes increasingly important in addressing both prevention and treatment. As our population ages overall, the occurrence of cancer, a disease whose greatest incidence is in humans 65 years and older, will inevitably increase. Some of the most promising recent strides in cancer treatment involve harnessing the power of our immune systems to combat tumors [7], advances that required a detailed understanding of the mechanisms of both immune activation and restraint. The preceding examples are not exhaustive. The scientific knowledge and skills possessed by immunologists are crucial to meeting current and future health challenges. The senior and mid-career immunologists of today must be replaced by succeeding generations of new scientists with these skills and knowledge. But it is neither necessary nor desirable that all or most of these new immunologists be tenured academics. Professions that need immunologists It is now widely acknowledged that the majority of PhD immunologists trained today and in the foreseeable future will not replicate their doctoral mentors in becoming tenured faculty members, due to the shrinking numbers of such positions nationwide [1]. But the US and the world still needs such scientists, in a wide variety of career paths. I will summarize examples of different options here. 2
Trends in Immunology xxx xxxx, Vol. xxx, No. x
Although our Federal government has decreased its financial commitment to scientific research, the government itself has a continuing need for PhD immunologists, and has steadily employed 12% of all biomedical science PhDs over the past 40 years [8]. Agencies such as NIH, NSF, CDC, FDA, USDA, USAMRID, and others need us not only to lead and perform laboratory research in their internal programs, but also to serve as experts in administration and policy. Members of both houses of Congress rely heavily upon expert staff members for advice on the increasing number of policy issues for which an informed position requires strong scientific knowledge (e.g., immunization policies, response plans for epidemics, many epidemiologic and environmental factors that impact the immune response, etc.). Two recent public health crises highly relevant to the immune response – the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and the recent surge of new cases of measles in the US, exacerbated by the spread of misinformation about the safety of childhood vaccines, highlight the importance of better communication between immunologists and the public, and the need to more effectively convey our specialized knowledge in a clear and convincing manner. In this regard, the American Association of Immunologists began a new program several years ago to train young immunologists in effective advocacy and participation in relevant policy issues (http://www.aai.org/ Public_Affairs/PPFP/index.html). An increasing proportion of the next generation of young immunologists is entering positions in the pharmaceutical industry and biotechnology. Such opportunities span a wide range of settings, from very large, established companies to small entrepreneurial ‘startups’. Similarly, the roles immunologists can play in industry are highly varied, from bench scientist to project manager, administrator, sales and marketing – all the way to the ‘corner office’. Immunologists can also bring their expertise to the professions of law (impacting patents for biomedical inventions, public policy, etc.), venture capital (providing support for innovative new scientific discoveries) and others. Compared to academic positions, these options have the potential to allow immunologists to participate in larger teams of researchers, often pursuing translation of basic research into applications that directly address human and/or animal health issues. When immunologists ascend to leadership positions in industry, they also have the opportunity to shape the priorities of a large enterprise. In this setting, there can be great satisfaction in participating in the movement of important basic laboratory findings to implement these discoveries with new technologies and treatments. This is a growing category of employment opportunities for PhD scientists, expanding from 10% of positions in 1973 to almost 30% today [8]. Another area in which immunologists can make key contributions is in sharing our knowledge with the public and future generations as teachers, to create a betterinformed citizenry. As the director of an immunology graduate program for 15 years, I noticed that many of our applicants described being drawn to the subject by exposure to an inspirational teacher at their undergraduate institutions. Perhaps more importantly, the many students in those classes who did not become scientists
TREIMM-1171; No. of Pages 3
Scientific Life will still make much better decisions about issues impacting public health as a result of the efforts of these talented teachers. Immunologists can also be highly effective in the professions of science journalism, science communication in a variety of venues, and scientific editorial and publishing careers, reaching a far wider audience in this way than the majority of scholarly research publications. A number of non-profit science and disease-specific funding agencies include in their missions the fostering of public education as part of their efforts; here, too, the expertise of PhD immunologists can make valuable contributions. Finally, it should be emphasized that even in the academic setting of large research-intensive universities, medical schools, and research institutes, PhD immunologists can make valuable contributions in many more ways than the previous model of the tenured professor, building his/her research dynasty in a basic science department. Although the number of PhD medical school faculty in such departments has been almost unchanged over the past 30 years, the number of PhD faculty in clinical departments has more than doubled over the same period [8]. PhD immunologists can facilitate the formation of bridges between basic and clinical science so crucial to the current emphasis on translating scientific discoveries to therapeutic advances. Important discoveries of the future will also require much more work by multi-disciplinary teams of basic scientists and clinicians from a wide variety of training backgrounds. Institutions are now beginning a dialogue about how to perform successful ‘team science’, including how to better recognize and reward contributions to these group efforts. Examples include the course on the topic taught at Northwestern University (http://www.nucats.northwestern.edu/ education-career-development/seminars-courses-andevents/taking-responsibility-for-responsible-conduct-ofresearch/presentation-materials/RCR_2012_CLASS10. pdf), and a recent panel discussion at The University of Michigan (http://www.michr.umich.edu/education/ teamscience/print). Some of the challenges that traditional academic cultures must surmount to benefit from team science are thoughtfully discussed in a recent commentary [9]. Thus, I strongly argue that we should not stop – or markedly curtail - training PhD immunologists. We must continue to advocate vehemently for increased Federal support for scientific research and training. Over the past 15 years, the Asian region’s share of global R&D spending increased by 33%, while that of the US decreased by 22%, and the US proportion of the world’s scientific publications also decreased. Asian countries including Japan and South Korea now spend more on science as a % of GDP than does the US, as do a number of European Union countries (http://www.nih.gov/about/impact/ impact_global.pdf). There is also a strong need for more effective ways to distribute such funding to best support important future discoveries [1,3].
Trends in Immunology xxx xxxx, Vol. xxx, No. x
But we should not deliberately train markedly fewer new immunologists because we don’t think there is a need or positions for them. The skills taught in effective PhD programs, including critical thinking, building hypotheses and experimental plans to address important issues, the ability to communicate complex subjects clearly to a variety of audiences, and analyze data in an open-minded and thoughtful way, are crucial to many career options. The F1000 report stated that training programs do not teach skills applicable to non-academic careers, but I disagree. Well-designed graduate programs teach all of the skills listed above, and provide ample opportunities to learn writing and presentation skills, as well as providing venues for interacting with established scientists in a variety of careers. Thus, what is needed is for all training programs to emulate those that are effective in this regard, and for both trainers and trainees to commit to active involvement in the process. In acknowledgement of the growing importance of teaching graduate students about the entire spectrum of career options, NIH has funded to date 17 BEST programs, with the goal of developing career training strategies that can be adopted by institutions nationwide, to better prepare new PhDs in the biomedical sciences for a variety of careers (http://commonfund.nih. gov/workforce/index). We need to remain faithful to principles of rigor in training young immunologists to think critically, identify important problems, and use creativity built upon sound scientific principles to design innovative solutions to a wide variety of world problems. We also need to teach these principles in the context of skills relevant to tomorrow’s careers and needs. We hope that major funding agencies will partner with leaders in the scientific community in this effort – both present and future – helping to develop initiatives, guidelines, and crucial support that acknowledge the importance of training the future biomedical workforce. References 1 Tilghman, S., et al. (2012) Biomedical research workforce working group report. http://acd.od.nih.gov/biomedical_research_wgreport.pdf 2 Danthi, N. et al. (2014) Percentile ranking and citation impact of a large cohort of NHLBI-funded cardiovascular R01 grants. Circulation 114, 600–606 3 Alberts, B. et al. (2014) Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 5773–5777 4 McDowell, G.S. et al. (2014) Shaping the future of research: a perspective from junior scientists. F10000Res. 3, 291 5 Okada, H. et al. (2010) The ‘hygiene hypothesis’ for autoimmune and allergic diseases: an update. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 160, 1–9 6 Shu, C.J. et al. (2012) The immune system’s involvement in obesitydriven type 2 diabetes. Semin. Immunol. 24, 436–442 7 Couzin-Frankel, J. (2013) Cancer immunotherapy- Breakthrough of the year. Science 342, 1432–1433 8 Garrison, H.H. and Campbell, E. [2013 (updated 2014)] Education and employment of biological and medical scientists 2013. FASEB Office of Public Affairs http://www.faseb.org/Policy-and-Government-Affairs/ Data-Compilations/Education-and-Employment-of-Scientists.aspx 9 Pavlidis, I. et al. (2014) Together we stand. Nat. Phys. 10, 700–702
3
Scientific Life
Training the next generation
Yes, we need PhD immunologists! Gail A. Bishop Departments of Microbiology & Internal Medicine, Graduate Program in Immunology, The University of Iowa and the VA Medical Center, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
Constrained research funding prompts some to advocate training fewer PhDs. However, PhD immunologists are critically needed for future health challenges. Rather than discouraging promising young scientists from pursuing doctorates, we should ensure that such training is relevant to many different career possibilities to which PhD immunologists can make valuable contributions. The Issue – the future of graduate training in immunology Are we training too many PhDs in the biomedical sciences, including immunology? This question is the subject of oftenpassionate debate in recent years, particularly since completion of the highly-circulated NIH Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group Report in June 2012 [1]. This study presented data showing that the growth in PhDs in the biomedical sciences over the past 10–15 years has clearly outpaced the growth in tenure-track faculty positions in academia. These findings led some to advocate limiting or reducing the number of students offered doctoral training in these scientific areas (although the report itself did not advocate training fewer scientists). The situation has been greatly exacerbated by the inconsistent and stagnating levels of Federal funding for scientific research, including immunologic research, particularly as costs of performing such research have increased faster than overall inflation rates. As NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins testified in hearings on the fiscal year 2014 NIH budget request (held on 5/17/13), NIH lost 22% of its purchasing power between 2003 and 2012 from these combined trends. Thus, competition for research funding has reached the point where our national peer-review system can no longer consistently identify the best research proposals, particularly in the case of projects with less-predictable outcomes [2]; http:// arstechnica.com/science/2014/09/is-there-a-creativitydeficit-in-science/. The majority of researchers in academic and non-profit institutions, who depend upon Federal funding, spend inordinately many and often fruitless hours writing unfunded grant applications instead of pursuing important new discoveries [3]. Why would the immunology community want to encourage our most promising young people to enter such a career? My answer is that new discoveries in immunology, both basic and applied, are critical to addressing key public Corresponding author: Bishop, G.A. ([email protected]). Keywords: immunology; careers; training.. 1471-4906/ ß 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2015.03.003
health problems in the US and around the world. PhD training in immunology, if designed for both future societal needs and employment options, can teach key skills applicable to a much wider and more varied range of careers than working as a Federally-funded Principal Investigator at a University or Research Institute. Interestingly, in this regard I largely agree with the major points made in a recent report from the Future of Research Symposium (F1000), held to provide junior scientists with a forum to influence discussions about the future of biomedical research in the US [4]; see Box 1 for a summary of key relevant points from the report. Immunology and global health challenges The mammalian immune systems we have today were shaped by past evolutionary forces to protect us from one of the greatest threats to passing on our genes – infectious disease. The discovery of antibiotics and widespread effective immunization to pathogens such as polio, smallpox, and measles viruses, as well as bacterial toxins such as tetanus and diphtheria, created an assumption in the developed world that we had largely conquered infections. However, multiple factors are converging to once again bring infections to the fore as a major cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. As the global human population increases and we thus begin to live in environments previously uninhabited by humans, we encounter new microbes that evolved to co-exist with animal or insect hosts, but are pathogenic to us. As the world becomes more connected, such microbes can spread with increasing speed and range. The warming of the world’s climate also allows insect vectors of both plant and animal microbes to thrive in locations previously too cold for their survival. Our over-use of antibiotics in both humans and livestock has enhanced the emergence of drug-resistant strains of bacteria, contributing to an alarming rise in untreatable bacterial infections (http://www.cdc.gov/getsmart/antibiotic-use/antibioticresistance-faqs.html). Our future survival depends upon development of new responses to these challenges, including approaches to rapid design of effective and safe new vaccines. The past several decades have also seen an increase in allergic and autoimmune conditions such as asthma and food allergies [5]. The understanding of mechanisms of immune activation and tolerance developed by immunologists are crucial to designing more effective and durable treatments for these conditions, with fewer side-effects. Additionally, a key role is now appreciated for chronic inflammation of affected tissues in pathogenesis of disorders Trends in Immunology xx (2015) 1–3
1
TREIMM-1171; No. of Pages 3
Scientific Life Box 1. Recommendations emerging from the Future of Research Symposium The F1000 report emerged from a symposium planned by a group of Boston-area postdoctoral fellows, held on 2–3 October 2014. The focus was how junior scientists want to shape the culture and practice of science in the future, including responding to the challenges of constrained research budgets, changing models of evaluating and communicating science, and – of particular relevance to this commentary – changing needs for training and career development. Below are summarized the organizers’ conclusions relevant to the latter topic. (i) Junior scientists should have greater involvement and a greater voice in discussions and debates about reforms to the scientific enterprise, particularly those involving graduate and postdoctoral training. (ii) The goals of the postdoctoral fellowship should be more clearly and consistently defined, with explicit guidelines and a defined training period. (iii) There should be greater transparency on outcomes of training, with widespread and accurate collection of data on numbers and career paths of trainees. (iv) Training needs to lessen its focus on academia as a career goal. To achieve this, trainees need more and better information on non-academic career options, and more training in skills that can be applied to multiple career paths. Additionally, PIs and training programs need to be rewarded rather than penalized for preparing students and fellows to enter a diversity of posttraining careers, rather than just faculty positions at major research institutions. (v) The Federal government and other stakeholders should make an increased investment in funding mechanisms for trainees that provide support independent of PI research grants, and should make the quality of the training program – not just the number of dollars and publications of the PI – a greater factor in determining awarding of such funding.
once believed to be caused almost entirely by fat intake – atherosclerosis and type 2 diabetes. As the latter is approaching epidemic proportions in the US [6], the knowledge immunologists possess becomes increasingly important in addressing both prevention and treatment. As our population ages overall, the occurrence of cancer, a disease whose greatest incidence is in humans 65 years and older, will inevitably increase. Some of the most promising recent strides in cancer treatment involve harnessing the power of our immune systems to combat tumors [7], advances that required a detailed understanding of the mechanisms of both immune activation and restraint. The preceding examples are not exhaustive. The scientific knowledge and skills possessed by immunologists are crucial to meeting current and future health challenges. The senior and mid-career immunologists of today must be replaced by succeeding generations of new scientists with these skills and knowledge. But it is neither necessary nor desirable that all or most of these new immunologists be tenured academics. Professions that need immunologists It is now widely acknowledged that the majority of PhD immunologists trained today and in the foreseeable future will not replicate their doctoral mentors in becoming tenured faculty members, due to the shrinking numbers of such positions nationwide [1]. But the US and the world still needs such scientists, in a wide variety of career paths. I will summarize examples of different options here. 2
Trends in Immunology xxx xxxx, Vol. xxx, No. x
Although our Federal government has decreased its financial commitment to scientific research, the government itself has a continuing need for PhD immunologists, and has steadily employed 12% of all biomedical science PhDs over the past 40 years [8]. Agencies such as NIH, NSF, CDC, FDA, USDA, USAMRID, and others need us not only to lead and perform laboratory research in their internal programs, but also to serve as experts in administration and policy. Members of both houses of Congress rely heavily upon expert staff members for advice on the increasing number of policy issues for which an informed position requires strong scientific knowledge (e.g., immunization policies, response plans for epidemics, many epidemiologic and environmental factors that impact the immune response, etc.). Two recent public health crises highly relevant to the immune response – the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and the recent surge of new cases of measles in the US, exacerbated by the spread of misinformation about the safety of childhood vaccines, highlight the importance of better communication between immunologists and the public, and the need to more effectively convey our specialized knowledge in a clear and convincing manner. In this regard, the American Association of Immunologists began a new program several years ago to train young immunologists in effective advocacy and participation in relevant policy issues (http://www.aai.org/ Public_Affairs/PPFP/index.html). An increasing proportion of the next generation of young immunologists is entering positions in the pharmaceutical industry and biotechnology. Such opportunities span a wide range of settings, from very large, established companies to small entrepreneurial ‘startups’. Similarly, the roles immunologists can play in industry are highly varied, from bench scientist to project manager, administrator, sales and marketing – all the way to the ‘corner office’. Immunologists can also bring their expertise to the professions of law (impacting patents for biomedical inventions, public policy, etc.), venture capital (providing support for innovative new scientific discoveries) and others. Compared to academic positions, these options have the potential to allow immunologists to participate in larger teams of researchers, often pursuing translation of basic research into applications that directly address human and/or animal health issues. When immunologists ascend to leadership positions in industry, they also have the opportunity to shape the priorities of a large enterprise. In this setting, there can be great satisfaction in participating in the movement of important basic laboratory findings to implement these discoveries with new technologies and treatments. This is a growing category of employment opportunities for PhD scientists, expanding from 10% of positions in 1973 to almost 30% today [8]. Another area in which immunologists can make key contributions is in sharing our knowledge with the public and future generations as teachers, to create a betterinformed citizenry. As the director of an immunology graduate program for 15 years, I noticed that many of our applicants described being drawn to the subject by exposure to an inspirational teacher at their undergraduate institutions. Perhaps more importantly, the many students in those classes who did not become scientists
TREIMM-1171; No. of Pages 3
Scientific Life will still make much better decisions about issues impacting public health as a result of the efforts of these talented teachers. Immunologists can also be highly effective in the professions of science journalism, science communication in a variety of venues, and scientific editorial and publishing careers, reaching a far wider audience in this way than the majority of scholarly research publications. A number of non-profit science and disease-specific funding agencies include in their missions the fostering of public education as part of their efforts; here, too, the expertise of PhD immunologists can make valuable contributions. Finally, it should be emphasized that even in the academic setting of large research-intensive universities, medical schools, and research institutes, PhD immunologists can make valuable contributions in many more ways than the previous model of the tenured professor, building his/her research dynasty in a basic science department. Although the number of PhD medical school faculty in such departments has been almost unchanged over the past 30 years, the number of PhD faculty in clinical departments has more than doubled over the same period [8]. PhD immunologists can facilitate the formation of bridges between basic and clinical science so crucial to the current emphasis on translating scientific discoveries to therapeutic advances. Important discoveries of the future will also require much more work by multi-disciplinary teams of basic scientists and clinicians from a wide variety of training backgrounds. Institutions are now beginning a dialogue about how to perform successful ‘team science’, including how to better recognize and reward contributions to these group efforts. Examples include the course on the topic taught at Northwestern University (http://www.nucats.northwestern.edu/ education-career-development/seminars-courses-andevents/taking-responsibility-for-responsible-conduct-ofresearch/presentation-materials/RCR_2012_CLASS10. pdf), and a recent panel discussion at The University of Michigan (http://www.michr.umich.edu/education/ teamscience/print). Some of the challenges that traditional academic cultures must surmount to benefit from team science are thoughtfully discussed in a recent commentary [9]. Thus, I strongly argue that we should not stop – or markedly curtail - training PhD immunologists. We must continue to advocate vehemently for increased Federal support for scientific research and training. Over the past 15 years, the Asian region’s share of global R&D spending increased by 33%, while that of the US decreased by 22%, and the US proportion of the world’s scientific publications also decreased. Asian countries including Japan and South Korea now spend more on science as a % of GDP than does the US, as do a number of European Union countries (http://www.nih.gov/about/impact/ impact_global.pdf). There is also a strong need for more effective ways to distribute such funding to best support important future discoveries [1,3].
Trends in Immunology xxx xxxx, Vol. xxx, No. x
But we should not deliberately train markedly fewer new immunologists because we don’t think there is a need or positions for them. The skills taught in effective PhD programs, including critical thinking, building hypotheses and experimental plans to address important issues, the ability to communicate complex subjects clearly to a variety of audiences, and analyze data in an open-minded and thoughtful way, are crucial to many career options. The F1000 report stated that training programs do not teach skills applicable to non-academic careers, but I disagree. Well-designed graduate programs teach all of the skills listed above, and provide ample opportunities to learn writing and presentation skills, as well as providing venues for interacting with established scientists in a variety of careers. Thus, what is needed is for all training programs to emulate those that are effective in this regard, and for both trainers and trainees to commit to active involvement in the process. In acknowledgement of the growing importance of teaching graduate students about the entire spectrum of career options, NIH has funded to date 17 BEST programs, with the goal of developing career training strategies that can be adopted by institutions nationwide, to better prepare new PhDs in the biomedical sciences for a variety of careers (http://commonfund.nih. gov/workforce/index). We need to remain faithful to principles of rigor in training young immunologists to think critically, identify important problems, and use creativity built upon sound scientific principles to design innovative solutions to a wide variety of world problems. We also need to teach these principles in the context of skills relevant to tomorrow’s careers and needs. We hope that major funding agencies will partner with leaders in the scientific community in this effort – both present and future – helping to develop initiatives, guidelines, and crucial support that acknowledge the importance of training the future biomedical workforce. References 1 Tilghman, S., et al. (2012) Biomedical research workforce working group report. http://acd.od.nih.gov/biomedical_research_wgreport.pdf 2 Danthi, N. et al. (2014) Percentile ranking and citation impact of a large cohort of NHLBI-funded cardiovascular R01 grants. Circulation 114, 600–606 3 Alberts, B. et al. (2014) Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 5773–5777 4 McDowell, G.S. et al. (2014) Shaping the future of research: a perspective from junior scientists. F10000Res. 3, 291 5 Okada, H. et al. (2010) The ‘hygiene hypothesis’ for autoimmune and allergic diseases: an update. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 160, 1–9 6 Shu, C.J. et al. (2012) The immune system’s involvement in obesitydriven type 2 diabetes. Semin. Immunol. 24, 436–442 7 Couzin-Frankel, J. (2013) Cancer immunotherapy- Breakthrough of the year. Science 342, 1432–1433 8 Garrison, H.H. and Campbell, E. [2013 (updated 2014)] Education and employment of biological and medical scientists 2013. FASEB Office of Public Affairs http://www.faseb.org/Policy-and-Government-Affairs/ Data-Compilations/Education-and-Employment-of-Scientists.aspx 9 Pavlidis, I. et al. (2014) Together we stand. Nat. Phys. 10, 700–702
3