• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Advice needed on Systems Biology


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 olaf.larsson

  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 21
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 24 November 2005 - 08:13 AM


I have come to a critical point in my education. I have the opportunity to go into Systems Biology modling, should I do it?[:o] What is the future in this area? I know that nobody really can answer a question, but you could give me your best guesses and suggestions. An alternative would be proteomics. Thank you for your help.

#2

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 24 November 2005 - 10:19 AM

Systems biology is the next generation of molecular biology. Huge future. Highly recommended.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#3 olaf.larsson

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 21
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 24 November 2005 - 11:11 AM

Yes the idea to be able to model everything is really tempting and very beautyfull.

But what are the possible backsides.. Are this models good enough to have implications for reality? How many are doing this things currently? Would it not be hard to find a job with such an extreem specialization? It seems that very few institutions are doing this things, it has not really any practical applications yet..

#4 JonesGuy

  • Guest
  • 1,183 posts
  • 8

Posted 24 November 2005 - 03:52 PM

The main problem with this area is the intelligence required. No one, no one, is currently smart enough to fully model a system - it's a brutal amount of interpretation and integration. It's all baby steps. 'Dummies' can't do it at all.

The simple fact though, is that it needs to be done. Really, really needs to be done. If you're smart enough to do it, by all means, do it. You might have to move to get into your graduate studies, but the move will well be worth it. Not only to you, but to everyone.

#5 olaf.larsson

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 21
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 25 November 2005 - 12:33 PM

System Biology could be considered as the Holy Grail of all biology, there is no complexity level above it.
I guess that there are some people somewere who would gladly had a finger shopped of for an opportuinty like this..
I´m hesitating... should I really go into this grotsque complex and small area. Which gives dubtfull results and unsure job opporunities..?

#6 JonesGuy

  • Guest
  • 1,183 posts
  • 8

Posted 25 November 2005 - 03:49 PM

Are you willing to move in order to get a job? That's the big question. That, and are you intelligent enough to excel in this field?

If you answer 'yes', then it's well worth your time. If you answer 'no', then it might not be.

Can you dabble in it, to see if you have a talent? I was in 'science-heavy' education until I was forced to dabble in economics, and that was when everyone realised my talent for it.

#7 caliban

  • Admin, Advisor, Director
  • 9,154 posts
  • 587
  • Location:UK

Posted 25 November 2005 - 04:27 PM

Hello wolfram

I'm unsure if we are talking about the same thing here. If you think about modelling along the same lines as the BBSRC then I don't agree that its a niche area or that you have to be a genius to do well in it. I do agree that its a high-growth area and likely to remain so for some time.
This is also due to political reasons: there is a technology push. The market pull comes from the pharmaceutical industry and funding bodies who are very eager to cut down on animal studies.
The ratio for it is as compelling as it is revealing: We can't extrapolate well from in vitro and we don't really understand what is going on in vivo. So lets do it in silico.

So in terms of careers advice its not a bad area at all, I should think (provided you enjoy it and have some math skills). In terms of the science I remain rather unconvinced by anything the modelling people have shown me so far. At the very best, they can make a model of something that resembles a particular observation. Predictive capacity is rare and explanatory capacity nonexistent. But there might a lot of potential and its certainly true that science tends to benefit from disciplinary synergy.

#8 John Schloendorn

  • Guest, Advisor, Guardian
  • 2,542 posts
  • 157
  • Location:Mountain View, CA

Posted 27 November 2005 - 06:24 PM

There is no greater danger for immortalists than to completely waste their time by doing something that would soon thereafter get done by a mainstreamy non-immortalist anyway. So my advice is to ask yourself: Is this so for "systems biology", or for the particular projects within that discipline that you may be having in mind to promote life-extension?

#9 JonesGuy

  • Guest
  • 1,183 posts
  • 8

Posted 27 November 2005 - 06:28 PM

Maybe, but we need immmortalist experts who can 'put together' advances in mainstream sciences. For example, cryobiology has a huge future, but unless an immortalist looks at the papers and says "hey, these help cryonics", then the field of cryonics will only advance via the immortalists - know what I mean?

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#10 olaf.larsson

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 21
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 27 November 2005 - 06:55 PM

There is no greater danger for immortalists than to completely waste their time by doing something that would soon thereafter get done by a mainstreamy non-immortalist anyway.


Well I have for example to pay my rent, and there doesnt seem to be many immortalist project around here, to work with.
If someone would like to hire me for immortalist purpose, very well I will go anywere on the planet and work for minimum salary.

Edited by wolfram, 28 November 2005 - 11:31 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users