Exploring my options

You must be the change you wish to see in the world.
        -- Mahatma Gandhi

How to find what I seek

Software options

• voting/delegation software - The lack of equitable participation in decision making is the root cause of many global problems. The migration to Internet based voting provides an opportunity to become a player in the electronic voting space, especially if go with a squeaky clean / open source play. The hope is to find a way to leverage this into more democratic forms of governance. The odds of success seem low, but the payoff for success would be extremely high.
• developing world social networking - The lack of trust prevents many economically beneficial transactions occurring in the developing world. The question is whether it is possible to use technology to either identify or create trust, and thus enable such transactions. Is it, for instance, possible to do microcredit without financial capital? I lack domain expertise. The odds of success seem low, but the payoff would be high. I need to research more before I can form a definite opinion.
• collaborative/social networking software in general - Such software seems likely to have a huge payoff overall, but it is not clear how much it will help the developing world. Others are working in this space, diminishing both the likelihood of making a difference, and the effective extent of any such difference. Other social network players are proprietary, so it might be possible to dislodge them with a google / open source / non-profit type play.
• microcredit software - Not clear what the need is. I also lack domain expertise (Blaise's friend, ASAPROSAR, Indian NGO, or Grameen Technology Center may be able to provide).
• disease diagnosis software (collaborate with Meg and Alan at Trinity Medical Center) - Collaborate with a doctor I met in Tanzania to develop medical diagnosis algorithms. Not clear the idea will work to me. Will still need pills and/or doctors following the diagnosis to provide treatment.
• collaborative software for neglected disease research - eg. a wiki like system for UCSF AIDS knowledge base. Hard to know if this is needed, if it will be used, or if it will make a real difference.

Biotechnology options

To become a researcher I would need to spend 5 years to get a PhD, and another 2-5 years doing a post doc. It is a lot of time. I would, however, start making a difference before completing my studies, but only to the extent that my work is more valuable to my utility function than that of some other student. A lot of students focus on either non-applied molecular biology, or other diseases. Consequently, a majority of the work I do as a student should make a difference.

The difficulty is what to do after completing my degree / post doc. There are few jobs in industry for the sort of work I am likely to want to perform.

One option is working as an academic researcher.

The first problem with positions in academia is, although theoretically academics are free to decide what to research, in practice funding levels for different research areas are set by the NIH, NSF, and other grant making bodies. Consequently, the difference I could make is limited to how much better the research I perform is than that of some other researcher that now doesn't get funded. I don't have a good handle on this. It is possible being 30% smarter could translate into producing either 10% or 100% more valuable research. My sense is it is probably the later, but I don't know. I wish there was a way to be a biotechnology researcher in which the full extent of my contribution would count towards making a difference. It seems I should abandon my plans for a traditional biotechnology research career if my skills and abilities do not appear significantly above my peers.

A second difficulty in becoming an academic biotechnology researcher lies in treatment access issues. Research isn't any good to me unless it reaches those in need. In the case of HIV/AIDS, all the successful academic research was handed over to pharmaceutical companies. The pharmaceutical companies decided it was more profitable to sell the drugs at high prices to Western consumers, than to everyone in the world in need of them. This represented a huge societal failure. All the scientific investment that went into anti-retrovirals, and they weren't available to 95% of people in need of them. The situation has now improved slightly, but not due to any scientific or technical advance. It has improved due to the efforts of the Brazilian government, the Indian generic drug manufacturer CIPLA, and the AIDS treatment access movement. Related stories can be told regarding malaria and TB. I don't deny we need better drugs, but it isn't simply about coming up with better drugs. More important is improving the availability and use of existing drugs. There are a range of neglected diseases in developing world, such as, visceral leishmaniasis, trypanosomiasis, and schistosomiasis, for which academia has come up with candidate compounds, but there is no commercial interest in performing clinical trials. The problem with academic research is it is about coming up with new ideas. Key issues that matter to me, such as pro-poor patent licensing terms, reducing drug manufacturing costs, and clinical trials of existing compounds, are not part of the academic mandate.

A third problem with academia, especially in the US, is that it revolves around publishing papers and applying for research grants. Performing many insignificant things is valued over attempting one important thing and failing. My sense is, to make a real difference, what is often needed is to takle the important but difficult high risk problems. Publishing trivial papers is largely a waste of time. Applying for grants also introduces a lot of overhead.

A second option would be to set up a private research lab in the US. The cost for a basic lab might be $50-100k, but the bigger cost might be the cost of biological supplies. The only data I have on this was a small 6 employee company, which spent around $25k/yr per employee on biological supplies. Given I don't want to be working alone, the amount of money required in the US is probably too expensive for me.

How best to make a difference as a biotechnology researcher is far from clear to me. If I continue along the biotechnology path, I will undoubtedly get a better sense of what needs to be done, and how best to contribute. Here are my top options for now:

• continue to dabble in biotechnology - Try to help others in various ways. Gain lab skills. Read more textbooks. Take some additional extension courses. This will help me in deciding whether to go to grad school, and may also turn up new projects for me to get involved with.
• grad school in Australia or the UK - Becoming an academic biotechnology researcher in one of these countries may offer greater autonomy and/or make it slightly easier to address treatment access issues than the US. The schools are highly regarded. Need to understand career path post degree.
• grad school in India - Academic standards might not be as high, and I have been told there is much more of a tendancy towards specialization. The former probably doesn't matter too much to me, but the later does. I would gain exposure to cultural issues. Need to understand career path post degree.
• lab in India - Explore the feasibility of setting up a private research lab in India. See whether the lower costs in India make establishing a small research lab within within reach. This obviously isn't something I would do now, but if it is feasible, it could answer what to do to make a difference post degree.
• grad school in US - Becoming an academic researcher in the US might not be my best option. The effective lack of autonomy in deciding what to research would reduce the extent of my contribution. It is also not a conducive environment to working on many of the treatment access issues. Need to understand career path post degree.
• volunteer in a research lab - Volunteering would allow the full extent of my efforts to count towards making a difference. Unfortunately, if I work as a volunteer instead of enrolling in a PhD program, I will never become a researcher in my own right. That would significantly limit my extent of the long term contribution I can make.

Public policy options

• donate to groups that do public policy - Get a high paying job that I enjoy and donate money to groups doing public policy work. This very indirect manner of making a difference destroys a lot of the emotional satisfaction for me. I am not sure why. It also involves a significant loss of personal autonomy.
• analyze HIV/AIDS research expenditures - Review HIV/AIDS research expenditures to make sure they are directed towards the needs of the global pandemic. Probably best to wait until I have more knowledge of molecular biology. Not clear how to turn this work into action. I would be working alone.
• possibly oppose nanotechnology - Learn about the issues once I finish learning about biotechnology. I would probably be working alone.
• volunteer with a science/technology public policy organization (CPTECH, or Vandana Shiva's organization) - This seems reasonable, except for my tending not to enjoy public policy. I would need to relocate.
• volunteer with RESULTS - This doesn't play to science/technology strength and passion. I would need to relocate.

Other options

• smallpox prize - It is not certain smallpox has been eradicated. Clandestine samples may still exist. The consequences of its release would be devastating. Various putative measures exist to discourage the possession of smallpox, but positive incentives for turning over any samples are presently lacking. I think I could create such incentives in the form of a prize. It seems possible to do so in a way that avoids creating a moral hazard. This idea appears quick and easy to do. It would also be low cost, unless smallpox exists, but then the cost would be well worth paying. The impact of this work is very quantifiable, eg. if outbreak would be expected to kill 2m, 1 in 10 chance smallpox clandestinely exists, 1 in 10 chance it will be released, and a 1 in 2 chance of the prize preventing this => 10,000 lives saved, or 100,000 lives saved if end up making payout. The hope is to be able to seed something, and then work with others to bring things to scale. Also appear applicable to other infectious diseases.
• start an orphanage - Not intellectually rewarding. Requires making a long term commitment. Might do as a side project if I ever find myself in an appropriate environment.
• start a microcredit institution - Lack domain and cultural experience. Not intellectually rewarding.
• start a company in Africa - Africa is seriously lacking in capital, and thus the obvious thing to do is work to help create it. Unfortunately, I lack domain experience. It is also not intellectually rewarding.
• learn economics - It would be fun and useful to have a better understanding of economics, and then to work on the economics of international development issues. I'm unclear though on the career track, and how to translate any ideas into making a difference in the real world. I think economists tend to be in oversupply, limiting the difference I might make as an employed economist, to any excess in my abilities.

Fun options

• research the economics of trust and cooperative behavior - I find network based models of cooperation interesting, and they seem to have some practical applications.
• research stock market returns using NIPA data - I think that the conventional method of predicting long term stock market returns based on the past is fundamentally flawed. I think proper long term prediction needs to be based on the economy, and as a result popular expectations are wildly over optimistic.
• research the evolution of sex in eukaryotes - the evolution of sex at the cellular and DNA level fascinates me. It seems so counterintuitive.

Organizational structure

• create an organization - This is clearly my preferred route. It is likely to make a bigger difference, but it is substantially more risky to attempt.
• join an organization - This would be easier and less risky, but it is less likely to make a major difference.

Location

Plan

• smallpox prize - Quick and easy. I will also gain skills at collaborating and/or establishing an organization.
• voting/delegation software - Harder and longer term.
• research the economics of trust and cooperative behavior - Do on a part time basis.
• developing world social networking - Explore in combination with previous item.
• continue to dabble in biotechnology - Continue to gain skills on a part time basis. Especially seek to gain lab skills.