
Scientists Aging Faster Than Other Workers - ranvir
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/science/ranks-of-scientists-aging-faster-than-other-workers.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
======
arcanus
It's harder than ever for young researchers to get initial grants.

The pay is seriously lagging industry. In many cases, the resources at your
disposal are substantially larger in industry as well.

Meanwhile, universities are increasingly run by administrators. Faculty have
more service requirements and less autonomy than in the past. Overhead
expenses are higher than ever, as well.

Furthermore! Tenured faculty are hard to fire, or even force into retirement.
They draw large resources even after they retire in pensions and emeritus
status. So open faculty positions are constantly hard to come by.

Last year I made a move to industry, from a research position at a well
regarded program. I multiplied my salary by a nice integer, and I had multiple
job offers from fortune 500 tech companies and a few of the HFT hedge funds
that users are familiar with on this website. I wouldn't have had a shot at a
faculty position at anything that I would have considered a tier-1 research
organization.

Don't get me wrong, I loved my time in academia and I was very well treated,
relatively speaking. But I was absolutely at a point of diminishing returns
where I would have floundered around like so many of my incredibly talented
and hard working friends who are still postdocs/non-permanent staff at these
institutions.

~~~
sandworm101
>> ...universities are increasingly run by administrators. Faculty have more
service requirements and less autonomy than in the past.

I teach one course at a local university. I have near-total academic autonomy
but I also have six different bosses, none of which actually teach. A new term
just started. I show up at the staff room to learn that I cannot get on the
wifi or classroom podiums until I "accept" my latest contract, which has yet
to be sent to me. I taught the first class on my laptop wired (hdmi) to the
projector and tethered to my phone. Too many people being paid to creating
silly rules and pointless systems.

I'm starting a new job in another city next month (government). After
explaining to my students that a different prof will cover the last half of
the course they couldn't care less about the subject of my lecture. They
wanted to hear about how I actually "got a real job". Interview processes and
resume writing are more important to them than actual knowledge.

~~~
ryandrake
> Interview processes and resume writing are more important to them than
> actual knowledge.

This should be unsurprising. For many, many jobs, the actual knowledge
requirements are dwarfed by the importance placed on interview skills and a
polished resume.

~~~
zem
and likewise, college's role as somewhere to learn stuff is dwarfed by its
role as a mandatory credential for employment

------
dwaltrip
We need to experiment with different ways of organizing our scientific
endeavors.

Between postdocs forced to spin their wheels in the mud (or quit) for untold
years, the replication crisis, generally misaligned incentives between doing
the best work possible vs. advancing one's career, and of course, funding
difficulties, I think it's clear that we aren't anywhere close to making the
most of our opportunities to advance human knowledge and understanding.

I'm not saying that we haven't acheived mind blowing things in the past few
centuries, or even that we won't continue to do the same in the coming
decades. I simply mean we shouldn't avoid the hard, grueling work needed to
make progress on some of the obvious problems.

We also shouldn't be afraid to be honest about the failings of current
approaches and processes. Although, I suppose in some political climates that
may be a little trickier​, given the apparent propensity for damaging
misinterpretations.

~~~
CuriouslyC
The current approach to science is pretty much screwed. In addition to the
things you mention, everyone in academic science is silo'd and
hyperspecialized, so there is very little cross pollination and new thought in
a given domain. As a result, we're getting very good at picking apart the
details of established domains, but very bad at coming up with big new
hypotheses or different approaches.

I really think industrial R&D is the way to go, we just have to shift grant
money there in the form of tax breaks in exchange for open access/patents that
permit non-commercial use.

~~~
gajjanag
All fine, but which industry would fund research in e.g algebraic geometry or
black hole physics?

~~~
CuriouslyC
Algebraic geometry research doesn't need funding, it just needs some spare
time for people who are interested in it. Black hole physics on the
theoretical side is much the same. Astronomy on the other hand probably would
get short shrift in an industry based science program, since it is expensive
and the gain is pretty much entirely intellectual.

------
Insanity
When reading the title I interpreted this as being that scientists show signs
of old age earlier. (aging faster). Due to stress or whatever it would have
been.

Quite the misinterpretation there :-)

~~~
roesel
I almost thought that was a clickbait intention.

------
gumby
What an unfortunately brief article. The reason seems clear to me[+]: there
are plenty of science _students_ but not enough entry level "professional"
jobs. Hence the long post docs, the multiple post docs, until the poor
candidate gives up. Either we need more research labs and universities or we
need to age scientists out. I would prefer the former, but who knows?

\+ (but like many beliefs, a study is needed)

~~~
NotOscarWilde
It is interesting to note two commonly repeated facts about academia, one of
which you mention:

1\. It is very difficult to get rid of aging professors with a low output.

2\. It is fairly easy to get postdoc positions (but hard to get a permanent
position).

In a way, you can argue that point 2 is a solution for point 1 -- with two
postdoc positions (two years each, which is common at least in computer
science) and a 4-5 year long PhD, you get 8-9 years of work from a candidate
who is in his prime at the start and around say 30-32 years old at the end.
After that, if you hired the candidate, you would only risk point 1, so why do
that?

(I agree that it's incredibly mean to take 9 best years of a scientist while
they work for a small wage, and then throw them away unless they are a genius.
I think it's also important to keep in mind that while postdoc researchers
face an extremely difficult challenge of getting a permanent position, they
likely enjoy their academic work quite a bit. Postdoc/PhD are not exactly a
"drain" in the same way a factory job might be.)

------
rm_-rf_slash
My dad's one of them. He retired a few years ago. The way he puts it,
electrical engineering research isn't what it used to be, because all of the
"big" discoveries in that field have been made. So aside from a fraction of
the researchers it's largely a technician's job.

At the same time, he says that if he had applied to the same school he studied
at and worked at for all of his life, there's no way he'd beat the competition
these days.

And that's before factoring in the cost of college now. No wonder.

~~~
usrusr
> And that's before factoring in the cost of college now.

Which brings us to the next question: can a modern college loan be repaid on
typical academia pay?

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
No.

~~~
aurizon
Well, grad stoonts and post ducks - not so easily, but profs and union staff
do very very well

------
jbmorgado
Well, at least where I live the problem seems to be one of availability of
positions.

Older scientists took all the positions and basically closed the doors to new
entrants when it comes to any kind of contract (we work on scholarships), so
most of us just changes jobs to industry (which is ratter easy) and don't
pursue a scientific career.

Of course now that those older scientists should be retiring, there aren't
enough younger scientists to do their work because they pushed so many of them
away.

------
maverick_iceman
Not surprising when you're past 40 before you even get tenure.

------
lacampbell
The compensation vs time/effort required getting a PhD must surely have a lot
to do with this. Wasn't the hey day of US science during WW2 and the Cold War,
when government funding was much higher?

~~~
draugadrotten
> Wasn't the hey day of US science during WW2 and the Cold War, when
> government funding was much higher?

It's not so much about the funding as it is about a common, shared goal.
Getting all the indians to shoot their arrows on the same target at the same
time is quite powerful.

------
SubiculumCode
From the title I thought that I was going to read about why grad school turned
me gray. =_=

~~~
Balgair
Oh, it's not just me then?

------
otoburb
_" The real question, she said: “Can you attract the future stars into this
line of work?”"_

Yes, but perhaps only the _next_ , and not this, generation of future stars,
after supply and demand forces have worked themselves out.

------
Geminii
its bc these professors are tenured and get grants well into their 60s and 70s
partly bc they are brilliant, and partly because they are well connected. peer
review is in favor of its peers.

------
stared
Related: [https://priceonomics.com/why-nobel-winning-scientists-are-
ge...](https://priceonomics.com/why-nobel-winning-scientists-are-getting-
older/)

------
JabavuAdams
I aspire to be a self-funded "gentleman scientist".

------
godmodus
Lack of sleep and publishing pressures probably play aml major role.

~~~
Asooka
Title is confusing. The individuals themselves aren't aging faster, the median
age of people is going up faster than for other fields.

------
jaddood
Misleading title

