|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, November 02, 2000 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Miscellaneous |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Science & Tech
| Previous
| Next
Human Genome Project: Missed opportunities for India
This is the second in a three-part series. The first article
appeared on October 26.
IT IS now well known that India is the only country in the world
that has extensive scientific infrastructure and capabilities
which was not a part of the international human genome sequencing
project. This was very unfortunate because in 1988 - that is,
about the time the U.S. had decided to invest in this project
which subsequently became an international project with the
participation of even countries such as China and Japan (but not
India) - I wrote a letter to the then Prime Minister, Shri Rajiv
Gandhi, suggesting that India should also invest in the human
genome project. I stated that India can do it at a much lower
cost than the U.S. that is Rs. 300 crores, which would mean, on
an average, Rs. 20 crores each year over a 15-year period.
This letter was written after very careful deliberation. I have
been one of the few privileged persons, especially from the East,
who have had an occasion to watch the entire modern biological
revolution from the early 1950s onwards from close quarters, and
to know most of the actors in this fantastic drama. Many of them,
including a score of Nobel Prize Winners and those who were
intimately involved in the human genome project, have been in the
CCMB (Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad) which
I had the privilege of conceiving, building and directing for 13
years and which is regarded as the finest scientific research
laboratories anywhere.
On the other hand, I also had the privilege of participating in
our battle for Independence as a university student in Lucknow,
and committing myself to contributing whatever an individual
could (within my own limitations), to making our country a leader
in my chosen area of science. It was this commitment that has
been the driving force behind all my scientific endeavours. Thus
a significant quantum of commitment, knowledge and experience
went into the above mentioned letter to the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister's Office referred my letter to the Department
of Biotechnology (DBT) of the Government of India who shelved it.
It seemed ironical to me that even though I had played a vital
role in the setting up of this Department and was a Member of its
high-power Scientific Advisory Committee for many years, not even
an acknowledgement was sent to me as a matter of courtesy, leave
aside communicating to me the reasons for the project being
shelved.
My proposal to the Prime Minister was commented on in the
national and international press, for example in Nature of 21st
September 1988 under the title ``Sequencing Bargain in India''.
According to the report in Nature , the proposal was turned down
by the DBT as ``the project would require equipment, reagents and
enzymes which would need to be imported'' and that the DBT and
many other scientists in the country supported by it and
occupying positions of power or influence, not always on merit,
disagreed with my estimate of the cost. The above reasons were,
to say the least, ridiculous and no more than excuses.
All the reagents and chemicals required were either already
available with us when I made the proposal, or have since then
become available in the country, or could have been easily
synthesised with the tremendous tradition we have of synthetic
organic chemistry which has been at the base of the remarkably
successful drug industry in the country.
The question of escalation in the cost estimate given by us would
have never arisen. In fact, if anything at all, it was clear to
the informed scientific community that the cost would come down,
as has happened in respect of both the international project and
the Celera Genomics human genome sequencing projects, the former
in the public and the latter in the private sector, the latter
project cost only 900 crores. It is well known that what can be
done in 900 crores outside India when there is major expenditure
on labour, can be done in India at one-fourth the cost. In any
event, Rs. 300 crores meant only Rs. 20 crores a year for 15
years which is by no means big money for India. It is the yearly
grant of a good laboratory.
Further, even in science in our country we waste at least thirty
times that much money every year. The DBT has spent nearly 2000
crores in the last nearly 15 years. What good has it done to the
country? Has it led directly to producing even one rupee worth of
a useful product which would not have been produced, perhaps
quicker, if DBT did not exist?
If we had initiated the human genome project in our country in
the mid 1980's, our gains would have been the same for which
Celera Genomics, a private company led by Craig Venter invested
on parallel efforts for sequencing the human genome. They started
later but finished at the same time as the international project
and for much less cost. They expect returns on the investment by
patenting a large number of STRs (short tandem repeats, which are
specific stretches of sequences in DNA, the genetic material). We
would have done the same. (The STRs would have a huge market in
diagnosis).
Further, when you are a part of the discovery team in such a
complex area as the sequencing of human genome, you have access
to information that is not made available when the final results
are put in the public domain; this information is often crucial
for optimal utilisation of the final result.
Thirdly, experience of sequencing a part of the human genome
would have made it easier for us to sequence other genomes of
particular interest to us. Lastly, if we had invested in our own
human genome project, the chances are that, at one point or
another, we would have become integrated with the international
effort but only after staking our right to leadership. As of now,
at least for a long item, we would only be a follower. I don't
have to tell the readers the difference between being a leader
and a follower; a leader, for example, is always in a much better
position in respect of bargaining.
Subsequently, Dr. Lalji Singh, one of India's most illustrious
scientists of today, whom I had persuaded to return to the CCMB
from the UK in 1987 and who is now the Director of CCMB, also
submitted a project to the DBT when he was not its Director and
after I had left the CCMB, suggesting that we should sequence at
least a part of the human genome (the sex chromosomes). This
project was also not approved by the DBT.
Eventually, on account of the high reputation Dr. Lalji Singh
enjoyed and the obvious importance of silk to the country, a
project that he had submitted to the DBT on sequencing of the
silk genome, was approved by the DBT, but it was subsequently
taken away by the DBT from Dr. Lalji Singh, just because he
changed his institution! This kind of project transfer in basic
science is really never done in any respectable organistion.
In essence, lack of our involvement in the human genome
sequencing project has been on account of the lack of vision, of
commitment to the country, of professional competence, and of
integrity on part of the DBT and of those on whom it has largely
depended. This Department was set up in February 1986 to develop
and pursue biotechnology, and I had a major role in setting it
up. The history of DBT has been documented by me and Chandana
Chakrabarti elsewhere (Current Science, 1991, vol. 61, pp. 549-
552; Economic and Political Weekly, Dec. 2, 1999, pp. 3049-
3050)0. However, everything that has happened in biotechnology in
the country such as the marketing of the country's first
genetically engineered product, the Hepatitis B vaccine by
Shantha Biotech, has happened outside of the DBT and inspite of
it with the DBT putting all kinds of hinderances in the success
of the project.
In fact, most of what DBT has been doing would legitimately come
under the purview of better-run and better-equipped departments
and agencies, such as the DST (Department of Science and
Technology), the UGC (University Grants Commission), the CSIR
(Council of Scientific & Industrial Research), the ICAR (Indian
Council of Agricultural Research), and the ICMR (Indian Council
of Medical Research).
Perhaps, the only worthwhile accomplishment of DBT has been the
setting up of the Bioinformatics Centres at various places in the
country, but even in there much remains to be done. I was the
Chairman of a Committee which reviewed the performance of these
Centres but out report has been gathering dust in the DBT.
I have been in the past a Member of the Scientific Advisory
Committee (SAC) of the DBT and of some of its other Committees;
and have been amazed at the ease with which even the minutes have
been wrongly recorded or manipulated. I remember that some years
ago there was a report in the newspapers that the Government of
India was planning to wind up the DBT.
I had then as a Member of the SAC of the DBT, asked for a one-
page write-up as to why this department should not be wound up;
with such a note, if it had merit in it, one could fight the case
with support of other scientists and informed public. No such
note was ever prepared and the matter was obviously taken up
behind closed doors at the political level.
One may ask as to why such a situation has arisen in the country.
A part of the answer lies in the evolution of a scientific mafia
(see P. M. Bhargava, TheHindu, 28th March 1993) in the country
since the late 1960s. The present Secretary of the DBT would
probably have not been there and certainly for not so long, if it
was not for the support of this mafia.
It is, of course, heartening that the influence of this mafia has
declined remarkably in the last few years but, unfortunately, its
role has now been taken up by sections of the Government. Let me
give an example.
The following Starred Question (Dy. No. 1857) was asked on the
floor of the Parliament on 4th August, 2000:
(a) Whether it is a fact, the former Director of CCMB, Hyderabad,
had submitted to the Department of Biotechnology, in 1989 the
human genome sequencing project by our scientists?
(b) Whether it is also a fact that the Department has confined
the proposal to the cold storage; and
(c) If so, the reason for not approving the proposal in 1989?
In reply to this question - on which we believe there was a
heated debate on the floor of the House - according to a report
appearing in the Indian Express of 5th August, 2000, the Minister
of Science, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, made the following
statements:
(1) 10,000 scientists were working (presumably in India) round
the clock on the human genome sequencing project.
(2) India had entered into collaboration with the United States
and France and had made headway in the genome project.
Both these statements are absurd. For example, if 10,000
scientists have been working in India on this project, as it
would cost at least Rs. 2 lakh per scientist, it would mean an
expenditure of Rs. 200 crores per year on this project. I have
asked Dr. Joshi in a letter dated the 8th August to let me have
the list of the 10,000 scientists, and details of the
collaboration with the USA and France. I have also asked him to
confirm if the report in The Indian Express is correct.
I have received no reply from his nor do I expect any. Not only
the above, the Minister of Science, who, perhaps, made the
statement on the advice of the Secretary, DBT, tried to confuse
the Parliamentarians by mixing up in his statement detection of
genetic disorders with the human genome project. Thus, in ways
more than one, the sanctity of the Parliament was violated.
The question in the Parliament was an opportunity to take the DBT
to task for its continuing failures but, in our country we defend
the indefensible and scuttle what is good for the country as much
in science as in any other activity. This has been the bane of
our science, and the denial of our participation in the human
genome project was just one consequence of it. But who cares what
damage has been done, what the country has lost? Surely not the
Government and the concerned scientists holding the reigns of
power whose only concern has been themselves and themselves.
Pushpa M. Bhargava
Former Director
Centre for Cellular and Molecular
Biology, Hyderabad.
(To be concluded)
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Science & Tech Previous : Net security? Read Kamasutra! Next : Banana bract mosaic disease | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Miscellaneous |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2000 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|