Singapore: Biomedical Growth Down To Single Digits Next 2 Y
-
Singapore: Biomedical Growth Down To Single Digits Next 2 Yrs
SINGAPORE -(Dow Jones)- The annual growth of Singapore's biomedical sciences output may slow to "high single digits" in the next two years, compared with 30.2% growth in 2006, the chairman of the country's biosciences promotion agency said on Tuesday.
"The industry is sustainable in the long run," Phillip Yeo, chairman of the state-run Agency for Science, Technology and Research, said at a briefing.
Singapore's biomedical sciences industry output totaled S$23 billion in 2006, A-STAR said earlier on Tuesday.
Biomedical sciences accounted for 10% of Singapore's total manufacturing output in 2006, the agency said.
The pharmaceutical sector is highly volatile and output can widely vary from year to year depending on manufacturers' product mix and import regulations around the world.
"The 30% growth is not sustainable," said Beh Swan Gin, executive director of the government's Biomedical Research Council.
Yeo said there are a few pharmaceutical plants coming onstream, but output from the plants may not be seen this year.
Singapore is investing heavily in biotechnology as part of its development strategy to lessen its dependence on manufacturing.
-By John Jannarone, Dow Jones Newswires
--
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20070205\ACQDJON200702052212DOWJONESDJONLINE000728.htm&selected=9999&selecteddisplaysymbol=9999&StoryTargetFrame=_top&mkt=WORLD&chk=unchecked&lang=&link=&headlinereturnpage=http://www.international.na -
Any economists in the house? Can you tell me whether I can get a job in this industry in 2 years time?
-
the report does paint a rosy picture but it's somewhat misleading i feel....this biomed thing is a 'high-value' industry...anyone less than phd can only wash test tubes....10,000 jobs, i would think the choice positions go to accomplished foreign scientists.....it will take a decade to 'bear fruit'...but i do wonder what is that fruit?.....the billions thrown into biopolis and sector could have been used to further expand the tourism industry, one or 2 more theme parks would be good...the direct employment and secondary businesses would have created jobs are all levels, and not just a select group of people....a case in point, australia gold coast is nothing without the 3 theme parks that was planted there, since then, the place is a real estate goldmine....
-
Don't worry
If biomedical hub does not work out
They will think of another hub -
I am no economist but I can tell you that nothing is for certain.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Any economists in the house? Can you tell me whether I can get a job in this industry in 2 years time?
Look at all their former hubs and see how long they last. History always repeats itself.
Always seek a backup route. No point in sticking in a job without prospects or a high risk for unemployment. -
The ridiculous thing about this so-called biomedical technology is that we are attempting not to open the economy much more but rather adding additional factories to the list of factories in the manufacturing sector.
Whether we are doing any research of substantial worth remains to be seen. With his Holiness Philip Yeo in charge, I doubt we will see any enlightened approach to research. They demand short term gain when research might not even yield any. Pfizer just wasted billions on a drug that turned out to be flawed. Does the Govt want to spend that mcuh? I think not. -
OUTPUT by Singapore's drug factories jumped by over a third last year, pushing overall biomedical production up by 30.2 per cent.
This robust growth puts biomedical output at a record $23 billion, almost four times production in 2000.
More than 90 per cent comes from pharmaceuticals, with the rest from the medical technology sector, a field that makes devices such as heart valves.
Singapore will soon have a new kind of factory on the biomedical scene - cutting-edge plants manufacturing human vaccines and other drugs derived by culturing living cells - a highly advanced field called biologics.
The fledgling biomedical sector already accounts for one quarter of the gross domestic product (GDP) generated by the manufacturing industry as a whole, making it second only to electronics, which accounts for 29 per cent.
The figures on the health of the biomedical sciences cluster, which were released yesterday, also showed that it employed 10,571 people last year, up 3.9 per cent from 2005.
A further 1,800 jobs will be created when new biomedical investments committed last year are fully realised, a process that typically takes three to four years.
These new commitments will be worth about $2.3 billion in additional GDP a year.
New plants coming on stream include Singapore's first commercial-scale biologics facilities as well as plants by pharmaceutical giants Abbot and Merck.
New entrant Abbott's planned $450 million facility, for example, will be its largest nutritional plant.
International players also continue to set up research programmes here, one of the latest being the Novartis Institute for Tropical Diseases' new malaria research programme.
The Government target for the biomedical sector to generate $25 billion in output and 15,000 in jobs by 2015 looks within reach, said Mr Yeoh Keat Chuan, executive director at the Economic Development Board for the biomedical sector.
'The outlook is very positive for biomedical sciences, which means we are likely to achieve our targets early,' he said.
At the research and development (R&D) level, the number of biomedical research scientists and engineers has grown from 2,055 in 2001 to 4,054 at last count.
Biomedical research units linked to the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) have also chalked up 15 patents, since their first one in 2002, in areas such as virology and bioimaging tools.
The foundation for biomedical sciences has been set, according to Mr Philip Yeo, outgoing A*Star chairman.
'For the last five years, we have done basement one, first floor,' he quipped, leaving successor Lim Chuan Poh and his team to build the second and third floors.
EDB's biomedical investment fund Bio*One Capital - designed to nurture firms contributing to the sector's growth - ploughed $114 million into 16 projects last year. Some products from its portfolio companies are entering the trial stage.
Bio*One plans to continue supporting firms in biologics as well as those in medical technology and small molecules translational projects.
What the Government plans to push next is something called 'translational research' or bringing medical innovations from the laboratory to the hospital bed, and finally on to the marketplace.
(Straits Times, 7 Feb) -
hub hub hub hub..
medical hub
biomedical hub
travel hub
transhipment hub
exposition hub
exhibition hub
financial hub
what other hub?
is the gabrament grasping at straws?
or is this a strategy of scattering into the winds and praying really hard that one of these things take root?
if it is so, it is very scary as the human costs of this is staggering.. like sgmacross asked, will there be a job for him in the near future? it if doesn't work out, a whole lot of people who have trained specifically for something like that will find it hard to get a job where they are qualified for.. they may then be part of the Singapore diaspora out there.. who may never come back because they have been forced to be quitters..
and with so many "hubs" out there, and so many of our youth training themselves to be employable specifically by these "hubs", failure of each hub would mean a huge group of people becoming marginalised..
it would be a sad thing..
p.s. the word "diaspora" comes from "scattering to the winds"... can we afford that here in Singapore? -
If you like to wash test tubes, then this job is definitely for you.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Any economists in the house? Can you tell me whether I can get a job in this industry in 2 years time?
-
In reply to OM's thread. Taken from here:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=230140Originally posted by lotus999:boys and girls, be prepared to be multi-skilled and to take up jobs you might not be specifically trained to do. the world is changing:
Careers
An evolution takes root
Global changes pushing a large number of Singaporeans to work in jobs outside their degrees; further shifts ahead.
By Seah Chiang Nee, littlespeck.com
Jan 6, 2007
AFTER returning with a Master's in mass communications in Australia, Phyllis fretted as she shot off one job application letter after another.
She had heard horror stories about the tough market here and worried that she would be unemployed for some time. To her surprise, she landed her first job within two weeks and discovered a career trend.
Her job, however, had nothing to do with what she had expected when she first went to Melbourne six years earlier, which was journalism, advertising or public relations.
She made it as a junior executive at a beach hotel on the flourishing island of Sentosa.
What she and many Malaysians seeking jobs here have discovered in recent years is a growing disconnect between their university degrees and subsequent careers as a result of the changing global economy.
It merely follows the trend in the developed world as old businesses disappear, sometimes overnight, and new ones spring up, creating problems for graduates with an inflexible job expectation.
My friendÂ’s son who graduated in civil engineering from one of AmericaÂ’s top colleges, for example, is now teaching in a secondary school instead of working in construction.
Lawyers have become journalists or musicians and doctors are now managers. An IT graduate I befriended is a professional photographer and a few trained biologists have done well in sales.
Cases of people working in jobs unrelated to their training have become so common that interviewers have stopped asking candidates questions like: “Why should a trained scientist like you want to work as a junior executive with us?”
In the past, parents used to send their children to study accountancy, law or engineering, the so-called secure careers, and see them move single-mindedly into these professions.
A doctor was then a doctor, a biologist generally worked in the lab and a civil engineer, more often then not, would end up wearing a hard hat – square pegs in square holes, so to speak.
Scattered stories of graduates working outside their studies have been around for some time, but the numbers really took off around the mid or late-90s.
The reason was two-fold: the large loss of industrial jobs to countries like China and India, and new economic demands that cause some jobs to disappear and others to flourish.
People were also responding to SingaporeÂ’s own economic restructuring to move into higher technology and services that required retraining and reorganising of the labour market.
The economic downturns of Sept 11 (2001) and the SARS crisis (2003) caused large unemployment – and career dislocation.
In the first half of 2001, for instance, four in 10 of the 9,000 people retrenched were executives and 16,500 tertiary-educated Singaporeans were jobless by September. This resulted in professionals having to move into new unrelated work.
In the years ahead, multiple skills and career flexibility will be a fact of life as a result of further changes. Careers will blow hot and cold due to rising and falling demands.
In some years, skills like IT, construction or accountancy would be in demand; in others, especially now, it would be personal banking, healthcare or teaching.
“Any professional sticking to one career choice or skill stands the chance of being left behind,” said an executive head-hunter.
Whether working in Singapore or abroad, the ideal 21st Century graduate will be one who is anchored to one or two disciplines but who has also covered a spread of diverse elective courses.
To its credit, before the world economy changed, the government argued that economic restructuring had to begin in education.
Today, eight out of 10 Singaporean students get post-secondary education that is steadily moving into a multi-faceted approach.
Firstly, it abandoned the old exam-oriented model and adopted a large part of the American system.
The two biggest universities, National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University, now allow students to pursue courses outside their immediate fields of specialisation.
This is filtering downwards to schools. By end-2007, upper secondary students in 40 schools will be offered 40-hour courses in five polytechnics.
“We'll cover subjects like tourism services (accommodation, food and beverage, and tour planning), IT, Media and Design, Chemical and Life Sciences as well as Game Design,” an official explained.
This will move to the pre-teens with the opening of Singapore’s first “primary school of the future” in 2008 (with 14 more by 2015) to prepare children for a life dominated by technology and information.
“We want to teach children from young to be comfortable with the latest technology,” said a senior official.
Increasingly, students will be offered a wider range of courses and electives, allowing school dropouts to have a better crack at a meaningful job.
Some special schools are moving into non-academic studies. A case in point is North Light School where students can be seen playing games on Xbox 360 consoles during classes.
At Townsville Primary, a small supermarket has been set up, at which children take turns to work – giving them lessons in arithmetic and working skills.
When the two S$10bil (RM22.9bil) casino resorts open in 2010, further career shifts will likely follow. You may well find a medical practitioner working in a casino – and I don’t mean in a clinic either. -
Citizens have lost more than S$10 billions over the past 3 years due to inept investment decisions colored by pride and self-centred decision making process.
Ex-president Ong Teng Cheong actually has suggested such investments in overseas project to be subjected to accountable and transparent processes which will be better able to protect against self-centred durai-type of power play which do not benefit any one or the citizens.
To justify mistakes like showing only information which are favorable and avoiding publishing the actual full picture will only postpone our current problems.
Temasek should learn from Shin Corp and NKF mistakes and adopt an accountable and transparent investment strategy and plan which will be understood and supported by the citizens.
One approach is to adopt the guideline that its overseas' investments should at least achieve a minimal annual yields (ROI) of 3% pa over any 10 years' time frame.
Any investments in ventures like Optus, Shin Corp and Global Crossing should be carried out only based on strategic master plan to uncover or unlock regional strategic resource or technological advantages to support our local industries and economic value-adding upgrading or at least produce 3% pa ROI.
If these criteria cannot be met we should seriously reviewing such investments of citizens' monies overseas.
We should in the event of the above-mentioned criteria being unavailable or not fulfilled continue placing our surpluses of citizens' monies where the mouths are to feed our own citizens in terms of lowering their costs of medicare and retirements funding or job creations.
Endowment funds should be set up to lock in any capital gains and held on long-term deposits to yield interests to fund such government services to the people (1) to lower costs of living (2) retirements/medicare needs of citizens.
The objective is to enable Temasek and GIC to safeguard citizens' surpluses in a less risky manner and unaffected by such major losses in billions due to immature egoistic decisions like shin corp or souzhou.
The alternative placing of surpluses in local industries are further protected because we could definitely derive benefits exceeding 3% through (1) bank deposits and (2) strategic local investments e.g. import substitutions, resource-based industries like petrol chemical, palm oil, mineral, biomedical, water and infrastructural developments, desalination, technology-startups in niche areas which will place us technologically on par with Korea and Taiwan if not Finland and Denmark.
Get citizens to be technologically savvy in telecommunications, computers, software engineering, and ready to be employed in technology start-ups to take advantage of downstream productions from petrol chemical and resource-based industries.
A master plan should be set up with top entrepreneurs and industrialists joining the panel under the direction of a minister for technology startups to boost implementation and upgrade to value-adding economy within 5 years since the civil servants in EDB only talk and so far could not quite oversee the whole economic structuring plans despite three recent deep recessions. Our government must adopt Stanley Shih (of Acer) strategy of (1) manufacturing what the world need (2) creating brand names (3) implement consistently technology startups with a whole team working to level up in practical knowledge and technology applications. -
With output base of S$23 billions,it is normal of single digit growth.
This sector is subject to the manugacturing cycles of drugs makers.
It may take few months to produce one batch of medicines.
1.it increase 4 times of output since 2000.Starting from zero in less than 10 years,it now forms 5% of GDP
2.Only 15-20% of biomedical scholars here are non-Singaporeans; Singapore has what it takes to not only attract foreign talents but also to nurture its talents through 'the best education'
3.Many big fishs here:
-
IT hub and telecommunications hub.Originally posted by the Bear:hub hub hub hub..
medical hub
biomedical hub
travel hub
transhipment hub
exposition hub
exhibition hub
financial hub
what other hub?
is the gabrament grasping at straws?
or is this a strategy of scattering into the winds and praying really hard that one of these things take root?
if it is so, it is very scary as the human costs of this is staggering.. like sgmacross asked, will there be a job for him in the near future? it if doesn't work out, a whole lot of people who have trained specifically for something like that will find it hard to get a job where they are qualified for.. they may then be part of the Singapore diaspora out there.. who may never come back because they have been forced to be quitters..
and with so many "hubs" out there, and so many of our youth training themselves to be employable specifically by these "hubs", failure of each hub would mean a huge group of people becoming marginalised..
it would be a sad thing..
p.s. the word "diaspora" comes from "scattering to the winds"... can we afford that here in Singapore?
The recent promotion of IT and engineering besides Science already tells us a lot... -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Problems with hubs is that the government focuses on the latest tech and forget the rest of the darn hubs. Biomedical is a long term hub which needs alot of money development, and alot of focus -takes about 10 years to get a yield. So far I seen none on Singapore's side - the government just jumps onto the next bandwagon of money yielding hubs.
With output base of S$23 billions,it is normal of single digit growth.
This sector is subject to the manugacturing cycles of drugs makers.
It may take few months to produce one batch of medicines.
1.[b]it increase 4 times of output since 2000.Starting from zero in less than 10 years,it now forms 5% of GDP
2.
3.[b]Many big fishs here:[/b]
Jack of all trades - master of none. Familiar there? -
fmyk: Problems with hubs is that the government focuses on the latest tech and forget the rest of the darn hubs. Biomedical is a long term hub which needs alot of money development, and alot of focus -takes about 10 years to get a yield. So far I seen none on Singapore's side - the government just jumps onto the next bandwagon of money yielding hubs.
Some people can't handle the truth. The truth sometimes hurts and few business or personal relationships could survive the harsh reality of total honesty. During the selling process, some people have difficulty saying "no" and will actually tell you that they are interested in order to avoid potential conflict. As the pressure of making a decision builds, prospects will frequently use half-truths or whatever to either stall or disengage from the selling sequence.
Jack of all trades - master of none. Familiar there?
If you are running a business, how long can you bleed? In this development as in many others who are the ones bleeding?; in this case, the jobs are for the 'specialists' to wash test-tubes.. the rest, eat ur heart out, find something lower n upgrade... never mind, let the ministerial pays... come with their consciences... 'using far water to douse near fire' plans as 'long term' (stop at two; quotas, etc) yet they are fire-fighting in practice. get a job and no life for ABC gardens, that's ur life ...haiz....
-
Biomedical is certainly a growth industry and will remain so for some time. With the aging population in developed countries and greater prosperity in developing nations like China, demand for new drugs and treatment will only rise.
Whilst China can make copies of everything under the sun, it does not have a reputation for quality in high value products like pharmaceuticals as yet. It is one thing to send back a consignment of poor quality garden tools, with medication, it's quite a different matter.
Singapore has the advantage in this area and it is not surprising to see pharmaceutical companies setting up shop in increasing numbers here and now contribute a significant amount to our economy. The sizzling growth rate of 30% is a reflection of the interest MNCs in our biomed industry and proof that we are on the right track. Of course, it is not sustainable anymore than a developed nation can expect double digit growth in GDP like China. As our biomed industry matures, growth will stabilize but that is a good thing.
It is also true that with time, China will build up its own reputation and one day will be able to compete us in the biomed industry as well. That is only to be expected. When that happens though, we must have progressed to higher value products. Whilst the Chinese may make cheap paracetamol generics, we should be making biologics and bedside diagnostic kits by then. -
I am not an economist but as someone in the biomed industry, I would say yes, you can certainly get a job in this industry in 2 years' time but alot depends on your qualifications. It is going to get alot more competitive.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Any economists in the house? Can you tell me whether I can get a job in this industry in 2 years time?
When it first started, Singapore was so desperately short of post-docs that anyone with a PhD in a relevant field can probably get a decent paying job. Now it is possible to get a Chinese post-doc with a year's experience in a reputable research lab who is prepared to take the job for S$3k.
At a higher level, the numerous scholars sent out by EDB to Oxbridge and Ivy League colleges are now returning to work in Singapore. You will be competing with these locals as well as the increasing numbers of foreign scientists that are lured to Singapore by the government investment in this industry. And that is not even to mention the graduate medical school (twinned with Duke University, USA) that will produce many clinician-scientists in time to come...
If you want to look for a job in the biomed industry in 2-3 years' time, you would do well to differentiate yourself. There are many postdocs with a PhD in molecular biology already, so what's so great about another one. On the other hand, if you have both a background in molecular biology but also have qualifications in bioinformatics, which is increasingly relevant with the amount of data being mined from microarray experiments, for example, you have an edge over the rest.
As in all fields, how successful you are depends on whether you have one up over the rest. -
Pharma giant will spend $100 million on R&D in China. November 6, 2006.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Biomedical is certainly a growth industry and will remain so for some time. With the aging population in developed countries and greater prosperity in developing nations like China, demand for new drugs and treatment will only rise.
Whilst China can make copies of everything under the sun, it does not have a reputation for quality in high value products like pharmaceuticals as yet. It is one thing to send back a consignment of poor quality garden tools, with medication, it's quite a different matter.
Singapore has the advantage in this area and it is not surprising to see pharmaceutical companies setting up shop in increasing numbers here and now contribute a significant amount to our economy. The sizzling growth rate of 30% is a reflection of the interest MNCs in our biomed industry and proof that we are on the right track. Of course, it is not sustainable anymore than a developed nation can expect double digit growth in GDP like China. As our biomed industry matures, growth will stabilize but that is a good thing.
It is also true that with time, China will build up its own reputation and one day will be able to compete us in the biomed industry as well. That is only to be expected. When that happens though, we must have progressed to higher value products. Whilst the Chinese may make cheap paracetamol generics, we should be making biologics and bedside diagnostic kits by then.
By 2010, China will be a top-five pharmaceutical market. By 2050, this nation is projected by some to be the world's largest market for pharmaceuticals. The question is: Can China become not just the world's largest consumer of medicines, but also, its pre-eminent power in medical innovation?...
http://www.asiawind.com/pub/cmi/-1996 u make me -
the thing about research into meds is that it is a high risk and potentially low return thing..
you may blow a billion into researching into a dead end..
or your find may save a million lives so much that people take it from you and your patent doesn't mean squat (see where the HIV pills are going these days)
oh well.. for every silver lining, may be a dark cloud of despair -
Actually you cannot compare China to Singapore.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Biomedical is certainly a growth industry and will remain so for some time. With the aging population in developed countries and greater prosperity in developing nations like China, demand for new drugs and treatment will only rise.
Whilst China can make copies of everything under the sun, it does not have a reputation for quality in high value products like pharmaceuticals as yet. It is one thing to send back a consignment of poor quality garden tools, with medication, it's quite a different matter.
Singapore has the advantage in this area and it is not surprising to see pharmaceutical companies setting up shop in increasing numbers here and now contribute a significant amount to our economy. The sizzling growth rate of 30% is a reflection of the interest MNCs in our biomed industry and proof that we are on the right track. Of course, it is not sustainable anymore than a developed nation can expect double digit growth in GDP like China. As our biomed industry matures, growth will stabilize but that is a good thing.
It is also true that with time, China will build up its own reputation and one day will be able to compete us in the biomed industry as well. That is only to be expected. When that happens though, we must have progressed to higher value products. Whilst the Chinese may make cheap paracetamol generics, we should be making biologics and bedside diagnostic kits by then.
I was speaking to a UK consultant who worked for WHO on H5N1 in China . Her impression of China - it is no longer that developing nation we like to think it is. China has already advanced so far ahead in bioresearch that even Singapore cannot catch it.
They have ALOT OF very capable scientists and researchers which were homebred and nurtured carefully - No FT hor. They are able to produce 10 billion animal vaccines through their Labs in a year . They have research lab in Harbin which is very advanced and comparable to US . Chinese scientists have an interest in taking new things apart and putting them back together to see how things work.
China is able to produce in 3 years what any other country like USA will take 10 years to produce if she wants to. They are manufacturing generic antivirals , not just panadols for local consumption. If there is an outbreak of influenza , they can solve the world's shortage of anti virals. Their pharmaceutical capability is there already.
Let's not forget Artesimin, the anti malaria drug which the Chinese manufactures in a large quantity for the world as well.
If they can get their act right in terms of the levels of bureaucracy , they will be able to convert those animal antiviral producing labs into human ones in an event of an outbreak.
Now Singapore has the ONLY advantage of respecting intellectual property.
China does not- their scientists like to take things apart and see how they work and improve on it when they put it back together. Once the blueprints is in their hands, bye bye intellectual property.
I would be very careful about what I say about China's research and technological capabilities. In history , China in the ancient days was very technologically advanced compared to european nations. History will repeat itself. -
I think biopolis has a centralised glassware cleaning facility. So no such job anymore.Originally posted by charlize:If you like to wash test tubes, then this job is definitely for you. -
Augh, bioinformatics. BLASTing here and there.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:If you want to look for a job in the biomed industry in 2-3 years' time, you would do well to differentiate yourself. There are many postdocs with a PhD in molecular biology already, so what's so great about another one. On the other hand, if you have both a background in molecular biology but also have qualifications in bioinformatics, which is increasingly relevant with the amount of data being mined from microarray experiments, for example, you have an edge over the rest.
We had some impromptu career guidance from our lecturer yesterday. He says, at least for the next 5 years, the hot subjects are: genetics, proteomics, immunology. What say you? -
Well... those hot subjects will continue to be hot, as long as diseases like HIV, bird flu, dengue, etc are not eradicated from the face of Earth.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Augh, bioinformatics. BLASTing here and there.
We had some impromptu career guidance from our lecturer yesterday. He says, at least for the next 5 years, the hot subjects are: genetics, proteomics, immunology. What say you?
But hot subjects is not equal to hot job markets. Nowadays more and more biomedical processes are automated. (One day, even washing test tubes may be automated.) Also, many other countries are catching up with us and competing with us... -
Genetics if you are in the US.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Augh, bioinformatics. BLASTing here and there.
We had some impromptu career guidance from our lecturer yesterday. He says, at least for the next 5 years, the hot subjects are: genetics, proteomics, immunology. What say you?
Proteomics if you are in the US and Australia.
Immunology if you are in the US and Australia and UK.
But most of these research jobs require a PhD while the diploma grad/bachelor grads do all the dirty work. -
Damn.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:I think biopolis has a centralised glassware cleaning facility. So no such job anymore.