California – Bioengineering

Why the future of bioengineering is so bright

11 March 2014

Sunset over Los Angeles from Griffiths Observatory

The last stop on my US tour was the inspirational California Institute of Technology. Based in Pasadena, Caltech has been reported as the top university in the world for the last three years in the Times Higher Education University Global Rankings. Although these rankings usually focus on a particular area I would agree that there is something pretty special about Caltech. The Caltech outlook was epitomized for me by Professor Frances Arnold who said they are not just training students to become scientists or engineers, they are training them to become Nobel Prize winners.

With that ambition laid on the table it was refreshing to hear such a senior academic speak so enthusiastically about her research and the development of her research over time from her mechanical & aerospace engineering roots through chemical engineering to her current research on protein engineering.

Broad the home of the Division of Biology and Biological Engineering at Caltech

I also met with Professor Michael Elowitz while at Caltech, a physicist by background Michael now works in synthetic and systems biology and is the Executive Director of Bioengineering in the Division of Biology and Biological Engineering.

I was interested in the naming of the division as this was the first time that bioengineering had been partnered with biology. Although the meaning of biological engineering at Caltech does have similar origins to MIT. Rather than use any of the MIT or Imperial-inspired triangle or square analogies Professor Elowitz sees biology and bioengineering as two sides of the same coin.

“It’s not the things that will be found out, but the way we approach the problems and the solutions we will come up with.”~ Professor Michael Elowitz

An example of this is Professor Michael Elowitz’s circuit approach to molecular biology. It’s not what the molecules do in isolation it’s what they do in combination, in a physiological environment that he finds most fascinating. With medicine the greatest successes will not be discovering the origins of disease, but will be creating new interventions to assist or in a more ideal world prevent disease before it starts.

“Intellectuals solve problems, geniuses prevent them.” ~Albert Einstein

While speaking to Professor Michael Elowitz he mentioned Sean R. Eddy’s paper about “Antedisciplinary” Science, published in 2005. I would recommend reading this article as although now nearly ten years on a lot of the ideas still hold true today. Caltech also supports and encourages individual interdisciplinary people, there seemed to be a lot of fluidity between the loose Department and division structure with academics given the space to follow their research interests. An environment, which given the calibre of the students that attend Caltech, is a healthy and inspiring environment to be in.

“When I think of new fields in science that have been opened, I don’t think of interdisciplinary teams combining existing skills to solve a defined problem—I think of single interdisciplinary people inventing new ways to look at the world.”~ Sean R. Eddy

In my opinion bioengineers are a prime example of ‘interdisciplinary people’, and the field attracts equally ‘interdisciplinary people’ from other scientific or engineering backgrounds. We need to utilise the tools, technology and techniques that we have and will create for bioengineering to fulfill its potential contribution to society.

This trip has made me wonder what the future bioengineering department would look like. It’s hard to say because the options are endless. I had thought that as bioengineering matures as a discipline bioengineering graduates will fill up our bioengineering departments. I don’t think that will entirely be the case though. As Professor Frances Arnold talked me through her journey to her current protein engineering research something consistently came up in her explanation. “It’s exciting.” Researchers from all fields will be pulled to bioengineering research because it’s intellectually exciting. This diversity doesn’t dilute, it only enriches the discipline.

I was also interested to hear that 15% of the undergraduates at Caltech are majoring in bioengineering or chemical engineering, with students who previously would have chosen biology or mechanical engineering in particular attracted to the new major.

“We are creating the future of engineering, not following it.”~ Professor Frances Arnold

This trip has certainly fueled my excitement, and I believe that now is the time for bioengineering to cement it’s central engineering role, whether it’s from the foundations of biology or a broader combination of sciences, bioengineering is here to stay.

‘Til next post

Jenna

UC Bioengineering

jstevens

8 March 2014

Over the last couple of days I have been to UC Berkeley, UCLA and USC, three University of California campus, and I think that the diversity within one state encapsulates the heterogeneous bioengineering landscape I have observed on my US tour.

At UC Berkeley they look more broadly at bioengineering, with particular expertise in synthetic biology, systems biology. The Department was founded in 1998 and is the youngest Department in engineering. UC Berkeley doesn’t have a medical school so they utilise the UC San Francisco medical school for clinical/engineering collaborations, biomedical engineering research at PhD level and through the translational medicine masters program.

At UCLA their focus is more molecular and mechanistic based, but research spans all scales. The Departments developed in more of a grass roots approach compared to other institutions I have visited with faculty brought in to build breadth of expertise, for example Professor Daniel Kamei who I met with has a chemical engineering background. The Department was formed in 2002, with the undergraduate major beginning in 2004.

Biomedical Engineering at the University of Southern California began in 1963 initially as a PhD option (in Systems Physiology) within the Electrical Engineering Department. The undergraduate major in biomedical engineering was initiated in 1974 and the Department was established in 1976 making it one of the first Departments of Bioengineering.

What was evident across these three institutions was that the research themes and the Departments definition of bioengineering change over time, depending on the faculty involved and their focus.

UC Berkeley had some useful concentric circle diagrams to illustrate the interplay between the research themes, and the academics working between or within research themes.

A benefit of the location of these institutions in California is the array of bioengineering industry that they have on their door step, this is not a coincidence, with faculty at all three institutions involved in start-ups and Silicon Valley close by. Industry is a key market for all of these universities, with students typically going into industry, graduate studies (such as medicine) or research.

From building links with industry to links with the community. University of California have taken an interesting approach to the latter through the creation of the Onward California website, which highlights the real-life applications of research by academics at University of California insitutions.

What was also great to hear at UCLA was that Professor Daniel Kamei, who grew up in Los Angeles continues to go back to his elementary and high schools to inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers. This close association with the community is really important as it makes the person a much more accessible role model. This is a form of outreach I would particularly encourage undergraduate and graduate students to do.

While I was at USC I had the opportunity to explore the Medical Device Development Facility. A workshop for medical device invention and innovation created by Professor Jerry Loeb in 1999. Professor Loeb had a different take on bioengineering to many others that I spoke to, having come from a medical background. To him engineering is applied physiology with the aim of creating treatments for disease. He also highlighted the importance of defining the distinction between engineering and science, something I equally feel strongly about. He expanded to discuss that to him the difference between biomedical engineering and biological engineering is that the former uses science for engineering and the latter uses engineering for science.

This reminded me of a quote I often use in presentations to illustrate the difference between engineering and science.

“Engineering is the use of technical and scientific knowledge for the benefit of humanity. Scientists study the world as it is; engineers create the world that has never been.” – Theodore von Kármán

‘Til next post
Jenna