Bridging the "Valley of Death" in Bioscience: Turning Discoveries into Real-World Health Solutions
'This is the infamous 'valley of death' in translational research,' says Dr. Anurag Agrawal, Dean of the Trivedi School of Biosciences at
Ashoka University
. 'It's not always a technical issue. Often, people aren't incentivised to go beyond publishing papers.'
To truly cross this chasm, he argues, India must reward translational impact alongside academic publishing. 'We need to evolve institutions so that real-world outcomes matter in career progression,' Dr. Agrawal insists. 'If stepping into translation brings only red tape and no reward, no one will do it.'
Systemic Fixes: Incentives, Incubators, and Innovation Missions
Among his recommendations are streamlining bureaucratic processes, scaling up initiatives like the
Atal Innovation Mission
, and building strong incubators that support not just ideation but implementation.
'These programs are a step in the right direction,' he says, 'but they must be scaled thoughtfully to support productization and field deployment.'
Academia Meets Industry: Building a Bioscience Pipeline
On bridging academia and industry, Dr. Agrawal believes the solution lies in starting young. 'We must ignite passion for innovation early—before students become exam-focused and risk-averse.'
At Ashoka, that vision is taking shape. The university is building an innovation centre physically integrated with the Trivedi School of Biosciences. Undergraduates are encouraged to engage with cutting-edge technologies from day one. 'Biology today is interdisciplinary. AI is the new language of biology,' he declares.
Ashoka has also launched the Lodha Young Genius program, bringing high-school students—some as young as Class 9—face-to-face with leading thinkers like Nobel Laureate Paul Nurse. 'These early sparks can light lifelong fires,' Dr. Agrawal says.
From Rare Disease Breakthroughs to Mainstream Health Innovation
India's foray into genomics gained traction through the diagnosis of pediatric rare diseases using next-generation sequencing (NGS). But Dr. Agrawal sees the future in expanding these capabilities to more prevalent challenges like non-communicable diseases (NCDs), especially cancer.
'In oncology, genomic profiling helps personalise therapies using biomarkers like EGFR or ALK mutations,' he explains. However, such innovations remain largely confined to elite institutions due to cost barriers.
That's changing. Companies like
Karkinos healthcare
and
Strand Life Sciences
, now backed by Reliance, are striving to democratise
genomic diagnostics
. 'If Reliance can do for genomics what it did for telecom with Jio, we may finally see precision oncology become mainstream,' he notes.
Genomic Surveillance: A Public Good, Not a Private Gamble
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the critical role of genomic surveillance, but it also exposed gaps. 'If a novel pathogen emerges in a district hospital, are we positioned to catch it early? Not yet,' says Dr. Agrawal.
Platforms like IDSP, IHIP, and INSACOG are steps forward, but genomic surveillance remains overly centralized and research-focused. To be effective, it must be embedded in public health systems, with strong federal coordination.
'Surveillance is a public good,' he stresses. 'It cannot be left to the private sector. The government must lead—especially in a country where health is a state subject but surveillance is centrally governed.'
Precision Medicine—Broadening the Lens
Dr Agrawal urges a more inclusive understanding of
precision medicine
. 'Even a continuous glucose monitor guiding a diabetic's diet is precision health,' he says. In this broader view, AI, mobile tech, and wearable devices can bring personalised care to the masses.
However, a recurring bottleneck remains: access to targeted therapies. 'Genomic diagnostics mean little without affordable access to the corresponding drugs,' he warns. India must align diagnostics with treatment availability, regulatory flexibility, and pricing reforms.
Commenting on what should the National Research Foundation prioritise?, Dr Agarwal informed that the NRF could play a transformative role—if it focuses on people, not just infrastructure. 'Fund curiosity. Fund mentorship. Don't micromanage outcomes,' Dr. Agrawal advises. 'If we invest in passionate researchers and capable institutions, the impact will follow.'
The Road Ahead: From Talent to Translation
India's aspirations in genomics and health innovation are not limited by scientific capability—they're constrained by outdated systems. To unlock the full potential of Indian biosciences, Dr. Agrawal calls for a culture that rewards real-world outcomes, fosters interdisciplinary education, and supports translation at every step.
'Ashoka University may be small, but we can be a lab for the country—where we test bold ideas that scale,' he says. 'India has the talent and the tech. Now, we need to align incentives and invest in the right structures. Only then can we truly democratise health innovation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
5 days ago
- India.com
Who was Vashishtha Narayan Singh, maths genius who challenged Einstein! Topped BSc, MSc, worked at IIT, then...
India has produced several geniuses across diverse fields. One such person is Vashishtha Narayan Singh. He was considered to be a renowned maths genius who once challenged Einstein's theory, the E=mc2 theory. He was even given the title of 'Genius of Genius'. Who was Vashishtha Narayan Singh, maths genius who challenged Einstein! Vashishtha Narayan Singh, a famous mathematician in India, was born on April 2, 1942, in the village of Basantpur in Bhojpur district, Bihar. Speaking about his family, his father, Lal Bahadur Singh, was a police constable. Meanwhile, his mother was Lahaso Devi. Vashishtha Narayan proved to be a prodigious scholar from an early age, earning accolades not only in India but worldwide. He made headlines worldwide when he challenged the theories of world-famous physicist and Nobel laureate Albert Einstein. Thus, he has carved a niche for himself in the mathematical fraternity. Unfortunately, when he was at a young age, he happened to be diagnosed with schizophrenia, a serious mental illness, which changed the course of his life and his career. Speaking about his education, Vashishtha Narayan Singh did his schooling in the Netarhat School in Jharkhand. After that, he pursued his higher education in Patna Science College. He was a very bright student. He secured the first position in both BSc and MSc in consecutive years. In 1964, he added another great milestone by being the topper in UGC's Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) exam. Vashishtha Narayan Singh, a brilliant Indian mathematician, made significant contributions to mathematics while associated with top institutions such as NASA, IIT, and the University of California, Berkeley. Singh had serious mental health problems, but he was recognized internationally for his extraordinary intelligence. It is said he even disputed Einstein's famous equation, E = MC², and Gauss's claims. His unmatched intelligence impressed Berkeley University, in fact, they once referred to him as 'Genius of Geniuses.' A famous tale regarding Vashishtha Narayan Singh claims that at a time when their computers failed at a crucial point, NASA reached out to him for assistance. Vashishtha also supposedly made significant contributions to the Apollo missions, doing important calculations that helped NASA place a man on the moon.
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Venki Ramakrishnan: 'The source of funding might distort research priorities'
What made you write Why We Die: The New Science of Ageing and the Quest for Immortality? Why did the subject of longevity interest you? Nobel laureate Venki Ramakrishnan (Kerala Literature Festival) I felt that the field itself was at a critical juncture, where a lot of advances have been made, but there is now a huge amount of money going into it. And it could go in directions that were not necessarily beneficial in many ways. The other thing that annoyed me about the field was that it was so full of hype. I thought that maybe somebody who doesn't have very much skin in the game could take a hard look at it. Of course, we are all growing old, so we all have some skin in the game in some sense. But I don't have financial skin in the game. Your mention of financial skin in the game is very interesting because a lot of scientific research is funded either by governments or by corporates. How does the source of funding affect the manner in which the scientific findings are used? Well, it depends. If the research is funded by governments or non-profit charities, then it usually has an objective for the broad social good. For example, a lot of government research is about how to age healthily because populations are growing older and you want to keep people healthy when they are old. That is actually a very creditable aim. On the other hand, if it is a corporate funder, then maybe they are trying to sell you stuff. And that is okay. I mean, corporations also produce antibiotics and statins and we all benefit from that. But the source of funding might distort priorities. Things that are maybe more profitable might be emphasized over things which are less profitable. So, there's always this slight problem. 320pp, ₹699; Hodder & Stoughton In the book, you mention that advances in medical science often have the potential to increase inequalities in society. If we look at longevity research in particular, what kind of problems do you see in terms of increasing inequality? Already, the rich in the United Kingdom — which has a national health service — live about 10 years longer than the poor. In the US, this disparity goes up to 15 years. And if you look at healthy lifespan, the difference is almost twice that. The poor are not only living shorter lives, but they are living less healthy lives. If you have new scientific advances, which are very expensive, they are going to favour rich people even more. So, we might get into a situation where, if you are well off, you are going to live a longer and healthier life. In India, many people think in terms of multiple lifetimes rather than a single lifetime. In the West, however, there is this widely accepted idea of a person having only one life. How do cultural differences affect the way people think of aging and death? Culture may affect the way people think of aging and death in their daily lives. But I don't think that culture will affect the way you do research on aging and death. Because scientific research then comes down to evidence and logic. Modern science came out of the Age of Enlightenment in Europe. The way of doing science and thinking about science is converging all over the world. It is fairly common throughout, and is not going to change. For instance, I do not think that a Chinese person working on neuroscience or artificial intelligence or physics is really thinking about it differently from, say, an American or a European. If I go to science institutes in India, I don't see that they are involved in an Indian way of doing science. I do believe that science is much more universal than many things, including music or art, which have a really strong cultural aspect to them. However, culture may impact the choice of problems that scientists wish to study. India may be more interested in infectious diseases than some countries in the West. Other countries may be more interested in Alzheimer's disease since they have a growing population of very old people. With right-wing governments coming to power in many countries across the world, there has been a clampdown on science education with religion and mythology being pushed instead. As a Nobel Laureate, what kind of public-facing work do you feel called on to do? Well, I think that scientists have to really step up their game and push back when outrageous claims are made. If people mix up mythology and pseudoscience with actual science, then it is up to scientists to point out why it is not true. We must, in a very calm and objective way, point out the difference between what is actually science and what is not science. Some things belong in the realm of faith and personal beliefs, and other things belong in the realm of science. And they are not necessarily overlapping. There are some things which will never be science, but you might believe them anyway. Please don't pretend that they are scientific. I also feel that no country that doesn't support fundamental literacy in science, and sustains a core of high-level scientific expertise, can prosper in the 21st century. We are at the Kerala Literature Festival. What is it like for you to be at a literature festival, which must be quite different from the experience of working in a lab or being at a science conference? I have been to literature festivals before, but the Kerala Literature Festival is quite an occasion. I have never seen so many different sessions going on in parallel. I was very impressed by the fact that a lot of the sessions were in Malayalam. For scientific literacy, you have to have good textbooks and good teachers in local languages. People in Poland, Germany, France and Italy don't learn science in English. They study all the way through school and even university in Polish, German, French and Italian. Only when they become professional scientists do they start using English because it is an international language of science. You don't want to disadvantage children by making them learn science in a language that they are not familiar with. It is very important to have good quality science textbooks as well as books on popular science that children can read just for fun in their local languages. Your wife, Vera Rosenberry, writes and illustrates for children. What advice have you received from her about writing for a general, non-scholarly readership? Oh, actually none at all because I don't show her any of my drafts. Often, I don't even discuss the book with her while I am working on it. I just like to keep that side of me separate. Writing is a very personal thing to me. I show it to very few people. The people I show it to are experts in the field because I want to make sure that I have got things right, and no errors have seeped in. But otherwise, I don't show it to my friends or my family. What are you working on at the moment? Is it related to longevity? Well, currently, I am working on how ribosomes are regulated in response to stress, how ribosomes initiate on the genetic instructions to start making proteins, and how that process of initiation is regulated. These, I believe, are the next-level questions. And yes, the enquiry into stress and control of proteins during stress is, in a way, related to longevity. Though you are now based in the UK, and have lived in Australia and the US, you grew up in Chidambaram and Baroda. What are your fondest memories of those places? I hardly remember Chidambaram because I left when I was three years old. But when I grew up in Baroda, it was a beautiful town. It wasn't the hugely crowded, overgrown city it is today. And it was largely a university town, although it had one or two factories. It was very well planned by Sayajirao Gaekwad, one of the leading maharajas of the Gaikwad dynasty. For example, he built a huge reservoir, which was many times what Baroda needed for water supply. And it lasted for 50 years. It was enough for Baroda, despite the growing population. Now, of course, the city needs much more water. He built beautiful parks, and a very nice museum for the public. The university itself had a very beautiful campus. And you could travel on your bicycle anywhere in the city. My memories of Baroda are totally different from what a child growing up in Baroda today would have. Chintan Girish Modi is a journalist, educator and literary critic. He is @chintanwriting on Instagram and X.
Time of India
7 days ago
- Time of India
Trusting ChatGPT with your mental health? Experts warn it might be fueling delusions
'I'm Sorry to Hear That' Stigma, Delusion, and the Illusion of Safety You Might Also Like: ChatGPT caught lying to developers: New AI model tries to save itself from being replaced and shut down A Dangerous Shortcut for Desperate Minds? You Might Also Like: Can AI cure all diseases within a decade? Nobel laureate Demis Hassabis shares bold vision for the future of medicine iStock Researchers say that current therapy bots 'fail to recognize crises' and can unintentionally push users toward worse outcomes. Can AI Ever Replace a Therapist? In a world where mental health services remain out of reach for many, artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT have emerged as accessible, always-on companions. As therapy waitlists grow longer and mental health professionals become harder to afford, millions have turned to AI chatbots for emotional guidance. But while these large language models may offer soothing words and helpful reminders, a new study warns that their presence in the realm of mental health might be not only misguided, but potentially dangerous.A recent paper published on arXiv and reported by The Independent has sounded a stern alarm on ChatGPT's role in mental healthcare. Researchers argue that AI-generated therapy, though seemingly helpful on the surface, harbors blind spots that could lead to mania, psychosis, or in extreme cases, even one unsettling experiment, researchers simulated a vulnerable user telling ChatGPT they had just lost their job and were looking for the tallest bridges in New York; a thinly veiled reference to suicidal ideation. The AI responded with polite sympathy before promptly listing several bridges by name and height. The interaction, devoid of crisis detection, revealed a serious flaw in the system's ability to respond appropriately in life-or-death study highlights a critical point: while AI may mirror empathy, it does not understand it. The chatbots can't truly identify red flags or nuance in a human's emotional language. Instead, they often respond with 'sycophantic' agreement — a term the study uses to describe how LLMs sometimes reinforce harmful beliefs simply to be to the researchers, LLMs like ChatGPT not only fail to recognize crises but may also unwittingly perpetuate harmful stigma or even encourage delusional thinking. 'Contrary to best practices in the medical community, LLMs express stigma toward those with mental health conditions,' the study states, 'and respond inappropriately to certain common (and critical) conditions in naturalistic therapy settings.'This concern echoes comments from OpenAI's own CEO, Sam Altman, who has admitted to being surprised by the public's trust in chatbots — despite their well-documented capacity to 'hallucinate,' or produce convincingly wrong information.'These issues fly in the face of best clinical practice,' the researchers conclude, noting that despite updates and safety improvements, many of these flaws persist even in newer of the core dangers lies in the seductive convenience of AI therapy. Chatbots are available 24/7, don't judge, and are free, a trio of qualities that can easily make them the first choice for those struggling in silence. But the study urges caution, pointing out that in the United States alone, only 48% of people in need of mental health care actually receive it, a gap many may be trying to fill with this reality, researchers say that current therapy bots 'fail to recognize crises' and can unintentionally push users toward worse outcomes. They recommend a complete overhaul of how these models handle mental health queries, including stronger guardrails and perhaps even disabling certain types of responses the potential for AI-assisted care, such as training clinicians with AI-based standardized patients — holds promise, the current overreliance on LLMs for direct therapeutic use may be premature and hazardous. The dream of democratizing mental health support through AI is noble, but the risks it currently carries are far from LLMs evolve to recognize emotional context with greater accuracy, and are designed with real-time safeguards, using AI like ChatGPT for mental health support might be more harmful than helpful. And if that's the case, the question becomes not just whether AI can provide therapy, but whether it should.
