What is science? Science is merely a term for knowledge. Nurse Review (Paul Nurse et al): Basic research: Is the acquisition of new knowledge about the natural world. Applied research: Aimed at achieving specific objectives and outcomes Translational research: A bridge between basic and applied research, or goal-oriented basic research. Technology is the skilled production of goods and services

Science and technology depend on each other Not a linear relationship, e.g. Basic science —> Applied Science —> technology Rather a complex intertwined web, e.g. Quantum theory leads to transistors and lasers leads to computers and new devices, leads to new science Basic science can often lead to technology decades or centuries later: e.g. Newton’s laws to satellites - ~300 years General relativity to GPS ~ 100 years Also unexpected - e.g. WWW from HE physics

World GDP through history https://infogr.am/Share-of-world-GDP-throughout-history

Fraction of world’s GDP https://infogr.am/Share-of-world-GDP-throughout-history

Science and the economy Science has brought enormous benefits to society - life expectancy doubled in just the last century Also a great triumph of human understanding - from the origins of the universe to how biology works Virtually every product you can think of has basic science that underpins its development Science and innovation lead to entirely new industries Many top companies not only didn’t exist 50 years ago, but even their industry didn’t

Knowledge much more important than resources Natural resources not as important as knowledge and technology (e.g. Africa or even Russia vs Switzerland or Singapore)

Wealth of country depends on knowledge and innovation Wealth of Britain not really a result of colonization (poverty of colonies may be). Rather mainly due to innovation and technology. E.g. richest countries in Europe like Sweden, Switzerland and Germany had almost no colonies. On the other hand countries like Spain and Portugal that had lots of colonies (on a per capita basis Portugal had the most) became among the poorest in Europe.

Poorer countries initially spur economic growth by exploiting discoveries made elsewhere USA: Edison’s light bulb really invented by Swann in the UK Recent example of wind turbines: Danish company set up manufacturing in China, resulted in Chinese companies acquiring skills and eventually competing, now dominating market

Economic growth precedes scientific growth In 1908, the USA became the world’s largest economy; However, not a major scientific player until the 1940s-50s. Similarly, Japan had become a first-rate economy by the 1960s; became major scientific country only from ~1990s on Today - Singapore - on its way to becoming major scientific power? Tomorrow - China? Heavily investing in science.

However, a minimum level of high quality science needed to make the transition Even by 1908, the USA had world class scientists: Millikan oil drop experiment (showing electron charge was quantized) Michaelson-Moreley experiment (light and ether) T.H. Morgan - connection between chromosomes and genes Basic science needed to even be able to exploit new technologies, e.g. today new biotechnology, etc.

Why should a country invest in science rather than use discoveries made elsewhere? Scientific understanding is basis of more applied fields like engineering and medicine Without base of scientists, not possible to acquire the fundamental knowledge required for these disciplines, including new technology First mover effect - if knowledge is local, it can help; e.g. Silicon Valley, etc. Agglomeration effect - complementary expertise nearby, availability of skills, etc. — > growth of clusters

Some major problems Food Water Energy Health

Why is the UK successful? Outstanding science Talented people working in collaborative environment Open innovation Supportive business environment R&D tax credits Patent Box Lower rate of Corporation Tax to profits from patented inventions. Funding Enterprise Investment Scheme, Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme Biomedical catalyst scheme - Government matches funding for early stage companies

CAMBRIDGE SCIENCE PARK (roots in Trinity college, 1970) 1.6 MILLION SQ. FT. BUILT STOCK 500,000 SQ. FT. OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DEDICATED SCIENCE PARK WITH 25% OF ALL OFFICE AND LAB ACCOMMODATION IN CAMBRIDGE 6000 EMPLOYEES, 80 COMPANIES SELECTION OF BIO-MEDICAL OCCUPIERS ON CAMBRIDGE SCIENCE PARK

Research and Innovation in the UK

Antibody Therapeutics Mouse mAbs - George Köhler and César Milstein 1975 Method to isolate and reproduce mAbs not patented by MRC Applications in human medicine limited as mouse mAbs rapidly inactivated by the human immune response Used in grouping blood types, identifying viruses, purifying drugs and testing for pregnancy, cancers, blood clots and heart disease. Humanised mAbs - Greg Winter 1986 Technology to ‘humanise’ mouse monoclonal antibodies licensed to ~50 companies, one-off licence fee and royalties on resulting drugs Human antibodies - Greg Winter, Michael Neuberger libraries of human antibodies for display on bacterial viruses. transgenic mice with human antibody genes mAbs now account for third of all new treatments breast cancer, leukaemia, asthma, arthritis, psoriasis, transplant rejection, etc. A nice example showing historical perspective – original idea not patented – How academic institutes became responsible for commercialisation On next slide how the technology developed and new companies started up/spun out from later developments Demonstrates flow from academia to industry, back to academia and then to new industry

2016 1989 2000 Antibody-related companies in Cambridge Humira® 2003 Cambridge Antibody Technology 1st fully human mAb as a treatment for RA Antibody-related companies in Cambridge 2016 1989 Follow on from previous slide Cambridge Antibody Technologies and 1st mAb product 2016 Mature established companies for therapeutics (e.g. Medimmune (AZ)) and reagents (e.g. Abcam) New companies based on different ways of producing human mAbs e.g. kymab, New companies based on engineering domains e.g. Domantis (now GSK) Others based on similar principles learnt from antibodies e.g. bicycle therapeutics 2000

DNA sequencing Human genome 2001 Fred Sanger Dideoxy chain termination 1953 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2016 Watson and Crick Structure of DNA Short RNA sequencing Maxam and Gilbert Chemical cleavage ABI sequencing machines Fluorimetric detection 454 Life Sciences Solexa  Illumina ‘next-generation sequencing’ technology Pyrosequencing Oxford Nanopore Single molecule sequencing Portable sequencers UK pioneered development of early DNA sequencing technologies (LMB contribution e.g. Sanger, method key to human genome project), contributed to1st human genome sequencing, translation to clinic through NHS 100,000 genomes project (5% complete in Aug 2015), pioneering the 3rd generation of sequencing technology development (Oxford nanopore phone-sized portable sequencer, Base4 as another example) Many additional companies formed to produce and analyse sequence data (e.g. Congenica – see later slide) Fred Sanger Dideoxy chain termination Nobel Prize, 1958 and 1980 bacteriophage phi X174 DNA 5.3kb 1977 Human genome 2001 100,000 genomes project NHS rare diseases

Funding Science Need good governance Researchers need stable, reliable funding, coupled with minimal bureaucracy, freedom from an early stage Also freedom from politicization and intrusion

Finally In science, evidence is what matters, not authority. That is its beauty and strength This means not caring whether someone dabbling in economic history is a Nobel laureate but looking at the evidence. We are living in a world in which all sorts of claims are propagated, often with no basis in fact OED announced “post-truth” as word of the year of 2016 Science is more important than ever