Francis Collins a vocal theist now the head of NIH

[malati]

Francis Collins a very well mannered and vocal theist has just been appointed to the top job in the NIH, a body which oversees grants on researches in the sciences and medicine not just in U S but in the world. Collins has debated Dawkins in at least 2 debates that I have read and heard.

Nice choice -- very decent and intelligent man.



Article is from the New York Times

Pick to Lead Health Agency Draws Praise and Some Concern
By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: July 8, 2009



Times Topics: Francis S. Collins | National Institutes of Health
Dr. Collins’s selection, which had been rumored for weeks, was praised by top scientists and research advocacy organizations for whom the health institute is a crucial patron.

Based in Bethesda, Md., the N.I.H. is the most important source of research money in the world; over the next 14 months it will dole out about $37 billion in research grants and spend $4 billion on research programs at its Maryland campus.

“Francis Collins is an extraordinary scientist and one of the nicest guys you could ever meet,” said Dr. Otis W. Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society.

But praise for Dr. Collins, 59, was not universal or entirely enthusiastic. Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, called Dr. Collins’s selection a “reasonable choice.” Others privately expressed unease.

There are two basic objections to Dr. Collins. The first is his very public embrace of religion. He wrote a book called “The Language of God,” and he has given many talks and interviews in which he described his conversion to Christianity as a 27-year-old medical student. Religion and genetic research have long had a fraught relationship, and some in the field complain about what they see as Dr. Collins’s evangelism.

The other objection stems from his leadership of the Human Genome Project, which is part of the N.I.H. Although Dr. Collins was widely praised in 2003 when the effort succeeded, the hopes that this discovery would yield an array of promising medical interventions have greatly dimmed, discouraging many.

Dr. Collins cannot be blamed for the unexpected scientific hurdles facing genetic research, but he played an important role in raising expectations impossibly high. In interviews, he called the effort “the most important and the most significant project that humankind has ever mounted” and predicted it would quickly allow everyone to know the genetic risks for many diseases.
Some scientists and advocates for people suffering from diseases criticized the extraordinary amount of money and attention the sequencing effort garnered, saying it distracted from more fruitful areas of research.

Fran Visco, president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition, raised questions about the appointment. “The N.I.H. needs visionary leadership willing to challenge the present stagnation at the institute,” Ms. Visco said. “It may be difficult for Francis, since he has been a part of the system.”

“We look forward to working with him,” she added, “to help him move beyond a focus on technology and to push N.I.H. to foster innovation and regain the sense of urgency to save lives.”

Dr. Collins’s confirmation by the Senate is all but certain. He has long cultivated good relations on Capitol Hill. And since the administration finalized rules for broader use ofstem cells in federal research before nominating him, anti-abortion forces will have a harder time using that issue to stop his confirmation.
Dr. Collins, who resigned last year as director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, would succeed Raynard Kington, who has been acting director at the N.I.H. since last fall.
Dr. Collins earned a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from Yale University and a medical degree from the University of North Carolina. He likes to sing and play a guitar decorated with a double helix, the shape of genetic code.

He was part of a team at the University of Michigan that in 1989 discovered the gene forcystic fibrosis. At the time, many predicted that the discovery would lead to a quick cure. But like so much in genetic research, that hope is still a long way off.

As the leader of the Human Genome Project, Dr. Collins engaged in a fierce public battle with Dr. J. Craig Venter of Celera to finish the sequence first and make it broadly available. The success of Dr. Collins’s project torpedoed much of Celera’s business model. But in a speech last month, Dr. Collins said the N.I.H. needed to form more partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry to create new drugs.

Dr. Alan I. Leshner, chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said it was “an excellent idea to have a very credible geneticist heading N.I.H. at a time when we are pursuing so vigorously the promise of personalized medicine based on genomics."

[Jaganath das]

More partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry to create new drugs. Yeap, thats exactly what the world needs...

[Skeptical]

Makes one wonder if his religious evangelism is not a major disqualification. I can see why so many are uneasy about him being in such position of power. Despite all of his other positive attributes, that particular leaning could cloud his judgment big time.

[malati]

Jul 19, 2009 8:38:38 GMT -6 @Skeptical said:

Makes one wonder if his religious evangelism is not a major disqualification. I can see why so many are uneasy about him being in such position of power. Despite all of his other positive attributes, that particular leaning could cloud his judgment big time.

Well, he is already in his sixties and has been a scientist for ages so if he has compromised anything then they can make a big big case out of it. But they did not.


Jaganath das: More partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry to create new drugs. Yeap, thats exactly what the world needs...

The point being ??

[Jagannath das]

The point of US govenment giving more money to the pharmaceutical industry??? Is that a serious question?

The reason there is no decent health care in the US and many other countries by extension, is because the pharmaceutical industry has got a hold on the synthetic drug market. Such a firm grip that even research and so called science on the field is manipulated by it. As a consequence, health care in America is basically immoral.

Its not enough to be a religious man. The guy has to be honest as well.

Geez, before supporting some cause how about getting a bit informed on it??

[malati]

Well, you seem to be so extreme in your views, like conspiracy theory is the norm.

How do you think they make medicines, pulling them from a hat, like some magic?


If you have a case about the man, then go to the proper authorities. Fact is even the most informed and powerful in the
U. S. have not that much complaint about the man. Some complaints yes, but not that gross to warrant rejecting him from the appointment.

In my years in the CV community I know that there are some who go to "religion" for the one reason that they have been materially marginalized in the U. S. to become extremist.

Get properly informed and get a grip of reality.

[Jagannath das]

Well the only case you got in favor of this man is that he is a Christian of some sort.

Do you know how decent of a scientist he is, I mean, do you really know any more than what you have read in this one article?

No you don't. You saw the word religion there, and science a few lines below, and you made the case that "just see, this scientist appointed to an important post in a US government office, is also religious, therefore its proven that religious scientists are all the rave."

If the man is advocating more money to the pharmaceutical industry he is being dishonest. The pharmaceutical industry has no intentions of losing the market for real research and health care. Honest people know that such dynamic is what has prevented this country from finding alternative routes to health care. By the type of medicine you say you take for caugh in India, but specially by the type of reaction you have shown here, one can tell you are not in the practice of preventive health care or humane health care.

You know, in our devotee circles the counterparts of conspiracy theorists are the fanatics who think that as soon as someone claims to be religious he/she should be supported, no matter how little political or scientific sense that individual may make.

This is not a case of conspiracy theory. Its a case of a fanatic devotee again speaking of something she has no clue about.

[malati]

Jaganath das: More partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry to create new drugs. Yeap, thats exactly what the world needs...


You obvioulsy didnt get the point of the sentence from the article.

About your other point, remember all systems on this planet are created by men. And it is in man's nature to stuff up systems from time to time or maybe many times.

Another thing. We are only 20 million here in Oz in such a big country and we have a very good health care system here. It's called universal health care system where all citizens can have access to free health care in all levels, centres, hospitals etc.

But even if its free, I seldom use it because I'm relatively healthy -dont get sick often- because of good diet, and living in a clean place. When I went back to my home country Philippines 2 years ago I didnt get sick there. But I got sick in India. Many western devotees always romanticize India. India is not perfect you know.

Bye

btw, for your own credibility you should register. Why are you afraid to have your IP address recorded here?

[Jagannath das]

Register and be snug to especulate on every issue. What good is such 'credibility'.

Look, I support religious people. But not indiscriminately. The pharmaceutical industry is a big problem for this and many other countries. Without honesty, neither religion nor science will solve such problem.

[Ekantin]

Malati, I agree with Jagannath das. I am also interested to know why you think Collins is a good choice for the position: Do you know anything of his scientific career, or do you simply think he is a good choice because he is religious?

Running away from the discussion doesn't help credibility any more than registering a forum membership, methinks.

[malati]

You should get Pres. Obama's opinion because he has wisdom that I dont have.

And you can look it up yourself if you seem to like to debate even a newsitem.

I'm busy at work; it's the end of financial year here. Still I'll give a quick reply.

I posted that article because it's newsworthy. We talk about Dawkins here so why not Collins.

Collins has contributed significantly to science. He is noted for his landmark discoveries of disease genes, and his leadership of the Human Genome Project (HGP). Moreover, he is a theist so that made the newsitem worth posting in the general discussion section here.

I like him as a person, someone who has made a name for himself in the field of science, obviously very intelligent but humble enough to recognize a "higher authority". I read his book "The Language of God" and he is one great person who has great faith in God. I learned so much from the book, not just about genomics but also about practical faith.

In that book, I was so touched and I won't be embrassed to say that I shed tears on his account and his acceptance and realization surrounding what happened to his daughter, who was a medical student and was raped and whose perperator was never brought to justice

Something here about him from Wikipedia.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins_(geneticist)

He is noted for his landmark discoveries of disease genes, and his leadership of the Human Genome Project (HGP).

Sanjay

I'm old enough to be your mother and as you know I really liked you even through the very last time you were posting as a GV in forums. Now all of a sudden you barge in a forum called Chaitanya Symposium dispensing of good manners.

To tell the truth, my children who are 17 and 18 and who do not care a thing about a so called God, have never used rude words some people here use.

Now I'm exposed to these type of bad manners in a supposedly meeting place for God loving people. I wonder how devotees relate in the real world? Do you fistfight , or something?

My advice to you Sanjay is; it's ok to have a contrary opinion but you have to express it in a civilized way. Or else you lose credibility and maybe so does the opinion you express itself.

Btw, giving your real identity makes a lot of difference. If you are unknown the tendency to lose control of restrain and manners is strong.

[Jagannath das]

As far as I am concerned, my opinion is strongly formed in this: Giving more government funds to the established pharmaceutical industry is basicaly immoral. An intelligent man can easily see that, what ot speak of a man of principles.

The story with Collins daughter; its terrible and I sympathise with his pain. I know of another story involving someone's daughter. A friend of mine, right next door, just had to part with her daughter who, due to a serious kidney condition, had to migrate to Canada because the cost of her treatment locally is forbidden for the family. The girl is only 18 years old, when she went away to the airport everyone was crying. If health issues arise in a family in this country, there is no mercy from the state. Its a system designed so the pharmaceutical industry keeps on profiting.

[Ekantin]

Excuse me Malati, but are you addressing what I wrote? Mind pointing out exactly what I said that was "uncivilised" or ill-mannered? All I said that I was interested (along with Jagannath das) in why you thought Francis Collins was a good choice to head the NIH. I also said that your running away from the discussion (by refusing to answer his questions) is just as less credible as your attempt to question Jagannath's credibility by pointing out his unregistered status, which is irrelevant.

Now that you have explained why you like Collins, thank you. That is all I really wanted to know. I wasn't interested in a "debate".

The rest of your post makes no sense at all and is personal. If you had manners, you would send me a PM or something and would drop the usage of real names in public fora as I asked in another thread. I cannot do that with you because you have chosen your name as your ID, but I'd appreciate it if you addressed me by my ID in public.

[D]

www.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/opinion/27harris.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&ref=opinion

Science Is in the Details

By SAM HARRIS
Published: July 26, 2009

PRESIDENT OBAMA has nominated Francis Collins to be the next director of the National Institutes of Health. It would seem a brilliant choice. Dr. Collins’s credentials are impeccable: he is a physical chemist, a medical geneticist and the former head of the Human Genome Project. He is also, by his own account, living proof that there is no conflict between science and religion. In 2006, he published “The Language of God,” in which he claimed to demonstrate “a consistent and profoundly satisfying harmony” between 21st-century science and evangelical Christianity.

Dr. Collins is regularly praised by secular scientists for what he is not: he is not a “young earth creationist,” nor is he a proponent of “intelligent design.” Given the state of the evidence for evolution, these are both very good things for a scientist not to be.

But as director of the institutes, Dr. Collins will have more responsibility for biomedical and health-related research than any person on earth, controlling an annual budget of more than $30 billion. He will also be one of the foremost representatives of science in the United States. For this reason, it is important that we understand Dr. Collins and his faith as they relate to scientific inquiry.

What follows are a series of slides, presented in order, from a lecture on science and belief that Dr. Collins gave at the University of California, Berkeley, in 2008:

Slide 1: “Almighty God, who is not limited in space or time, created a universe 13.7 billion years ago with its parameters precisely tuned to allow the development of complexity over long periods of time.”

Slide 2: “God’s plan included the mechanism of evolution to create the marvelous diversity of living things on our planet. Most especially, that creative plan included human beings.”

Slide 3: “After evolution had prepared a sufficiently advanced ‘house’ (the human brain), God gifted humanity with the knowledge of good and evil (the moral law), with free will, and with an immortal soul.”

Slide 4: “We humans used our free will to break the moral law, leading to our estrangement from God. For Christians, Jesus is the solution to that estrangement.”

Slide 5: “If the moral law is just a side effect of evolution, then there is no such thing as good or evil. It’s all an illusion. We’ve been hoodwinked. Are any of us, especially the strong atheists, really prepared to live our lives within that worldview?”

Why should Dr. Collins’s beliefs be of concern?

There is an epidemic of scientific ignorance in the United States. This isn’t surprising, as very few scientific truths are self-evident, and many are counterintuitive. It is by no means obvious that empty space has structure or that we share a common ancestor with both the housefly and the banana. It can be difficult to think like a scientist. But few things make thinking like a scientist more difficult than religion.

Dr. Collins has written that science makes belief in God “intensely plausible” — the Big Bang, the fine-tuning of nature’s constants, the emergence of complex life, the effectiveness of mathematics, all suggest the existence of a “loving, logical and consistent” God.

But when challenged with alternative accounts of these phenomena — or with evidence that suggests that God might be unloving, illogical, inconsistent or, indeed, absent — Dr. Collins will say that God stands outside of Nature, and thus science cannot address the question of his existence at all.

Similarly, Dr. Collins insists that our moral intuitions attest to God’s existence, to his perfectly moral character and to his desire to have fellowship with every member of our species. But when our moral intuitions recoil at the casual destruction of innocents by, say, a tidal wave or earthquake, Dr. Collins assures us that our time-bound notions of good and evil can’t be trusted and that God’s will is a mystery.

Most scientists who study the human mind are convinced that minds are the products of brains, and brains are the products of evolution. Dr. Collins takes a different approach: he insists that at some moment in the development of our species God inserted crucial components — including an immortal soul, free will, the moral law, spiritual hunger, genuine altruism, etc.

As someone who believes that our understanding of human nature can be derived from neuroscience, psychology, cognitive science and behavioral economics, among others, I am troubled by Dr. Collins’s line of thinking. I also believe it would seriously undercut fields like neuroscience and our growing understanding of the human mind. If we must look to religion to explain our moral sense, what should we make of the deficits of moral reasoning associated with conditions like frontal lobe syndrome and psychopathy? Are these disorders best addressed by theology?

Dr. Collins has written that “science offers no answers to the most pressing questions of human existence” and that “the claims of atheistic materialism must be steadfastly resisted.”

One can only hope that these convictions will not affect his judgment at the institutes of health. After all, understanding human well-being at the level of the brain might very well offer some “answers to the most pressing questions of human existence” — questions like, Why do we suffer? Or, indeed, is it possible to love one’s neighbor as oneself? And wouldn’t any effort to explain human nature without reference to a soul, and to explain morality without reference to God, necessarily constitute “atheistic materialism”?

Francis Collins is an accomplished scientist and a man who is sincere in his beliefs. And that is precisely what makes me so uncomfortable about his nomination. Must we really entrust the future of biomedical research in the United States to a man who sincerely believes that a scientific understanding of human nature is impossible?

Sam Harris is the author of “The End of Faith” and co-founder of the Reason Project, which promotes scientific knowledge and secular values.

[Shiva Cheats]

D is for... Dhyana? Such pressing questions indeed...