‘‘Fundamental research must remain in universities, institutes should focus on development’’

Prof Dr G Padmanaban, director, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bangalore, graduated from Presidency College, Madras and did masters from IARI. A doctorate from IISc, Bangalore, he was also selected by the UGC/British Council for a Fellowship at St Mary’s Hospital Medical School, London. Prof Padmanaban is passionate and optimistic about India developing as a world scientific power. A recipient of PadmaShri in 1991 and PadmaBhushan in 2004, his pioneering work has catapulted ‘curcumin’ an active ingredient found in turmeric into the map of effective drugs against malaria. Yet another discovery by him is the efficacy of rifampicin and INH in fighting malaria apart from their traditional role in curing tuberculosis. In an exclusive interview with R BabyManoj, he shares his vision for science in India in the light of the role being played by Indian Institute of Science, (IISc) his parent institution and others. Excerpts:

You had found that rifampicin and INH are effective in malaria treatment. What has been the progress of this finding?

At the moment we are not pursuing further research on that as Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) committee felt that these drugs could be reserved for tuberculosis only. The reason they cited is that tuberculosis itself is developing resistance to these drugs. Tuberculosis is much more dangerous in terms of occurrence in our country than malaria.

Could you explain the role of ‘curcumin’ in malaria?

Curcumin is working effectively against malaria especially in combination. As a monotherapy it gives 30 per cent protection in mice, which is as good as artemisinin. It has the advantages of a natural compound. We have carried out some experiments in culture with chloroquine, the first line drug for which resistance has been developed by Plasmodium falciparum, the drug resistant variety of the causative organism. We also used it along with artemesinin, WHO preferred drug to be used in Africa to treat malaria.

In both the cases we have found that the dose of the other drug in P falciparum culture is substantially reduced in the presence of curcumin. This is specially significant as there is a global shift towards avoiding monotherapy. Hence, curcumin can be an ideal combination drug. It is also seen working in chloroquine-resistant culture. We have found that with curcumin, the parasite responds to chloroquine at one fifth the original concentration.

Our idea is not to use curcumin alone for treating malaria, instead, to use it as a combination drug. It is non-toxic turmeric and has been in use traditionally for thousands of years. If the animal trials are successful, the clinical trials can be easily approved, curcumin being already in use.

What is the reason behind resorting to trying out existing drugs for other diseases in malaria than developing new molecule?

Finding drug molecule anew is a very costly proposition. We follow a two-track approach. India can’t afford the cost of new drug discovery. Malaria is a poor man’s disease and herbals and traditional medicines can be cheaper options.

We are also working on heme biosynthesis in the parasite as a new drug target and keep publishing papers. The other track is of trying out drugs which are already in use.

Do you feel that since malaria is a poor man’s disease, pharmaceutical companies are not interested in your finding?

If the findings were in some other areas like cardiovascular, neurological, or behavioural diseases, there would have been many takers.

Have your findings been published in any international journal?

I have over 120 publications. The international journal Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications published the study on curcumin.

Recently, the union finance minister has allocated Rs 100 crore for IISc, Bangalore. Is the fund sufficient for IISc? How will it be utilised?

The way the fund has to be utilised should be decided by the Institute. There are a number of infrastructure deficiencies which need to be addressed. The institute needs much more than Rs 100 crore. However, it is a good gesture from the government. Being one of the leading R&D institutions of the country, IISc Bangalore needs major support. The government’s initiative is more of a signal which tells about its commitment.

What is your opinion of the Indian science institutes vis-a-vis the western and developed countries?

Firstly, I am not in favour of such comparisons. Because the parameters are different. We need to look at what this institute (IISc, Bangalore) has done in terms of science that is relevant to the country and generating high quality people who are manning many institutions all over the world.

Publications in journals like Nature cannot be the only parameter for determining quality. Dr Mashelkar has written an article in ‘Science’ recently. It speaks about the investment in terms of GDP per paper generated. If you examine the cost of a paper proportionately, India stands very much on the top. IISc has a major contribution in this regard. What needs to be looked at is the kind of return on investment.

There is no substantial difference in quality in our national institutes and many of their western and developed counterparts. We are publishing papers in the best of journals. I can say with absolute confidence that in the science of biology, there has been substantial increase in the quality of papers. For example, taking ‘impact factor’ as a criterion, our papers are getting ‘five’ and above, which is very good.

The problem our country faces is that quality papers are all coming from agency institutions like those of CSIR, DBT, DST, IISc etc, not from our universities. As far as quality of science is concerned, the cradle must be the university. Not more than a dozen out of 250 universities in the country do high quality research! This is our problem. IISc is a peculiar combination for historical reasons.

What is the difference between the role of universities and that of institutes funded by the central government?

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru started all the central institutes, hoping that they would be great supporters of universities. In fact, it happened the other way round. The universities have been depleted. Nehru’s concept was that these institutes should be built around universities in order to provide great support to them. For example, a question can be asked as to what extent has Lucknow university been benefited because of Central Drug Research Institute, Industrial Toxicology Research, Institute, National Botanical Research Institute and National Institute for Aromatic and Medicinal plants.

Now, the government is looking at the possibility of integrating universities with national institutes. Initially, four CSIR institutes would be integrated with universities. There is a plan for each CSIR institute to adopt a college/school.

Universities must be strengthened not just for teaching. They must undertake fundamental research. University is a place for blue sky research. However, the institutes have got greater support from the government than universities.

Out of the research activities taking place in institutes, some are totally basic in nature. While, one cannot draw a line between basic and applied research. In general basic research should be done in universities. The role of the institutes is converting basic research into products and processes. The institutes should give much more emphasis to applications. Many national institutes are working like universities.

What are your comments on proliferation of universities, even deemed universities? Do they contribute to raising educational and research standards?

The situation in our country has degenerated to such an extent that it will not be an exaggeration if I say now in one town there are 15 to 50 universities. Every alternative building is a university! This deterioration happens mainly because of political pressure. Just to get votes, politicians start a new university. They should understand that starting a university is not like starting a way side shop.

When even Rs 100 crore announced by the government is insufficient for this institute, how can it be possible to set up a university for Rs 10 crore as is being done in many parts of the country.

Education has become a business. Such universities will hardly have any facilities. Only a few students. There is a dearth of teachers in the existing institutions for modern subjects. The conditions of laboratories are pathetic. Lack of work experience of teachers is yet another drawback.

What is the selection procedure for admission at IISc?

The Institute conducts an entrance examination at 16-18 centres in the country. For research, we make a selection, depending on vacancies and the number called for essentially by interview.

It is seen that students opt for their PhDs and post doctoral research in developed countries like USA? What is the major difference in the quality of research? How can we prevent brain drain?

In developed countries, essentially, research is done by post doctoral fellows. All our students who are go there are serving as post doctoral fellows.

The major difference is in the money in the fellowships. In the US, the minimum amount of post-doctoral fellowship is $30,000 (approximately 13.5 lakhs - means more than a lakh per month!). In India, it is somewhere near Rs 10,000 to 15,000 per month only. We can never match that amount.

Even though money is not the only criteria, it is a major one. By the time a fellow reaches post doctoral level his/her age will be around 28-29 and he/she needs to raise a family. In the west, better infrastructure and other facilities are also available. The reputation factor also exists. You cannot prevent students from going abroad.

However the trend is now getting reversed. Many scientists of Indian origin in the western countries want to come back to India. It is evident from the fact that the number of applications we receive from abroad for faculty and other positions in the country.

What is the role of Society for Innovation & Development (Innovation Centre) in IISc?

Through ‘Innovation Centre’ many companies set up their own labs in the campus. IT, communication, electronics and biotechnology are the major areas which attract companies.

— rbmanoj@expressindia.com