What is the future of Science following COVID19

coronavirus completely disrupted our

lives

for months we were locked in our homes

unable to meet with relatives and

friends

do proper exercise and even go to work

or school

many of us spent way too much time on

tick tock

the pandemic left

many families heartbroken and

traumatized with almost 5 million deaths

worldwide

despite this there have been some

successes

as a scientist i am thrilled

that my family friends and students are

suddenly familiar with abbreviations

such as pcr

i spent the last three years

working in parliament and still recall

our meetings in early 2020

out of the blue

our political discussions became

scientific

i was having to explain the yarn number

and other aspects of virology to

officials

clearly

in the age of covert many people have

realized how important science has been

is and will be to our society

from apps

that track cases in real time to

diagnostics mathematical modeling new

medications and of course

vaccines

the reason we are here today is because

of scientists and their remarkable

discoveries

scientists have saved the day

now that the whole country is listening

to scientists there is a golden

opportunity to regenerate science

in the uk

i say regenerate because i believe we

need to reevaluate our approach to

science

although it might not seem obvious we

are not going

in the right direction

change is required

i have four concerns that i wish to

explore today

my first concern relates to the

financial investment or lack of

in science

historically

the uk has always championed science

and british scientists including isaac

newton charles darwin alexander fleming

myself and many others

have changed the world for the better i

like to think

the uk has also won the second highest

number of nobel prizes after the us

and in 2018 produced seven percent

of the world’s scientific publications

sounds like the uk has done rather well

right

let’s now look at it for a different

angle the angle of economic performance

which is widely regarded as the best

indicator of the actual impact of

science on society

the european commission publishes an

annual ranking of the world’s best

performing r d research and development

companies

in 2019 not a single uk firm

made the top 25.

economically

whilst london and the southeast are

productive

most uk regions are not

there are significant geographical

imbalances in r d spending

let’s explore our science budget in more

detail

in simplified terms

gdp is the total income of the country

currently

the uk spends 1.7 percent of its gdp

on r d

the goal is to increase that to 2.4

percent

by 2027.

is this ambitious

well

let’s try and contextualize this number

austria sweden switzerland germany japan

already spend over three percent

of their gdp on r d

south korea over 4.5 percent

it seems strange to me that we are

aiming for a target far below

many countries

if the uk is to make the major

discoveries that could transform the

world whether that’s new drugs

against diseases or new solutions to

combat climate change i believe we must

triple

our science budget in the next five

years

more specifically we should be spending

five percent plus

of our gdp

on science the highest globally

my second concern relates to the way in

which scientific advice is implemented

in government decision making

during a pandemic we observed some of

the greatest scientific successes of our

lifetimes including the super-fast

development of vaccines

normally it takes 10 years

we managed it in 10 months

the uk and the us were both labeled the

best prepared countries in the world to

respond to a pandemic by the global

health security index

and yet

we have one of the worst covered death

rates globally

our vaccine success has been

overshadowed by a horrific

mortality rate

in my view there were mainly many

failures that ultimately proved

catastrophic

for example

many studies confirmed that mandatory

face masks on public transport and in

shops reduced new infections in germany

by 45

but the uk rejected the use of face

masks at the beginning of the outbreak

was this really

a good decision

south korea experienced mers another

coronavirus in 2015

and so they knew

they had to monitor and follow up every

case very carefully right from the start

as a consequence

south korea did not implement a single

national lockdown

in contrast the uk had free as we all

know too well

now

there were benefits to lockdown

i too enjoyed making banana bread and

not using the piccadilly line to get to

work

but why didn’t the uk

use south korea’s test and trace model

until may last year

uk’s mortality rate is now 55 times

higher than south korea’s

of course

it’s wrong and unhelpful to blame

individuals but moving forward full

transparency is required

new systems should be put in place to

improve decision making and

communication

so that we can properly prepare

for future

emergencies

my third concern

is that investment in medical research

does not always reflect population need

of course when i say we should invest in

science i don’t just mean biological

sciences

chemistry physics engineering all

require more financial support

i would like to use hearing loss as a

case study to illustrate my point

hearing impairment is the most common

form of sensory impairment in humans

but is one of the most underfunded

disorders

uk research health analysis

shows that 83 pence is spent on hearing

research for every person affected

over 16 pounds is spent on vision

research for every person with sight

loss

still low but significantly more and

we now have gene therapy for blindness a

fantastic achievement

but actually

hearing research attracts a low amount

of funding

relative to the scale

of the problem

in the uk

2 million people suffer from vision

impairment

12 million people suffer from hearing

loss

ranging from mild auditory impairments

to complete deafness

imagine

if he could take a pill and hear

perfectly again

so

why do we neglect this problem so much

one reason

is that our politicians are not

particularly interested in investing in

research they will not get credit for

the average length of a british prime

minister in office is around 5 years

the average length of a secretary of

state is two years and science requires

time and patience to achieve results

a scientific development normally takes

17 years

by the time results are produced and

published there may be another prime

minister in downing street who will

benefit from those discoveries

i believe we need long-term science

secretaries who are

science experts

the last concern i would like to raise

is the unhealthy environment scientists

experience

i would briefly like to mention

scientists in training often referred to

as phd students

doctoral researchers can work in both

academia or industry and are known for

their excellent analytical skills

logical and independent mind and great

attention to detail

but alarmingly

70 percent quit academia

soon after passing their phds

this requires urgent attention we need

to ask ourselves why so many talented

individuals are discouraged from

pursuing their scientific ambitions

the reasons are complex

common justifications include poor pay

poor work life balance inadequate

supervision

career uncertainty a toxic environment

a survey performed by nature

shows that one in five experience the

bullying or harassment

during their programme

one in three required treatment for

depression and all anxiety

the central theme is clear

scientists in the uk do not feel valued

enough

scientists in the uk are also underpaid

on average data engineers in germany

earn almost 18 000 pounds more than in

the uk

uk lecturers earn 45 percent less than

canadian lecturers 34 percent less than

americans and 16 percent less than

australians

the uk is a country of services

we pay our bankers lawyers etc

good salaries and that’s excellent

the uk should also be a country of

research and development

to begin the process of science

regeneration we first need a culture

change

investing in scientists emotionally and

financially is important

science driven innovation fuels economic

growth and supports trade manufacturing

and national security

without science there is no medicine

without science there is no nhs

whilst we do not know

what the next 50 years of discoveries

will bring

let’s be ambitious and address global

challenges collaboratively and

professionally

let’s give our scientists a chance let’s

invest properly thank you very much