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