by James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, Popular Rationalism, ©2024
(Oct. 27, 2024) — It is October 2024, and we face a crossroads. Science and medicine are represented as advancing at breakneck speed, but the way we fund and prioritize research is outdated, fragmented, and deeply flawed. We are chasing immediate results, throwing resources into short-term translational projects, and turning blind eyes to risk and externalized costs while neglecting the foundations of discovery and innovation. This imbalance is robbing us of the opportunity to address the root causes of the most significant challenges we face: chronic illness, environmental degradation, and the now decades-long shift from learning to earning.
It’s time for a new vision. One that recognizes the need for balanced, integrated research—a vision that unites the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and other agencies in a shared mission. One that leverages the immense power of technology and machine learning to reinvigorate basic research and ensure that ethics remain at the heart of all we do. This is an urgent call to action. We can no longer afford to operate in silos. Cross-pollination among agencies and scientific disciplines to optimize how science learns must be the cornerstone of our approach.
Reclaiming the Power of Basic Research
Basic research has been woefully undervalued for too long, seen as a luxury rather than a necessity. Yet the most remarkable medical and technological innovations have grown from the soil of basic science. Without new discoveries in the fundamentals of biology, physics, and chemistry and all of their subdisciplines, we cannot hope to solve the complex problems of chronic illness or environmental decay.
Consider EvoDevo, the once-thriving field of evolutionary developmental biology. It promised to unravel the mysteries of how genes and environmental factors interact to shape development, providing insights into everything from congenital disorders to cancer. I would have expected that over the last 20 years we would have seen a massive number of very important resources, like video libraries and development-period specific development biopathways databases linked to functional molecular knowledge databases. It sounds simple – because it is. The impact on research done in the public interest would have been profound. That is not to imply that significant work has not been published in EvoDevo, but Pubmed only includes abstracts from 195 papers that mention “EvoDevo” and “regulatory” (as in “regulatory network” or “regulatory function”. We could have done better. The National Science Foundation should not be led astray on priorities on basic research, which has so much potential.
We have not even started to reach that potential. Like so many fields, basic research for the sake of knowledge has been starved of funding, sidelined by the rush to apply headlines, ROIs, and immediate solutions. The potential was there – and still is – to create vast developmental atlases, biopathway databases, and detailed models of developmental programs that could inform everything from regenerative medicine to disease prevention. Yet, we left basic research languishing. What could we have learned for the sake of knowledge?
In return for the huge investment in translational research, we have record levels of chronic illness, with monies squandered on the search for the next blockbuster drug. The consequences of this neglect are profound. Chronic illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes, and autoimmune disorders are often rooted in early developmental processes. Without a deeper understanding of these roots, we’re treating symptoms while ignoring causes. Imagine what could be achieved if we revitalized basic research across fields, using the lessons of EvoDevo to address the underlying mechanisms of chronic illness. This our societal ethical imperative.
Cross-Pollination: Integrating Environmental, Evolutionary, and Medical Sciences
Medical research alone cannot solve the challenges ahead. Our health is inextricably linked to the environment, and it’s time we acted on that truth. For decades, the EPA has been narrowly focused on climate change. While vital, climate is not the only factor affecting human health. Pollution, toxic chemicals, and environmental degradation are insidiously driving an epidemic of chronic diseases—from respiratory disorders to cancer to neurodevelopmental conditions.
The NSF, NIH, and EPA must learn to learn together, breaking down barriers between their domains. The NSF must dramatically increase its investment in environmental toxicology and basic methylation responses to environmental toxins, studying how pollutants interact with all aspects of human biology in real-time. The EPA must coordinate its research with the NIH, understanding that protecting the environment is also about preserving the human genome and epigenome from the assault of toxic exposures. We need basic research on inexpensive and effective approaches to detoxifying soils, planets, resource streams, and people.
We need cross-agency initiatives that prioritize human health holistically. The pollutants in our air and water are as much a part of the chronic illness equation as diet and genetics. By creating integrated programs that unite researchers from all three agencies, we can not only slow the progression of environmental destruction but also mitigate its effects on public health.
Read the rest here.
I have toiled many years in the trenches of biotechnology, with an occasional glance over at computer science.
This article I regard as so fundamental, so profound, that it needs to framed and lit up for the world to see. He is right on target in characterizing the problems of modern American scientific research. There is a rot that needs to be cut out.
That said, the article is just a beginning. So, let the rebuilding of American Science begin.