Comment
are England-specific; the devolved administrations have different schemes. To the well-established scheme of NIHR personal fellowships, two others have been added recently: transitional fellowships to assist researchers with a background in basic research to move to acquire translational expertise, and Clinical Trial Unit fellowships to develop trial-knowledgeable clinician-researchers. The NIHR Trainees Co-ordinating Centre, based in Leeds, expends much effort in creating relationships with trainees and providing additional support that can be important in helping individuals to shape and develop their careers towards success. Thus, for senior trainees, a leadership development programme with Ashridge Consulting has proven very successful and is highly rated by participants. The Academy of Medical Sciences has provided a mentorship programme for more senior medical trainees.
The very first human trial of prenatal corticosteroids directly followed studies in sheep in New Zealand, aiming at an understanding of the still poorly understood physiological mechanisms that trigger the onset of labour. The aim of NIHR is to see similar future discoveries in basic science translated into real health gains for patients and the public. Talented, well trained, and well supported researchers, comfortable with and respectful of multidisciplinary research, working in or alongside the National Health Service, will be central to the achievement of this mission. Economic gains will accrue through healthier populations, better evidence-based practice and policy, and collaboration with the biosciences industry. James P Neilson Centre for Women’s Health Research, Liverpool Women’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK [email protected] Prof James P Neilson is the NIHR Dean for Faculty Trainees.
Engaging with the media Published Online February 26, 2014
6
Why should scientists engage with the media about their research? This question is often answered these days with words like ”duty” and ”responsibility”. Most scientists are publically funded and the argument goes that the public has a right to hear how this money is being spent and in what directions scientists are taking us. I agree that this is a powerful case for engagement, and it has been gratifying to be part of a huge cultural shift in science over the past decade which has seen ever more scientists emerge from their ivory towers to embrace their responsibility to engage the public on their work. At the Science Media Centre’s tenth anniversary celebrations in 2012, I welcomed the arrival of a new breed of scientist, one for whom engaging the media and public is seen not as an add-on for an enterprising few but part and parcel of what it means to be a good scientist. But in another way words like ”duty” and ”responsibility” fail to capture the range of benefits that come from engaging the media, and I welcome this opportunity to describe some of these. You do not get a job at the Science Media Centre unless you give the right answer to the interview question ”Do you shout at the radio and TV when science is covered badly?”. The truth is that much of the misrepresentation of science in the news comes from a 24-h news machine hungry for guests and happy to use self-appointed experts
with axes to grind who are only ever a phone-call away. If you do not want to find yourself shouting at the radio when your area of research is being misrepresented by politicians, campaigners, or agenda-driven journalists you have to make yourself available to the media and make it just as easy for time-poor journalists to reach a great scientist as they do to find others with rather less respect for the evidence. Former Education Secretary Estelle Morris once told a packed meeting in the House of Commons that she learned more about the real threat from nuclear radiation from scientists talking to the media during the Fukushima crisis than she ever learned from school science lessons. Science hitting the headlines is often uncomfortable for researchers with all the sensationalism, hype, and fearmongering that characterises science as front-page news. But what researchers do not appreciate is that it is also a fantastic opportunity to get good accurate evidencebased science into the public domain at the very moment when the wider public really cares. The British public said no to genetically modified foods after a year-long media frenzy in which very few of the best plant scientists took part. From fracking to vaccines to synthetic biology to embryonic stem-cell research to mitochondrial DNA transfer we need scientists with deep expertise and respect www.thelancet.com
for truth to engage the media to ensure that decisions we make are based on the best possible information. If the public says no to new technologies having heard and understood the science, that is fine—indeed it’s called democracy. If they reject a new treatment because of an ill-informed debate dominated by non-experts then science has only itself to blame. One of the great pleasures of working at the Science Media Centre is watching scientists discover the joy of sharing their excitement about their research with science and health journalists looking for great stories. Scientists who steer clear of the media for fear of being misreported or mocked by colleagues for dumbing down also miss the amazing buzz of seeing their research reported to millions of people. Prof Sarah Bailey is one of the many scientists I have met who are anxious about engaging with the media. An eminent pharmacologist from Bath University, Sarah was the first to study the effects of the controversial anti-acne drug Roaccutane (isotretinoin), which was subject to law suits in the USA after anecdotal allegations of a link to depression and suicide in teenagers. Sarah understood the need to be transparent about her findings, which indicated some depression-like symptoms in mice. But because of the controversy she was reluctant to do media work for fear that a very preliminary study in mice would end up as front page news reported as proof that Roaccutane led to suicide. She also faced anxieties from colleagues about mentioning the use of animals in research at a time when the legacy of animal rights extremism in universities loomed large. Along with her university press office, the Science Media Centre reassured Sarah about the quality of our specialist health reporters, advised her to do a press briefing rather than a press release, urged her to emphasise the limitations of her study, and explained that detailing the animal side of the work was crucial to ensuring that this was not wrongly reported as immediately relevant to human beings. For Sarah, as with so many other scientists in a similar position, the results were revelatory. Far from realising
Academy of Medical Sciences
Comment
all her worst fears she found herself enjoying the media briefing immensely, loved doing back-to-back interviews in television studios, and was delighted to read her own science reported brilliantly throughout the mass media. Far from being deluged by emails from animal rights activists, she received emails and letters from patients thanking her for her research and accolades from senior colleagues delighted at the profile for the University. Much resource has been invested in new ways to inspire our young people to study science at school and in higher education, but sometimes the mass media side of this gets neglected. Results of surveys show that, although young people tend to rely on social media for their information, they also continue to pick up news, albeit on their smartphones. That the people best placed to understand, explain, and even find solutions for Fukushima, the horsemeat scandal, volcanic ash, swine flu, climate change, incurable diseases, and so on, are those who became scientists and engineers must surely show young people that these are the careers that can truly change the world. Fiona Fox Science Media Centre, London, UK fi[email protected] Fiona Fox is the Director of the Science Media Centre.
Engaging with health-care policy All physicians, whether they like it or not, necessarily become engaged in formulating health-care policy. This activity might be at a local level such as membership of a hospital Formulary Committee; sometimes at a www.thelancet.com
subregional or regional level such as membership of a Clinical Commissioning Group or a Clinical Senate; or possibly at a national or international level. There are opportunities for clinical academic trainees to get
Published Online February 26, 2014
7
are England-specific; the devolved administrations have different schemes. To the well-established scheme of NIHR personal fellowships, two others have been added recently: transitional fellowships to assist researchers with a background in basic research to move to acquire translational expertise, and Clinical Trial Unit fellowships to develop trial-knowledgeable clinician-researchers. The NIHR Trainees Co-ordinating Centre, based in Leeds, expends much effort in creating relationships with trainees and providing additional support that can be important in helping individuals to shape and develop their careers towards success. Thus, for senior trainees, a leadership development programme with Ashridge Consulting has proven very successful and is highly rated by participants. The Academy of Medical Sciences has provided a mentorship programme for more senior medical trainees.
The very first human trial of prenatal corticosteroids directly followed studies in sheep in New Zealand, aiming at an understanding of the still poorly understood physiological mechanisms that trigger the onset of labour. The aim of NIHR is to see similar future discoveries in basic science translated into real health gains for patients and the public. Talented, well trained, and well supported researchers, comfortable with and respectful of multidisciplinary research, working in or alongside the National Health Service, will be central to the achievement of this mission. Economic gains will accrue through healthier populations, better evidence-based practice and policy, and collaboration with the biosciences industry. James P Neilson Centre for Women’s Health Research, Liverpool Women’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK [email protected] Prof James P Neilson is the NIHR Dean for Faculty Trainees.
Engaging with the media Published Online February 26, 2014
6
Why should scientists engage with the media about their research? This question is often answered these days with words like ”duty” and ”responsibility”. Most scientists are publically funded and the argument goes that the public has a right to hear how this money is being spent and in what directions scientists are taking us. I agree that this is a powerful case for engagement, and it has been gratifying to be part of a huge cultural shift in science over the past decade which has seen ever more scientists emerge from their ivory towers to embrace their responsibility to engage the public on their work. At the Science Media Centre’s tenth anniversary celebrations in 2012, I welcomed the arrival of a new breed of scientist, one for whom engaging the media and public is seen not as an add-on for an enterprising few but part and parcel of what it means to be a good scientist. But in another way words like ”duty” and ”responsibility” fail to capture the range of benefits that come from engaging the media, and I welcome this opportunity to describe some of these. You do not get a job at the Science Media Centre unless you give the right answer to the interview question ”Do you shout at the radio and TV when science is covered badly?”. The truth is that much of the misrepresentation of science in the news comes from a 24-h news machine hungry for guests and happy to use self-appointed experts
with axes to grind who are only ever a phone-call away. If you do not want to find yourself shouting at the radio when your area of research is being misrepresented by politicians, campaigners, or agenda-driven journalists you have to make yourself available to the media and make it just as easy for time-poor journalists to reach a great scientist as they do to find others with rather less respect for the evidence. Former Education Secretary Estelle Morris once told a packed meeting in the House of Commons that she learned more about the real threat from nuclear radiation from scientists talking to the media during the Fukushima crisis than she ever learned from school science lessons. Science hitting the headlines is often uncomfortable for researchers with all the sensationalism, hype, and fearmongering that characterises science as front-page news. But what researchers do not appreciate is that it is also a fantastic opportunity to get good accurate evidencebased science into the public domain at the very moment when the wider public really cares. The British public said no to genetically modified foods after a year-long media frenzy in which very few of the best plant scientists took part. From fracking to vaccines to synthetic biology to embryonic stem-cell research to mitochondrial DNA transfer we need scientists with deep expertise and respect www.thelancet.com
for truth to engage the media to ensure that decisions we make are based on the best possible information. If the public says no to new technologies having heard and understood the science, that is fine—indeed it’s called democracy. If they reject a new treatment because of an ill-informed debate dominated by non-experts then science has only itself to blame. One of the great pleasures of working at the Science Media Centre is watching scientists discover the joy of sharing their excitement about their research with science and health journalists looking for great stories. Scientists who steer clear of the media for fear of being misreported or mocked by colleagues for dumbing down also miss the amazing buzz of seeing their research reported to millions of people. Prof Sarah Bailey is one of the many scientists I have met who are anxious about engaging with the media. An eminent pharmacologist from Bath University, Sarah was the first to study the effects of the controversial anti-acne drug Roaccutane (isotretinoin), which was subject to law suits in the USA after anecdotal allegations of a link to depression and suicide in teenagers. Sarah understood the need to be transparent about her findings, which indicated some depression-like symptoms in mice. But because of the controversy she was reluctant to do media work for fear that a very preliminary study in mice would end up as front page news reported as proof that Roaccutane led to suicide. She also faced anxieties from colleagues about mentioning the use of animals in research at a time when the legacy of animal rights extremism in universities loomed large. Along with her university press office, the Science Media Centre reassured Sarah about the quality of our specialist health reporters, advised her to do a press briefing rather than a press release, urged her to emphasise the limitations of her study, and explained that detailing the animal side of the work was crucial to ensuring that this was not wrongly reported as immediately relevant to human beings. For Sarah, as with so many other scientists in a similar position, the results were revelatory. Far from realising
Academy of Medical Sciences
Comment
all her worst fears she found herself enjoying the media briefing immensely, loved doing back-to-back interviews in television studios, and was delighted to read her own science reported brilliantly throughout the mass media. Far from being deluged by emails from animal rights activists, she received emails and letters from patients thanking her for her research and accolades from senior colleagues delighted at the profile for the University. Much resource has been invested in new ways to inspire our young people to study science at school and in higher education, but sometimes the mass media side of this gets neglected. Results of surveys show that, although young people tend to rely on social media for their information, they also continue to pick up news, albeit on their smartphones. That the people best placed to understand, explain, and even find solutions for Fukushima, the horsemeat scandal, volcanic ash, swine flu, climate change, incurable diseases, and so on, are those who became scientists and engineers must surely show young people that these are the careers that can truly change the world. Fiona Fox Science Media Centre, London, UK fi[email protected] Fiona Fox is the Director of the Science Media Centre.
Engaging with health-care policy All physicians, whether they like it or not, necessarily become engaged in formulating health-care policy. This activity might be at a local level such as membership of a hospital Formulary Committee; sometimes at a www.thelancet.com
subregional or regional level such as membership of a Clinical Commissioning Group or a Clinical Senate; or possibly at a national or international level. There are opportunities for clinical academic trainees to get
Published Online February 26, 2014
7
