Finally, there is the impact on our own sci-
ence. Preparing oneself to discuss issues that
are current (e.g., genetically modified organ-
isms and stem cells) can have a positive
impact on one’s own research and teaching.
It helps us to stay current with related areas,
to think about concerns of the public at large,
and to think more broadly about how our
basic research can be used to help under-
stand human disease. Such meetings with
nonexperts also sharpen teaching and speak-
ing skills as one learns how to translate spe-
cialized knowledge into generally accessible
concepts.
There are also some persistent myths about
advocacy for biomedical research and science
public policy. For example, sometimes, when
science advocacy comes up in conversation
with friends and colleagues, the concern is
expressed that advocating for science has a
negative impact on other priorities for tax
dollars such as education or the environment.
But, it is a mistake to assume that it is always
a zero-sum game. Also, remember that you
have specialized knowledge of scientific pro-
grams, but not necessarily about other social
programs. These other programs have their
own expert advocates. Advocating for sci-
ence is not advocating against other pro-
grams and it is not taken that way. Our repre-
sentatives are getting input from other
sources, and it is their job to try to weigh the
relative merits to society of each.There is also the perception that scientific
advocacy must take a lot of time. But it need
not. One or two letters per year advocating
for a particular position on funding or policy,
the periodic thank you letter for supporting
sound science policy, or a yearly congression-
al visit, especially in one’s home district,
doesn’t take that much time. In addition,
when compared to how much time it takes to
write a grant, doesn’t it make sense to spend
a little bit of time helping to make sure that
funds continue to be available? Finally, there
are 435 congressional districts and 100 sena-
tors; each of us has one congressperson and
two senators whom we can inform and
engage as constituents. Thus, if we each
do a little, our impact can be broad-based
and extensive.
One also hears concerns on the order of:
“I’m not senior (or famous) enough,” or, “I’m
only a junior faculty member/a postdoc/a
student.” But, we all vote, we all have the
right of free speech, and congressional
offices are always happy to hear from con-
stituents with special knowledge or experi-ence. A young graduate student generally
has more scientific expertise than most con-
gressional staffers or Members. It is quite
valuable if they talk about what they know
in a letter or congressional visit, why they are
excited about what they do, and why it
might be useful, even in the long-term. A
sense of excitement about science can be
infectious—use it!146 CAREER ADVICE FOR LIFE SCIENTISTS II
Preparing oneself to discuss
issues that are current (e.g.,
genetically modified organisms
and stem cells) can have a
positive impact on one’s own
research and teaching.Think of the congressperson as a
PI, with a staff of eight to ten
young, smart, well-educated
people comparable in age to
graduate students and postdocs.