Point of View: Applied research won’t flourish without basic science, 2024, Lorsch, Tabak and Bertagnolli

[SNT Gatchaman]

Point of View: Applied research won’t flourish without basic science
Jon R Lorsch; Lawrence A Tabak; Monica M Bertagnolli

Three senior figures at the US National Institutes of Health explain why the agency remains committed to supporting basic science and research.

Link (eLife) [Open Access]

To advance basic research on these and other fronts, we must harness the virtuous cycle between scientific research and technology development, and create new instruments and methods to allow researchers to answer novel questions at increasing levels of resolution. Recent advances in molecular structure determination by cryo-electron microscopy, for example, have propelled a number of fields forward, including the provision of key insights during the development of COVID-19 vaccines. We anticipate that new technological breakthroughs – in areas such as cryo-electron tomography, the determination of the sequences and modification states of macromolecules, and artificial intelligence – will catalyze many more important discoveries in the coming years.

 

[Creekside]

"At the moment, applied research seems to be favored, with much attention focused on how the research enterprise can most effectively translate existing scientific information into solutions to real-world problems, including new diagnostics and therapies for diseases." Maybe that should be "translate existing scientific information into profits". Even for the scientist, developing a profitable treatment is more enticing than a citation.

 

[rvallee]

Actually this is puzzling since one of the biggest issues in science, especially so in medicine, is precisely that findings take 10-20-30 years to be applied in clinical practice. So if that's what's fashionable lately, then wow is it a massive failure.