To really harness the power of scientific breakthroughs – and temper the risks involved – it’s crucial to make sure innovation is championed in the right way.
“We have a responsibility to champion transparent, evidence-led discussions on the risks, opportunities, implementation and regulation of new technologies,” says Harpal Kumar, Head of Johnson & Johnson Innovation EMEA. He previously spent 15 years with Cancer Research UK (CRUK), earning a knighthood for his services to cancer research.
As part of our Scientists Meets the Media series, Kumar spoke to WIRED about why he’s equally horrified and optimistic about climate change, the limits of the science publication system and why scientists will have to work outside their own ranks to tackle the biggest health challenges we’re facing today.
Harpal Kumar on climate change
I’m horrified and hugely optimistic in equal measure. Horrified at the wilful ignorance of leading politicians in the face of overwhelming evidence, and their inclination to hide behind the veil of business, rather than reaching for solutions that would be economically neutral or even enhancing.
And I’m hugely optimistic because I see a tsunami of new technologies and approaches to tackling climate change, both in the UK and globally. In the UK, from my vantage point at UKRI and Innovate UK, I am excited by the spectrum of activity, from carbon capture to hydrogen-powered trains.
In Belgium recently, I was at a business research site which, by the end of 2020, will have 90 per cent of its energy needs met by geothermal sources, and the remaining 10 per cent per cent from North Sea wind power. This is a site that consumes energy equivalent to 40,000 homes. A substantial upfront capital cost yes, but with a huge return on investment which would rival many venture capital funds.
On the rise of antibiotic resistance
Whether you are a nurse in South Africa, a cancer survivor on chemotherapy in Europe, a newborn in China, or a patient about to undergo surgery in the United States, the possibility of acquiring an infection that is resistant to many, if not all, available therapies is unacceptably high.
Together with sanitation, anti-infective drugs have arguably been behind the greatest advances in health in the last hundred years, responsible for dramatic gains in life expectancy globally. However, the rise of antimicrobial resistance is now one of the defining scientific, health and economic challenges of our time. For all of the efforts of leaders like Dame Sally Davies, I am frustrated that we are not yet close to the commercial solutions which will incentivise meaningful innovation. If ever we can get past Brexit, this needs to be a major priority, in which the UK could lead the world.
On ethics in science
Breaking new ground will always raise new questions and require new governance. However, we must not let fear become the problem we are trying to solve. For most innovative technologies – whether it’s AI or CRISPR – we have a responsibility to champion evidence-led discussions on their risks, opportunities, implementation and regulation.
When I attended business school, ethics was the very first class I took, and it was one of the few compulsory modules. I would advocate that ethics should be a compulsory part of the curriculum for every undergraduate and masters STEM course.
On the need for more diversity in science
Maybe it’s just me, but it feels like the pace and intent of change, at least on gender diversity, is as rapid as I can remember in my lifetime. There is some distance yet to travel, but it feels like we are climbing and that the argument has been well and truly won.
On ethnic and other diversity, I fear we are much further behind. All of us have a really important role to play in making sure that the benefits of diversity are championed loudly and continuously, until we have won this argument also. However, it’s more than simply bringing a diverse group of people together – their ideas, perspectives and outlook need to be respected and nurtured. All of us need to be aware of the “invisible” hurdles – such as unconscious bias – that can hold talented individuals back.
On the future of healthcare
The medical challenges we face today are more complex than ever, but the opportunity we have to address them is unprecedented. Tackling those challenges means changing the way we think about innovation at a fundamental level. We can no longer think about innovation in isolation – it is about bringing together people who are in otherwise different worlds.
Academics, entrepreneurs, government and industry are all essential players in the quest to improve health for the public and patients. I believe that we will eventually see that all disease is treatable, curable or preventable – and by working together we can make that a reality. But we must also start to practice what so many have preached but few have delivered – investing in health, to save on treating ill-health and disease. Otherwise illness care will collapse under its own weight.
On the best and worst of today’s science
Every day I am stimulated and excited by the creativity, dedication and curiosity of the scientists and engineers I see all around us – not just the younger ones, but some of those who have been around a while also. We will continue to see fundamental advances in our understanding and in our impact, in ways we cannot imagine.
But we have also to address the inadequacies. The process of science hasn’t changed nearly as much as the science it is delivering. Careers are still overwhelmingly defined by publications, and the pressures on younger scientists are higher than ever. We continue to describe “peer review” as the “least worst” system, but we are unable to come up with an alternative that works. Surely, we can do better.
Scientists Meet the Media at the Science Museum in London was organised with the Royal Society, sponsored by Johnson & Johnson Innovation and supported by the Association of British Science Writers andWIRED.
This article was originally published by WIRED UK
