American Scientist

Scientific research is not for the impatient. A lack of results can persist for years before a breakthrough. A promising piece of data might not ever bear out, upon further study. Structural biologist John Raul Somoza puts these tribulations front and center in this issue’s cover article, “A Revolutionary Drug to Treat and Prevent HIV Infection.” Somoza was part of a team that was eventually successful in developing a medication, called lenacapavir, that just this year has made it all the way through approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, but he does not gloss over the years of false starts and dead ends.

Somoza admits that their research team at Gilead Sciences started out with a known long shot. They began looking for ways to affect the capsid, the protein shell that protects the RNA genome of HIV. They found two sites on the capsid that bind molecules; the first went nowhere, but the second site eventually panned out.

The success of lenacapavir demonstrates the value of scientific research in improving the lives of countless people worldwide. It also shows the tenacity necessary to pursue a career in research. Unfortunately, it additionally brings to mind the people who still deny that the disease AIDS is caused by HIV, in the face of overwhelming data. Imagine being a scientist trying to find treatment for a disease like AIDS, and you regularly receive hateful anonymous messages in your email inbox that accuse you of lying and indicate that they know your home address. These and many other ideological attacks on scientific research are widespread and difficult to counter, but scientists who supply evidence-based responses are often then subjected to such personal threats. We are fortunate in this issue to have the thoughts of climate scientist Michael E. Mann and virologist Peter J. Hotez, who sadly have experienced such threats against themselves and their families. That experience has led both of them to advocate for better protections for scientists who strive to counter misinformation. In “Support Scientists Who Stand Up,” Mann and Hotez describe efforts already in place to provide legal aid to scientists, as well as ideas about how these resources could be expanded. They also call upon universities and scientific societies to do a better job of protecting their affiliated researchers. Mann and Hotez’s new book, Science Under Siege, from which this essay is adapted, will be released in September. (Also see an interview with Hotez in the September–October 2020 issue, and a video of his COVID-19 Distinguished Lecture from November 20, 2020.)

In our prior issue, we published a call for letters from scientists to raise awareness as to why their research is important. As you will see in this issue’s Letters section, we have been gratified to receive a number of responses to this appeal. We encourage you to continue submitting your letters. As a reminder, please keep your letter submissions to no more than 300 words. Let us know if you would like us to keep your letter anonymous, or if you are comfortable sharing your name, your location, or both. Please note that as a nonprofit, American Scientist is not permitted to endorse any specific legislation or candidate, but we can support evidence-based science policy, so please keep your submissions nonpartisan. Focus your submission on why your work is important, effective, and worth carrying out. Send your submissions to editors at amscionline dot org with the subject line “Science Is Important.” Submissions may be published in print or on our website, and may also be featured on social media.