Basic Science for the sake of curiosity

Basic Science for the sake of curiosity

We can’t always put a dollar amount on basic science research, especially when politicians want to talk about return-on-investment when discussing funding basic science research. There are so many examples of breakthroughs that build on a wealth of knowledge that started out as a curiosity in basic science research. Good examples of seeing the value of basic science research (and then losing sight of it) are Bell Labs and Xerox PARC. Look at all of their contributions to everyday technology and science, yet they were eventually closed down.

Although it’s preaching to the choir, please read this excellent post from Buddhini Samarasinghe.

Originally shared by Buddhini Samarasinghe

Nanopore sequencing: a story about discovery science

Ever since I began a career as a scientist (and even more so as a science communicator now), I’ve been a passionate advocate for discovery science. ‘Discovery science’ is a term used interchangeably with ‘basic science’, or ‘blue skies research’, but essentially it means curiosity-driven research rather than a specific goal-oriented research programme. Discovery science asks open ended questions, like “what does this protein do?” as opposed to “how do you block this protein so we can make a new drug?”.

Many of the serendipitous discoveries in science, especially the ones that improved our lives, happened the way they did because there already existed a strong scientific base upon which to develop those initial ideas. Put another way, no matter how healthy a seedling is, it won’t grow and flourish unless the soil it’s growing on is fertile.

But tracking these stories is not easy – how do you look at a technology that exists now, a technology that we take for granted, and then attribute it’s existence to previous discoveries? We like to quote Newton’s “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants” but can we actually find out exactly who those giants were?

Several months ago, I started asking this question in the very specific context of genome sequencing. We are now at a place where genome sequencing is unimaginably easy and cheap compared to how it used to be several decades ago. For about $1000, you can buy a portable USB powered DNA sequencer that is the size and weight of a chocolate bar, and hook it up to a laptop. This technology, known as ‘nanopore sequencing’, would not have been possible were it not for decades of discovery science preceding it. Even more interesting is the fact that the pioneer of nanopore sequencing didn’t even set out with the intention of developing a brand new, disruptive sequencing technology; he started out studying a tiny protein found in a humble bacterial species!

I hope that this story highlights the importance of curiosity-driven research, and the unexpected benefits we can glean from them. It took me a while to pull these disparate threads together to weave this story, and yes a lot of it does have a focus on the UK’s Medical Research Council’s work (because I did this as part of my day job, yay!). But I hope you enjoy it, and more importantly, are inspired to advocate for discovery science like I am, because we probably need it now more than ever.

https://mrc.ukri.org/news/browse/decades-of-discovery-set-to-revolutionise-healthcare/

https://mrc.ukri.org/news/browse/decades-of-discovery-set-to-revolutionise-healthcare/