For Dr. Linda Birnbaum, every day offers joy in discovery. As a toxicologist, Dr. Birnbaum studies how the environment affects our health. Since 2009, she has transformed her groundbreaking research into a groundbreaking role. Dr. Birnbaum is the first toxicologist and the first woman to lead the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Toxicology Program.

Following her M.S. and Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Dr. Birnbaum completed her first postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst. She then completed her second postdoctoral fellowship in Utica, NY. Her third postdoctoral fellowship was with the National Toxicology Program. Before her appointment as NIEHS director, Dr. Birnbaum spent 19 years at the Environmental Protection Agency.

Dr. Birnbaum has published more than 700 peer-reviewed publications and received numerous awards, including election to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies in 2010 and the Collegium Ramazzini.
Throughout her career, Dr. Birnbaum has mentored the next generation of scientists, personally and through her role as adjunct professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and at Duke University.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

I believe it’s extremely important to mentor others and to find someone to be mentored by.
When I first came to NIEHS for my postdoctoral fellowship, Dr. Skip Matthews was the principal investigator. He always told it like it was. He made me cry every day, but I always knew where I stood. He was completely fair, honest, and open, and he was full of encouragement.

On the other side, I have mentored people in my professional career from the time I was a senior graduate student. I have worked with many students in my labs over the years. They would come to me, and we would talk about work and life. Today I have just one postdoctorate fellow in my lab, but I also mentor junior staff outside the official mentor/mentee relationship.

I always encourage my students to find someone to talk to. It’s not always a matter of age or seniority. I am still being mentored by people who are younger than me.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

Don’t be afraid to spread your wings. I completed three postdoctoral fellowships. Many people are scared to do so many, but I believe you should try different things. I wouldn’t be where I am now without those three postdocs.

Have a family when the time is right for you. I am often asked the question, “When is the best time to have kids?” I always say that there is never a good time! The time is best for you when you are ready. Don’t base it on where you are in your career or where you are in your relationship.

I completed my postdocs while having and raising three children. I was able to work part-time some of that time, and it didn’t impact my career.

Be flexible. When I mentor someone, I try to help them think outside the box. I emphasize flexibility and compromise. There is often more than one way to achieve your goal, and it isn’t always the straight and narrow.

Focus on what is most important. For me, that was my family. I would not take work home at night. Instead, I was focused during the day and didn’t allow myself to do much “visiting” at work, so I could relax in the evening with my family.

What do you enjoy about being a scientist?

It’s fun! I can’t imagine coming to work every day and not being excited. There is something new happening every day.

Research can be frustrating at times, but I’m a firm believer in Murphy’s law. You have to get to the point of giving up before it all turns around.

My motto is to have fun every day, and for me, science is fun every day.

What are the barriers to women in science?

Women in science face internal and external barriers today.

Women are socialized to please everyone and to hold the traditional role of the woman in the home. I believe that we as women struggle with and against that idea. Even if you grew up hearing from your parents that you could do anything, it is really “you can do anything in addition to the traditional role.”

Externally, the field of science is still an old boys’ club. More female scientists are rising in their careers, but the field is dominated by men. It can be difficult to develop relationships. I can’t follow them into the men’s room or sit around the bar. And not many of the other directors want to go shopping!

What do you do outside your work?

My husband and I like to visit our grandchildren. We also like to hike and travel. I love music, and I lead the service and the singing at our synagogue.

What do you think are some of the most exciting recent scientific advances in your field?

As a toxicologist, I look at the safety of things. I am especially excited about epigenetics — how the environment impacts and changes our gene expression. Current research focuses on windows of susceptibility, understanding that our exposure to the environment early in life, even in the womb, may set the trajectory for the rest of our lives. A good start lasts a lifetime.

I am also interested in the exposome. We’re beginning to understand how much we are exposed to and how it affects us, but also how our stress levels or diets affect our exposure and response to chemicals and other factors in our environment.

All of this is very exciting and spills into other fields of science.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have?

I think I would have gone to medical school to be a pediatrician, or perhaps I would be an archaeologist. I have loved science since I was a kid. I was good at it, and I liked being one of only a few girls in my class. I also hated writing, but I learned that it is an acquired skill that I would need. Even in science, you have to write essays!

I also like people, so something people-centered, like counseling, would also appeal to me.

Tags: Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Susan Bonner-Weir is a senior investigator with the Joslin Diabetes Center and a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. Her research focuses on beta cells—cells in the pancreatic islets that produce insulin. Insulin is a hormone that helps the body regulate levels of glucose (sugar) in the blood. If the beta cells do not secrete sufficient amounts of insulin, the result is diabetes.
Dr. Bonner-Weir, in collaboration with other researchers, has demonstrated in experimental systems that the number and size of beta cells can change, contrary to a long-held belief. Also, in the lab, she and her team have manipulated certain cells of the pancreas to become stem-cell-like in their ability to become any sort of pancreatic cell, including beta cells. If transplanted into animal models, the beta cells mature and gain the ability to respond to glucose levels. In the future, this new knowledge might be used to help patients with diabetes by restoring their ability to regulate their blood sugar levels through transplanted or regenerated beta cells.

After graduating from Rice University, Dr. Bonner-Weir earned her doctorate in biology from Case Western Reserve University. She has published more than 180 peer-reviewed papers, as well as numerous chapters and reviews. For her pioneering work on the function and regulation of beta cells, Dr. Bonner-Weir was inducted as a fellow into the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

How has mentorship (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

I had several mentors who played different roles at different times. One was my postdoctoral advisor, Dr. Art Like, a pathologist who not only introduced me to the world of pancreatic islets (I had worked before in cell biology using an insect model) but also, more important, gave me, as a mother of a 1-year-old, the opportunity to work part time. I learned how to prioritize what needed to be done and learned how to present my data.

Back in the 1970s, there were few women with young children in the diabetes field, so another important mentor was Dr. Eva Neer, who served as role model of a successful scientist with two children and a professional husband. From her, I learned the value of a role model and since have tried to be one for other woman scientists and physicians.

Probably the most important mentor was my husband and long-time collaborator Dr. Gordon Weir. With our complementary fields of expertise, we actually mentored each other as we collaborated on understanding the pancreatic islet in health and disease.

What is the career achievement of which you are most proud?

I think my greatest career achievement has been to provide much of the initial evidence of compensatory growth and turnover of the pancreatic beta cell. When I first entered the field, it was taught that one was born with all the beta cells one would have for life; the beta cells were not thought to turn over or change in number except their loss with disease. It is now clear from our work and that of many others that compensatory growth and function of beta cells occur throughout life via several different mechanisms, and that inadequate amounts of beta cells lead to dysfunctional beta cells and diabetes.

What are some of the challenges of being a scientist?

Currently one of the biggest challenges is getting and keeping funding so that one can continue to be a scientist. It is also challenging to do important original work, not just "me-too" experiments or, as Dr. Lelio Orci (one of my mentors) said, “filling in the chinks.”

What have been the most rewarding aspects of your career?

Being a practicing scientist has been my greatest reward. To think that solving puzzles and discovering new things and concepts is actually a paying job!

Being able to share this experience with younger people and instill in them the excitement of doing science is a bonus. We have always been very open to bringing in people—whether medical students, undergraduates, or even high-school students—for short-term lab experiences to introduce them to “science in action.”

What is a life achievement of which you are most proud?

The life achievement I am most proud of is having raised two well-adjusted, productive daughters who have professions they love, successful marriages, and delightful children (my grandchildren), all while having myself a fascinating career of science.

Has your research ever taken you to exotic or exciting locations?

Although the research itself has not been elsewhere, one perk of being a scientist is to be invited around the world to present one's data. It has allowed us to travel extensively. My field of research is so international that I have gained friends around the world.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have? Why?

As graduate students, we always joked about starting a restaurant if we couldn't make it in science. Of course, the career advice tests we were given in high school all indicated that I should be a forest ranger because I love natural history: insects, plants, and sea creatures. But, I would probably have been a science teacher if I hadn’t become a practicing scientist.

Tags: Career Achievement Highlight, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Marianne Bronner, a developmental biologist at Caltech, studies a cell type called the neural crest, found only in vertebrate embryos. When the nervous system is forming, a flat sheet called the neural plate lies at the midline of the embryo. As the neural plate rolls up into the neural tube, the neural crest cells form the leading edge—then crawl out of the central nervous system into the periphery, where they form many derivatives, including most of the peripheral nervous system, the melanocytes of the skin, and the craniofacial skeleton.  

Understanding the normal development of these cells has important implications for elucidating the origin of birth defects and diseases that affect the neural crest, including cleft palate, familial dysautonomia, Hirschprung’s disease, and cancers like melanoma and neuoblastoma that derive from the neural crest.

Dr. Bronner earned her Ph.D. in biophysics from Johns Hopkins University in 1979. From 1985 to 1996, she was a professor at U.C. Irvine. She has been a professor at Caltech since 1996.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

I had very little mentorship. That’s why I think it's incredibly important. Navigating through a career is sort of like a random walk. You bump into things and make lots of mistakes. If someone can mentor you, you can navigate more quickly and more efficiently.

I spend a good portion of my time mentoring other people. Once you get as old as I am, there are a lot of people you can mentor. Earlier in my career, I had a largely graduate student lab. Now I have mostly postdocs. I also mentor young assistant professors.

It’s important for young people to seek out mentors. If you see somebody that you think you could relate to well, start up a conversation with them. You can keep in touch with them by email and just ask for advice whenever you need it. I wouldn’t ask for a formal mentoring relationship; I would just pursue it.

Name some of the highlights of your career.

I've had a wonderful career. I've been very fortunate. It’s hard to pick highlights. The great thing about this kind of career is, first of all, you can have a big influence on a lot of other people and really help them.

I love the flexibility that one has as a scientist. I thought it was much easier to raise kids, because I had the ability to stay home when they were sick and take them to whatever event they needed to go to. I also love the fact that we get to travel all over the world and see all sorts of wonderful things.

I find the whole idea of discovery so exciting. In a larger group like mine, there’s some cool discovery almost every day.

One of my most cited papers was one that was published about 25 years ago, where we did single cell lineage analysis of cells in the forming neural crest region in chicken embryos. We found that one cell could give rise to multiple derivatives. It was before the whole concept of stem cells, but it showed that these cells had broad developmental potential.

What’s really cool is that recently, in the journal Cell Stem Cell, a paper was published in which the authors examined the same question in a completely different experimental manner. They used confetti mice, where you can use multiple colors to identify precursor cells, and they found exactly the same result. They used an incredibly elegant technology in a different species and came up with the same conclusions that we raised 25 years ago. That’s pretty cool.

What do you think are some of the most exciting recent scientific advances in your field?

Neural crest cells give rise to lots of different derivatives in the embryo. But embryos are really small. One of the enigmas to me was, as the embryo grows, and into adulthood, how do we keep growing? How do you keep adding cells to organs?

There were a couple of papers published last year in Science about something called Schwann cell precursors. The neural crest cells I work on give rise to Schwann cells, which are cells that wrap around nerves and help conduction velocity. When your motor neurons want to make your arm move and it doesn’t take minutes to happen, that is because of these Schwann cells.

These two papers in Science discovered that these Schwann cell precursors are basically stem cells. Even postnatally, they can give rise to lots of different types of cell types, including neurons and peripheral ganglia but also melanocytes, and probably many other things that have yet to be discovered. I thought that was really cool because it helped explain how stem cells are retained into adulthood.

What are the barriers to women in science?

I actually don't think there are very many right now. Right now in science the barriers are uniform for everybody. Everybody's worried about funding. I think in some ways women are our own worst enemies because we get psyched out. I think women get more frustrated and take the challenges to heart.

Today things are very different from when I started out in science. There was one faculty member in my department, in graduate school, who would call up women who were accepted and discourage them from coming, because he didn’t think women could be scientists. This was 35 years ago. It’s just not like that anymore. In fact, we have as many female graduate students in most classes as men, and sometimes more. The real problem now is the leaky pipeline—that women often drop out of science at every step along the way, from graduate school to postdoc to faculty level.

The other thing that's really changed is, when I was applying for jobs, I had people say, “Well, why should we hire you, when we could hire a man? You might have babies.” You could never say that now. Now all of the young people who want to have children have them. In fact, in one of our job searches a couple years ago, there was a young woman who came for an interview and had just had twins, something like six weeks before. My department chair asked me if I could help find a room for her to pump. It was no big deal.

I think in biology things are very good right now. I think other disciplines—physics, engineering—are not quite as good but they’re also coming up.

How do you manage work/life integration? Do you have tips for young scientists about this?

I always knew I wanted to have children. If I’d had to make a choice between having kids and having a career, I probably would have chosen to have children. It was great when I had my first child—I could go into lab when I felt like it and make my husband stay home with the baby. I didn't feel any pressure to not spend time with my kids.

I actually think having children helped me run a lab. I tend to treat the people who work for me as if they're my family. You don't yell at your family, you don’t yell at your children, and you don’t yell at your postdocs. Just be patient and loving.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have? Why?

Surprisingly, I'm a very good teacher. I say that’s surprising because I was so intimidated by the thought of teaching at first. I like to teach. I think it's a much harder job than doing research. I teach one undergraduate course in biology a year to Caltech students, and the class is usually very well regarded. Probably in a different era I would have been a high school teacher.

But, in reality, I can't imagine liking doing anything more than what I do.

Tags: Barriers for Women in Science, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship

The Women of Color (WOC) Committee of the trans-NIH Working Group on Women in Biomedical Careers routinely nominates outstanding women scientists for the NIH Wednesday Afternoon Lecture Series (WALS). The committee was delighted to host WALS lecturer and Nobel Laureate Linda B. Buck, Ph.D., on March 29, 2017. Dr. Buck met with the WOC committee to share her scientific journey.

Dr. Buck is a biologist best known for her research in the field of olfaction, the sense of smell. She currently works in her lab at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington. There, she focuses on how mammals detect odor chemicals in the environment and how the brain translates those chemicals into odor perceptions and instinctive responses.

Training and Early Research

Dr. Buck obtained her Ph.D. from University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, where she studied immunology and cell surface receptors. She then did postdoctoral research at Columbia University. While using molecular biology to study the nervous system of a sea slug, she read a paper on the sense of smell that she has said changed her life. Similar to the immune system, which detects a multitude of infectious organisms, the olfactory system detects a vast array of environmental chemicals perceived as different scents. From this point in her research, she became “obsessed” with olfaction and finding receptors for odors in the nose. Her persistence finally drove her to discover the odorant receptor gene family, which is responsible for odor detection in the nose in all vertebrates. Humans have about 350 of these receptors, and mice have about 1,000.

Professional Progress

After publishing this discovery in 1991, Dr. Buck took a faculty position in the Neurobiology Department at Harvard Medical School. She spent the next 10 years there, rising through the ranks from assistant to full professor, before moving back to Seattle, her hometown. During this 10-year period, Dr. Buck's lab made a series of additional discoveries about the sense of smell. These included findings on how the nervous system organizes information from 1,000 different odor receptors, how odor receptors are used in combinations to specify the identities of different odors, and how pheromones may be detected.

Early Inspirations

Looking back, Dr. Buck says she was fortunate to have parents who told her she could do anything she wanted in life. She notes that things have improved for women in science as in other areas since she was a student. The equal rights movements in the latter half of the past century made a big difference. Due to changes in the law, graduate and professional schools were required to open their doors to more women and to hire more women faculty.

Recommendations and Final Thoughts

Although conditions have improved, there is still more improvement needed, Dr. Buck says. There is still a problem with "subconscious" bias, and, in addition, women are often less comfortable than men in promoting their accomplishments. If these shortcomings can be ameliorated, women in science will be much more visible to their younger colleagues, therefore, guiding younger women toward fulfilling their dreams of becoming the next generation of women in science. Dr. Buck says she always tells young scientists to work on a problem that fascinates them. Making new discoveries can take tremendous time and effort, but if you love the problem, it will be easier to persist through challenges and attain your goals.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists

As part of her research on the role of family in adolescent development, Tara Chaplin, Ph.D, leads a parenting mindfully study. The study aims to reduce parents’ stress and improve parent-child relationships.

Dr. Chaplin received a Ph.D. in child-clinical psychology from Penn State University and completed post-doctoral training at the University of Pennsylvania. She then moved to Yale University, where she completed one year as a post-doctoral associate, two years as an Associate Research Scientist, and, in 2009, was promoted to Assistant Professor of Psychiatry. She joined the faculty at George Mason University in 2013 as an Assistant Professor of Psychology.

In addition to her mindfulness intervention for parents of adolescents, Dr. Chaplin examines gender differences in emotion and the implications for the development and prevention of substance abuse and depression. Her findings help to understand sex differences in psychological disorders, with women at greater risk for depression/anxiety and men at greater risk for alcohol use disorders.

Dr. Chaplin has published numerous peer-reviewed articles, authored several book chapters, and obtained an NIH Mentored Research Scientist Development Award to support her independent research.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

I am fortunate to have had excellent mentors, such as Dr. Pamela Cole at Penn State and Dr. Jane Gillham at the University of Pennsylvania, who encouraged and supported me. They showed me by example how to navigate a successful scientific career as a woman.

I always loved research, but I credit my mentors with helping me realize my dream of becoming a scientist. They believed in me and told me that I could really make it happen.

At Yale, Dr. Rajita Sinha was a great inspiration to me. She was doing cutting-edge science and wasn’t afraid to get into the thick of things. She had an idea and she pursued it. I’ve struggled to learn that confidence as a female scientist. I have tried to apply what I’ve learned from my own mentors to my mentoring of my female graduate students. It has been rewarding to pass on skills to them.

What are some of the challenges to being a female scientist?

Just being a scientist is challenging with all of the different hats you have to wear, from researcher to supervisor to businesswoman. The challenge for female scientists is especially real.  

One challenge for me has to do with confidence. I find sometimes that I will be in a meeting full of other scientists—male scientists, and I’ll have an idea. But, rather than sharing it, I’ll question myself and think it through more. Then one of the male scientists will speak up with the idea that I had.

I think this is a common struggle for women in business and in science. There is this socialization of women. We hold back what we want to say; we watch out for others’ feelings. We’re careful in what we say. But I’m learning to speak up, to go for the big ideas and the big grants.

It can also be a challenge to balance family life and work. Men don’t always feel that same pressure. I worry constantly about my son and how he’s doing. That can take a toll. When I initially pursued my career, I had this idea that becoming a professor meant working 60 hours a week. I thought to myself: How could I do that and have a family too? But the good news is that most people do not have to work 60 hours a week. If you’re really focused and don’t overcommit, you can work a normal work week and still have time for your family.

What have been the most rewarding aspects of your career?

I love the science. I love when I can have an idea, conduct a study, and discover something interesting. I’m interested in emotions. When I first started out in the field, many researchers didn’t think much about emotion. People would actually laugh at the idea of emotions being related to depression. I believe that, with my finding that emotions are central to psychological disorders, I’ve contributed something significant to the field.

What do you do outside the lab?

I hang out with my son and play with him. He’s a preschooler, so I don’t get much alone time, but when I do I like to read and work out.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

The moment I will always remember is when I was awarded my Mentored Research Science Award. I saw the score and read the reviews, and I knew from that that I would be funded. The process was amazing. I had never thought I could be a cutting-edge, real scientist. This validated my dream and changed the course of my career.

Has the trajectory of your career changed over time?

When I began my career, I was a bit intimidated about how hard it would be to be a professor. I didn’t think I would do independent research; instead, I thought I would work under someone. Now, I have a real passion to contribute to the field, to become more serious in my pursuits. I know my goals are attainable.

Recently, my research interests have grown to include brain development and neural arousal, integrating FMRI and neuroscience with my work on adolescent substance use and mindfulness interventions.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have?

If I weren’t a psychologist, I would probably be a physicist or mathematician. I love to write, too, so perhaps I would be an author.

Tags: Career Achievement Highlight, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Barbara Corkey is an award-winning scientist who is internationally recognized for her work in lipid metabolism, insulin secretion, and pancreatic beta cell function. Her current research focuses on metabolism—how specific cells involved in diabetes and obesity communicate. She is also studying possible influences of environmental toxins and food additives on the development of diabetes. Her research on pancreatic beta cells, which produce insulin, challenges the popular and long-standing belief that insulin resistance causes diabetes.  

Dr. Corkey is the Zoltan Kohn Professor in Medicine at Boston University. She also serves as the Department of Medicine’s Vice Chair for Research, director of the Obesity Research Center at Boston Medical Center, and as a mentor to graduate students.

Among her accolades include two of the most prestigious awards for diabetes research: The Charles Best Award from the University of Toronto and the Banting Medal for Scientific Achievement from the American Diabetes Association.

Dr. Corkey’s professional achievements are internationally recognized, and her story is an inspiration to all female scientists. Dr. Corkey attended New York University on a path to medical school, but dropped out to join a laboratory. She then pursued her interest in biochemistry at the University of Pennsylvania. Raising two children as a single mother, before marrying and having a third child, Dr. Corkey worked at several labs. She then earned her doctorate—her only degree—at the age of 43. She stayed at the University of Pennsylvania, conducting her groundbreaking research on diabetes and obesity, until she joined the faculty at Boston University in 1987.

How has mentorship shaped your career?
One day while wandering the halls at NYU medical school, I peeked into a small lab and saw a beating heart on a string. I stopped and asked the scientist how it was done. Two hours later, following a demonstration of stopping and restarting the heartbeat, I knew the answer: ions and fuel. I also knew that I wanted to do that sort of thing with my life rather than going to medical school. The scientist was Nobel laureate, Otto Loewi, my first mentor.

A few days later, wandering the same halls, I inquired about a research position and was hired as a technician in a lab where Bob Steele was developing the “Steele equations” used to this day to determine glucose kinetics in living animals and humans. There, I was taught a very high standard of scientific inquiry and great tolerance for “stupid” questions from several outstanding scientists, including Bob Steele, Richard deBodo, Norman Altszuler, and Arnold Dunn. They were my second mentors.

Finally, in 1962, I was hired by Britton Chance at the Johnson Foundation, University of Pennsylvania, where lively debate and challenging questions were a way of life.

From Steele, Chance, and Loewi I felt respected and challenged and sensed that life in science was a passionate, endlessly challenging way of life that I have grown to love.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?
Nurture the qualities of bravery and fierceness. The world of science is not fair! You can do all the right things, be smart and engaging and hardworking, and still receive rejection.

Don’t give up if research is your passion. We are capable of tremendous creativity, cooperativity, and perseverance. Research requires that kind of commitment, and great breakthroughs have rarely come easily.

What are some characteristics of a successful scientist?

A passion for discovery and a childish delight in finally understanding the way something works or the solution to a problem. A drive to find the answer and the patience to pursue many avenues toward an achievement. A sense that this is the only thing you can do.

What do you do outside the lab?
Paint, cook, train a puppy, and most interesting—travel.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?
None. My only goals have been to cure diabetes and obesity, and I have not yet succeeded. But I still think I can.

Has your research ever taken you to exotic/exciting locations?
Yes, one of the best perks in the life of a scientist is becoming a world citizen and traveling all over the globe. Some of my best trips have been to Israel, Scandinavia, Turkey, India, and Southeast Asia.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Gannon grew up in Queens, New York. She received her B.S. in biology from Molloy College and her M.S. in biology from Adelphi University, both on Long Island. Her thesis work was conducted in Dr. David Bader’s lab at Cornell University, where she received her Ph.D. in cell biology and anatomy in 1995. Dr. Gannon pursued postdoctoral training in Dr. Chris Wright’s laboratory at Vanderbilt University, studying the role of the Pdx1 and HNF6 transcription factors in pancreas development. She is currently Professor and Vice Chair for Faculty Development in the Department of Medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Dr. Gannon is also the 2017–2018 chair of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) science session planning committee. She was elected an American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) fellow in 2015, and she has received funding from JDRF, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), ADA, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

The Gannon lab studies genes and pathways that regulate the number of insulin-producing cells throughout the life of the organism — under normal conditions and under physiological stress. Their projects involve understanding embryonic pancreas development as well as beta cell plasticity following cues such as injury, pregnancy, weight gain, or high-fat diet. They use mouse models of diabetes to develop approaches to augment beta cell mass and promote regeneration.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

I have been lucky to have interactive mentors who have also become very good friends. While working on my master’s degree, I had two mentors who shared a lab and became father figures to me. From there, I worked as a technician for three years for a woman who was an excellent role model for work-life balance. She had children and was very active in her home life and hobbies while running a lab. During my doctoral training, I worked with David Bader, who served as an excellent role model of someone who loves science and never lost that childlike enthusiasm for science, and I have tried to hold onto that. Conducting rigorous research while having fun is an essential skill that David instilled in me. Finally, my postdoctoral advisor, Chris Wright, was very open and generous in sharing ideas, reagents, and animal models, and I have tried to emulate that generosity. All my mentors treated me like a colleague rather than a trainee, and I speak with all of them regularly and consider them to be lifetime mentors and friends.

When I started my own lab, I needed to transition from being a good mentee to being a good mentor. I try to encourage all my students and postdocs to remain in contact with me for the long term, as I have done with my own mentors, and not simply for letters of recommendation. The bond between a mentor and a mentee is really important and is something you can fall back on throughout life. As Vice Chair for Faculty Development, I work with junior faculty and try to serve as an example of someone with a healthy work-life balance. It’s my responsibility to help them navigate the path to promotion and tenure and ensure they receive consistent mentoring from their own committees.

What have been some of the most rewarding aspects of your career?

Watching my students and postdocs develop and flourish as scientists has been one of the most rewarding aspects of my career. I get excited watching them move on to new opportunities and succeed in their careers. Another rewarding aspect for me has been following the natural evolution of science. I started out as a developmental biologist focusing on basic scientific research, and now I am involved in drug development and bioengineering. If you asked me at the start of my career whether I would end up here, I would have emphatically said, “No!” However, I followed the science in the direction it was naturally going, despite needing to leave my comfort zone, and have established the necessary collaborations to be successful. That has been rewarding and fun.

What do you do outside of the lab? 

A lot! I am an Irish step dancer. I attend a two-hour class each week and participate in shows throughout the year. I have competed in Irish step dancing at the local, regional, and national levels. I also love to sing. I have competed in Celtic singing and sing at church and in shows. I am also involved in activities with my son. I volunteer with his Boy Scout troop as a merit badge counselor and attend monthly camping trips with his troop. Prior to this year, I served as my son’s classroom parent for seven years.

What is the career achievement of which you are most proud?

I am very proud of being promoted to full professor. Earlier in my career, I was advised against taking a position at Vanderbilt, because the job would require a level of intensity that was not conducive to having a family life and hobbies. At the time, I decided that I would try doing it my way with hobbies and balance, and if it didn’t work, I would pursue something else. Being able to make it to the top of the profession at a place as rigorous as Vanderbilt has been a huge accomplishment.

What is the life achievement of which you are most proud?

Being able to balance a scientific career and performance has been amazing. I have had the opportunity to dance with the Chieftains, a renowned traditional Irish band; sing on stage at the Tennessee Performing Arts Center; and dance on stage at the Grand Ole Opry. My Irish dancing team came in first in the southern regional competition and third in the North American championship.

I was unsure whether I could have children due to health problems. I am blessed to have my son, and maintaining a work-life balance has allowed me to be significantly involved in his life. I am very proud of my role as a mother.

I have Crohn’s disease, and accomplishing major personal, scientific, and performing achievements while facing periods of being very ill with low energy levels is an incredible feat. I am proud to have done so.

What are some of the challenges to being a scientist?

In many other professions, you can be “finished” with your work at a defined time, whether it be the end of a shift, the end of a project, or the end of a semester. As a scientist, there is always more you can do — one more experiment, one more paper, one more grant. Therefore, one of the greatest challenges is establishing barriers and boundaries to give yourself time for other things, like your family, your health, your hobbies, or thinking about science. It’s so easy to “go, go, go”! Having Crohn’s disease, it is essential for me to take the time to relax and minimize stress. Not doing so can result in me being very ill and ultimately not helpful to my lab or family. However, balance can benefit everyone. As a scientist, you need to know how to wrap up a story for publication, finish a draft of a grant early enough that you can get feedback prior to submission, or set other personal deadlines. Not doing so hurts productivity and publication records and leads to burnout and not getting the payoff of a grant or a promotion.

Has your career ever taken you to exotic/exciting locations?

I come from a lower-middle-class background, and my family did not have the resources to go on vacations. I also did not have the means to travel during graduate school or my postdoc. I actually got a passport for the first time as a faculty member. Since then, I have been amazed and appreciative of the opportunities to travel to conferences around the world. My work has taken me to Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, Spain, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, England, and Mexico. Growing up, the Middle Ages were a passion of mine, so the opportunity to travel to castles and cathedrals in Europe has been amazing! Being a scientist has afforded me the ability to travel to places I would not have seen otherwise. I have friends all over the world now, and for that, I am grateful.

Tags: Career Achievement Highlight, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

As a 17-year-old graduating from high school, Dr. Patricia Grady considered the careers that were generally open to women: teacher, nurse, and secretary. She thought nursing was the most flexible and interesting, so she picked that—and started down a fascinating and varied career path of nursing, teaching, research, and now administration.

Dr. Grady has a master's degree in nursing and a doctorate in physiology from the University of Maryland. Her scientific research has been primarily in stroke, with emphasis on arterial stenosis and cerebral ischemia. In 1988, Dr. Grady joined NIH as an administrator in the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, focusing on stroke and brain imaging. Since 1995, she has been the director of the National Institute of Nursing Research.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

You really need mentors as you move through your career. When I started out there were not as many women in science, so we tended to support each other as we tried to figure out the system. Most of my early mentors in science were males, since there weren't that many females.

I benefited from a lot of indirect mentoring, where you watch people who are successful and study their approaches to things. For example, if there were researchers in my doctoral program who were particularly good at presentations, I would pay attention to how they would alter their style when they spoke to different audiences.

Also, I would seek out people with particular expertise. For example, one of the faculty in my doctoral program did a lot of publishing and presenting. When I had to write an abstract, I made an appointment with him. I still use the principles that he gave me today.

When I came to NIH, I had a lot of experience and I could help other people avoid some of the pitfalls that I had encountered. It was a really positive experience, transforming what I had learned to help other people.

Has the trajectory of your career changed over time?

Yes, several times. When I finished my undergraduate degree, I worked for a year, and then got my master's in nursing. I taught on the nursing faculty for a few years. At the time, there were only a few programs that offered a Ph.D. in nursing, and they weren’t a good fit for me. Instead, I decided to get my Ph.D. in the school of medicine, in physiology. Neuroscience was not a formal field in those days, but I was interested in the central nervous system and the brain. I thought I would come back to teaching, but realized that I could use what I’d learned to do research on preventing stroke.

For about 17 years, I did research on stroke with NIH funding. Then came another turn in the road: I was recruited to come to NIH, to run the programs in stroke and brain imaging, which was my area. It was terrific to be able to have that kind of impact on a whole field, and to understand it from a national perspective.

What have been the most rewarding aspects of your career?

Being in a position to do something that influences the health of our society is very exciting. It's wonderful to see the progression of both of the fields that I've been part of, nursing and neuroscience.

I love having the opportunity to work with the next generation. NINR recently had our 30th anniversary symposium. We asked for nursing researchers to submit posters about their work and had nearly 400 submissions, many more than could fit in the space. About 70% of those were from young or early-career investigators.

Nursing is a terrific career. We have nurses in Congress. We have nurses who are heads of hospitals and health agencies, deans, and presidents of universities. There are just so many opportunities. We still have a very limited research workforce in nursing, but it's growing. It's just wonderful to see the growth of this field over time.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

In 1995, about two years after the National Center for Nursing Research achieved Institute status at NIH and became NINR, I was fortunate to be named the director. It was so exciting to help shape the Institute from its early years —and to help shape the field of nursing research.

The whole health care system is moving in directions in which nurses can play major roles. Nursing is all about quality of life and improving symptoms. As our population ages and people live longer, more people are developing chronic illnesses. The information we generate through research will help with that.

For example, one of the big issues is how to care for the growing number of people with Alzheimer’s disease. That work is going to fall to friends and family. It can be extremely stressful and cause health problems for those caregivers. NINR has supported a substantial body of research on how informal caregivers can better manage their own health.

As the population ages, another area of growing interest is palliative care. We want to understand more about how people want to be treated, the choices that they want to make, and how the health care system can support them. As the lead Institute on end-of-life research at NIH, we are also very focused on palliative care. Our Palliative Care: Conversations Matter campaign helps parents with pediatric palliative care decision making, and helps raise awareness of and improve communication about palliative care among families and healthcare providers.

What do you do outside the office?

I like to hike and be outdoors. I sometimes have to train to go on vacation; I’ve done a few high-altitude treks. There’s so much to see out there. I’ve been to Siberia, Myanmar, Cambodia, and Central Asia. It's good to see what other people's experiences are. It also really reaffirms my commitment to wanting to try to make the world a healthier place.

And I read a lot—mostly mysteries. I'm always trying to find out answers. Mysteries used to be sort of lowbrow, but now there are all kinds of mysteries set in a variety of exotic locations.

What are some characteristics of a successful scientist?

Having a curious mind, asking questions, wondering about things. Scientists aren’t satisfied with the status quo.

If you are curious and like to find out new things, you'll never run out of things to do. Being a scientist also requires a certain amount of tenacity, because you may not find all the answers right away.

I also think it's helpful to be a bit of an optimist. If a project turns out the way you wanted, that's great. If it didn't, you've still generated more information.

What are some of the challenges to being a scientist?

Being a scientist is a different kind of career. It's a lifestyle, too. You're always learning. When you're 17 or 18, I think that probably seems daunting. For people who enjoy routines, perhaps science isn't always such a good fit.

It is wonderful to get to create new knowledge. For the time that you're doing those experiments and collecting that information, that's information that nobody else in the world has. People who go into science tend to be bright, with curious minds. It's a good neighborhood to hang out in.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

If you're starting out, jump in and test out the waters. You can work on research projects in high school and college. That’s a wonderful way to learn about the lifestyle and get some sense of what the landscape is like.

Always be prepared to take advantage of opportunities and learn as many different things as you can. There's this myth that things come along in a certain order, but that’s not the way that real life plays out. A career is a long time, and you never know when things that you learn might come in handy.

I think the best thing is to find something you really like to do. If you like science, find a place within that that resonates with you. For me, thinking about the idea of helping to prevent strokes, and to prevent all that devastation, was very exciting.

You spend a lot of time on a career. You want to be spending your time doing something you really enjoy.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

From her work as a cardiologist to her pioneering role at the National Institutes of Health, Bernadine Healy, M.D., will long be remembered as a champion for women’s health who changed the way the medical profession viewed heart disease.

Dr. Healy received her medical degree from Harvard Medical School in 1970, one of 10 women in a class of 120. She completed training in cardiology at Johns Hopkins University. After two years at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, she joined the faculty at Johns Hopkins as the first woman in the cardiology division.

In 1988 she became president of the American Heart Association. Although the leading killer of both women and men, research on cardiovascular disease in women was lacking. “The problem is to convince both the lay and medical sectors that coronary heart disease is also a women’s disease, not a man’s disease in disguise,” Dr. Healy wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1991.

That year Dr. Healy became the first women to head the NIH. Less than a month after becoming director, she introduced the Women’s Health Initiative to Congress, describing it as a “moon walk for women”. The $625 million research program greatly advanced our knowledge of women’s health in middle age and beyond. Research from the Women’s Health Initiative showed that combined hormone replacement therapy, used to treat the symptoms of menopause, increased the risk for invasive breast cancer and heart disease.

While at the NIH, Dr. Healy drew from her experience in science policy, as a deputy director of the White House Office of Science and Policy in the 1980s, to set a new course for the Institutes. She mandated that NIH-funded clinical trials include women if the disease affected both genders. In 1992, Dr. Healy launched the Minority Health Initiative to promote research on diseases that disproportionately affect minorities. She also supported increasing minorities in the sciences. That year she spoke of the need for increased diversity at the National Conference on Diversity in the Scientific and Technological Workforce:

“If Albert Einstein had been born a Hispanic woman, would we have recognized her genius? If Jonas Salk were an African American man, would the discovery of a polio vaccine have been delayed? … At what price do we deny or delay their opportunity to contribute?”

As director in the early days of the Human Genome Project, Dr. Healy recruited new scientists, including current NIH director Dr. Francis Collins, to head the project. She established a grant program to retain talented scientists during lapses in larger grants and formed the National Institute of Nursing Research.

Dr. Healy went on to serve as dean for Ohio State University’s College of Medicine. Recognizing the importance of prevention, she expanded the school into the College of Medicine and Public Health. As a result of Dr. Healy’s work, the college was designated a National Center of Excellence in Women’s Health. In 1999, Dr. Healy was named president of the American Red Cross, where she oversaw relief efforts during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

In her later life, Dr. Healy became a vital bridge to the general public on health and medical issues. She was a TV commentator on CBS News and PBS-TV and a health columnist for U.S. News and World Report for more than a decade. She wrote on a wide range of health issues in her columns and several books, including candidly about her fight with brain cancer, which took her life in 2011. Her columns, like her life, inspired and empowered countless women and men.

Chief of the Chemistry and Drug Metabolism Section of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) since 1998, Dr. Marilyn Huestis is a toxicologist studying the effects of illicit drugs on the body, brain, and in utero. Her doctoral research focused on cannabis (marijuana), and she went on to study a wide range of illicit drugs, including cocaine, methamphetamine, ecstasy, and heroin. Her recent work includes an initiative to develop new diagnostic tests for designer drugs, which current drug tests cannot detect. She is motivated to see how her research improves people’s lives by reducing deaths from drugged driving or reducing the effects on children when mothers use drugs during pregnancy. She thoroughly enjoys mentoring students in toxicology, having overseen the doctoral or post-doctoral research of more than a dozen investigators.

Dr. Huestis began working in a toxicology lab in 1969 as an undergraduate. She married, earned an M.S. in clinical chemistry, held a variety of jobs, and raised a family, returning to school to earn her doctorate in toxicology in 1992 from the University of Maryland Baltimore School of Medicine. In the late 1990s she started one of the few human clinical research labs in the world to test illicit drugs in humans.

Dr. Huestis is a past-president of the Society of Forensic Toxicologists, past chair of the Toxicology Section of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and the first woman president of the International Association of Forensic Toxicologists.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

Mentoring is one of the most important aspects of my job. An important role of NIDA’s Intramural Research Program is to train young investigators in basic and clinical research related to drug abuse, and assist with their career development. Toxicology needs mentors—especially more female mentors for female students. It’s an important responsibility to reach out and support other women in the field.

Mentoring doctoral students is very important to me. I help them learn how to conduct research, how to present themselves, and how to build their careers. They also have to learn scientific writing skills—how not to over-interpret the data while maintaining attention to detail and how to maintain a confident voice while remaining open to alternate hypotheses. To watch students’ development from the beginning of their studies to the earning of their Ph.D.—that’s absolutely the best part of my job.

It would have helped to have more mentorship in research earlier in my own scientific training. I didn’t start conducting research until I was working on my doctorate, which I pursued only after raising a family. When I finally got into research, I fell in love with it, and wound up publishing 390 publications, only having started after age 40. But I think if I had had different mentors I might have gravitated toward research earlier in my education, and accomplished even more.

As an undergraduate at an all-women’s college, I had great mentors teaching me to think and resolve complex problems, instilling the message that I, a woman, could accomplish a lot in the world. However, I didn’t have a lot of mentors in my specific discipline, biochemistry, and I don’t remember much encouragement to pursue science, which even fewer women did then than now. It would have helped to get more reinforcement that it was possible for women to become career scientists.

I was number one in my class and my major, but my teachers were disappointed when I married in my senior year. They let me know they didn’t think I was fulfilling my potential. That left me with a feeling that I always wanted to get back to academia. At the first opportunity, 10 years later, I went through a full two-year program to earn my master’s degree. Several years later, I went for my doctorate. I think the perseverance it took to pursue my studies sprang from the confidence nurtured by my undergraduate mentors.

I believe it’s really important to introduce girls in high school, middle school, or even earlier to the possibilities of a career in science. And especially girls in developing countries, who may be struggling to obtain an equal education to boys.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

Recently, we used the world’s most advanced driving simulator, built by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), to conduct the first-ever study of the effects of an illicit drug on driving. It took several years to obtain funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy, NHTSA, and NIDA, but I think it was the best study ever done on the effects of cannabis and alcohol on driving.

There were many hurdles in conducting the study. The campus we used had a complete ban on smoking; we managed to work around that by using a vaporizer for the cannabis. The simulator’s driving tests were designed to be sensitive to the effects of alcohol, but they had no existing drive to observe the effects of cannabis. Ultimately, we had to build six different drives to study the effects of low-dose, then high-dose cannabis alone; low-dose alcohol alone; low-dose, then high-dose cannabis with low-dose alcohol; and then tests with placebos for both drugs. And it was difficult to get our test subjects—illicit drug users—to follow through on such a demanding protocol. They had to report to the study six different times.

But we did it, and the data were amazing. It was the first time we were able to identify the blood concentrations of THC, the psychoactive component of cannabis, which produce the same level of driving impairment as alcohol. We found that alcohol affects peak THC concentrations, and that THC delays the peak of alcohol concentration. It was a tremendous challenge from a research perspective, but it worked out really well. And the researchers I trained and worked with have gone on to excellent careers.

What is a life achievement of which you are most proud?

In 2010, I received a doctor honoris causa, an honorary doctoral degree, from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Helsinki, a school that supported my work on in utero drug exposure. That was a great honor, and it meant the world to me.

Has your research ever taken you to exotic locations?

In addition to Finland, I’ve been invited to teach in many places around the world, including Australia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Uzbekistan, Thailand, and Greece. I love it. I get to work with different people and learn about their history, culture, and religions.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

You need to choose a career that you’re going to be passionate about, no matter what career you choose. If you choose something that you love and are invested in, then it’s really not work at all. It’s pursuing your passion and making a contribution—and there are so many ways you can make a contribution in every field. It’s critical to find a field that you love, that is going to give you satisfaction and allow you to grow and reach your full potential. At the same time, maintaining work/life balance is a challenge, and you need mentors who will support that.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship

The undeniable and compelling need to eliminate health disparities has been an important driver of the career of Dr. Regina Smith James in the several positions she’s held at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Currently the Director of Clinical and Health Services Research at the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD), she works to strengthen the Institute’s projects on minority health and health disparities in clinical settings, health services research, and patient-clinician communication. She has also been the lead NIMHD representative in planning activities related to the NIH Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) and served as the co-chair for the Community Engagement/Health Disparities NIH PMI Working Group.

During a stint as the director of the Office of Health Equity at the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Dr. James led the Institute’s efforts to address issues related to maternal and child health disparities and disseminate research findings aimed at closing gaps in health outcomes. Prior to that role, she oversaw the Mood Disorders Program, Attention Disorders Program, and Pediatric Eating Disorders Program at the National Institute of Mental Health. Dr. James has received various honors for her work at the NIH.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

Having a mentor is extremely important, but it takes a team approach to help shape a career.

All of my mentors have played critical roles in coaching and helping me develop professionally, but others have gone a few steps further and became my advocates and sponsors. An advocate is someone who supports and speaks highly of you to his or her colleagues, and a sponsor is a person who is in a position to help propel one’s career trajectory in a positive way.

One person at NIH who has served as my mentor, advocate, and sponsor is Yvonne Maddox, Ph.D. (currently the vice president of research for the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences). I first met Dr. Maddox when I was a clinical fellow and she was serving as the acting deputy director of NIH. I reached out to her after hearing her give a very informative and impassioned presentation at the NIH Clinical Center. Since then, we have maintained a relationship that has been very instrumental to my career development. She is a wonderful person and a strong supporter, and I truly respect and appreciate her leadership and guidance.

F. Xavier Castellanos, M.D., a renowned neuroscientist, has been another mentor and key role model for me. He is a true physician-scientist; hardworking and compassionate, he cares deeply about his work and his colleagues. Our research at NIMH on pharmaceutical treatments for children and adolescents diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder was recognized by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, which awarded me the Norbert and Charlotte Rieger Award for Scientific Achievement.

Many others have mentored me throughout my career. The list includes Robert Haynie, M.D., Ph.D., of Case Western Reserve Medical School, whom I met as an intern, and John Glazer, M.D., who served as my residency director and mentor at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation.

Having the benefit of continued relationships with my mentors constantly reminds me to “pay it forward,” so I too serve as a mentor. It’s a reciprocal relationship: I learn from my mentees, and I share my knowledge and experience with them. I was honored to be one of the first recipients of the NICHD Mentorship Award in 2013.

What is an individual achievement of which you are most proud?

In 2014, in honor of Women’s History Month, I was asked to give a keynote address in Washington, D.C. that focused on “celebrating women of character, courage and commitment.” It was an energizing and humbling opportunity to reflect on my challenges and accomplishments, while looking to the future and thinking about new pathways that I could establish to achieve current and new goals.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

I feel very fortunate to have a career that affords me the opportunity to ask questions, stimulate dialogue and discussion, and help mobilize research efforts that can address health and health care inequality for vulnerable populations. It brings me great professional and personal satisfaction to know that my work contributes to our understanding of the complex nature of health disparities and how they can be addressed.

What do you think are some of the most exciting recent scientific advances outside your field?

A scientific advancement within the last decade that was particularly exciting to me as a public health advocate and as a parent of two teenagers was the development of a vaccine that could potentially reduce the risk of cervical and other cancers.

Knowing that the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which is available to pre-teens and teens, has the potential to improve the health of both men and women, particularly in communities of color, is very exciting to me. Rates of cervical cancer, which is associated with HPV infection, are 45 percent higher among Black women and 65 percent higher among Hispanic women than White women—meaning protection before exposure is important. We still have some work to do on targeted health communications to promote vaccine use, but I’m hopeful. The other exciting piece about this discovery is that the technology used to create the first HPV vaccine was developed right here at NIH!

How do you manage work/life integration? Do you have tips for young scientists about this?

I have been very fortunate to have what I call “wrap-around” support through a network consisting of my husband, my extended family and friends, and a supportive work environment. Many times I have to work long hours, and it’s important to have family and friends who can step in and help when needed. When I was the program chief at NIMH and my kids were young, I felt very supported when I needed to try and balance time between family and work.

Having a supportive environment shaped the way that I have worked with my colleagues. When I felt supported, I was happier, I worked harder, and I was more productive. I enjoyed work, and I wanted those who worked with me to also feel supported and encouraged. My tip to young scientists is to make sure they develop a strong support system and be receptive to others stepping in to help out.   

Why is it important to support and encourage the next generation of female scientists? 

At the heart of research is systematic inquiry or investigation. Encouraging the next generation of female scientists is absolutely necessary in order to have different perspectives on the types of inquiries being made or questions asked. Who is conducting the scientific inquiry or asking the questions directly affects what research will be performed and which doors to science will be opened.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship, Work-Life Balance

Ruth Kirschstein, M.D., was a fixture on the NIH campus for more than 50 years, guiding the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) at pivotal turning points. She was well known for her determination, attention-to-detail, and mentoring, and has served as a role model for generations of female scientists. The first woman to head an Institute at the NIH, Dr. Kirschstein also served as acting director of the NIH twice.

Dr. Kirschstein received her medical degree at Tulane University in 1951 and was drawn to pathology during several residencies across the United States. Dr. Kirschstein was a meticulous scientist, a trait that served her well as a pathologist in the NIH’s Division of Biologic Standards (DBS), which was later transferred to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). She joined the DBS in 1957—just a year after a faulty batch of the Salk polio vaccine infected 40,000 children in the U.S., paralyzing 50 and killing five.

Dr. Kirschstein developed an accurate and reliable method for testing the safety of the polio vaccine, ensuring a similar mistake never happened again. Dr. Kirschstein advocated for the Sabin oral polio vaccine and consulted with the World Health Organization on the international fight against polio. She was awarded the DHEW Superior Service Award for her lifesaving work in 1971.

In 1974 Dr. Kirschstein was appointed director of the NIGMS. In her nearly 20 years as director, Dr. Kirschstein transformed and expanded the Institute. NIGMS’ budget quadrupled during this time thanks in part to her eloquent and engaging testimony before congress.

Dr. Kirschstein championed many causes at NIGMS in the face of changing political tides and trends. She was a steadfast supporter of basic science and grants to train the next generation of scientists. She organized the NIGMS response to the AIDS epidemic. Amidst conservative opposition to spending federal money on AIDS research, she initiated a structural biology program to identify drug targets against HIV. Dr. Kirschstein was also central to the formation of GenBank, the first nucleotide databank, which was later transferred from NIGMS to the National Center for Biotechnology Information.

Having faced discrimination throughout her career, Dr. Kirschstein was a vocal advocate for social justice. She fought tirelessly to ensure that her minority colleagues had equal opportunities to advance in science. Concerned that the Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC) program was not enough, Dr. Kirschstein crafted an innovative program in the 1970s to attract and prepare minority undergraduate students for careers in science and medicine. Later she visited disadvantaged schools in Washington, DC, to get students excited about science. Despite her own barriers, Dr. Kirschstein was undaunted: “It never occurred to me that I could not do anything I wanted,” Dr. Kirschstein noted of her career choice in her biography, released by the NIH as a free eBook. 

Dr. Kirschstein mentored countless researchers. Many of these researchers went on to leadership positions at the NIH and in science. “There are few at the NIH who have not been touched by her warmth, wisdom, interest, and mentorship," said NIH director Dr. Francis Collins in 2009 in a statement following her death at 83 from multiple myeloma.  In recognition of her commitment to training young scientists and her many accomplishments, Congress renamed the NIH graduate student fellowship program in her honor in 2002. Through this program, today, thousands of young scientists are able to pursue their passion and continue the legacy of Dr. Kirschstein.

Dr. Ana María López entered medicine to take care of people. Her career trajectory shows continuous movement toward not only doing that better but also making better care more accessible for more people.

Following undergraduate study at Bryn Mawr College, Dr. López earned her M.D. at the Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University and went on to a residency in internal medicine and a fellowship in general medicine. She then completed a clinical fellowship in hematology and oncology and a National Cancer Institute–funded research fellowship in cancer etiology and prevention, all at the University of Arizona. After concurrently completing an M.P.H. at the University of Arizona, Dr. López joined the faculty of the University of Arizona College of Medicine, where she became a tenured professor and also served as medical director of the Women’s Health Initiative, founding medical director of the Arizona Telemedicine Program, and associate dean of outreach and multicultural affairs.

Dr. López moved to University of Utah Health Sciences in 2015 and is a professor of medicine at the University of Utah School of Medicine, director of cancer health equity at the Huntsman Cancer Institute, and associate vice president for health equity and inclusion at University of Utah Health Sciences. She is a member of the Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program at Huntsman Cancer Institute and associate director of collaboration and engagement at the Center for Clinical and Translational Science.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

Consider a career in academic medicine. It offers many rewards with the opportunity to participate in scientific enquiry, medical education, and clinical care. There is so much we don’t know that this is incredibly exciting.

Know that it’s OK if your hypothesis is proven wrong. It may be just as important to know what is not the answer. A negative result can point you to a better outcome than your initial hypothesis.

Science is a collaborative process. More and more, multiple disciplines and perspectives are coming together to answer complex questions. Purposefully bring unusual suspects to the table and learn from each other.

Persevere. It can seem like a long and difficult road, but it is very rewarding and energizing. I look around and see others saying, “Oh, I have to go to work today,” but I am saying, “Oh! I get to go to work today!”

What are some characteristics of a successful scientist?

Perseverance, resilience, and openness.

When I submit a grant, manuscript, or protocol to an institutional review board and it comes back with comments or lots of red marks, I always think, “Somebody has taken the time to give me feedback, and I can use that feedback to make it better.” Be grateful. Don’t let the process knock you down.

Be open to other people, to other opportunities, to other ideas. We don’t know what the future will bring, but if we are open, we may be better able to catch a glimpse of the opportunity to participate in shaping what the future will look like.

Early in my career, I was exposed to the nascent field of cancer prevention, and it made so much sense to prevent cancer and avoid the suffering of the diagnosis and the treatment.

Telemedicine emerged as an opportunity when the Arizona Telemedicine Program was established and a medical director with expertise in both public health and cancer was sought. I was not a techie enamored of the technology. I was intrigued by telemedicine’s potential to facilitate access to care.

Who were your scientific role models?

I remember one of my hematology/oncology fellowship peers saying, “You can learn from everyone.” So I have not had one role model but many.

My first role models were my parents, both pathologists. I was born in Bolivia, and we came to the United States from Colombia when I was 6 for their postgraduate training. From them, I gained my steadfast commitment to learning, which I absorbed as if by osmosis.

My undergraduate mentors in philosophy helped me tune my critical thinking skills and see the importance of the question: How a question is set up serves as the framework for the answer. As scientists, we all bring in our own assumptions. It is important to be very clear about what those assumptions are.

During my fellowship, Dr. David Alberts introduced me to the field of cancer prevention and actively role-modeled intellectual curiosity. He could as easily engage an optical engineer, a clinical trialist, and a palliative care expert. He was always open to the enquiry.

Finally, my mentor in telemedicine was Dr. Ronald Weinstein, director of the Arizona Telemedicine Program. Dr. Weinstein demonstrated the keen ability to engage others with great enthusiasm to create that which was not yet.

Has the trajectory of your career changed over time?

The answer to that is yes and no. I think the core value guiding my career has really been to take care of people. This guidepost resonates with the mission of an academic medical center to care for all and is the reason academic medicine has been my home. My work within academic medicine has been to address the specific needs of women, of underserved populations across the spectrum from prevention to palliation. These tailored interventions can often be facilitated by telemedicine technology.

How do you manage work/life integration? Do you have tips for young scientists?

You hear a lot about work/life balance, and I used to give a lot of these talks, but then I looked around and saw only women. I decided to stop giving these talks until men were also in the audience. Men today are asking these questions. We are no longer talking about maternity leave but parental leave. Shifts are happening.

Keeping track of your priorities is important. For me, my two children are my top priority. My daughter was born during my second year of residency; my son, during my second year of fellowship. Being in training and having children, I began to feel discouraged that I could not “have it all.” Then my thinking moved from “As a woman, you can have it all,” to “I can have it all, just sequentially, on my own timeline.”

On my daughter’s first Christmas, I was on call. I went in very early Christmas morning, made rounds, and got home and back into my pajamas before she woke up. When she woke up, our first Christmas together started.

So maybe your path is not as direct as someone else’s. That’s OK. Mine has not been linear, but I absolutely do not regret my choices, not for a second. The important thing is to be clear on your priorities.

Why is it important to support and encourage the next generation of female scientists?

The mean age of folks in academic medicine is in the 50s. Many people are looking to retire, and there are not many in the wings to replace us.

Academic medicine is how we make discoveries. We have so many unanswered questions. We need to encourage people, not just women, to enter academic medicine and to become active in enquiry.

We need a diverse biomedical workforce, because different people will bring different questions and different solutions. Greater diversity allows for better answers to the complex problems that we are facing.

Academic medicine seeks people committed to learning and enquiry and who find inspiration even in failure. Thomas Edison said, “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.” That’s the kind of person we need in academic medicine.

Of which career and life achievements are you most proud?

First, my two children. Being a mother is the most challenging and most rewarding of all my undertakings.

Achieving tenure was second. I think I was the sixth woman to achieve tenure in the College of Medicine at the University of Arizona.

The third is a certificate of recognition given to me by the community health workers with whom I worked on population needs and access to care. That is the most meaningful award or honor I have received, because it came directly from the community served and acknowledged that together, we had made a difference.

What are some career goals you have yet to achieve?

There is much left to do! In the cancer area, we can do more to prevent cancer. It’s not complicated; it’s lifestyle. It’s a cheap intervention but very difficult. Physical activity, a plant-based diet, and decreased stress can make a difference. Implementing community-based efforts to help make these goals achievable by everyone—that would make a great impact.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship, Work-Life Balance

Dr. Manly is an associate professor of neuropsychology at Columbia University. Her research aims to improve the diagnostic accuracy of neuropsychological tests used to detect cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease among African American and Hispanic elders. She is also conducting research to uncover the mechanisms underlying disparities in cognitive aging and Alzheimer's disease, including research on early life educational experiences and their influence on later life cognitive function.

Dr. Manly’s work clarifies the independent influences of language, acculturation, educational experiences, racial socialization, and socioeconomic status on cognitive test performance. Her recent work focuses on the specificity of cognitive tasks in detecting subtle cognitive decline among illiterate and low-literacy elders. This work has important implications for determining the complex influence of reading and writing skills on brain function.

Dr. Manly has also been invited to speak at the NIH Director's Wednesday Afternoon Lecture Series, colloquially known as WALS, which is the highest-profile lecture program at the NIH. Each season includes some of the biggest names in biomedical and behavioral research.

Dr. Manly completed her graduate training in neuropsychology through the Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology offered by the San Diego State University and the University of California at San Diego. She also completed a clinical internship at Brown University as well as a postdoctoral fellowship at Columbia University. Dr. Manly is extensively published and has received various honors for her work.

How has mentorship (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

My mentors in college inspired me to pursue brain science. They showed me in a very informal way, through their interest and actions, how fun it was to explore the link between brain and behavior. They also showed me that science could be a very stimulating and satisfying career.

In graduate school, my mentors were amazing. They always had time for me, supported diversity, and embraced my interest in race and culture and their relationship to cognitive test performance.

As a mentor, I am constantly humbled by my mentoring experiences. Mentoring can be challenging. I always think of how I can help my trainees. Not necessarily how to create a “mini me,” but rather how I can launch a trainee in their independent research career. I’m still growing and developing as a mentor.

What have been the most rewarding aspects of your career?

The most rewarding aspect of my career is the partnership we have with the participants in our studies. I am honored to be someone who is invited to speak to community groups, churches, or black organizations about maintaining brain health through the aging process. There is a lot of knowledge that we can share through those talks and partnerships.

What are some of the challenges of being a female scientist?

Sometimes I face challenges related to my sex and race but I try to overcome them as they happen and move on.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

My advice would be to have a support group. Every week I have a call with two women scientists who are African American. We can talk about anything: career, family, balance, what we’re facing, or just blow off steam. I think that having a peer group to check in with regularly is important.

My advice to women at any stage of their career is to find colleagues across the country with whom you can form a peer group. Make a date every month, or every week, to talk.

What are the barriers to women in science?

The number of women in neuroscience has increased, which has translated into having peer groups such as those mentioned, as opposed to being the only female scientist. However, this hasn’t translated to having more women in senior positions, in most environments. Parity in academic senior positions is still a challenge.

What do you do outside your work/the lab/the office?

Outside the office, I play LEGOs, read superhero books, and spend time at playgrounds with my younger children. I also love to cook and enjoy trying out new recipes with my older son. Sometimes we go out and play soccer as a family.

Has your research ever taken you to exotic or exciting locations?

Through professional meetings we’ve traveled extensively. I usually add a few days to the trip to include family. We’ve been to a safari in South Africa, explored fjords in Norway, hiked in England, and biked in Amsterdam. We’ve also visited New Zealand; Fiji; and St. Petersburg, Russia.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

Kelsey C. Martin, M.D., Ph.D., is a professor of Biological Chemistry and of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences as well as the Dean of the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Her research focuses on how experience changes connections between neurons in the brain to store long-term memories. Understanding this connectivity is important to understanding conditions such as post-traumatic stress, memory disorders, and Alzheimer’s disease.

Do you see sex differences in your research on the brain?

We pay a lot of attention to the differences in males and females in our research on mice. At this point, we haven’t seen differences, but it doesn’t mean that we won’t find them. I do expect that we will.

What do you think are some of the most exciting recent scientific advances in your field?

There are three advances that are really important. One is being able to use exome sequencing or genome sequencing in large populations so that we can begin to tease apart the genetic control of different behaviors in brain health and disease. In my lab, we can use the insights from that work to focus our attention on specific molecules and genes.

Another area is imaging brain circuits in animals. The advances in microscopy — probes that look at activity in neurons, using light to control circuits — those are incredibly exciting technologies that enable us to understand the connections between nerve cell circuits and behavior.

Another exciting advance is in stem cells. You can’t get access to nerve cells in the brain, but we can differentiate stem cells into neurons and grow the circuits in a dish. We can begin to grow three-dimensional structures that have a lot of the same characteristics of developing brains. That’s an area that I think is going to open up a lot of discovery.

What do you enjoy about being a scientist? 

I like the process of the scientific method. There’s something inspiring to me about the goal in science of trying to uncover the truth about the natural world. I am really motivated by this huge potential of biomedical research to transform health and alleviate a lot of suffering.

I was an English major in college. After college, I went into the Peace Corps, and I went to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and lived in a village where, every year, there was a measles epidemic that killed young children. I started a vaccination program, and it stopped that annual epidemic. I saw the power of an immunization program, and I realized that it wasn’t just the vaccine — it was the fact that scientists had learned about the virus, how to grow the virus, how to develop the vaccine. It was this incredible real-world demonstration of our biomedical research.

How has mentoring shaped your career?

Mentoring has shaped my career in pretty profound ways. George Miller, Jr., M.D., made me realize what an incredibly creative endeavor science is. Ari Helenius, Ph.D., taught me how to pay attention to data, how to think deeply about problems, and how to do the most controlled experiments so that you have confidence in your results. Eric Kandel, M.D., showed me a level of synthetic thinking — being able to take information from many different sources and apply it to a problem. I would say that those teachers dramatically influenced my own career.

I do a lot of mentoring, and I have a number of students. I also co-directed the M.D./Ph.D. program for eight years at UCLA. Both as chair and now as dean, I consider mentoring junior faculty to be a huge part of my job. I think that a big part of being an effective mentor is really helping the person gain confidence in what their gifts and capacities in science are.

What do you do outside of work?

I still love to read, and I like to draw and paint. I have two children and two stepchildren. I really like to spend time with them and with my husband.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have?

That’s a hard one because there are two different answers. I would either be in international public health because you can have such an impact working on health problems that are common across the world, or I’d write books and illustrate them. That’s what I’d end up doing if I weren’t a scientist, but I’m really happy being a scientist.

Are there barriers for women in science and, if so, what are they?

I would say there are challenges. I don’t know if I’d call them barriers at this point. One of the challenges is there’s so much pressure to devote every moment of your waking life to science. I personally don’t think that’s necessary.

I’ve seen it from my own trainees that there’s this incredible concern about having a family and being a scientist and how you balance the time. I think that fathers have become more and more engaged in child rearing, but I still find that it is more of a concern for my female trainees than for my male trainees.

I had my first child while I was an M.D./Ph.D. student. I remember people telling me that it was going to be the end of my career. I’m very grateful that I didn’t pay any attention to that. I really wanted to do science, and I also really wanted to be a mom. One of my best ideas for an experiment that really opened up a whole new area of research for us came to me as a postdoctoral fellow while I was with my daughter on a preschool class field trip.

I was so fortunate at Columbia to have a daycare that was across the street from the lab where I was a postdoc that was open from 6 a.m. until 9 p.m. Not that you would leave your child there for the whole time, but it would allow you that flexibility that, if it was needed, you could pay $10 for an extra hour so that you could finish your experiment. So there are structural things we can do, absolutely.

I also believe that the more women who are in the field and who are balancing different parts of their lives, the more this myth that you can’t be a mom and a scientist will go away.

In terms of barriers, there is something psychological that happens when you start out in medical school or graduate school and at least half of your classmates are women. You go to faculty and it’s much less than that. You go to the chairs and it’s way less than that. You go to a deans’ meeting and it’s still less. I do think that has an impact on the individual as a woman or as an underrepresented minority. It’s something that needs to change.

What advice do you have for young women scientists?

My advice would be that, if science is thrilling and fascinating for you, go for it. There’s so much to do in science, and women have so much to offer in terms of being able to think creatively, deeply, and collaboratively. I hope that young women feel that the doors are open.

I do worry that there is concern in science about job security. There’s a concern about support for research. And yet, we’re in such an exciting moment in the history of science in terms of what we can discover. I want to encourage women to dive in and give all of their deepest thinking to the scientific problems that they’re passionate about.

We need to make sure that we communicate to the public, to legislators, about why what science has to offer is good for the country and for the world. I would say to young women scientists that there are a lot of ways to contribute to science, and it’s not just in the lab, so have an open mind about it.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Karen E. Nelson is the president of the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) and the head of the microbiome program at Human Longevity, Inc. She received her undergraduate degree from the University of the West Indies and her Ph.D. from Cornell University.

Dr. Nelson has authored or co-authored more than 150 peer-reviewed publications and edited three books, and she is currently editor of the journal Microbial Ecology. She also serves on the editorial boards of BMC Genomics, GigaScience, and the Central European Journal of Biology. She is a member of the National Academies Board on Life Sciences, a Fellow of the American Academy of Microbiology, an honorary professor at the University of the West Indies, and a Helmholtz International Fellow.

Dr. Nelson’s career has focused on microbial ecology, microbial genomics, microbial physiology, and metagenomics. She has led several genomic and metagenomic efforts, including the first human metagenomics study, which was published in 2006.

How has mentorship (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

I always sought and relied on good mentors and would not have been successful without them. I suspect that many scientists, especially women, may be reluctant to ask for help because they are concerned they will look weak. But one of the great parts of being a scientist is that you are surrounded by more experienced people who can make a positive impact on your career.

In addition, it’s important to be open-minded and realize that there are many great mentors outside of science who can serve as wonderful role models for life in general. Since mentoring was so influential for me, I have also made it a priority for JCVI. Our internship programs are an important example of how we contribute to training the next generation of scientists, starting with students in high school.

What are some characteristics of a successful scientist?

Science can be a difficult field, and not just because of the technical knowledge. Research can be slow and disappointing, and we are often exposed to a lot of rejection (grants being rejected after working on them for weeks or months, manuscripts that have been submitted to journals, the promotion process, failed experiments). To be successful as a scientist, one has to be able to get past those setbacks, and that takes focus, drive, and determination.

What is the career achievement of which you are most proud?

I am very proud of the human microbiome paper my team and I published in 2006. Now, the microbiome is this new, hot topic that the media mentions all the time, but back then it was an unexplored research area. The work we did was the first of its kind and launched a major field of research. Sometimes it even amazes me how large it has grown, and it’s still growing.

Microbiome research could hold the keys to so many major human health concerns, from cancer to diabetes to mental health concerns. I’m glad to have been there at the beginning and excited to see where else the field may go in the next few decades.

What is the life achievement of which you are most proud?

Becoming president of JCVI is my crowning achievement. JCVI is, in my opinion, the most cutting-edge genetic institute in the world. Our legacy includes sequencing the first microbial genome, the first human genome, and the first human microbiome and creating the first self-replicating synthetic bacterial cell, just to name a few accomplishments.

To be here, at the center of the genomic revolution, and as a woman in a field that can tend to be male-dominated, is something I wouldn’t trade for anything.

What are the barriers to women in science?

One of the barriers is that women are often seen as less capable than men. This type of environment can discourage girls from pursuing science, even those who have scored well on science and math tests. Lack of confidence can be another barrier that holds women back, and when they have those doubts, they look around to see if there are other people who look like them succeeding—and there are not that many. So another potential barrier is lack of female role models in science. And even women who have succeeded in science may find themselves being asked to prove themselves over and over again for the duration of their careers.

Tags: Barriers for Women in Science, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Elizabeth Parks studies how human bodies work—specifically, how the body uses and distributes the nutrients from food. As a professor in the Department of Nutrition and Exercise Physiology at the University of Missouri School of Medicine, she focuses on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), a condition that occurs when some people put on too much body fat and begin to store fat in their liver.

In people with NAFLD, the fat buildup in the liver interferes with liver function and can cause diabetes and pre-diabetes. It can eventually lead to cirrhosis of the liver. Dr. Parks’s research group studies how food is metabolized by giving volunteers food that is marked with non-radioactive stable isotopes. These isotopes are safe to eat and easy to detect in the body. They can be followed, by taking blood or tissue samples, to learn how the molecules from the food move through the body, including how they get to the liver.

Dr. Parks has a bachelor’s degree in exercise physiology and education from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and a Ph.D. in nutritional biochemistry from the University of California, Davis. She received the University of Missouri School of Medicine’s 2015 Award for Excellence in Junior Faculty Research Mentoring and the 2016 Robert I. Levy Award from the Kinetics and Metabolism Society.

What have been the most rewarding aspects of your career?

I am always surprised at how the body keeps going in times of stress. The body keeps going in cancer, when people consume too much alcohol, and when they smoke cigarettes. It’s absolutely phenomenal how the system just tries to keep working. Much of our work has been about understanding the basic physiology of how the human body tolerates too much body fat. Where does the fat in the liver come from? Before we started our studies, nobody had ever asked that question.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

We have significantly contributed to changing the treatment of NAFLD in this country. Our studies were the first to demonstrate the negative effect of dietary sugars on liver disease.

Fat can accumulate in your liver by coming out of your fat stores, or it can come from dietary fat. It can also come from dietary sugar. When you drink a sugary drink, that sugar comes into the body and goes to the liver. The liver takes the sugar apart, puts the pieces back together, and synthesizes a new fatty acid. That process is called de novo lipogenesis.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, it was thought that this process was minor in humans. We have really led the way in showing this is a very important chemical process. Our early work showed that people with fatty liver disease have this happening all the time. The process doesn’t turn off between meals, the way it does in people without this disease.

When our data first came out, a lot of people in the field were skeptical. But it’s just become obvious that dietary sugars do contribute to fatty liver disease. This leads to an easy environmental and behavioral treatment. Recently, other scientists have shown that people don’t even have to lose weight to reduce liver fat. If they cut the sugars, their liver fat will fall very fast.

What are some characteristics of a successful scientist?

I think it’s willfulness. It takes a lot of energy and commitment to test a new idea. You have to be smart, but you also have to never give up. You take that idea and stay with it, no matter how long you have to work. There are barriers to science—not enough money, lab equipment breaks down, experiments don’t work.

But when you see really successful scientists, it’s that energy and single-mindedness. There are some quiet, calm scientists, and some who state their opinions quite openly … but successful scientists are all willful. When challenges come up, they just put their heads down, and they just do it.

What are some of the challenges to being a scientist?

Because many scientists are single minded, it can make it difficult sometimes to work together. It’s a rare thing when you see a bunch of scientists say, “OK, I’ll stretch your direction and you’ll stretch mine, and we’ll find some new way to investigate this question.”

This is particularly true in the field of nutritional biochemistry. I suspect there are not going to be any more vitamins discovered or other discoveries that are driven by a single lab. Unlike with the major discoveries of the 1940s and 50s, these days, no lab is going to go forward in this field alone. I think nutrition science that will make an impact is now going to have to be team science. That means we need to get out of our comfort zone a little bit.

How has mentorship (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

The mentoring I received was just stellar. I have been mentored by very inspirational scientists and teams of scientists. I have been mentored by people who are younger than me. I’ve had mentors that are more structured and organized and show the path, and I’ve had other mentors who think way outside of the box and are completely creative. So I’ve been able to see that all of that works. You can be a really successful scientist with all these different personal styles.

I think there’s so much talent out there that mentoring is really easy. When the mentee is ready to learn, you just put a little help in there, and they go forward so well. It is such a pleasure to see early career faculty do well.

Mentors also can appear out of nowhere. Recently, I was writing many, many pages of a grant, and I received very good input. There was one person who, in the margins, would give me input about the science and then a little compliment at the same time. I’m not used to that! It was just amazing, how encouragement to keep going helped a lot when I was focusing on trying to make my writing better.

What do you do outside the lab/clinic?

I garden. Getting my hands in the dirt is my therapy. But I also really, really like my work. I don’t spend a lot of time outside of work because I enjoy it every day, going to the lab. I’m lucky, I know.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

Find something that you like so much that you’re willing to give it your all. Being a scientist is really hard. You spend months writing a grant, putting your best ideas out there. Your job is to submit your best and have it critiqued.

You have to like the process, because the likelihood of success is so very low. Unfortunately, in scientific culture, too much emphasis is put on benchmarks for success. During training in science, if you’re not happy until you’re done with your Ph.D., then you won’t be happy for a while. Then you’re not happy until you’re done with a postdoc. Then you’re not happy until you’ve got your assistant professorship, and then you’re really afraid you’re not going to get tenure. And then you get tenure—and will you be promoted? And will you get funded?

Science tends to set up that expectation that those benchmarks are the only things to focus on. You should be very proud of them, but every day you have to go to work. My goal is to appreciate the daily activities and the people around me.

It’s all about your attitude. That’s how you get success in academia: Do your job. Put the grant in. Teach your classes well, be a good colleague, and do your scholarship. It’s a great life.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Vivan W. Pinn is a woman of many firsts. She was the first full-time director of the NIH’s Office of Research on Women's Health (ORWH) from 1991 to 2011, and the first permanent NIH Associate Director of Research on Women's Health. Prior to that, Dr. Pinn became the third woman and the first African-American woman to lead a U.S. pathology department when she joined the staff and faculty of Howard University Hospital in 1982.

She received her undergraduate degree from Wellesley College and her M.D. from the University of Virginia School of Medicine, where she was first again—the only woman and only African-American student in her class.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

I have benefited from so many people—professionals, but also people who were simply around, or were in the community, or are family members. I know what a difference it is to have someone just to be there for you to give you advice, listen when you have a problem, and maybe help you think through it yourself. What a difference that can make in terms of personal development and professional development.

In medical school, I had important mentors who were almost all men, because there were so few women who were in medicine, or who were in senior positions. I was very fortunate that these men supported what I was doing, served as role models, gave me advice, and guided me.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

I thorough enjoyed the first 25 years of my pathology career, when I was a researcher, teacher, and department chair in academia. Then, when I came to ORWH, I joined a national and international movement to further research in women’s health. It was a new, exciting field, and it has continued to evolve and expand beyond our wildest dreams.

I am most proud of the difference I made in the lives of the young people I taught and helped to succeed. I made an impact because I impacted the lives of others.

What are the barriers to women in science?

When ORWH first began addressing issues related to women, we looked at barriers to women in biomedical careers. We held a workshop in 1993 to discuss some of the major barriers. Years later, many of those same barriers still exist:

• The work overload and lack of work-life balance for many women who are both primary family caregivers and professional scientists continue to hamper them from fulfilling their career potential.

• Women are still receiving lower salaries and fewer promotions than men for doing the same work. We still need to improve women’s compensation and advancement opportunities.

• Sexual harassment of women in academic settings still exists. This issue has not gotten much attention in the past, but we are learning more today because women are speaking up. Now we need to ask, how many instances of sexual harassment have affected women’s careers? Women can lose out on opportunities for advancement due to sexual harassment, whether or not they register a formal complaint. We’re seeing that academic institutions’ responsiveness and robust enforcement of Title IX are essential to the prosecution and prevention of sexual harassment.

• We still need to identify more mentors and role models for women in science, in both novice and expert positions. Mentors offer guidance and open doors to bring more women into the field.

• We need to do more to support and encourage women of color in science careers. At an ORWH conference session years ago, women of color said that, to them, the glass ceiling feels more like a cement ceiling. We are seeing more efforts to address barriers to diversity, but we must recognize that both men and women need to help eliminate this “ceiling” altogether.

What is the most exciting advancement in women’s health research over the past decades/since the formation of ORWH?

Over the past 25 years, women’s health has gained attention and respect as an essential element of biomedical research. Finally, it’s recognized that women’s health is about much more than just reproductive health. Back then, many questioned the need to study women’s health at all. Even when the research gained acceptance, there were a lot of skeptics when ORWH was established. But we have come a long way, with significant advances over the last two decades:

• The landmark Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study, sponsored by NIH’s National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)—one of the most definitive, far-reaching clinical trials of post-menopausal women's health ever undertaken in the United States. The WHI involved 161,808 women aged 50 to 79, included minorities, and administered the first randomized clinical trials examining the use of postmenopausal hormone therapy. The trials, which were stopped early because of the risk to participants, found that postmenopausal hormone therapy posed more danger than benefit. Combined estrogen plus progestin therapy was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and some increased risk of cardiovascular disease. The estrogen-alone trial found an increased risk of stroke with no benefit for coronary heart disease.

• Development of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine—the first to prevent transmission of a sexually transmitted disease and help prevent cervical cancer. ORWH had a role in supporting the clinical trial of the vaccine.

• Reduction of neonatal transmission of HIV, virtually to zero in some instances. Work on this issue sparked a widespread realization that AIDS treatment had to be approached differently in women—an insight that ultimately decreased women’s overall morbidity and mortality.

Do you have advice for young female scientists? Why is it important to support and encourage the next generation of female scientists?

Have a mentor and be a mentor. Look to your advisors, teachers, and colleagues for possible mentors and mentees. Have more than one person you can ask for or offer advice on the complexities of a science career, such as applying for grants, refining a research focus, or achieving work-life balance.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship

Carla M. Pugh, M.D., Ph.D., is the Susan Behrens, M.D. Professor of Surgical Education at the University of Wisconsin (UW) School of Medicine and Public Health and is a member of the UW Department of Surgery’s Section of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery.

Dr. Pugh earned her M.D. from Howard University College of Medicine and her Ph.D. from Stanford University School of Education. She is certified by the American Board of Surgery. In 2011, Dr. Pugh received the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers.

The use of simulation technology to assess and quantitatively define hands-on clinical skills is one of Dr. Pugh’s major research areas. Currently, more than 100 medical and nursing schools use one of her sensor-enabled training tools for their students and trainees.

Could you give us an overview of your research?

My research involves the use of engineering technologies — sensors, motion tracking, even videos and audio — to measure clinical skills in the medical field. We record all kinds of data as medical practitioners perform hands-on exams or procedures, from a physical exam to a complex surgery. Our goal is to provide feedback to physicians about their hands-on techniques.

One example is a model of a baby born with a clubfoot deformity. The babies are born with varying degrees of angulation that make it impossible for them to walk normally. These babies get a series of casts placed on their legs and feet. There is an art and a skill to examining a baby with clubfoot, determining what angle the foot should be at that point in treatment, and placing the cast.

Using molds from another company, we built a silicon model that you can move. We put in firm material to simulate the bones and denser tissue, like the heel. We added sensors inside the model and attached these legs to a doll because when the surgeon comes in to put a cast on a baby, it’s not just an isolated baby’s leg dangling there on a demonstration pole. Now we have a clubfoot simulator baby.

How did you get into this field?

I’ve always been visually oriented and good with my hands. As a child, I always did surgeries on my dolls, so I knew how all the most popular — and the most unpopular — dolls were made and the faults in their engineering that made them break. All the things that kids do to test toys — when they broke, I was the doll surgeon who would fix them.

I had a transplant clinic. I had donor arms and legs. I had suture and solder and glue. I had all my operative doll instruments. Not only did I walk away from my childhood with that creativity, but I also had a high level of confidence that I could fix anything that was broken, including electrical things. If a lamp was broken, I would take it apart and look at the inside. There is some pattern recognition involved because after taking things apart, you know what “unbroken” looks like. I was very much a maker engineer as a child.

How has mentoring (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career? 

When I started, I was age 5. You never know what’s in the imagination of a 5-year-old. Combine that with my mom telling me that I could be anything I wanted to be. I really believed her. And I also heard stories during family reunions: Everyone would say, “You’re inquisitive like your great-grandma.” Both my great-grandmother and a great aunt served their communities in the dual role of veterinarian and midwife, so I thought it was pretty common that women could be physicians. And I thought, “Great, that’s exactly what I want to do.”

What do you enjoy about being a physician-scientist?

I enjoy the mystery and the opportunity to investigate, gather information to support your hypothesis, and find a potential solution. And then to collaborate and discuss it with people, discuss it with a patient, and then execute the solution and see good results. I love problem solving; it’s the same whether I’m problem solving my patient’s gastrointestinal tract or problem solving Barbie’s defective rubber band mechanisms.

Are there barriers to women in science, and if so, what are they?

When you look at the roles in science and in the medical fields, the jobs were created and occupied by men for years. And so the rules of engagement, the outcomes and measures for success, are defined from the male perspective. Joanne Martin, Ph.D., a business school professor at Stanford University, wrote a book noting that a lot of the problems that women have in the workplace relate to the fact that they are adjusting to modes of inquiry that were not designed by or for women.

If you read the psychology literature, when men get angry, they tend to become aggressive. When women get angry, they cry. Both of those are valid emotions, but if you cry, in today’s mainstream culture, that’s a sign of weakness. Women can’t cry in the workplace. But if a man shows emotion in the workplace and gets angry, he’s showing leadership. He’s powerful. And if a woman gets angry, it scares people. That’s reserved for the men; you can’t do that.

I don’t believe that all women think one way and men think another. But I do think that there are trends in how men and women think, learn, and communicate. It may be changing a little. People are starting to be more explicit about those differences and questioning why it’s not okay for a woman to be a woman in the workplace and still be respected and considered intelligent. We’re not fully there yet, but it’s exciting that the conversation is starting to happen.

How do you manage work-life integration?

You learn to triage what is really important. You find yourself triaging between five things that you’d really like to do, and you can only do one. You have to find comfort in staying in your lane and that the four other things that you want to do, it would be better for you to mentor someone else who also has that interest. I’m learning to do that. It’s not just within my lab. It includes training the postdocs and letting them develop a concept or research question from their own perspective and direction. It’s partnering with someone at a national level regarding resident feedback and realizing that I can’t take on that project but that I could definitely be a mentor to that assistant professor at another university who wants to do it.

If you weren’t a physician-scientist, what other job would you have?

If you asked me that 20 years ago, I would have said an anatomist because I was completely consumed by the mystery, the beauty, and the amazing way that we’re put together as human beings. But now, I would be an ethnographer or a science curator. I would have a television show where I would go around and speak with scientists who have made discoveries or who have discovered new things.

What do you do outside of work?

I am an outdoors person. I really like nature. It’s still science, right? I love hiking, scuba diving, fishing, and gardening. I grew up in Berkeley, California, and we went up to Tahoe all the time. Hiking there during the summer is just amazing, and in the winter, we would go for the weekend and ski. I spent half of my childhood at the Berkeley Marina, watching people fish and watching the seals and the pelicans. The wildlife and the whole ecosystem are just amazing. It’s all science. What do I like to do in my work? Science. What do I like to do in my spare time? Science.

Tags: Barriers for Women in Science, Impact of Mentorship, Work-Life Balance

Dr. Belinda Seto is a lifelong advocate for women in biomedicine and in the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). Dr. Seto joined the National Eye Institute (NEI) as its deputy director in April 2014. She came to the NEI from the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB), where she served as deputy director for 11 years.  

After earning her Ph.D. in biochemistry from Purdue University in 1974, Dr. Seto completed a postdoctoral fellowship in the renowned Stadtman Lab of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). She researched hepatitis B and vaccine development at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and oversaw the analysis and reporting of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants data through the Office of Extramural Research (OER). Her experience in database management and analysis led her to serve on the executive committee of the NIH Big Data to Knowledge initiative (BD2K) and its oversight body, the NIH Scientific Data Council, which are equipping researchers with better tools and training for dealing with big data.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

Mentorship has been very helpful in shaping my career and setting me on a successful career path at NIH. After earning my doctorate, I was recruited into the Stadtman Lab, a world-class biochemistry laboratory. Drs. Earl and Thressa Stadtman mentored a huge cohort of postdoctoral fellows, including two Nobel Prize winners and others who are now members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The “Stadtman Way,” as their mentorship approach is known, has been institutionalized at the NIH, in the form of the NIH Stadtman Tenure-Track Investigators program.

When I first walked into Thressa Stadtman’s lab, she told me that she would be a co-author on my first paper, but, after that, the papers would be all mine. She said, “You need authorship more than I do. I’m already a member of the NAS and other professional societies.” It was that sort of generosity that set the bar for me in my career; her example encouraged me to be generous with others. 

Mentoring is a two-way path—as a mentor, I benefit from my mentees. Mentoring, really, is just one way of imparting and receiving information. My mentees teach me about the science, and they provide unique insights about the scientific community and their culture. I give them opportunities to shine, progress, and advance.

Just as I had learned to be open-minded about science, I was open-minded about career options. I broke away from the research track and looked into new paths in the areas of science management and science policy. At that time, forking off of the research career path was uncommon. But having an open mind translated into risk-taking, to do things that might not be in a typical career path for a biochemistry postdoctoral fellow.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

Be confident. Be bold. In salary negotiation, women do not value their worth correctly. They need to demand higher salaries. Be confident in yourself and your abilities.

Choose a spouse who is supportive of your scientific career. My husband and I have three daughters. We worked as a team. He also worked at the NIH. In our marriage, there was no discussion needed about division of labor. Our kids grew up thinking of their parents as a team.

Choose a workplace that is supportive of family. My career has been at the FDA and NIH. NIH is full of husband-wife teams of scientists. NIH leaders understand and accommodate family obligations. Your workplace environment should be collegial and collaborative, and your supervisors should appreciate the importance of family obligations. Also, by living close to work, my husband and I could participate in our children’s school activities. Our children knew that both of their parents cared about their education.

Who was your scientific role model?

For woman scientists in particular, my mentor Dr. Thressa Stadtman was a great role model. Successful female scientists were rare when she was launching her career. She encouraged us to be outstanding in our scientific skills, thinking, and analytical ability. She believed it was very important that we, the woman scientists in her lab, try to eliminate the stereotypes by challenging the presumption that we were not analytical or quantitative. She often advised us to not shy away from the quantitative sciences.

Thressa had spent time in Paris and adopted the French sense of style. She used to say, “Just because we are scientists doesn’t mean we have to dress in jeans and T-shirts. You can wear high heels and beautiful dresses. You can be feminine. Being stylish will not make people think less of you as a scientist.”

Thressa always said that failed experiments are learning opportunities. “Experiments that go as predicted are not informative; they don’t break new ground. Science should be filled with surprises.” Failed experiments teach you to probe and look deeper, and they allow you to be open-minded about new options that you would not otherwise have explored.

What are the barriers to women in science?

In recent years, things have eased up a bit in terms of barriers, but we still have room to improve.

When you look at the postdoctoral level, there is not much distinction between numbers of men and women. But as one advances in her career, whether in government or academia, the filters become more restrictive for women. In engineering, for example, the number of women who are full professors does not reflect the pipeline of available candidates. Each step in academia—assistant, associate, full professorships—is increasingly restrictive, which is reflected in greater attrition among women compared with men.

When you look at NIH data, we have done better over the past 10–15 years in terms of promoting women to lab chief positions, but we can do better.

With regard to career paths for women in industry, I interacted with industry quite a bit when I was with NIBIB due to the nature and mission of that Institute. Women tend to go into sales, marketing, and human resources even though they were trained as scientists. In such positions, women cannot meaningfully contribute to the scientific or business direction, which are driven by executives in R&D (research and development). But, this observation should be enriched with data.

What do you think are some of the most exciting recent scientific advances in your field?

Recent, cutting-edge developments at NEI in vision science are very relevant to the President’s remarks about precision medicine during the last State of the Union address. At the NEI, we are now well positioned to begin testing cell therapy for correcting eye disease. This approach is at the forefront in treating eye and other diseases.

NEI researchers are studying the use of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) as therapy for retinal degeneration [a common eye condition and a leading cause of vision loss among people age 50 and older]. Because of the iPSCs’ ability to replace degenerating cells in the retina, the therapeutic potential of this approach is great. The patient’s own somatic cells are reprogrammed and differentiated under controlled conditions into healthy retinal cells.

The NEI laboratories are at the cusp of carrying out human clinical trials; such trials are already under way in Japan.

What are some career goals you have yet to achieve?

I look forward to retirement because it will be an opportunity to indulge my love of storytelling and writing. I’d like to write several books—and that would be the best way to keep my intellect engaged and my mission active. I’ve already written some chapters of a memoir about my mother, now 91 years old, who was a model of boldness and risk taking throughout her life.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Impact of Mentorship

With a distinguished career in academic and clinical dentistry and research, Dr. Martha Somerman was appointed director of the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) in 2011. Even before becoming director of NIDCR, Dr. Somerman had a long history with NIH and NIDCR: she was a staff fellow in NIDCR’s intramural research program in the early 1980s, received her first NIH grant in 1987 while teaching at the Baltimore College of Dental Surgery (1984–1991), and served on NIDCR’s National Advisory Dental and Craniofacial Research Council from 1999 to 2002.

Throughout her life, Dr. Somerman has followed her passion as a clinician, an educator, and a scientist. Today, she continues to lead a research team in the Laboratory of Oral Connective Tissue Biology at the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. Her research, which has earned her international recognition, focuses on the molecular biology of dental-oral-craniofacial development, especially the periodontal complex. Her investigations are targeted at defining the key regulators controlling the development, maintenance, and regeneration of periodontal tissues.

Before becoming NIDCR’s director, Dr. Somerman had many academic and leadership roles. From 1991 to 2002, she was a professor and chair of periodontics/prevention and geriatrics at the University of Michigan School of Dentistry and a professor of pharmacology at the University of Michigan Medical School. From 2002 to 2011, Dr. Somerman was the dean of the University of Washington School of Dentistry.

Dr. Somerman received a bachelor’s degree in biology and a D.D.S. from New York University, a master’s degree in environmental health from Hunter College, and a Ph.D. in pharmacology from the University of Rochester. She completed her periodontal residency at the Eastman Dental Center in Rochester, New York.

What led you to dentistry?

I didn’t go straight to dental school from my undergraduate studies. While I taught in New York City’s public school system—painting murals and filling a variety of other positions as I tried to figure out what I wanted to do—I became aware of the art in dentistry. The dental-oral-craniofacial complex is unique to each individual, and that’s what’s so beautiful about it.

Was it unusual for a woman to choose dentistry at that time?

In my dental class, there were four women out of 200 students. I came in at the right time, and it was a wonderful opportunity. Today in the United States, the male/female ratio for dental school enrollment is nearly equal, and at some dental schools, the proportion of female students is greater!

How did you choose to specialize in periodontics?

When I was a student, dentistry wasn’t as science-based as it is now. So I pursued periodontics, an area of dentistry that—at the time—stood out as the most scientific in its approach to prevention and treatment.

What inspired you as a clinician to pursue a career in research?

Science is creative, collaborative, and culturally enriching; it’s an opportunity to play in your sandbox every day. You ask yourself some of the same questions in science that you use when you’re creating art; for instance, “How does it fit together?” and “Why does it fit together?” The diversity of scientific fields offers infinite opportunities for discovery, and new tools and technologies are being developed all the time.

As a clinical investigator, I have found a good balance between research and clinical dentistry. Even now, I participate in patient care; it requires me to think every day about the impact of our research on people and public health.

How has being an educator benefitted you?

Teaching helps me as an educator grow as an individual because I need to understand concepts thoroughly in order to teach them effectively to students. Sometimes students pose intriguing questions that challenge me to review the subject and improve my teaching approach. It’s an intellectual challenge for everyone.

How has mentorship (either as a mentee or a mentor) shaped your career?

I currently mentor several postdoctoral researchers in my lab. Through mentoring, I can share the excitement I feel about research discoveries, play a vital role in the learning experiences of students, and watch individuals grow and advance in their careers.

Throughout my career, I have had mentors and been a mentor, sometimes simultaneously. I gain as much from mentoring my students as they do. It goes both ways. It’s refreshing when a mentee has a new idea which generates a lively discussion. It can be a welcome change from the routine responsibilities of my day. You never stop learning in science, no matter where you are in your career.

Sometimes young scientists are a bit shy about getting to know other people, so a mentor’s role is critical when it comes to networking, introducing the student to helpful contacts, and making sure they have the time to present at meetings. It’s important for young scientists to visit different labs and conclude “I like that about this lab,” or “I don’t like that aspect of the work” at another lab. It’s important for them to see how different investigators run their labs, observe how the universities operate, and consider their preferences for their own future work.

What advice do you have for the next generation of women in science?

Sometimes people get stuck if they don’t pursue postdoctoral research because they don’t get the opportunity to plan and take steps toward their future career. No matter where you have your postdoctoral experience, it is critical to your future. The postdoctoral years allow students to explore different areas of research and discover their passions. Mine allowed me to refine my research direction, introduced me to networks of scientists, and helped me recognize that teaching was important to me as well.

It’s also useful to have many mentors because each one will have a different perspective. When you ask for a mentor’s advice, have some ideas about how you would conduct the research in question. Be sure to listen in earnest to the advice you get. But don’t be afraid to ask questions. I think perhaps junior scientists, especially women, are more hesitant to approach leaders and ask questions. Mentors want to support the work of their mentees; we become their advocates and fans, and a mentoring conversation can be the high point of the day.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Impact of Mentorship

JoAnn Trejo, Ph.D., is an internationally renowned scientist who conducts basic research on cell signaling. She is best known for her groundbreaking discoveries that reveal how cellular responses are regulated by G protein-coupled receptors, the largest class of drug targets for FDA-approved therapeutics. She recently became Associate Dean for Health Sciences Faculty Affairs at the University of California in San Diego.

Dr. Trejo is the youngest of five children and comes from a family of migrant farm workers raised by a single mother with little education. She credits her mother’s strong work ethic along with her teachers’ support in helping her to become a leading educator and world-class researcher. Dr. Trejo not only continues to be creative in her research that is pioneering new frontiers in cell signaling, but her early life experiences have inspired her to become a passionate advocate for diversity. She is the director of the San Diego IRACDA Program, a NIGMS-supported postdoctoral training program that aims to increase the diversity of academia. In 2015, Dr. Trejo received the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Ruth Kirschstein Diversity in Science Award. This award recognizes outstanding scientists who show a strong commitment to mentoring and encouraging underrepresented individuals to enter the sciences.

Dr. Trejo earned her bachelor’s degree at UC Davis and her Ph.D. at UC San Diego. She then completed her postdoctoral fellowship at UC San Francisco in the lab of Dr. Shaun Coughlin. She took her first faculty position at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, in 2000 and then moved to UC San Diego in 2008, where she was promoted to full professor a few years ago.

She has received numerous grants from the NIGMS and NHLBI, Komen Foundation, UC Tobacco-related Disease Research Program and the American Heart Association (AHA) including the prestigious AHA Established Investigator Award. She was also elected to serve on the Council of the American Society for Cell Biology, as Chair of Gordon Research Conferences, and in multiple NIH Study Sections.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

Mentoring is a critical aspect of scientific training and career advancement. Mentors come in different forms and serve different purposes. Most people have multiple mentors. I have received outstanding mentorship through my persistence to connect with the right mentors, at the right time.

I found great mentorship working with Professor Joan Heller Brown during my graduate studies at UC San Diego. She was the kind of mentor that I needed at that time. As a graduate student, I initially struggled with the pace and demands of scientific research. Professor Brown was patient, friendly, and encouraging. She always radiated confidence in my abilities as a scientist. Her belief in my work built my confidence and fueled my desire to succeed in science and I thrived under her guidance.  

My postdoctoral mentor Professor Shaun Coughlin provided phenomenal mentorship by example. He challenged us to do rigorous and creative research. Careless work was not acceptable. I responded by developing a strong and rigorous scientific work ethic that enabled me to be an independent and successful scientist. I credit my scientific work ethic to this experience. I also realized that my own drive, confidence, and passion for science are necessary to sustain me in the severely competitive and incredibly satisfying scientific career.

Having those two mentors who are quite different from each other and from me was a revelation. As a mentor, it is important to identify what each mentee needs and mentor them based on that. This is challenging, as they are different people, with different backgrounds that shapes who they are and how they respond to different styles of mentorship.

What do you enjoy about being a scientist?

I truly enjoy being a scientist because science is important for understanding how things work and for solving problems. As a scientist you make discoveries and gain new knowledge that lead to breakthrough solutions that can alleviate or prevent problems related to human health and disease. Being a scientist is a human centered activity – our work requires people and teams of scientists. I work with undergraduate and graduates students, postdoctoral fellows, junior faculty, senior professors, staff and administration. Working with people is not always easy. I have therefore learned and developed skills to effectively manage people. I cannot underrate the importance of learning how to manage teams effectively.

What are the barriers to women in science?

I believe that the greatest barrier to women advancing in scientific careers is unconscious bias – the hidden beliefs about women’s capabilities. Women are often perceived and assessed differently then men. Stereotypes of women influence our perception of their competence. Women are often held to higher and different standards in evaluations and overtime this can result in a cumulative disadvantage resulting is lower success rates in obtaining key leadership positions, awards, promotions and compensation. One way to combat unconscious bias is to raise awareness of its existence. This is particularly important to those in leadership positions, because they can affect the culture of institutions.

What do you do outside the lab?

I like to exercise and to be outdoors. I enjoy biking, running and hiking. I especially enjoy backpacking and exploring the Sierra Nevada mountain range. I also love to read biographies – especially about women who have struggled, persevered, and transformed their lives. These stories ignite my imagination and hopes, and I believe that they are road maps that allow people to see where they can go with their own lives. Recently, I enjoyed reading “My Beloved World,” Justice Sonya Sotomajor’s autobiography and “Notorious RBG” the life and times of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

How do you manage work/life balance?

A healthy balance of work/life is essential for me to do my job effectively. I am very organized and use my time efficiently to get work done. I try very hard to use my work week to get as much done as possible so that I have time on the weekends to socialize with friends, see family, and to enjoy activities with my spouse. I also try to eat well and maintain a regular exercise routine. I would encourage young scientists to develop skills in time management and how to effectively manage people – this will save you a lot of time in the long run.

Why is it so important to support and encourage the next generation of female scientists?

The U.S. is a world leader in science. If we are to maintain our status as a world leader in science and our economic competitiveness, then we must draw on the talent of all of our people not just some of them. Women represent half of the talent pool in our society.

Leadership must support female scientists, and it’s not just the men in leadership, women leaders also need to support women. Sometimes, women can be the worst advocates for other women. It’s important for leadership to embrace diversity and inclusion, and provide a welcoming supportive environment to future women scientists. This is one of the reasons I have continued to move up in leadership positions. This type of change has to come from the top down.  

Smart capable women are not getting the opportunities they deserve. But, as more female students pursue graduate studies and careers in science, this may change. In academia, certainly, faculty diversity is needed, so there is a better representation of the student diversity that exists in our academic institutions. Female students need to see more women as professors and scientists, people that they can relate to. Also, having a diverse faculty enriches the teaching and learning experiences for all.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have?

I like to fix things and solve problems. Around the house, I’m the person who fixes the leaking faucet.  So perhaps I would be a mechanic, a bicycle mechanic. I would love to work on bicycles all day.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Impact of Mentorship, Work-Life Balance

Lydia Villa-Komaroff, Ph.D. is a molecular biologist, an executive, and a diversity advocate. She is a board member and former Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer of Cytonome/ST, LLC, a company developing and manufacturing purpose-built cell sorters. She is a founding member of the Society for Advancement of Chicanos/Hispanics and Native Americans in Science (SACNAS). Dr. Villa-Komaroff held faculty positions at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Boston Children’s Hospital, and Harvard Medical School. She served as Vice President for Research at Northwestern University in Illinois, and Vice President for Research and Chief Operating Officer of the Whitehead Institute. Dr. Villa-Komaroff is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Association for Women in Science. Her honors include induction into the Hispanic Engineer National Achievement Awards Conference Hall of Fame, a Lifetime Achievement Award from Hispanic Business Magazine, 2008 National Hispanic Scientist of the Year (Museum of Science and Industry, Tampa, Florida), 2013 Woman of Distinction (American Association of University Women), and the 2016 Morison Prize Lecture (MIT). She is one of 11 women scientists profiled on the website of the White House Office of Science and Technology. Her B.A. is from Goucher College, and her Ph.D. is from MIT.

Dr. Villa-Komaroff is currently semi-retired; however, as a bench scientist, she used molecular biology to study aspects of cellular biology, neurobiology, and developmental biology. When she became an academic administrator, interest in organizational structure and organizational change became the focus. Now, she is particularly interested in increasing diversity in STEM—specifically in the synthesis of information that brings together a theory of how the mind works, how the human mind evolved to think, and how that process results in implicit bias and so interferes with our ability to move forward more rapidly with introducing diversity in STEM.

How has mentorship (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

I have been fortunate in my mentors. It started with my parents and grandparents, who were important role models and mentors to me. As I entered science, there were certainly not role models for someone like me, a Mexican-American woman of color. I was fortunate to have a series of role models, mostly Caucasian men and some Caucasian women, who were important in encouraging me, had high expectations of me, and did not have preconceptions of what I could and could not do because of who I was. As a mentor, I try to model that; I let people know you are never too old to need a mentor and never too young to be a mentor. Mentoring is part of the job description of a responsible scientist.

What are some of the challenges to being a scientist?

I’m not sure that there are challenges that are specific to science. Any worthwhile field will have challenges with respect to work-life balance. Being a scientist gives you more flexibility than some other kinds of work, but in any career, you find your way. If you want and love to do something, then you will find a way to fit your life and career together. It’s not really about balance; it’s more like juggling. One must set priorities at different times depending on what’s important in the moment. Sometimes you need to focus on your training and discipline and other times focus on your family. It is a dance through life that we all must do. It is not specific to being a scientist. In terms of being a good scientist, the basic challenge is defining important, interesting, and solvable problems and communicating that to your colleagues in a clear way. It is also a good idea to convey information in a way that is understandable to the general public.

What have been the most rewarding aspects of your career?

I would say there have been two. First, there is nothing quite like finding something truly novel and potentially important. If you are doing cutting-edge science, then that is a rare feeling, since many times things don’t work. Other rewarding aspects are just doing it. I really enjoyed benchwork and working with my hands. Secondly, seeing the scientists I trained go on to successful careers of their own is very rewarding. Watching those young women and men develop into productive grown-ups. Some became scientists while others did not, but they all seem to find their way, and that is very satisfying. Perhaps, in the end, the people are the most rewarding aspect of my career.

Do you have advice for young female scientists?

There isn’t anything that is easy. What you want to do is pick something you like to do, because there will be tough times no matter what you choose. If you choose to devote full time to family, there will be challenging times. If you combine career with family, that’s going to be difficult as well. You should pick something that is truly what you want to do and figure out how to get it done. Secondly, be persistent. Finally, seek advice, help, and comfort from peers and older individuals that have been through it.

What are some characteristics of a successful scientist?

Curiosity is the outstanding hallmark: an open curiosity and willingness to consider the options. It is so easy to fall in love with your own ideas, and a good scientist must question one’s own assumptions as well as the assumptions of others. The most successful scientist is one who questions and is willing to go out on the edge, where others haven’t gone. Another hallmark is persistence. Science is a career where you are bound to fail many times, so persistence is important. At the same time, you need to know when to change course. It is an interesting balance of persistence that doesn’t turn into stubbornness.

What do you do outside the lab/clinic?

I like reading a lot, so I read everywhere I am. I read quickly, so being able to have many books on my devices is a blessing. I also like music a lot, so I listen to music and sing on occasion. Also, my husband and I like to travel together. Our latest was a tour of the National Parks including the Grand Canyon, Zion, and Bryce.

Who is/was your scientific role model? Has it changed over the course of your career?

I have had a lot of role models. When I was a child, one of my role models was Hans Selye. He was an endocrinologist in Montreal who studied the stress response. As a scientist, Madame Curie was my very first professional role model, because she was a scientist and a woman who won the Nobel Prize twice. As an undergraduate, I worked in Loretta Leive’s lab at NIH—she taught me the basics, such as how to do dialysis, run a centrifuge, and plan an experiment. She also made it clear to me that I had to apply for graduate school at MIT, which was the best thing that happened to me as a budding scientist. In graduate school, my mentors David Baltimore and Harvey Lodish, as well as faculty members such as Mary-Lou Pardue and Lisa Steiner, became some of my scientific role models. As a postdoc, my continuing role models were Wally Gilbert and Salvador Luria. There are many others.

What is a career achievement of which you are most proud?

As a scientist, I was privileged to work with Wally Gilbert in a team that showed that insulin can be produced in bacteria; that was certainly the scientific highlight of my career. In collaboration with Bruce Yankner, who was a postdoc in my lab and is now a professor at Harvard Medical School, we provided the first evidence that amyloid can damage neuronal cells. These two are scientific achievements of which I am most proud. In terms of administrative work, I helped the administration at Northwestern University move the university into a position of greater strength as a research institution. Lastly, a source of great pride is seeing all that my trainees have done.

What is a life achievement of which you are most proud?

Being one of the founding members of the SACNAS, on which I worked with a group of innovative individuals, is an important achievement. I am most proud of the mentoring I have done.

Has your research ever taken you to exotic/exciting locations?

Yes! Science gave me my first opportunity for international travel. It took me to Europe and other parts of the world to scientific meetings. I am a molecular biologist, so it doesn’t involve trips to the jungle, but meetings in Europe were an eye-opener. It also afforded me the opportunity to become acquainted with other places not necessarily associated with travel—such as being exposed to courtrooms, the patent office in Munich, the high court in Britain, and courts in the United States where recombinant gene cases were being litigated and I served as an expert witness.

Has the trajectory of your career changed over time?

Yes. I started as a bench scientist, then went to academic administration, and then to the business world. I think this serves as another message for young scientists. Scientific training—the ability to solve and define problems—helps you in a very important way. The world is changing fast, so you will probably be doing something entirely different in 5 to 10 years.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have? Why?

I’m not sure; however, there are times I thought I could have made it as an entertainer. I think that, all things considered, science is an extraordinary career, and it allows you many possibilities Being a researcher, teacher, administrator, and businesswoman shows the range of things you can do with scientific training.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Career Achievement Highlight, Challenges of Being a Scientist, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Amparo Villablanca, a professor of cardiovascular medicine at the University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, is a pioneer physician-scientist in the field of women and heart disease. In 1994, she founded and became director of the UC Davis Women’s Cardiovascular Medicine Program, the first women’s heart program in the nation.

Dr. Villablanca received her M.D. and completed her internal medicine residency and cardiovascular medicine fellowship training at UC Davis. Today, she educates physicians, medical students, and the lay public via lectures on cardiovascular disease in women, hormonal influences on heart disease, and gender differences in cardiac risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment. Her research program focuses on understanding the molecular and cellular determinants of atherosclerosis, the mechanisms whereby hormones and their receptors regulate susceptibility to cardiovascular disease in males and females, and the molecular determinants of the neurovascular inflammation that may lead to Alzheimer’s dementia.

Dr. Villablanca’s research has been funded by several NIH Institutes, including the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS). Since 2005, she has been a national spokeswoman and West Coast partner for NHLBI’s The Heart Truth® campaign to raise awareness about heart disease as the leading killer of women.

Dr. Villablanca is also a champion and mentor for women in academic medical careers. She was co–Principal Investigator on a four-year award entitled “Women’s Careers in the Medical Sciences and Family Friendly Policies,” supported by one of 14 NIH grants addressing issues posing barriers to women in the academic biomedical workforce. She helped to establish programs for faculty development, diversity, mentoring, and women in medicine at the UC Davis School of Medicine and currently serves as director of the Women in Medicine and Health Sciences Program. She is also a co-chair of the national Research Partnership for Women in Science Careers. Throughout her career, Dr. Villablanca has advocated for organizational changes in the academic system to better support women’s careers.

How did you decide to pursue the study of women and heart disease?

After completing cardiology fellowship, I attended a national medical meeting and learned something I had not heard prior: that heart disease was the leading killer of women. I was shocked that I had finished many years of medical training without knowing that and, at that point, decided that I wanted to devote my career to studying heart disease in women. Today, there is still a lack of awareness in the general public and even among health care professionals, although awareness has been improving, due in large part to national campaigns like those of the NHLBI and the American Heart Association.

How has mentorship shaped your career?

Mentorship has been critically important to my development as a physician-scientist. I would not have the scientific career I have today without the guidance of mentors. My early career mentors shared the knowledge you can’t get from formal medical training—for instance, how to generate a compelling research question and formulate a research plan to address that question. These mentors, most of whom were men, also shared their professional connections and welcomed me into their labs, greatly expanding the range of possibilities for my own research. Later career mentors, many of whom have been women, have taught me about academic leadership and served as a sounding board for career choices and direction.

It can be difficult to recognize one’s own need for mentors. Many of us feel like we can do and should do it all on our own, but mentors help to guide the way. You need someone that you can bounce ideas off of, someone to help you navigate the challenges of your career, both personal and professional. You need experts in your field who can teach you specific skills. We advocate a team mentoring approach at my institution, using both UC Davis faculty and outside scientists, as no one person can fulfill all the mentoring needs for any one individual or scholar. And you need different kinds of mentoring at different stages of your career.

I also enjoy mentoring and interacting with students at all levels—undergraduates, graduates, postdoctorates—and trying to help them achieve their goals. The message I try to convey through mentoring is, follow your dreams and passion, persevere, seek to be challenged, be open to new opportunities, embrace diversity, and welcome new ideas.

What do you enjoy most about being a scientist?

To me, one of the most rewarding aspects of science is the process of discovery and creativity. Going from the known to the unknown, formulating significant research questions, having an impact through your findings, working out the methodology to do that—the entire scientific process is exciting and challenging. Synthesizing facts to derive a new conclusion is also part of the creative process and can lead you to a totally new way of thinking about a problem. Part of the challenge is evaluating the data and results and framing the findings according to the knowledge gaps your research is trying to fill.

Science is in some ways different from the practice of medicine, where usually we’re trying to interpret diagnostic findings to arrive at a known diagnosis. We rarely discover a completely new disease. To use an analogy, in medicine, I feel like I’m standing on the rim of a circle and turning inward to apply existing knowledge to deduce established diagnoses, whereas in research I’m standing on the edge of the same circle but facing outward toward what is not known, to possible new discoveries. They are related but different disciplines that require different skill sets and different ways of thinking about problems, and both require training and mentoring.

What are the barriers to women in science?

Science careers, and certainly careers that combine medicine and science, are very rewarding, but also very challenging. One challenge is the inherently long career training path; the more specialized you become in your field, the longer the training path. Another challenge is integrating career and family life—devoting adequate time and energy to both.

These are challenges for both males and females, but perhaps more so for females, who still tend to bear heavier caregiving demands. Career flexibility and academic culture are not always well-aligned, and maintaining resilience and preventing burnout can be an additional challenge. Yet it’s important to stay fresh and engaged and not lose your passion for your work. It is important to do things that bring you joy and help you recharge—whether it be vacation, spending time with family, traveling, or pursuing hobbies and other interests.

What other female scientists do you admire and why?

There are many female scientists I admire, for both their personal and professional impact and their strength as leaders and as women. They include Dr. Vivian Pinn, the first director of NIH’s Office of Research on Women’s Health [ORWH]; Dr. Hannah Valantine, NIH’s first Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity; and Dr. Elizabeth Nabel, former director of NHLBI and current president of Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Dr. Nabel is also a cardiologist who, during her tenure at NHLBI, advocated for women and heart disease as a public health issue and The Heart Truth campaign. These and many other talented women leaders are all great models for female physician-scientists.

Why is it important to support and encourage the next generation of female scientists?

The percentage of women faculty in academic medicine has increased over the years, which is contributing to a culture change and multiple generations of women at work in academia. This is helping to pave the way for more women who want to enter academia to find a welcoming environment and mentors that they can relate to. Identifying strategies to engage and support the talent, values, and priorities of the younger generation has become important to recruiting and retaining them. This is important for women, but also increasingly so for males as younger men take on more responsibilities in their families and want to be more engaged at home.

The academic community now recognizes the importance of providing career flexibility and family-friendly options as an important means to having a satisfied workforce. These aren’t just accommodations; they are strategic tools for attracting and retaining top talent. The business world has known this for a long time.

It has been rewarding to see more women in science and medicine, and the diversity, collaborative approaches, and perspectives they bring, but we still have a very significant problem with attrition of women out of biomedical academic careers. As you go up the academic ladder, the proportion of females decreases quite significantly, a trend that has remained relatively unchanged over the years. This issue has gained national attention and was highlighted in the National Academy of Sciences report Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. In response, NIH and ORWH issued specific grants, one of which we received, to identify causal factors and effective interventions to help retain women in academia. I expect to see more effort and funding in this area in the future, as it is critical to encourage and support the next generation of female scientists.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have?

I am passionate about my career in academics and about medicine and cardiology, and know they will continue to challenge me in new and exciting ways. However, if I were not a scientist, I might be interested in having a career in interior design. Design brings beauty and order to a space. In many ways I think I like it because design and science share similar characteristics: They are both creative, use math skills—think scale and proportion—and require innovation. And in the future, the two may not be viewed as being so discordant, as the gap between science and aesthetics continues to narrow.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Impact of Mentorship

Dr. Donna L. Vogel dedicated 25 years of service to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) beginning with conducting research on reproductive medicine to becoming the first Director of the Fellowship Office at National Cancer Institute (NCI). Although she is currently retired, Dr. Vogel continues to volunteer for numerous organizations and mentor young, enthusiastic scientists.

Dr. Vogel is a graduate of Bryn Mawr College, and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. In 1980 she came to NIH as a clinical fellow and postdoctoral researcher, conducting clinical and basic research relating to infertility and reproductive medicine. Her research trajectory was quite diverse- from studying the differentiation of neurons in the Mexican axolotl to studying spermatogenesis in neonatal rats to combined basic research on pituitary gonadotropin biosynthesis and clinical research on male infertility. She moved to the NIH extramural program in 1987 to manage the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Reproductive Medicine grant portfolio. Dr. Vogel is also a four-day Jeopardy! winner and 2009 Tournament of Champions semifinalist.

How has mentorship (either as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

Over the last few decades, I have thought, spoken, and written a fair amount about mentoring; to me, it’s providing the mentee every opportunity to develop as an independent professional. After a while it stops being about you, and it becomes about helping other people launch their career. I used to think that switch came with maturity, but not anymore. Everyone at some point has used something he or she knows to help another person move forward. That can be a touchstone for every mentoring interaction that follows, and it’s a source of tremendous satisfaction.

What do you enjoy about being a scientist?

I love having cultivated a critical, analytical worldview. Healthy skepticism can serve you very well in many areas of life. I also love the collaborative culture that gives rise to the “aha” moment. Innovation comes from looking at a new-to-you question in a different way, and that a means a fresh set of eyes.

What are the barriers to women in science?

One of the biggest barriers to success for scientists of any gender is the cost and difficulty of finding reliable dependent care. This causes a slowdown that just snowballs into problems in authorship, hiring, promotion, and tenure. Support for childcare during travel to conferences is a beginning.

Name some of the highlights of your career.

I am very proud that programs I helped build are still making a difference. Some were career development grant programs, such as the NICHD Women’s Reproductive Health Research Program (WRHR) and the Office of Research on Women’s Health (ORWH) Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women’s Health (BIRCWH). At NCI, I started a fellowship for women postdocs, now a mentoring program, and the Outstanding Mentor Award. At Hopkins, we developed a number of courses and workshops that I feel really positive about, particularly our “Research Leadership” course for postdocs.

What do you do outside the lab/clinic?

Most of my career has been away from the bench, in management and education. I haven’t done an experiment or treated a patient since 1987, and like to represent as a model for the many ways one can be a success in science. Since retiring from full-time employment, everything I do is outside the traditional workplace; giving advice, talks and workshops. I volunteer with a number of organizations - some a lot like work, some nothing like work. I’m the DC-area Career Development Representative for my alma mater, Bryn Mawr College, participate in events with Association for Women in Science (AWIS), record digital textbooks at Learning Ally for students with visual and learning disabilities, and am involved in a number of projects at my synagogue. I’m getting more sleep and more exercise. And oh yes, there was the Jeopardy! thing. Some people still remember me for that.

How do you manage work/life integration? Do you have tips for young scientists about this?

It’s never easy. I am fortunate that my husband is a scientist and our sons, when they were little, went to the NIH infant care and preschool. My advice is, 1) choose your spouse or partner carefully - either another scientist, or someone who understands the lifestyle: the late nights, weekends, travel. Someone who will take at least his/her share of household and family responsibilities. 2) Even if you followed advice #1, if you have children, do whatever it takes to get quality childcare. Not having anxiety about who’s watching your kid allows you to be productive.

Why is it important to support and encourage the next generation of female scientists?

The federal government was actually way out ahead on this. Years ago, they said - and implemented - the dictum that if you do not have a diverse workforce, you are simply cutting yourself off from a big pool of top talent.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have? Why?

I would be a stage actor. I love an audience.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Barriers for Women in Science, Career Achievement Highlight, Impact of Mentorship, Work-Life Balance

Wei Yang, Ph.D., is an NIH Distinguished Investigator at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases where she serves as Chief of the Mechanism of DNA Repair, Replication, and Recombination Section, Laboratory of Molecular Biology. She studies the three-dimensional structure of proteins and how they work. Her research group focuses on the proteins that work with DNA. These proteins copy DNA, repair it when it is damaged, and move or “copy and paste” DNA. Dr. Yang’s research helps explain how mutations in these proteins interfere with their work — and endanger the stability of the genome. This kind of basic research can help explain how some cancers work and identify targets for drugs.

Dr. Yang received her Ph.D. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics at Columbia University. She completed postdoctoral fellowships at Columbia University and Yale University before joining the NIH in 1995. She was tenured in 2000. In 2011, she was awarded the Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin Award from the Protein Society for exceptional contributions in protein science. Dr. Yang is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a member of both the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

How has mentoring (as a mentor or mentee) shaped your career?

Being mentored by the right people really played a key role in my career. I think the most important thing for me was having mentors who approach science with the highest reverence possible. They take science as the highest calling in life and treat it with such respect. We do our best to understand biological phenomena at the molecular level. My graduate advisor, Dr. Wayne Hendrickson of Columbia University, was extremely nurturing, and he treated everyone equally. Your gender, ethnic origin, or training background didn’t matter. He gave everyone an independent project and a fair chance to succeed, listening to us and offering us the best advice and insight that he had.

My postdoctoral training was carried out at Yale University under the supervision of Dr. Tom Steitz. He won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2009. His career has been amazing. When he started in the 1970s, he proposed to study the central dogma — the whole machinery for making proteins based on DNA. People literally laughed at him because, at the time, people studied structures of only single small proteins and not large protein complexes. But he succeeded at every step. He always chose the most direct ways to study the most interesting and important questions. I learned so much just watching him.

Tom also supported women scientists wholeheartedly. His wife, Dr. Joan Steitz, is also a world-class scientist who was elected to the National Academy of Sciences before he was. He never minded being known as Joan’s husband. Differences in hair length or voice pitch made no impression on Tom. All he saw was if someone had a good idea and did good work.

What do you enjoy about being a scientist?

I think it is true that, in developed countries such as the United States, more and more women get a fair chance to grow in their careers. But still, I think, for young women, having children and being a caregiver is one of the biggest challenges. Many institutions are providing more support to women and mothers. I know NIH is expanding its day care so more female postdocs have access to affordable child care.

There’s also the traditional expectation that men should be more successful than women, and women should shoulder more of the burden of family life than men. I know more and more female scientists, however, whose husbands are willing to put their own careers on the slow burner and take some time off. But it’s still not nearly as many as women who put their careers on hold for their husbands.

How do you manage work/life integration? 

I spent a lot of time in the lab — most of my waking hours — so I met people in the lab. My husband is a scientist, too. He never had second thoughts about me pursuing my career full throttle. He recently moved to the University of Texas at Austin. At the beginning, he was expecting me to move with him, and I agreed, but then I decided, it’s far better for my career if I stay at NIH, and he supported me. Every other weekend, we visit one another.

With colleagues and friends, I do a lot of hiking on the weekends. I listen to books on CD while I drive or exercise. I like to visit museums and go to concerts. I have trainees in my group, and I always encourage them to spend time away from the bench. Overworking is not good for productive thinking. Your brain needs diverse stimuli, and you need to live a balanced life. You never know when that key idea will strike, and it often seems to occur at unexpected times.

If you weren’t a scientist, what other job would you have?

I want to be a chef! It has so many parallels to being a biochemist. I love food, and I like experimenting — and the result is a pleasure to consume!

What advice do you have for young female scientists?

If they really do like research, they should pursue it. And there’s no age limit on one’s capacity for scientific research. Recently I heard a talk by the brilliant scientist Dr. Peter Walter. He presented some work that was done by a woman who was a graduate student years ago, then she had a family and took a few years off. He hired her back, and again she did extraordinary work. Now she can start her independent career after 40. One can go back to pursue research at 45 or even 50 because our life expectancy is more than 80 years. There’s another 20 plus years to do what we are interested in, even if we start at 45.

Tags: Advice for Other Women Scientists, Impact of Mentorship, Work-Life Balance