“It takes a long time to do science,” said Molly Stanley.
Years of scientific experiments to accumulate the data. Rigorous peer reviews that challenge the smallest of details that could require going back to square one. And the final step of getting published in a scientific journal that announces the discovery.
“It’s extremely rigorous — and challenging,” Stanley said, with expectations routinely dashed.
I visited with Stanley Monday afternoon from her home in Burlington, Vt., where she teaches neuroscience at the University of Vermont.
A 2007 graduate of Iola High School, Stanley has a PhD in neuroscience.
Last week, the Register published a column by Stanley that expressed her concerns of federal funding cuts to science programs like hers and the setbacks it would mean to biomedical research.
Stanley’s current focus is the Drosophila melanogaster fruit fly, which she refers to as a “common model organism” that lends itself to multiple experiments concerning neurobiology, including how neurons sense chemicals in the environment and communicate this information to other parts of the brain.
A rare disease typically presents with, “a genetic mutation,” Stanley explained. A glitch, whose discovery is inserted “into this modest little critter” to see how it affects its functions.
“The feedback, which arrives very quickly, tells us what we can expect a living animal — a human — will experience,” launching countless experiments to determine not only what causes the mutation but effective treatments and cures.
“And what if that process gets ‘paused?’” I asked.
“You lose everything,” she said. “You lose the people signed on for the study if you have human participants. You typically lose all funding for the study. It’s not just something you can put on a shelf, hoping to revive it later.”
That possibility hits close to home for Stanley.
“We’re in the middle of publishing a paper from my National Science Foundation grant and we have only a certain period of time to revise the manuscript with the experiments requested to pass the peer review process for submission to a journal.
“If we were forced to stop what we’re doing, we would lose our opportunity to publish this paper in the journal and formally report our results.”
Stanley also would most likely lose funding for the four students scheduled to work in her laboratory over the summer.
“Those are full-time jobs.”
But around the country, that’s what is happening to thousands of university studies whose funding rely on federal programs. Their history goes way back.
