Cutting science funding threatens our freedom to flourish

As a PhD candidate at the University of Iowa, I focus on cleaning up toxic “forever chemicals” in soils and sediments at the bottom of bodies of water, specifically polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). New production was banned in the 1970s/ But many improperly disposed PCBs remain in sediments to the present day, where they are being released into the air, posing a cancer risk. Luckily, scientists like me are developing ways to contain these chemicals, but the future of this work is uncertain due to proposed funding cuts.

Dealing with PCB-contaminated sediment via dredging and transporting it to a landfill or incinerating it is difficult, expensive, and can release more PCBs into the air. To solve this problem, my group’s project works with special PCB-degrading bacteria that can treat sediment directly at contaminated sites. We are working on attaching the bacteria to a charcoal-like black carbon material called biochar, which works like a magnet to attract PCBs while providing a safe habitat for the bacteria to break the PCBs down.

What gives our work a connection to Iowa is that our biochar is made from corn kernels, which represents an exciting potential new use for Iowa’s top homegrown resource. Our innovative research on corn-kernel biochar is only possible through National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for the Iowa Superfund Research Program (ISRP). Researchers at the University of Iowa continue to face the possibility of federal funding cuts, which could prevent recruitment of outstanding new students and researchers.

I am writing as part of the nationwide McClintock Letters Initiative, named for Dr. Barbara McClintock, whose pioneering work in corn genetics led to her becoming the first American woman to win a solo Nobel Prize in the sciences. I am honored to follow in her footsteps. Through hard work and excellent mentorship in science communication, I was able to win the 2023 University of Iowa Three-Minute Thesis, an unforgettable experience that inspired me to communicate the importance of my research directly to my funding sources – not just the NIH, but to you, the communities I work with and for.

Over 80% of Americans believe that scientists’ jobs should include communicating their research to the public and elected officials. In academia, we have become too isolated from the public who pay our salaries, fund our research, and who deserve to know about the returns on their investment. Early-career researchers and scientists, many of whom are eager to stay in and work for the communities we value, are faced with the prospect of having their talent wasted due to widespread science funding cuts. Science funding leads to discoveries that protect and enhance our everyday lives, including giving people the freedom to flourish in a world free from toxic forever chemicals.

If you feel strongly about continued support for science funding after reading this piece, I urge you to contact your representatives and fill out the Locals Supporting Science Pledge.

David Ramotowski is a PhD candidate in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Iowa. Opinions expressed are his own and do not reflect that of the University of Iowa.