Exploring the Policy Implications of Emerging Technologies.

by Neel Bardhan, PhD

As scientists, we love to ask questions. We spend a lot of time in the lab wondering about structure and function, or trying to come up with the next big idea. One of my recent obsessions however has been to better grasp the policy implications of advanced technologies that are being spun off from labs, and how public perception is shaped around these new technologies as they become a part of our daily lives. 

One of the avenues where I got to experience policy discussions first-hand was at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting in Washington, D.C., held on Feb. 14 - 17, 2019. At AAAS, I was connected to Dr. Mahmud Farooque, the Associate Director of the Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes and Arizona State University's Washington Center, and got the opportunity to participate in a symposium called “Driverless Futures: Disciplines, Sectors, and Geographic Conditions.” There I learned about how different stakeholders in the U.S. and EU in the fields of AI-driven mobility are engaged in a conversation about the impending arrival of this new technology. Though the field of autonomous driving is outside my comfort zone of research in nanomedicine, I was amazed to learn about diligent efforts to engage the public from the very beginning on this new technology. I also learned that citizen-based science initiatives could be similarly applied to the healthcare sector with respect to complex issues such as the privacy regulations surrounding "-omics" data. This was perhaps best put succinctly by Prof. Susan Hockfield, President Emerita of MIT—and outgoing President of AAAS—in her opening address, as “Science needs champions who can engage society in a broad way.”

During the Family Science Days event at AAAS, I was thrilled to volunteer for a group called the “Science Storytellers.” This hands-on event was a fun opportunity to be interviewed by young kids from nearby elementary and middle schools on various aspects of my research. Using a blown-up model as a prop for the M13 bacteriophage—which we use in our targeted treatment for cancer imaging—I told my scientific story to kids, and hopefully got some of them curious and excited about STEM. Topics that we were interviewed on, were, quite honestly, difficult ones, and likely questions we may wonder ourselves as scientists: did you like doing science as a kid? What are you the most curious about? What are some of the most important questions in your research? What did you find so far? Have you ever been wrong? Why does your work matter?

Later in my scholarship, I tried to gain deeper insight into the workings of policy and legislative issues surrounding health data. I attended the conference “Consuming Genetics: The Ethical and Legal Considerations of Consumer Genetic Technologies” on May 17, 2019, organized by The Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics, at Harvard Law School. Among the numerous issues debated at this forum was the question of Property Conversion in Genetic Property Rights—who owns the data available in these large datasets? It became clear during the sessions that while the scientific community tends to support adequate informed consent, researchers strongly believe that claims for genetic conversion should not stifle research, or create moral harms. At the same time, I learned that all stakeholders need to rethink their informed consent methods for their research protocols, given the confusion arising about the use of the data among patients, their care providers, and researchers working with data specimens.

In addition to policy engagement and outreach activities, I also attended professional development programs organized by Boston Biomedical Innovation Center's Skills Development Center, and Harvard Catalyst. One of the courses I attended was “Project Management for Success in Scientific Research,” the other being “Managing Yourself before Managing Others.” In the former, teams of professionals working in the biomedical field in the Greater Boston area were assigned to work on a hands-on project, to design the project management chart for a functional biosensor project. In the latter, individual professionals worked on their personal “Immunity to Change Map,” which is designed as a diagnostic tool to help identify latent commitments working against achieving our stated goals (and inspired by our "adaptive behavioral immune system"!). These workshops really helped me get more hands-on experience on project management, as well as finding the right approach to advance complex team-based projects.

Looking back, the Convergence Scholars Program offered me a unique opportunity to explore, engage, and nurture my intellectual curiosity in areas outside of my direct field of research. Coupled with the amazing mentorship I received from Tarek Fadel, the Assistant Director of the Marble Center for Cancer Nanomedicine, and through interactions with my peers in the 2018-2019 class of Fellows, I believe that this unique program has really helped me rekindle my love for hands-on science, and ultimately has been beneficial in enhancing my contributions to my own lab. For anyone out there who is wondering about different career choices available to postdocs, this program has been a great way to testdrive several alternatives in a sandboxed environment!