Editorial: Lessons in resilience from COVID-19

This week C&EN presents the Talented 12 class of 2025: a dozen early-career researchers who are using chemistry to do world-changing work. When the Talented 12 agree to be profiled, we give them a survey that asks them mostly fun questions. But one question is serious: Have you faced adversity in your career?

One person’s response to that question reminded us that this year’s Talented 12 were doing work that would establish their careers—whether postdoctoral research or setting up independent labs—during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

These researchers may have thought the hardship of those days, when the outside world had an outsized impact on their work, were behind them. But they may have been wrong. The current US administration’s cuts to research institutions and its international policies signal that these researchers still face tremendous adversity.

The COVID-19 pandemic was traumatic for early-career researchers, but one T12er also says it “made us reflect on how to be creative, not just on our research, but also on how to pivot on practical things when we were facing hurdles.” The Talented 12 regained their footing after the pandemic and found success. Could the lessons in resilience they learned help these and other early-career scientists wade through the challenging environment they face today?

The first intense year of the pandemic, March 2020 to March 2021, was a period of loss and uncertainty compounded by supply chain troubles and disruptions in how the world functioned. Scientists had to figure out how to continue their research even when they couldn’t come into the lab or replenish basic lab supplies. They had to find ways to recruit students at a time when no one was allowed on campus. Travel ceased, conferences were canceled, and the world seemed to come to a standstill.

Yet there was government support. There were collaborations across academia and industry—even among nations—to develop vaccines. The virus was a common enemy. We were all in it together.

The current environment has some resonance with the pandemic. There are job and funding losses, as well as economic and political uncertainty. But there is a key difference. This time, there is no US government support. In fact, scientists in the US face an environment that is intentionally disruptive and seems hostile to basic research.

Federal agencies that have been the lifeblood of research labs across academia and industry are now dealing with dramatic budget and staff cuts.

Termination or stalling of grants keeps early-career scientists from building labs and running research projects. Tariffs and escalating trade wars are causing supply chain turmoil and increasing the cost of scientific instruments and lab supplies. The undermining of science, atmosphere of uncertainty, and attacks on universities and research institutions take a toll on morale.

The cuts also have long-term consequences. They keep faculty from recruiting the students who will be the next generation of researchers. In addition, early-career researchers have long benefitted from a diverse pool of collaborators to produce cutting-edge research, and that pool may very well shrink. In a recent Nature poll, 75% of postgraduate researchers and PhD students said they were considering leaving the US.

Meanwhile, international students are looking beyond the US for graduate education.

This year’s Talented 12 includes researchers born in Canada, Germany, India, and the Philippines. Two T12ers now live in Canada and Switzerland. If political tensions and trade wars escalate, research budgets will be tighter and research mobility constrained, inhibiting collaboration with the US.

Despite the resilience the group built during the pandemic, it seems as though the impact from the current US administration will be more lasting and more damaging to early-career scientists than the tough times of 2020 and 2021.

The editorial is the result of collective deliberation in C&EN. For this editorial, the lead contributors are Bethany Halford and Prachi Patel.

Views expressed are not necessarily those of ACS.