WHAT’S THE PURPOSE of your study? It’s the question many basic-science researchers are worried about. And it’s the question that many graduate students face before a panel and all many could do is murmur about the importance of research.
I still don’t know how my doctoral research (entitled Characterization of Multicomponent Replicative Form Ribonucleic Acid of Barley Stripe Mosaic Virus) can directly benefit people. But we need to recognize that the pursuit of immediate applications is not the goal of basic science since it seeks to fundamentally understand natural phenomena. That doesn’t mean the research is worthless. Projects that could be considered silly or useless can lead to scientific advances that improve our lives.
Take the study of sea fireflies. By the 1950s, the tiny crustaceans’ glow had puzzled scientists for decades. Researchers knew that a molecule–enzyme pair generated the shine, but they had not been able to isolate and study the molecule. Many avoided the work because it was considered difficult and unpredictable. Plus, it probably didn’t seem relevant to humans. That is until Japanese chemist Osamu Shimomura isolated it.
Shimomura and his team identified two of the proteins responsible for the jellyfish’s mysterious glow — aequorin and green fluorescent protein.
The work revolutionized biological research and medicine. For instance, doctors now use green fluorescent protein to better visualize and avoid nerves during surgery, as well as to track the spread of cancer cells in the body.
Such examples don’t stop politicians from questioning the value of basic science time and time again. David Hu, a fluid dynamics researcher, had his projects listed as wasteful. (Reminds me of an infamous Philippine Senator questioning the value of rice research during a budget hearing going so far as calling it useless.)
But Hu’s work on how long mammals take to pee showed that, regardless of species, it takes about 21 seconds to empty a bladder. This helped establish healthy urination time. Doctors now use it to detect prostate problems early. Engineers use it to design prosthetic urethras that can generate a proper urine stream. Hu defended his research and the importance of scientific exploration. Regardless, the experience launched Hu’s public advocacy of curiosity-driven research.
Thus, it’s nearly impossible for a science project to follow a straightforward path that results in an immediately applicable outcome. It is an especially timely reminder as the government cuts science funding today.
I am also endlessly appreciative of VSU scientists like Dr. Ea Kristine Clarisse Escueta and all the researchers who continue to pave the path of advocacy for basic research. More power to all of you and may your tribe increase. By Manny Palomar, PhD (EV Mail SEPTEMBER 15-21, 2025 Issue)
