A recent study released by NPR provided some sobering facts about how delicate and critical these next few months are to getting us out of this pandemic.

According to the report, 49 percent of Republican men and 47 percent of Trump supporters have indicated they do not plan to receive the COVID vaccine, despite reports that former President Trump and former First Lady Melania were quietly vaccinated back in January. Forty percent of white men without college degrees have also said they do not plan on taking the vaccine. In addition, 10 percent of respondents who voted for Biden also said they don’t plan to get the shot.

Despite Dr. Fauci’s claim that receiving the vaccine is not a political issue, it is. The statistics above make that very clear.

So how do we make what appears to be a political issue… not a political issue? President Biden has suggested backing off statements from politicians and I couldn't agree more. In fact, a recent focus group indicated that not even Trump could be influential in convincing his supporters to receive the vaccine. The study cited that participants “did not have trust in politicians or anyone perceived as partisan.”

Instead, it has been suggested that vaccine advocates should be doctors and faith and community leaders. This makes sense, given that many of these folks are seen as guideposts for social issues and political advice from their followers. But there’s one more group that should be elevated during this process.

Over the past few years, science has been assaulted in ways never thought possible, and the pandemic only made matters worse. As Dr. Facui recently said in a panel discussion, “The [lesson] that I think is most cogent is that if ever you want to have a historic pandemic, don’t have it at a time when there’s intense divisiveness in society. If you are going to fight a pandemic, it’s got to be the entire country pulling together.”

If we are to reach herd immunity through vaccination, the buy-in of skeptics is required, and that includes a vast majority of those mentioned in the statistics above. Bringing to the table non-partisan groups, such as faith and community leaders and local doctors is a great start, but scientists need to be a part of the conversation as well. This will ensure continuity in the messaging of the safety and efficacy of vaccines, but also heal the gaping wound dealt to the scientific community through conspiracy theories, misinformation, and the proliferation of falsehoods through social media and other influential platforms. Keep the politics out, but bring the science in.

Who better to talk about the safety of the vaccines than Dr. Kizzmekia Corbett, the lead of the Coronavirus Program for the National Institutes of Health, who was instrumental in developing the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine; she is already conducting community outreach initiatives to combat the hesitancy so many may feel. Bringing on and supporting scientific experts such as Dr. Corbett will help reduce the misinformation that can oftentimes spread due to the miscommunication between those who know the science and well-intentioned leaders delivering the information.

This is a critical time for communication and understanding. The research has spoken and after more than a year, there is a light at the end of this pandemic tunnel. Barbeques and gatherings could be possible this summer but only if we band together as a nation, trust in science, and become effective and empathetic communicators who are open to having hard, fact-based conversations with those who have expressed skepticism or genuine concern about what getting the vaccination will mean to them. The only way we’re getting out of this is together. It’s time to stop fighting against the tide and start riding the waves as a collective.

Despite this report and the historic nature of the pandemic and vaccine production, the reaction seen with vaccine approvals for adults provides insight into how the response to COVID-19 vaccinations might go when approved for young children and tweens. There is hope, though, but the work has to start now.

Read the full article in The Globe Post.

Do you remember that Always commercial, “Like a Girl”? I find myself thinking about it when I’m a part of conversations about imposter syndrome. To me, this ad highlights how society’s beliefs about women and girls begins to shift as we seek advancements and positions of power. These “roles” women are placed into usually have nothing to do with supporting women, but rather are used to make other people feel comfortable about themselves and their place in a company or organization.

The Imposter syndrome theory has been around since 1978 by psychologists Pauline Rose Clance and Suzanne Imes. This is expressed as having feelings of self-doubt that persist, no matter where you sit on the ladder of success. In their research, Clance and Imes theorized that women are uniquely affected by impostor syndrome.

Famous and highly successful people have talked about suffering from feelings of inadequacy at moments in their lives, such as Michelle Obama, Tina Fey, Penélope Cruz, and Selena Gomez. It is estimated that 75 percent of female executives feel this way. If you are a woman, you have most likely been a part of a training, workshop, or summit about this subject. I, for one, attended many in my time.

Contrary to what many believe, Imposter syndrome doesn’t necessarily mean low self-esteem. In fact, some researchers have linked it with perfectionism, especially in women. Through discussions with many women, especially in science, the idea of imposter syndrome is heightened due to the standards that are placed on them in the workplace.

More often than not, there are only a few women in the room helping make decisions, and that number decreases for women of color. These women are oftentimes held to standards that demand perfection, because, whether we like it or not, in many scientific organizations and institutions, women are still being asked to prove they belong in the room. In addition to these unrealistic standards, women are oftentimes volunteering more, serving on more committees, mentoring, and, if she has a family at home, she is usually bearing the brunt of most of the child-rearing responsibilities at home. How is this sustainable?

This weight is felt and understood by women. It leads us to make sure we’re prepared for anything before presenting, double and triple-checking qualifications before applying for jobs or starting a business, checking countless boxes before running for office, and in science, imposter syndrome has been credited to the “leaky pipeline” for women pursuing STEM careers. In a recent survey taken by its membership in 2020, the US-based Association for Science cited the barriers that female STEM leaders encounter were cultural issues, ideas or work being credited to men, feelings of inadequacy leading to fear of being called a fraud.

There are a few things you can do to help combat imposter syndrome for yourself, but I’d like to focus on what companies can do to help support the women within their organizations.

It’s time to change the narrative.

I was on a call where leaders of an organization commented that they offer many opportunities for women to take the leadership roles on key research projects, but women rarely step up and volunteer themselves, so these roles end up being taken by men. This kind of language continues to place the burden on women who, as we’ve already established, have a good few barriers to overcome already.

Here’s how this statement should be reframed: Women are not taking on leadership positions within our organization, despite these opportunities being presented to them. What can we shift within our structure to provide the support women need to take on these opportunities and become leaders for our team?

This statement takes the ownership of the problem off women and places it where finding the solution belongs—with the organization.

Companies usually have good intentions, but how can they fix a structure rife with barriers to entry and unattainable standards placed on women, if many helped create the problem in the first place?

Imposter syndrome is real, and women have been attending countless training and seminars to help offset these feelings. It’s now time for companies to take ownership and start shifting their narratives and look within their own structures to root out the parts of their business that help perpetuate the barriers women face when climbing the ladder.

Within the next decade, we are going to see one of the largest wealth transfers in human history—up to $68 trillion is expected to be handed to the next generation of philanthropists over the next 25 years, many benefactors of this wealth will be women.

I’ve dedicated my career to elevating women in science. I see it as the only way our society can move forward and advance research; however, this mission is not shared by everyone, and that may not come as a surprise to many of you. So, if you are still questioning or are not sure of why it’s fundamentally important to have women at the table for scientific discoveries, how about we talk about where this lack of investment might hurt most—financially. Has the fire been lit under you yet? Let me explain.

Wealth transfer aside, women already control more than half of our nation’s private wealth. In fact, a recent study published in the same report showed women give more often and when they do, they give more. On top of that, according to a recent report, women already control the wealth in 90 percent of affluent households and are expected to control two-thirds of all the wealth in the U.S. by 2030. It will also come as no surprise that women also tend to give to groups supporting their own gender.

Add trillions of dollars on top of this female philanthropic windfall and you have some very big reasons to finally invest in women and appoint them in positions they’ve deserved, but have been kept out of reach through the deep-seated patriarchy of many scientific institutions—leadership.

Philanthropists are always looking for organizations to give to, and they are going to want to give to institutions, and organizations that value and support women in leadership and throughout their companies.

The good news is, these women already exist, and always have. They are brilliant, strong, engaging leaders who already serve within the ranks of many organizations, and supporting them can be done in many ways. Here’s how to get started:

1. Put women in leadership roles. A recent report of the biotech industry highlighted the work we have to do to achieve gender and racial parity in leadership positions. Women make up nearly 45% of employees, but only 30% of executive teams and an abysmal 18% on biotech company boards. These numbers drop even further when looking at people of color: 15% and 14% respectively. “Highest Paid Executives are generally people with the most power, and having females and people of color in these roles signals to employees, customers, and investors that the company is interested in diverse perspectives,” the report states.
2. Create platforms where women’s voices can be heard. I have spoken to many women throughout the scientific community and their experiences, compared with the perspective leadership, directly conflict with each other. Leadership will often say there are many opportunities to “step up,” but women aren’t volunteering themselves. The real question these companies should be asking is, “What is it within our organization and its structure that prevents or deters women from taking on leadership roles?” Looking at elevating women from this perspective will provide a different (and critical) viewpoint to companies who are curious, or should be curious, about why women aren’t being tapped for leadership positions.
3. Men need to help. Yes, women cannot do this alone, especially given the fact that many executive positions within an organization are held by men. This needs to be done with self-awareness and empathy. Here’s what I mean, women are asked to do at least double to work and be flawless in their execution. Women are serving on committees, volunteering, and sometimes going through the stressful exercise of the tenure process during child-rearing years (if they are choosing to have children). Generally speaking, women are still the primary caretakers at home. More men need to understand the nuances of being a woman in science, and that requires asking questions and seeking out ways to support women doing the work. Some people, even women, will refute this statement, claiming that women in science should not be treated differently. Yes, I agree, but here’s the thing. Men are different from women. Not better, different. This means companies and organizations need to stop jamming women into the male molds society has constructed to measure success, power, and advancement. Different types of “molds” can net the same success, as long as you consider the person rather than defaulting to the “it’s always been done this way” approach. With this frame of mind, women can stop attending countless training sessions meant to help advance themselves in a male-dominated world, and spend more time doing the work they’ve dedicated their careers to.

I see the value and understand that diverse voices can advance discovery in ways never imagined (it would also be nice to have women’s voices and research to address the many health issues that plague women and have gone unfunded or underfunded for years).

With the Great Wealth Transfer on the horizon, it’s time for you to look around at your organization and have an honest conversation about where you have let women fall through the cracks.