Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 02:01:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <642761425.25.1711692075368@odprdoirapp.od.nih.gov> Subject: Exported From Confluence MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_Part_24_1034504477.1711692075358" ------=_Part_24_1034504477.1711692075358 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: file:///C:/exported.html
Download the PDF: Silverman_Debra_oral_history (256 kB)
National Cancer Institute
Division of Cancer Epidemiology & Genetics
National Institutes of Health
Oral History Project
Interview with Debra Silverman
Conducted on April 22, 2022 by Holly Werner-Thomas for
History Associates, Inc., Rockville, MD
HWT: My name is Holly Werner-Thomas and I=E2=80= =99m an oral historian at History Associates Inc. in Rockville, Maryland. T= oday=E2=80=99s date is Friday, April 22, 2022, and I am speaking with Dr. D= ebra Silverman for the National Institute of Cancer, Division of Cancer Epi= demiology and Genetics, part of the National Institutes of Health or NIH. T= he NIH is undertaking this oral history project as part of an effort to gai= n an understanding of the National Cancer Institute=E2=80=99s Division of C= ancer Epidemiology and Genetics. This is one in a series of interviews that= focus on the work of five individuals at the NCI-DCEG, including their car= eers before and during their time with the institute. This is a virtual int= erview over Zoom. I am at my home in Los Angeles while Dr. Silverman is in = Washington, D.C. Before we get started, can you please state your full name= and also spell it?
DS: Debra, D-E-B-R-A, T = as in Tom, Silverman, S-I-L-V-E-R-M-A-N.
HWT: Thank you. Dr. Silverman is chief of the Occ= upational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch within the Division of Canc= er, Epidemiology and Genetics, NCI. She received a Doctor of Science in Epi= demiology from the Harvard School of Public Health and a Master of Science = in biostatistics from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Hygiene and Pub= lic Health. She joined the NCI as a biostatistician in 1972 and has served = as a cancer epidemiologist since 1983. She has received numerous awards, in= cluding the Harvard School of Public Health Alumni Award of Merit, the PHS = Special Recognition Award for research on environmental determinants of bla= dder and other cancers, and she=E2=80=99s an elected member of the American= Epidemiological Society, and a fellow of the American College of Epidemiol= ogy.
= So, let=E2=80=99s go ahead and jump into the questions. And so, as I= was saying, I always like to ask people to describe their backgrounds in r= elation to their career paths. What support did you have at home or at scho= ol, if any? And was there anybody in your life who influenced you when you = were growing up to pursue this career?
DS: Well, actually, my i= nterest in cancer research began as a senior in high school. I was in AP Bi= ology in the New York area, and we went on a field trip to Sloan Kettering.= And I was so impressed with the research that they were doing at Sloan Ket= tering that I thought to myself=E2=80=94that was a really appealing, inspir= ational career. Later on, I went on to be a math major in college. And the = combination of my interest in biology with mathematics was a natural to pur= sue biostatistics. And the chair of the mathematics department suggested th= at there was a new area, a new field, where there were a lot of possibiliti= es=E2=80=94 that I should look into biostatistics.
= At the time, Johns Hopkins had started a master=E2=80=99s program in= applied biostatistics. So, I applied to it, and I was accepted. I went the= re for two years. I had a U.S. Public Health Service traineeship. And when = I completed my training in Baltimore, I interviewed for a number of positio= ns at NIH. I was faced with quite a dilemma=E2=80=94which institute to go t= o. I was biased towards the cancer research. And at the time, I asked Abe L= ilienfeld, who was chair of epidemiology at [Johns] Hopkins [University], w= hat he thought. And he said, =E2=80=9COh, go to cancer. That=E2=80=99s wher= e all the money was=E2=80=9D. This was in 1972; the [National] Cancer Act w= as [passed in] 1971 and the field was growing tremendously. And that=E2=80= =99s how I ended up at NCI. I=E2=80=99ve never had any other job.
HWT: I wanted to ask you just a follow-up questio= n because, you know, at that time, as a woman, as a young woman, what were = the obstacles that you faced, if any? You know, going for a career to= begin with, and then particularly in the sciences, math and science.
DS: Well, when I arrived= at NCI, I realized that almost everyone had a doctorate, not a Master=E2= =80=99s. There were a few others, and they were women. The men all had doct= orates. Early on, I was informed (laughs) that to progress in my career, I = really needed to go back for my doctorate. There were no women in leadershi= p positions. That is, in the program I was in. I can=E2=80=99t speak to the= whole National Cancer Institute. But certainly in our program, no women we= re in leadership positions. Which is dramatically different from today, whe= re it=E2=80=99s probably greater than 50% of the leadership positions are h= eld by women. I have to say that the very top is still male-dominated. So, = we=E2=80=99re almost there. Haven=E2=80=99t quite gotten there yet. But alm= ost.
HWT: Very interesting. What was NCI like in the e= arly 1970s when you first joined? You just mentioned one specific thing. Bu= t more generally speaking.
DS: Well, when I started= in 1972, NCI was just making the transition to computers. This had a drama= tic impact on research, not just cancer research but throughout science; it= was a transition period where computing was taking off. So when I first be= gan, all the data collected in epidemiologic studies were being recorded on= punch cards. (laughs) And I actually recall, although it was no longer bei= ng used, that there was a Xerox room with a big card sorter where they had = been doing analyses with card sorters. But by the early =E2=80=9870s, the t= ransition was happening. The data were still being collected on punch cards= ; (laughs) it seems remarkable when I look back that we accomplished anythi= ng. Because it took so much longer to accomplish anything. The technology h= as dramatically changed.
HWT: (Dog barking) Again, apolo= gies for the noise. Friday is very difficult. So, I wanted to ask you one m= ore question just sort of about the growing up years or early years at NCI.= We can come back around, of course. But what are the resources that you ha= d and that you wish you had had, pursuing your education? And then, you kno= w, the early part of your career?
DS: I was extremely fort= unate. So, as I mentioned, my tuition and the stipend when I was going for = my master=E2=80=99s at [Johns] Hopkins [University] were covered by a U.S. = Public Health Service traineeship. After a few short years, I think it was = three years at NCI, I decided to go back to school to get my doctorate. And= NCI was extremely supportive. They actually sent me to Harvard for m= y doctorate. They paid the full tuition. They paid my full salary. And they= moved me to Boston, they moved me home, and they let me work on my dissert= ation for four years when I came back as part of my job. So, I have been in= credibly fortunate. I have had terrific resources.
HWT: So, let=E2=80=99s move on to now some of you= r work. I want to ask you what inspires you? What motivates you? And someti= mes people say there=E2=80=99s a societal need that they identify and that= =E2=80=99s what motivates them. I think less likely in this case, but you n= ever know. Maybe there=E2=80=99s a market need or there=E2=80=99s some comb= ination. So, what are you curious about and what inspires you? And then on = the flipside of that also, what bores you?
DS: I=E2=80=99m inspired= by challenging scientific questions. So, when I look back over my career, = my greatest achievements were on studies that were focused on answering iss= ues that were unclear. I conducted the New England Bladder Cancer Study. Th= at study was designed to address an excess of bladder cancer mortality that= had persisted for decades in New England. The reason for the excess was un= known. This was a challenge. But we did a terrific study. And we learned th= at arsenical pesticides that had been used in the first half of the twentie= th century persisted in the soil. And depending on the level of the water t= able, arsenic was seeping into private wells. A high proportion of the New = England population uses private wells as their primary source of drinking w= ater. Drinking from these shallow wells in the first half of the twentieth = century was causing the excess. So I=E2=80=99m inspired by challenging ques= tions.
= Another study that I consider a very important achievement in my car= eer is the study of diesel exhaust and lung cancer. And that study took 20 = years to conduct. At the time that we launched that study around 1990, it l= ooked like diesel exhaust might cause lung cancer. It was not clear, howeve= r, because many of the studies that had been done had methodologic issues. = And the risk was very low. It was not clear whether diesel exhaust really c= aused lung cancer. So, we launched what I consider the Mercedes of studies = in underground nonmetal miners. The reason we studied underground nonmetal = miners was because they experienced very high levels of exposure. The walls= of the mines that they were operating in, in confined spaces, were black. = And they were being exposed to these high levels for many years. And we fig= ured that if diesel causes lung cancer, that we should observe an elevated = risk in these underground nonmetal miners. And we conducted a state-of-the-= art exposure assessment. It took about a decade to do. The study was under = attack from almost the beginning. The mines that were included in this stud= y formed a coalition in an attempt to stop the study. The study was conduct= ed in collaboration with NIOSH [National Institute for Occupational Safety = & Health]. We went to court 13 different times. The study had Congressi= onal oversight. And I am proud to say that when it was all said and done, d= iesel exhaust became a lung carcinogen according to IARC [International Age= ncy for Research on Cancer]. And that was most gratifying. I actually like = a good challenge, and I like to prevail in the end.
HWT: Who can blame you? So, what about the = flipside of that? I don't know if you want to talk about that. It=E2=80=99s= kind of an interesting question to me to ask people what bores you, you kn= ow?
DS: Mediocre science bor= es me. And having been in this business for so many years, it also bores me= to see science that gets recycled. What happens is, oftentimes I=E2=80=99l= l see a paper. And I know there was literature on that 20 years ago. And it= =E2=80=99s as if it didn=E2=80=99t exist. Well, [it] bores me. That kind of= , it displeases me, as well. But I don=E2=80=99t like to do mediocre scienc= e. I like to pursue really exciting, challenging questions.
HWT: So, I want to ask you some process questions= later. But I just want to follow up with one now. So, you mentioned exposu= re assessment, for example. I=E2=80=99m just curious about your process, wh= ich is a long question and a long answer. I=E2=80=99m sure there=E2=80=99s = more than one answer. But can we get into the weeds a little bit about your= process?
DS: Well, different stud= ies have different requirements. But oftentimes the assessment of the expos= ure that you=E2=80=99re studying is really critical to the success of the s= tudy. If you don=E2=80=99t do a good job of it, you may wipe out findings. = In the diesel study, this was particularly difficult. We went to each mine.= NIOSH monitored the exposure levels at each mine over days. And we recorde= d all the data. And then we took all the records that MSHA=E2=80=94MSHA is = the regulatory agency, (Mine Safety and Health Administration)=E2=80=94had = for each mine. They go into mines routinely for enforcement purposes. They = had years of data on our mines. And we had to obtain these records and sort= through them and make sense of them. And then we took the historical measu= rement data and the more recent data and we developed models so we could ex= trapolate back in time. We call it retrospective exposure assessment. And f= or each person who worked at these eight mines, we actually estimated their= exposure over their entire work history. So an incredible amount of work g= oes into building the data set before you develop the estimates of risk of = lung cancer. It takes years sometimes. Good epidemiologic studies can often= take years. The ones I=E2=80=99ve worked on have all taken years to conduc= t.
HWT: I wanted to ask you, what ties your research= interests together? And you know, you=E2=80=99ve already talked about, you= =E2=80=99ve mentioned the diesel exhaust, the miners, the bladder cancer in= New England. So, what=E2=80=99s the bigger picture for you?
DS: Well, my expertise i= s mainly in bladder cancer epidemiology and the carcinogenicity of diesel e= xhaust. Although for a period of time in the 1990s, I did spend a great dea= l of time on pancreatic cancer. I began my career with my dissertation, whi= ch was on occupational bladder cancer. I started off working in that area. = My dissertation was part of the National Bladder Cancer Study. It was one o= f the very first large-scale population-based case control studies of any d= isease in the United States. It was actually designed to determine whether = saccharine caused bladder cancer. It was quite some time ago, but in the 19= 70s there was a big issue about saccharine being a food additive. And Congr= ess gave NCI the funding to do this very large bladder cancer study. And I = was fortunate to work with Bob Hoover, who led the study. Others, Tricia Ha= rtge, Ken Cantor, Tom Mason. I kind of cut my teeth, shall we say, on one o= f the most impressive case-control studies of any disease of its time. Many= studies followed, but this study was extraordinary. This was the study tha= t triggered my interest in bladder cancer etiology. Not just occupational b= ladder cancer. I went on to conduct other bladder cancer studies. One in Sp= ain, the Spanish Bladder Cancer Study, and the New England Bladder Cancer S= tudy. Each of these was a major undertaking. So throughout my entire career= , there=E2=80=99s been a theme of understanding the causes bladder cancer.<= /p>
= The diesel exhaust actually came as an offshoot from my dissertation= . Because I found that truck drivers who had exposure to diesel exhaust had= an increased risk of bladder cancer. And so, I became very interested in c= ancer and diesel exhaust, which led to lung cancer. Which is the natural fo= llow-up for diesel exhaust. That kind of ties it all together.
= My work on pancreatic cancer was not really tied to this research. B= ut at the time which we=E2=80=99re talking about, the late 1980s, pancreati= c cancer was a pretty big mystery. We didn=E2=80=99t even know that smoking= caused pancreatic cancer. It turned out that again, many of the studies ha= d a methodologic flaw in that they were dominated by next-of-kin interviews= . Because people were so sick with pancreatic cancer that early epidemiolog= ic studies did not attempt to interview them. Unfortunately, you don=E2=80= =99t get the highest quality data from next of kin. It can be okay. But it = left something to be desired. So we did probably the first case-control stu= dy of pancreatic cancer based on direct interviews. And that study showed w= hat we suspected for some time, that smoking caused pancreatic cancer. In f= act, I was interviewed by [journalist] Tom Brokaw on the NBC Nightly News w= hen that study came out. That was quite exciting, especially back in 1994 = =E2=80=93 I was pretty young at the time.
And I went on to write = a number of other papers from that study that were also very important. It = was one of the first studies to suggest that obesity was a risk factor for = pancreatic cancer. And that diabetes, longstanding diabetes, was also a ris= k factor.
But as the years went o= n, I ended up focusing on bladder cancer and diesel exhaust. I had to cut b= ack. Can=E2=80=99t do everything. So, I did not follow up that study in lat= er years.
HWT: Thank you for that. Super important. So, you= mentioned a little bit about how you came to work for NCI. I don=E2=80=99t= know if there=E2=80=99s anything you want to add there. But I=E2=80=99d li= ke to ask you what you felt that your initial goals were. Just, you know, b= rand new, coming into the working world. You said that the Cancer Act had p= assed in 1971. There was a lot of money for cancer. But what questions were= you yourself asking? And what did you feel like you needed to know?
DS: When I first started= at NCI, I was in a group that analyzed survival from cancer. It was called= the End Results Section. (laughs) And we would put out reports on= cancer survival by type. That is actually the very first area of research = that I did. And I was a master=E2=80=99s level investigator, so I was worki= ng with someone who had a doctorate. I was running programs, generating res= ults. But I realized that what I really wanted to do was to come up with my= own hypotheses and conduct my own studies. That=E2=80=99s what an epidemio= logist does. It=E2=80=99s a different role from a biostatistician. So, in t= he very first years, I was kind of clueless. And what I did was realize tha= t I wanted to become an epidemiologist. Which is what I then went on to do.=
HWT: And just a couple of questions. So one, I wa= s going to ask you actually, so you began at the NCI as a cancer epidemiolo= gist in 1983. So, I wanted to ask you what that meant to you. But also, and= you are addressing this, but to talk about your evolution from the time yo= u started in 1972 and then 1983. As well as the evolution of the field.
DS: Well, yes. As I ment= ioned, the field was evolving rapidly at the time. To be a part of the Nati= onal Bladder Cancer Study, such a cutting-edge study, was really a tremendo= us opportunity. And I was fortunate to be able to analyze data and write pa= pers from that study. The study design=E2=80=94this is pretty esoteric prob= ably for you=E2=80=94but the study design, the population-based case- contr= ol study design, was underused until then. It actually evolved during that = timeframe that you=E2=80=99re asking about. It came into its own in the 197= 0s. And then in later years, it kind of dropped back, where a lot of focus = shifted to the cohort study design. These are two basic study designs in ep= idemiology. So, I saw an evolution from=E2=80=94it=E2=80=99s kind of the ri= se and fall of the case-control study, so to speak, which is interesting to= me as an epidemiologist. Cohort and case-control studies both have their s= trengths and weaknesses. And they both are very important, and it=E2=80=99s= not either/or. So that was big, in my mind, significant.
HWT: And then I also wanted to ask you what it me= ant to you more personally. Maybe define for a layman=E2=80=99s audience th= e difference between, obviously there are differences, a biostatistician an= d an epidemiologist first. And then what that meant to you with your own ev= olution.
DS: Well, a biostatistic= ian analyzes the data that an epidemiologist collects. So, the statistician= plays a very important role. And I actually liked the analytic part. That= =E2=80=99s why I started off in biostatistics. But when you look at researc= h questions as a whole, there=E2=80=99s much more to it. It=E2=80=99s comin= g up with the important hypotheses that need to be pursued to determine wha= t studies need to be done, to learn about, have the judgment to choose what= to study and when to study it. An epidemiologist does it all. So to me, it= was the bigger picture. It wasn=E2=80=99t just the analysis. And that=E2= =80=99s why I transitioned from a biostatistician to an epidemiologist.
HWT: And then, can you take me through an average= day if there was such a thing? First in the 1970s, and then starting after= 1983, in the 1980s?
DS: That=E2=80=99s a rea= l tough one because looking back, the big thing, which I=E2=80=99ve mention= ed already, is technology and what it took to turn the data that we were co= llecting into an analyzable form. We spent so much time at the front end of= preparing the data for analysis. Whereas today, we do interviews directly = on the computer. We=E2=80=99re operating in a different world. An average d= ay back in the =E2=80=9870s, you spent a lot of time on kind of drudge work= , so to speak, that we don=E2=80=99t have today.
HWT: And, you know, I want to just ask you, I=E2= =80=99m pushing it a little bit because it=E2=80=99s super interesting to t= hink about how people went to work at a certain time and place. So give us = an example of a day when you=E2=80=99re still using punch cards. How did yo= u go about your day, in other words?
DS: I spent a lot of my = day as a biostatistician in the early 1970s making up tables by hand. We wo= uld have pads of tabular paper. And I would work in pencil and extract the = information and make the tables up by hand. I was counting and putting the = numbers in the cells. Today the computer does all of that. So when I say dr= udge work, I mean the work was tedious. You have to be really careful. You = have to double and triple check everything. But it is drudge work. The comp= uters do it for us now. That is by far the biggest difference.
HWT: So are there other technologies that have in= fluenced the field over the years? And if so, what are those?
DS: Well, there=E2=80=99= s so much in the field of genetics research. But I=E2=80=99m primarily a cl= assical epidemiologist. I conduct studies of environmental factors and how = they interact with genes. It=E2=80=99s a big part of our work now. Studies = back in the =E2=80=9870s and the =E2=80=9880s didn=E2=80=99t include biolog= ic components. We didn=E2=80=99t collect biologic samples. Now when we cond= uct studies, we collect blood or buccal cells. We do all kinds of things th= at we didn=E2=80=99t do back then. We didn=E2=80=99t have the technology. A= nd the technology started by the mid =E2=80=9880s. Things were changing. Bu= t it takes a while before it really gets a foothold.
HWT: Is there anything you want to add about your= work after 1983 in a general sense? Your evolution, in other words, going = forward?
DS: Well, I guess my res= earch has evolved from just exposure-oriented work to exposure/gene interac= tion work. That has definitely become a big part of what we do today. The o= ther part of my work that has evolved is that my research on diesel exhaust= led me to become more interested in air pollution and cancer (lung cancer = and other cancers). And I=E2=80=99m currently engaged in the study of ultra= fine particles and lung cancer in L.A. [Los Angeles], where you are. (l= aughs) I=E2=80=99ve gotten more engaged in the environmental epidemiol= ogy. Whereas in the early years, not as much. Particularly air pollution. B= ut also, some of my more recent work is on bladder cancer risk and disinfec= tion byproducts and nitrates in drinking water. My work has evolved in that= direction.
HWT: Is the environmental work a growing area?
DS: It=E2=80=99s a growi= ng area in our branch. I=E2=80=99ve been branch chief for, let=E2=80=99s se= e, it=E2=80=99s about fourteen years. When I became branch chief, occupatio= nal cancer research dominated the branch=E2=80=99s research portfolio. And = today, environment and occupation are just about equal. So that really has = changed. There are a number of factors that actually contribute to the chan= ge in that it=E2=80=99s difficult to conduct occupational cancer studies in= the United States. Much of my branch=E2=80=99s occupational cancer researc= h is being conducted in Asia in recent years. When we collaborate with NIOS= H, they have the right of access to facilities in the United States. Nation= al Cancer Institute does not have the right of access. So the Diesel Study,= for example, was a collaborative study with NIOSH, and NIOSH had the right= of access. Getting access in the United States to conduct occupational can= cer studies has become very difficult. So, it is a challenge. We still do i= t. The environmental studies, although they are challenging in different wa= ys, they=E2=80=99re also appealing because they=E2=80=99re easier to conduc= t. There=E2=80=99s no problem in doing air pollution studies or studying wa= ter contaminants and cancer. The data are there. They=E2=80=99re available.= EPA has a wealth of data. So we have the resources to do these studies.
HWT: You mentioned that it was difficult to condu= ct studies in the United States. What are the reasons for that?
DS: Mm hmm. Well, becaus=
e say there=E2=80=99s an occupational exposure that we think is suggestive,=
that might cause cancer. And we go to the companies who make it. And the c=
ompanies don=E2=80=99t say, =E2=80=9CCome on in, (laughs) we=E2=80=
=99ll give you our records and we=E2=80=99ll let you do what you want.=E2=
=80=9D They don=E2=80=99t cooperate, generally. I=E2=80=99m not saying ever=
y last company is like that. But they know that it sets up a liability for =
them. And that makes them reluctant. You know, once a causal association wa=
s established between asbestos and mesothelioma, and Manville went out of b=
usiness, things changed. It had a great impact on industry=E2=80=99s attitu=
de towards research because they saw what their liabilities were. It=E2=80=
=99s significant.
HWT: What makes it easier when, you know, if you = focus on a place like China? For me, that=E2=80=99s a little surprising as = well, that it would be actually easier access. Is that correct?
DS: Yes. We=E2=80=99ve d= one some really important work in China. I don=E2=80=99t know the future, w= hat that will hold. But I have to say that when we look at our achievements= and what we=E2=80=99ve learned, some extremely important work has come out= of China. For example, we=E2=80=99ve conducted studies in Xuanwei. This is= not my personal research. But Qing Lan and Nat Rothman have conducted stud= ies in Xuanwei where the women cook with smoky coal. It is a certain type o= f coal. We call it smoky coal. It=E2=80=99s particularly carcinogenic to th= e women. And they cook indoors without ventilation. And they have some of t= he highest rates of lung cancer in the world. We=E2=80=99ve done a consider= able amount of research in Xuanwei, with full cooperation. But as I say, it= =E2=80=99s not clear what the future holds. (laughs) Though we=E2= =80=99ve been successful in the past.
HWT: Are there Chinese partners you want to= mention? Official organizations?
DS: I don=E2=80=99t want= to be selective because there=E2=80=99s a long list of them. And if I pick= one or two, that would be biased. There are many groups that we=E2=80=99ve= collaborated with and continue to collaborate with. China CDC is one. But = there are others.
HWT: I=E2=80=99d like to talk a little bit about = DCEG=E2=80=99s trans-disciplinary approach. Because it seems to work across= divisions, across institutes and across, you know, obviously the broader p= opulation to study risk factors, among other things. Is there anything you = want to talk about with that question? Or is that relevant to you?
DS: The trans-disciplina= ry approach is critical to our research. It makes our work very strong. The= re=E2=80=99s expertise across the Division in all the key disciplines. And = it makes for great team science. We often collaborate across branches. And = the synergy of bringing the various disciplines together like that is often= extraordinary. It=E2=80=99s one of the greatest strengths of DCEG.
HWT: Is there an example that comes to mind?
DS: Well, there are so m= any. There is no study that we do that really isn=E2=80=99t trans-disciplin= ary, to be honest with you. I=E2=80=99d have to think hard about what we ar= en=E2=80=99t doing. It=E2=80=99s that pervasive.
HWT: And just to go back before we go forward, I = wrote a note. You had said something about gene interaction work. Do I have= that right?
DS: Yes. It=E2=80=99s en= vironment, well, it=E2=80=99s really a simple notion. And it=E2=80=99s inte= grated in the name of the division. So, it=E2=80=99s really about how a par= ticular exposure, like smoking, causes a disease like lung cancer; are ther= e people with certain genetic mutations that put them at higher risk? It=E2= =80=99s a whole field. It=E2=80=99s complex. And I=E2=80=99m not the person= who will tell you all about it. The person is [Stephen Chanock]. But= it=E2=80=99s how they interact, the genes and the environmental exposures,= that=E2=80=99s so important.
HWT: So why have you decided to spend your career= at the NIH?
DS: Besides the fact tha= t NCI has treated me extremely well over many years, which I actually shoul= d mention. I=E2=80=99ll get to that in a minute. NCI is a world-class opera= tion. In terms of the epidemiology of cancer, in my mind, there=E2=80=99s n= o better place to do it. With the best resources. And terrific scientists. = There was never any desire to leave because there was never a better place = to be. So I stayed. And they wanted me there. So, they wanted me, and I wan= ted them, and it was a win/win. I=E2=80=99ve never really thought of leavin= g=E2=80=94I=E2=80=99ve had offers to go, oftentimes to university positions= . I never seriously entertained them. I=E2=80=99ve always been happy at NCI= .
= And there is this other piece that I haven=E2=80=99t mentioned. When= I began in the 1970s and in the 1980s, we had no telework. We had no flexi= -place. There were no programs in place. I was young starting out and I wan= ted to raise a family. And I actually, although I=E2=80=99ve been at NCI fo= r nearly 50 years, believe it or not, for about 16 years I worked part-time= because there was no option to work at home part of the time. If you weren= =E2=80=99t in the office, then you weren=E2=80=99t working. And although I = had to work extra hours to keep up, because science is a rapidly changing a= rea, they did allow me to do it. It wasn=E2=80=99t easy. But Joe Fraumeni w= as a pioneer in allowing me, Sheila Zahm, and Tricia Hartge=E2=80=94the thr= ee of us worked part time to raise our children. And then I went back to fu= ll-time. Today, fortunately, women don=E2=80=99t have to make that choice. = So that was a profound difference between then and now. In other part= s of NIH, I don=E2=80=99t think it was that simple for an intramural scient= ist to work part-time. And I was able to raise my two daughters that way. A= nd then I went back full-time. The fact that they allowed it was actually g= roundbreaking.
HWT: Talk about the process of that a little bit,= in terms of gaining permission and asking. How did you go about that?
DS: The process was simp= le. You request that you want to change in your tour=E2=80=94it=E2=80=99s t= he government, so there are forms and whatever. Your supervisor, in this ca= se, because it was so unusual, it was the division director who decided, Jo= e Fraumeni, that he would permit it. But it was almost unheard of at that t= ime. It would be hard to believe now that that was unheard of. And as I say= , it makes me feel really good to know that women today are not forced to g= o part-time to raise their families, that they can telework, they can do ot= her things and make it a lot easier.
HWT: Are you talking about the 1970s? Is that rig= ht?
DS: It=E2=80=99s actuall= y the =E2=80=9880s. My children, my first daughter was born in 1986. So I= =E2=80=99m talking about the second half of the =E2=80=9880s into the early= =E2=80=9890s.
HWT: Which is, you know, kind of surprising, in a= way. I assumed it was the =E2=80=9870s because it=E2=80=99s a while ago. S= o, there has been a shift. Although things are far from perfect. But there= =E2=80=99s a real shift.
DS: Yes. Well, the intro= duction of what they call flexi-place, which I guess was the forerunner of = teleworking, that made a difference. And I=E2=80=99m not sure exactly when = that happened. I guess it happened sometime in the =E2=80=9890s, I=E2=80=99= m not sure. But certainly in the =E2=80=9880s, there was nothing like that.=
HWT: And the number of women working at the agenc= y, that=E2=80=99s changed over time. And the number of women you mentioned = in leadership roles.
DS: Leadership roles. An= d the number of professionals. The number of women epidemiologists in our d= ivision, it=E2=80=99s dramatically shifted. But [the lack] of women in lead= ership roles was particularly conspicuous, because there were no women in l= eadership roles in 1972. And I remember that. I remember because I was in t= he section called, as I mentioned, the End Results Section, doing the survi= val work. And the assistant section head was a woman. But she was an assist= ant. And she wouldn=E2=80=99t be permitted to go on work trips becaus= e her husband wouldn=E2=80=99t allow it. It was such a different world. You= can=E2=80=99t even imagine.
HWT: That does sound a little dated, I have to sa= y. (laughs) Goodness.
DS: She was older, and s= he came from a different era. But that was the era when I started working. = That was the environment.
HWT: How did that make you feel about your own po= tential for leadership and growth?
DS: Well, for my potenti= al. Now I=E2=80=99m kind of near the end of my career. (laughs)
HWT: No, but when you first started and there wer= e no women leaders.
DS: I wondered about it.= I wondered about the male dominance in the leadership. You know, I was you= ng just starting out. I had my mind set on becoming an epidemiologist. I wa= sn=E2=80=99t really obsessed about it. But it was noteworthy. It wasn=E2=80= =99t inspirational, to tell you the truth. And it wasn=E2=80=99t clear that= it was going to change. It did change over time=E2=80=94but it took a long= time to change.
HWT: So you=E2=80=99ve been in your current role = you said 14 years.
DS: Mm hmm.
HWT: So, can we talk about that, as well? If ther= e=E2=80=99s anything you want to add, I mean, it=E2=80=99s a long stretch, = but we=E2=80=99ve talked about your work in different ways over time. But b= etween the 1980s, 1983 and then the 1990s, up until the early 2000s, when y= ou became the leader. So, anything else that you want to add? And then we c= an talk about that specific role.
DS: Well, as branch chie= f, I consider it one of my primary responsibilities to guide the branch=E2= =80=99s research portfolio. What studies we should be doing that we=E2=80= =99re not doing, what areas need to be researched. I believe it=E2=80=99s r= eally key to what I do. I spend most of my time on guiding the branch rathe= r than on my own personal research, because my branch is fairly large, abou= t 35 people, with 12 principal investigators. And it=E2=80=99s a very broad= research portfolio covering both occupational and environmental exposures.= So, I also think it=E2=80=99s critical that our research is timely, that w= e can do cutting edge work. And I consider the most important things I do, = actually, are guiding the branch and mentoring. And I mentor junior scienti= sts and I mentor senior scientists. Because everybody needs mentoring. It= =E2=80=99s not just the junior people. So those two areas are what I spend = most of my time doing.
HWT: Can you talk about your=E2=80=94so you=E2=80= =99ve given me the overview=E2=80=94but a sort of a specific story over the= last fourteen years, in terms of guidance, for example. We=E2=80=99ll talk= about mentoring a little later. But in terms of guidance.
DS: Yes, I can give you = an example. So, I don=E2=80=99t know if you know what PFAS (Perfluoroalkyl = and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) is. It=E2=80=99s a class of chemicals. PFOA= [Perfluorooctanoic Acid] is one member of that class. It=E2=80=99s used in= many things from the Teflon pots from a long time ago to the nonstick pots= that were prevalent, well, they=E2=80=99re still prevalent today, but they= =E2=80=99re not made with PFOA anymore. And it=E2=80=99s used in even thing= s including fast food packaging, such as microwavable pizzas. It=E2=80=99s = really everywhere. And the prevalence in the U.S. population of elevated PF= OA, detectable PFOA levels in the blood, is extremely high. So, this is a w= idespread exposure. PFOA in particular has been linked to a number of adver= se health outcomes, including cancer. And this is a really important area b= ecause the exposure is so widespread in this country. And in other countrie= s. It=E2=80=99s not just the United States.
= So, a number of years ago, perhaps around 2017-ish, we realized that= this was a really important area because it=E2=80=99s a widespread exposur= e and because it may be linked to cancer. And so, we started to launch stud= ies of PFOA and cancer. Right now, we have about a dozen studies ongoing. I= was the motivating force to ensure that we could address the cancer issue.= There were other health outcomes being addressed in a variety of places. B= ut it=E2=80=99s become one of the top priorities of federal agencies to eva= luate PFAS and adverse health outcomes.
= And so, guiding that whole process, launching studies to address to = address the concern, is what I find most gratifying. And I chair the NCI ta= sk force on PFAS. This is an example of how we quickly saw that there was a= need and were able to step in and get studies initiated that will be very = informative in terms of various cancers and PFOA and other PFAS, critical w= ork in that area.
HWT: Thank you for that example. Again, I realize= you=E2=80=99ve been talking about this all along the way. But can you talk= about the impact of your work?
DS: Well, as I told you = before, the Diesel Study was critical to IARC, the International Agency for= Research on Cancer, in classifying diesel exhaust a human carcinogen. That= was one of my most important accomplishments in terms of public health imp= act. In northern New England a number of states (Maine, New Hampshire, Verm= ont), because of the findings from the New England Bladder Cancer Study, la= unched campaigns to encourage people to go get their well water tested. Wel= l water is not regulated like public supply water. The results of our study= were appearing on billboards. They were on television. And they made natio= nal news as well. So, raising the level of awareness in the New England pop= ulation to this danger was another example of the public health impact of m= y research.
= I=E2=80=99m hopeful that the PFOA work, and the other PFAS work, too= , will have a tremendous impact. The work we do leads to regulation. I know= that, for example, California EPA is putting in place goals for the levels= of PFOA in the water supply. And the driving force behind that is the work= we did with kidney cancer and PFOA. So, seeing it translate into regulatio= n where people are protected, that=E2=80=99s the public health impact.
HWT: Wonderful. So, in a way I=E2=80=99ve asked w= hat you are most proud of. I don=E2=80=99t know if there=E2=80=99s anything= else you want to add. Because there=E2=80=99s so many things. There=E2=80= =99s the work itself. We=E2=80=99ll talk about mentoring. Is there anything= you wanted to add?
DS: As I=E2=80=99ve alre= ady told you, I=E2=80=99m very proud of the Diesel Study and the accomplish= ment of prevailing despite 20 years of obstacles provided by the motor vehi= cle manufacturers of the world. I consider that a tremendous accomplishment= . And the New England Bladder Cancer Study as well, with the arsenic in the= well water.
HWT: And then I always like to ask the other side= , too, in terms of disappointments or setbacks. Is there something that sta= nds out? And was it a learning experience for you?
DS: My disappointments w= ere when I was doing the part-time stint for 16 years, my career slowed dow= n. And it was self-imposed. But nonetheless, I kind of stayed in place. It = didn=E2=80=99t feel like my career was progressing. But I knew that one day= I would go back, and I would make up for lost time, so I was lucky that I = could make up for lost time. Not everyone can. But I guess the lesson to be= learned when you feel like that is to just keep going. And if you want som= ething, you keep working at it until you get what you want.
HWT: So, you=E2=80=99ve received a long list of a= wards, and we=E2=80=99re not going to list them all here. But starting in 1= 966, you won a New York State Regents Scholarship. And as recently as 2020,= you received both the DCEG Tech Transfer Award and the EPICOH Lifetime Ach= ievement Award. So what awards=E2=80=94and you know, I know it might be dif= ficult to pinpoint=E2=80=94but I=E2=80=99m wondering what awards or profess= ional acknowledgements you=E2=80=99ve received have been meaningful to you,= or the most meaningful to you, and why.
DS: Well, several of the= m have been very meaningful to me. I received the NIH Director=E2=80=99s Aw= ard after the Diesel Study came out. So that was around 2013. And we were a= ll in the auditorium at NIH for the awards ceremony. And every other group,= everyone else that got the award [received] a group award, for team scienc= e. I was the only person up there that got an individual award. That really= was meaningful. Harold Varmus and Francis Collins gave it to me. So that w= as a touching moment. And they told me I really deserved it. Whispered it i= n my ear.
HWT: Lovely.
DS: The Harvard Alumni A= ward was also very meaningful. To go back to Harvard and to receive the rec= ognition was very special. There are many stellar alumni from Harvard, as y= ou know. So it was touching to be singled out in that way.
HWT: What does it mean to you to be an elected me= mber of the American Epidemiological Society, and a fellow of the American = College of Epidemiology?
DS: Well, so the America= n Epidemiologic Society is particularly meaningful, because it=E2=80=99s an= elite group of American epidemiologists. That is what it is. You have to b= e sponsored by others to be accepted. You don=E2=80=99t join it. They invit= e you. I=E2=80=99ve been in that society for quite a few years. And it=E2= =80=99s an honor to be a part of that society. Many epidemiologists in that= society are in the infectious disease world. There aren=E2=80=99t that man= y cancer epidemiologists, there are some. But people like [Anthony] Tony Fa= uci [Director NIH-NIAID], they=E2=80=99re all in that society. So, it=E2=80= =99s an honor to be a part of it.
HWT: And then I wanted to ask you, you know, when= you first started=E2=80=94sort of going back and looking at your whole car= eer=E2=80=94what your work has been built upon, specific to both biostatist= ics and epidemiology. You talked about the technology in the early days, fo= r example. But what about the work itself? We talked about 1971, the Cancer= Act passed, and there was money. But do you have a notion of what you sort= of, you know, people are always building on work that=E2=80=99s happened, = and then upon that and upon that. Are there people who you think about, his= torical figures? Or what was your work built upon, in other words?
DS: Well, in epidemiolog= y, oftentimes each finding leads to the next study. So, you build upon your= own research, as I said, for example, on bladder cancer, starting with the= National Bladder Cancer Study. Then I conducted the Spanish Bladder Cancer= Study. Then I did the New England Bladder Cancer Study. They were all desi= gned to learn more about what causes bladder cancer. And findings in one st= udy need to be replicated in a different study population. So, you do studi= es in different places and see if you replicate your own findings. So it=E2= =80=99s really part of the process. That=E2=80=99s how epidemiologists do r= esearch. In the same way, the diesel work led to my interest in air polluti= on and conducting the study of ultrafine particles in southern California a= nd lung cancer.
HWT: Building on that a little bit, what were the= other bladder cancer studies, for example, that came before yours? Were th= ere any that were of interest to you that influenced your work, in other wo= rds?
DS: I=E2=80=99ve been do= ing it for so many decades that you=E2=80=99re asking me to reach back into= ancient history. Sure. There was work done initially in bladder cancer by = an epidemiologist who was at Harvard, was one of my professors at the time,= Phil Cole. And Bob Hoover was his student. Bob Hoover was my mentor. Phil = Cole had come up with the notion that we should not be studying what occupa= tion people work in and its relation to cancer, but rather the specific exp= osures that workers had and evaluate the cancer risks of those exposures. H= e introduced this idea of exposure orientation. I believe I=E2=80=99m credi= ting him accurately. It was his idea. And Bob Hoover actually collaborated = with Bob on this initial work. It was not his dissertation. I became a doct= oral student while Bob Hoover was finishing up his dissertation. So yes, th= at work had a profound influence. Phil Cole=E2=80=99s idea of focusing on t= he exposure. That=E2=80=99s what=E2=80=99s causing the cancer, not a person= =E2=80=99s job title. For example, it=E2=80=99s not that a person is a truc= k driver. But what is it? Is it that he=E2=80=99s being exposed to diesel e= xhaust? Is it something else? That idea had a profound influence on my late= r research.
HWT: Thank you for that. Anything at all that you= want to add? I have some questions about other areas of your career in ter= ms of teaching. I have a couple of questions, and some other questions abou= t mentoring. But do you have anything to add in terms of your career over t= ime or any specific moment? Any research study? We=E2=80=99ve talked about = several. Anything at all.
DS: Well, when I was tal= king about the awards, I didn=E2=80=99t mention how important receiving the= EPICOH [Scientific Committee on Epidemiology in Occupational Health] Lifet= ime Achievement Award was. That was also a great honor. And I certainly did= n=E2=80=99t mean to skip over it.
HWT: Yeah, that often happens. Understandable. So= , you were an adjunct faculty member at Georgetown Medical School for, my u= nderstanding is about 16 years in the Department of Community and Family Me= dicine. Can you talk about your experience as a professor, why you became o= ne, what teaching means to you?
DS: Well, I was an adjun= ct professor. I would give lectures on methodology, actually on control sel= ection. So early on in my career, one of the other areas that I worked on w= as selecting controls, how to select controls for case-control studies. And= I would give guest lectures at Georgetown for a number of years in that ar= ea. I enjoyed teaching. Mentoring is teaching, too. So, I feel like that ar= ea is addressed in my mentoring at NIH. I find it very rewarding, tea= ching. I didn=E2=80=99t continue. I mean, I haven=E2=80=99t really done any= thing formally like that. I do give guest lectures at times at various plac= es like Yale and such. I get invitations to do that. I like working with st= udents. It=E2=80=99s very satisfying.
HWT: Can you give me an example as to why? What i= s it that is satisfying about working with students? And does anybody stand= out to you?
DS: Oh, gosh, (laugh= s) I=E2=80=99m not going to name names. You can=E2=80=99t get me to do= that. Well, it=E2=80=99s really teaching. It=E2=80=99s being the person wh= o communicates these complex ideas to the student for the first time, proba= bly. They=E2=80=99re like sponges. And they=E2=80=99re sopping it all up an= d they=E2=80=99re enthusiastic. That=E2=80=99s a very gratifying feeling to= be able to give them that knowledge. It=E2=80=99s profound.
HWT: I think it=E2=80=99s important, so=E2=80=94<= /p>
DS: It=E2=80=99s very im= portant.
HWT: Yes. So, I have some Covid questions for you= . And you=E2=80=99ll tell me to what extent these are relevant to your expe= rience. But I wanted to ask you what the response to Covid-19 has been at t= he NCI.
DS: Ah. Well, it generat= ed a great deal of research at NCI that our branch has not really been enga= ged in. Most of what we do is not applicable to Covid. However, the impact = of the pandemic on our research program has been profound. Just like it=E2= =80=99s been throughout science and throughout other areas. There was a lon= g transition to teleworking, to 100 percent teleworking. Plus, the stresses= experienced by many people and their families is significant. And being ab= le to keep things going was a challenge. Things slowed down dramatically in= a way that I had never seen. And it=E2=80=99s only recently that it=E2=80= =99s picked up. Maybe in the last year, maybe six months. It=E2=80=99s hard= to say. You know, we finally got it. How to telework effectively. And ever= yone adapted to it. And now that we=E2=80=99ve gone back to the office, we= =E2=80=99ve gone back just last week in a hybrid schedule, it=E2=80=99s a w= hole new transition. Once we got it going with telework, now we=E2=80=99ve = got to adjust to a hybrid schedule. Each time, it=E2=80=99s a big transitio= n for people. And it impacts the research, and the pace of the research is = really what it impacts.
In our studies in China,= we haven=E2=80=99t been able to go there physically for over two years. An= d it=E2=80=99s really important when you=E2=80=99re conducting studies to b= e able to monitor them. Now fortunately with the ability to have virtual me= etings, we keep things going. But it=E2=80=99s not the same. So, it=E2=80= =99s had a big impact on, call it a big slowdown.
HWT: And I know it sounds obvious, but I=E2=80=99= d like you to explain why it has affected the pace so much. Why the slowdow= n?
DS: Well, there=E2=80=99= s an adjustment process. People were just so distracted with Covid. In thei= r families, how their home lives were affected. Their kids were at home. A = lot of people have children. They needed attention. They needed help with t= he computer, to do their online classes. All of that is a distraction. Peop= le would work at nights and on weekends to make up for it. But it=E2=80=99s= not the same.
= Now as time went on and kids went back to the classroom, which I thi= nk helped a lot, people have more free time during the day, when they weren= =E2=80=99t exhausted, to do their teleworking. And I think things really ha= ve improved. But it slowed things down. There=E2=80=99s no question about i= t.
HWT: Can you take a moment to describe the first = month or two during shutdown? It was about this time two years ago was Marc= h. Now we=E2=80=99re only in April. What was that first sort of month to tw= o months like?
DS: You know, I have to = say, I=E2=80=99m going to pass on this. Because I don't remember it that di= stinctly. I just remember that everyone was very concerned about Covid. And= preoccupied. And there was a lot of that and it went on for a long time. W= e were fortunate in that we got online easily, and we were doing virtual me= etings, and all of that happened pretty fast. It was almost a seamless tran= sition in terms of technology. The NCI computer support was excellent. So, = we had the ability to work, telework, instantaneously. But people=E2=80=99s= minds and their fears were somewhere else, it was a huge distraction. That= =E2=80=99s the word that comes to mind. A huge distraction.
HWT: Of course, in those early months, we didn=E2= =80=99t know whether or not it was transmitted by touching a doorknob, or w= as more airborne, or both. And so, things really halted in that sense, as w= ell. I remember. (laughs)
DS: Yeah, people were re= ally afraid. Even outside, I remember we didn=E2=80=99t know how close you = could be to someone, breathing the aerosol. It was a worrisome time.
HWT: Is there anything else about Covid that you = want to add? In terms of, we talked about the pace or not being able to go = to China. And the work itself in terms of the pace, of course, and also the= fact of the distraction that is Covid. Anything else in terms of the proce= ss, the research process, or anything else you want to add?
DS: Well, when you=E2=80= =99re dealing with complex issues on the study, it=E2=80=99s hard to work t= hrough them on the screen. It=E2=80=99s easier when you=E2=80=99re sitting = in a room across from each other. The interactions, the flow, it just it wo= rks better. There=E2=80=99s a synergy that is difficult to achieve on the s= creen. It=E2=80=99s achievable. But it=E2=80=99s harder. So challenging asp= ects of our work were made more challenging by the virtual environment.
HWT: And then finally with Covid, and I=E2=80=99m= not sure this is exactly the right question for you, but you=E2=80=99ll te= ll me. Obviously Covid has had a disproportionate impact on already margina= lized communities. African American communities, poor communities everywher= e. Could you take a moment to talk about health equity?
DS: We=E2=80=99re just b= eginning to really study that in our branch. We are launching some projects= that are aimed to learn more of that health disparities for cancer. But we= don=E2=80=99t have any findings. We=E2=80=99re just initiating, and the wo= rk is ongoing. So, I=E2=80=99m going to have to hold off talking specifics.= But we=E2=80=99re concerned about this whole area. And it has been an unde= rstudied area. And we hope to make great strides in that area in the next f= ew years.
HWT: People are talking more and more about, obvi= ously, everything to do with the environment and environmental justice. And= I imagine that that plays into this quite a lot.
DS: Yes. It is certainly= true that there are all kinds of disparities in the exposures of potential= carcinogens. Racial disparities. And we=E2=80=99re taking a systematic app= roach to it. And we think this research is very important.
HWT: So, I just have a few questions about mentor= ing and sort of medicine and society. And of course, public health in gener= al is concerned with protecting the health of entire populations. I always = like to ask this question because I know it=E2=80=99s not specific to the e= ra that we=E2=80=99re living in, but we do seem to be living in a very anti= -science sort of era. You=E2=80=99ve got anti-vaxxers and you have cl= imate change deniers and people refusing to wear masks. So, I=E2=80=99m jus= t wondering what should your role really be in society? What should that co= mmunication look like? You talked about the communication in New England an= d getting the word out and affecting that population. At the same time, a l= ot of science communication seems to be left up to broadcast reporters who = don=E2=80=99t have any special expertise. So, what is your role? What shoul= d it be? How do you communicate with the public?
DS: Well, our role is ve= ry important and should be separate from politics. I really believe in the = separation of science and politics. Scientists need to do their science in = the best possible way. As far as epidemiologic findings, the role of = the media is extremely important because they=E2=80=99re the ones who repor= t the findings to the public. So, I think it=E2=80=99s the responsibility o= f each scientist to be able to communicate to reporters in a way that they = can understand the findings so that they can then accurately report them to= the public. That=E2=80=99s critical. And oftentimes for findings from stud= ies that we put out, not just press releases, we develop talking points of = critical language to use to explain our findings to the reporters, because = it=E2=80=99s so important. And my experience has been very positive. They w= ant to get it right, the reporters. They don=E2=80=99t want to get it wrong= . And lots of times they=E2=80=99ll even let you see the draft of the repor= t. Of course, you can=E2=80=99t do that with taping on television. But none= theless, it=E2=80=99s part of our responsibility to be able to communicate = our findings to the public through the media. So, it=E2=80=99s very importa= nt.
HWT: You=E2=80=99ve talked about mentoring. You m= entioned Bob Hoover. And early on you mentioned somebody named Abe Lilienfe= ld.
DS: Abe Lilienfeld.
HWT: So, I wanted to ask you first about your own= mentor. You=E2=80=99ve mentioned some. If you want to add anything about e= ither Bob Hoover or Abe Lilienfeld and how you felt mentored. But I also wa= nt to ask you about your role as a mentor and your personal style. Obviousl= y, you=E2=80=99ve mentored a long list of people over the years.
DS: Well, in terms of my= mentors, as I mentioned, Bob Hoover was clearly my primary mentor over the= many years at NCI. But there have been others. I didn=E2=80=99t mention Al= an Morrison. He was my mentor. Abe Lilienfeld didn=E2=80=99t mentor me. He = gave me advice on what job to take, which led to my career at NCI. Not quit= e the same. And there have been many other people over the years. But Bob H= oover certainly stands out. Joe Fraumeni as well.
&nbs= p;
= And in terms of my style of mentoring, it=E2=80=99s actually a lot d= ifferent from Bob Hoover=E2=80=99s. Bob=E2=80=99s style was always to be pr= etty hands off. And people learned from their mistakes. I=E2=80=99m more di= rective than that. But it depends on who the mentee is. Some people need mo= re direction than others. It is not one size fits all. When they are going = in the wrong direction, I like to pull them back. And I will say what I thi= nk. Because I think they need to hear it. So, I know Bob wouldn=E2=80=99t h= ave done that. (laughs) He=E2=80=99d let you go astray. And learn = it the hard way. I=E2=80=99m not quite that tough.
HWT: More generally, can you talk about the role = mentors play in science?
DS: Oh, God. It=E2=80=99= s critical. I learned so much by being mentored. When you get your degree, = you come to the job with a certain skillset. But working on projects, you l= earn so much that the original skillset is a fraction, a small fraction, of= what you know by the end of your career. And different studies, different = issues, they all contribute to your knowledge. You pick up so much from dif= ferent people and different settings. It=E2=80=99s cumulative. I look back = now at how much I knew then and how much I today. It=E2=80=99s a function o= f great mentoring. And work. And experience. Experience also plays a big ro= le.
HWT: What advice would you give to encourage youn= g scientists to continue pursuing their goals or to seek out necessary reso= urces, even in spite of any setbacks or barriers that they might face?
DS: Well, I=E2=80=99ve a= lways believed that if you have certain goals, that you shouldn=E2=80=99t l= et setbacks discourage you. And most of the time, you should work hard and = keep working for what you want and persevere. Perseverance has worked well = for me. I know that in the Diesel Study, for example, in the mid-1990s, the= re was no one at NCI who believed that the study would ever have reached co= mpletion because the resistance by industry groups. But I believed we could= prevail. And I just stuck to it. And it took a long time. And maybe if I h= ad done other studies in that space of time and I had abandoned it, I might= have had more papers on my CV. But to be perfectly frank, the importance o= f the papers from the Diesel Study outweighs what I would have done in that= space. So, I really believe that you need to pursue what your goals are an= d not get offtrack with setbacks. Unless, of course, they become overwhelmi= ng. But luckily, I was never faced with that.
HWT: And then in terms of the DCEG more generally= , I read that there=E2=80=99s a strategic plan from 2020 to 2025, and that = among the major goals include developing and implementing strategies for wo= rkforce equity. Of course, we=E2=80=99ve talked about women and the changes= over time. But women and people of color are typically underrepresented in= science in general. Are you involved in that effort? Can you comment on th= at?
DS: Well, I=E2=80=99m on= a search committee for the division. It=E2=80=99s actually an experiment t= o bring on tenured scientists. Which is unusual. We usually bring on people= before they reach tenure. And they get tenure at NIH based on their work a= t NIH. But we=E2=80=99re trying to bring in one or two tenured scientists e= ach year whose research is really focused on studying health disparities in= cancer. And I=E2=80=99m part of that search committee. So, I=E2=80=99m dir= ectly involved. We=E2=80=99ve recently hired someone. And this is kind of a= n experiment that=E2=80=99s going on at a number of institutes. To see if t= his will help address the inequities in the workforce. It=E2=80=99s difficu= lt to find people, but there are good people out there. It=E2=80=99s just, = it=E2=80=99s hard to do. Not impossible.
HWT: So, is there anything we haven=E2=80=99t cov= ered that you would like to add? Anything that I haven=E2=80=99t asked that= you feel is important in any area?
DS: No, I think we=E2=80= =99ve covered quite a bit.
HWT: Hopefully not too much for you.
DS: No, no, it=E2=80=99s= fine.
HWT: Okay. Good. And you=E2=80=99re comfortable w= ith everything, and the conversation that we had, hopefully.
DS: Yes.
HWT: Okay. Good. I appreciate your time. Thank yo= u. Have a great day.
DS: You, too. Thank you.=
HWT: Okay. Bye.
[End Interview.]
[1]= a> Johns Manville is an American company based in Denver, Colorad= o, that manufactures insulation, roofing materials, and engineere= d products. For much of the 20th century, the then-titled Johns-Manville Co= rporation was the global leader in the manufacture of asbestos-containing p= roducts, including asbestos pipe insulation, asbestos shingles, asbestos ro= ofing materials and asbestos cement pipe. See Justia US Law, https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/ap= pellate-courts/F3/7/32/479329/