https://doi.org/10.36866/pn.91.40

Siobhan Dennis, Eli Lilly & University of Bristol, UK

What was your route into physiology?

Subsequent to being enlightened about the concept of doing a PhD, by a helpful and kind post-doc who guided my final year undergraduate research project at the University of Bath, I went to Bristol University to see what they had to offer. This is where I met my PhD supervisor, Jack Mellor, who patiently explained his proposed project to me. I was naively unaware of electrophysiology at the time, but the idea that you could poke holes in cells and record changes in electrical differences (to put it simply!) fascinated me. Aside from those who have helped me in life, if it weren’t for a few particular people, such as my secondary school science teacher, college biology teacher and my PhD supervisor, I wouldn’t be doing what I am doing today. I admit that I stumbled into electrophysiology accidently, but I’m sure I have learnt a lesson. It is just by chance that on the day of the PhD interviews I was open minded, but this enabled me to be drawn in and to explore the unknown and from that I have started a career.

What is the most memorable moment of your professional career?

Although I am early in my career, one of my most memorable moments has been presenting my work. In 2011 I submitted an abstract for poster presentation at the BNA annual meeting in Harrogate and much to my surprise I was invited to give a talk. My talk was placed in a ‘Hot Topic’ session later on in the day with other presenters on a mix of research areas utilising a range of experimental techniques. Suffice to say, I didn’t expect many people to show, but the fair-sized room was packed with people and post-presentation discussion was lively. It was one of the turning points of my career, when I began to feel like a ‘real’ scientist. People were interested in what I had to say and it helped to give me confidence to take the next step in my career.

How have you tackled the work–life balance?

Before I met my fiancé, I would happily study and stare at data into the small hours with blurry, caffeinated eyes. However, he has shown me that there is a good reason to ensure that you are tackling the work–life balance carefully. You have one life, so live it. Part of living your life is to excel at your profession and give yourself that satisfying career you want and need. The other part of living your life is to do the things you enjoy and make the most of these experiences. Being organised is everything, if you plan your day well, with the odd exception, you can often get done what you need to at work. Personally I can’t let things fester, if there’s a particular job coming up at work that you hate, jump on it and get it done before it causes stress. I do much outside of work including aikido, archery, filming and some form of exercise once a day, all of is impossible without organisation!

Do you think more can be done to support women working in science?

There is a clear trend: there are lots of female students, but very few women holding senior positions. Where all these women go, I’m not quite sure. It is inevitable that some are ‘lost’ through having a family, but it feels like there are so many female PhD students, there should be enough making it to senior positions to equal the number of senior men.

In my experience, employers don’t explicitly discriminate and there is no difference in what I have been asked to do compared with members of the opposite sex. Employers are very aware of the gender division in science, but exactly how you can combat the loss of females due to families and, perhaps, lack of confidence is hard to resolve. It appears that sex discrimination exists, not necessarily due to lack of employers’ efforts to hire women (as they have become more aware over the years), but perhaps just to the fact that men and women are different and end up with different responsibilities in life (regardless of whether this is right or wrong). Unfortunately, I think change will require more effort from both employees and employers than simply a commitment to fairness and equal opportunities.

Kim Dora, University of Oxford, UK

What was your route into physiology?

After completing a PhD in Biochemistry with Michael Clark in Australia, I was awarded a CJ Martin Fellowship enabling me to work at the University of Virginia in the USA, studying the microcirculation with one of the world leaders in this field, Brian Duling. I found immediately that I had an affinity for the particular research questions and the methods of thinking, and I have continued on the same path ever since. Being able to image changes in arteriolar diameter at the same time as either muscle or endothelial cell Ca2+ and membrane potential in situ and in vitro is very challenging, but combines many disciplines, not least physiology and pharmacology!

Without doubt, a key factor is finding an area of science you really enjoy studying. Each day the first thing that springs to mind should be how to move to the next step in understanding your data and taking it forward. To do this you must be in a supportive environment and a well-equipped laboratory. Key senior colleagues must understand your ambitions and drive, and your strengths (while tolerating your weaknesses!). I have been fortunate in my time in the UK, having the constant support of Chris Garland, whose group I joined in Bristol in 1997, but also other senior members of the cardiovascular community both in the UK and overseas. Further to this, our current head of department, Antony Galione, is completely supportive. Pharmacology in Oxford is a relatively small department, which is unusual these days. However, the positive and friendly environment this provides is a great strength, particularly in terms of research interaction. As a centre of excellence recently ranked number two in the QS world ranking of pharmacology departments, it allows people to maintain their identity, yet feel their research and teaching contribution are really appreciated. Finally, and importantly, the team within the laboratory must be harmonious and constructive. Ideas from all angles should be listened to and considered. We must each want to identify key research questions and be able to work together in attempting to answer them.

What is the most memorable moment of your professional career?

High on that list are the award of a readership while at the University of Bath and then news of my successful applications to the British Heart Foundation for a Senior Basic Science Research Fellowship (twice now). The latter supported my move and sustains my research group in Oxford. These Fellowships have provided me with the opportunity to continue my studies of conducted vasodilatation, and are now supporting me in translating this research to humans.

How have you tackled the work–life balance?

There is no doubt that for academics this is difficult. Switching off is not easy, but then I enjoy life when my research is successful. Designing experiments to test your ideas and then discovering something new is incredibly rewarding, but of course sometimes things don’t go as planned and this is very frustrating! Moving to Oxford has provided the added dimension of contributing to small group teaching in college (I am a Fellow of Worcester College, and also Tutor for Women there). I have rediscovered and learnt a lot of physiology and pharmacology by interacting with students. These interactions have provided me with new ideas for my research, illustrating the mutual synergism that can occur between research and teaching, and which defines universities! I feel the breakdown of this crucial link in some universities is a real backward step.

Do you think more can be done to support women working in science?

The huge plummet in women staying in academic science (~50% at PhD/postdoc level) needs to be tackled. Clearly women are capable of performing at the highest level in all aspects of an academic career. Difficulties arise from career breaks, which I think is being tackled to some extent with initiatives from various funding bodies, but the financial and time burden of childcare is a major hurdle. One possible solution may stem from economically viable, flexible child support provision at work. Although I have not had to deal with this aspect myself, I truly think addressing this issue would help women to develop their career in research.

What are the challenges of doing physiology in different countries?

My experiences of working in the USA are very positive. This relates not only to the attitude of scientists, but also the general public. The public are really interested, supportive and proud of their universities. Therefore I found it a very productive environment, which provided excellent job satisfaction. Many of my collaborators today link back to my time in Virginia, mainly through the Microcirculatory Society, but also the American Physiological Society. Indeed, Brian Duling was president of the APS while I was in his laboratory. Their societies have excellent infrastructure and support for junior investigators, which again I think essential to encourage PhD students to become postdocs and ultimately run their own research groups.

Video interviews with our female Consulting Editors

As part of a series from The Journal of Physiology, Carol Robinson, Kay Davies and Frances Ashcroft share their enthusiasm for physiology and give us an insight into their research. Details can be found on page 55.

Diane Lipscombe, Brown University, USA

What was your route into physiology?

I wasn’t sure what I wanted to do in school, but my family were very encouraging academically, despite none of them previously going to university. For the first few days in my first job as a lab technician at Burroughs Wellcome in Kent I just made tea, but, with encouragement from the people in the lab, I was soon running experiments. By pure chance I had ended up under the wing of the wonderful Sir James Black where I received outstanding training in organ physiology and pharmacology. It was the closest thing to what I had always thought I wanted to be: a detective! From technician, I went on to a BSc (‘82) and then PhD (‘86) in pharmacology at University College London.

My journey into the world of calcium ion channels started when I joined Richard Tsien as a postdoctoral associate at Yale University School of Medicine and subsequently at Stanford University Medical School. In 1992 I joined the Department of Neuroscience here at Brown where I work closely with undergraduate and graduate students, as well as postdoctoral trainees. My guiding influences come from the great people I have worked with; James Black, Humphrey Rang, David Colquhoun and Richard Tsien.

What is the most memorable moment of your professional career?

Starting my own laboratory and never knowing when discoveries would be made was very exciting. I remember sitting with my graduate student, Weifeng Xu, and we were both staring at a new finding – the culmination of three years’ work – when we both suddenly realised that we’d found something new and exciting. Everything came together.

Very recently my PhD advisor Humphrey Rang visited my own lab at Brown. A student in the lab was recording synaptic events from nerve muscle junction of drosophila larvae, not so very different from the kind of recordings I did as a PhD student. This was a proud moment for me and it struck me how important our early research experiences are in shaping future research directions.

How have you tackled the work–life balance?

I have a son James, 23, daughter Kathryn, 21, two older daughters by marriage, Aimee and Jackie, and two grandsons, Wheeler and Oakley. Balance, having at least one person to support you, and looking forward, not back, are key to the work–life balance. Having a family has made me a better scientist and mentor. Although at times I felt like I was failing as both a scientist and mother, it’s possible to have everything. Passion is critical and loving the challenge of experimental research, but the stability that having a family brings allowed me to reach higher and perhaps be a bit more fearless in my research. The disappointment of a rejected grant is far outweighed by the unbridled, excitable greeting from your children at the front door.

I was lucky to have happy and healthy children – and also a scientist for a husband, so priorities were always understood. Depending on who was writing an application or a paper, the other would take on the kid duties. We were lucky to have this flexibility and our success is shared, just as caring for our kids was and is a partnership.

Do you think more can be done to support women working in science?

Women have every right to have it all, be accomplished scientists and have a family, but that doesn’t mean doing it alone. Without a partner with flexibility for the unpredictable schedules that children have, it is very hard to stay competitive, to travel to key meetings, and to put in the long hours often needed to run experiments and to prepare grant applications. Caring for children is, and should be, a shared responsibility. There are many things that universities and research institutions can do to support faculty with children, including offering safe and affordable childcare and reliable emergency childcare back-up services. Faculty colleagues who are flexible and supportive makes a huge difference and many countries, including the USA, could have more reasonable maternity leave policies. Salary compensation is also critical; 95% of my salary went on childcare when I had my first child. We must recognise that if these resources and support networks are not available, there is a whole group of smart female scientists that are locked out of the profession.

I do a lot of mentoring for young scientists and I say that you have to push yourself and not look at what other people do. No-one will be in your exact situation, but you need people to encourage you and stop you from over-thinking! Some people like to plan. Women will often focus on life plans and what order they should do things. I have to honestly say that I had no plan – that can be disconcerting. But I never thought I could do it all, but I have.

What are the challenges of doing physiology in different countries?

When I moved to the USA from the UK, I felt there were many more opportunities to communicate science and get funding. Science and opportunities in the USA were bigger. I think this has changed with the ease of communication, travel and data sharing. Now I don’t notice many differences at all between the UK and the USA.

There are, however, big differences in the opportunities available for young scientists between the USA and UK compared to many other countries. In my role as an editor and involvement in science publishing, I know of many young, spectacular researchers in different countries, including Argentina, Mexico and China. These young scientists need better access to training, for example, to help them publish in English-speaking journals. We need to continue outreach through the major science societies to reach scientists in other countries, partner them in their development, and encourage them to go on to be great mentors. Engagement throughout the scientific process is critical. For example, editorial boards of scientific journals and society committees should have representation from the international community.

Maria Gomez, Lund University, Sweden

What was your route into physiology?

At high school in Uruguay, I had a very good biology teacher, Padre Falcone, who pushed us to our limits and created exciting laboratory lessons. Then, in my second year of medical school in Uruguay I remember an electrophysiology lecture – I was so fascinated at this exciting and busy late night session on patch clamping that I knew then I had to do something related to this.

I continued studying medicine in Sweden and realised I wanted to side step from medicine into scientific research. I went down to the physiology & biophysics department to knock on any door for advice and instead I bumped into Per Hellstrand on the stairs. He instantly offered to talk and directly after I started working in Per’s physiology laboratory and he became my supervisor for my PhD on smooth muscle and calcium signalling. On discussing that I liked electrophysiology, he challenged me to set up some patch clamp equipment that had just been sat in boxes!

What is the most memorable moment of your professional career?

My career is full of memorable moments – I feel privileged to really enjoy my job and get paid to learn. Particular highlights include the viva for my PhD thesis where I had Alison Gurney from Scotland acting as examiner and she whispered in my ear that she was more nervous than I was! Also the exciting time as post-doc in Mark Nelson’s laboratory in Vermont, a fantastic inspirational environment. Furthermore, it is great to climb and achieve different academic steps. I have recently become a professor and this acknowledgement provides a lot of encouragement. I also specifically remember how proud I felt when my first student got her PhD, it’s even better to see someone you have helped succeed.

How have you tackled the work–life balance?

I find it helps to be active and sporty. When I was first starting up my lab it was extremely hectic and stressful and I realised I had to take a step back and enjoy the things I used to like doing, which included being physically active, taking part in a range of things including ski racing.

It is important to accept that this profession has unlimited workloads – you will never be finished and you cannot accomplish everything on a wish list. You can always write more papers and apply for more funding, but you must decide a comfortable level and work with discipline.

I have three children: Felix, 7, Vincent, 13 and Isabella, 17. Having a family has empowered me. I had my first child while doing my PhD, then went on to my postdoc in the USA when my second child was five months old. It concerns me that there is some belief that having a family takes away time that could otherwise be dedicated to your science. In reality, it gives perspective and forces you to use your limited time in the most effective way. It is great to be a professional female role model for your children. My chemist husband takes equal responsibility for the children, and it would have been impossible without this support, and lots of planning.

Do you think more can be done to support women working in science?

There is room for improvement. Social and political structures vary greatly across different countries. In Sweden there is a great system for childcare and this certainly facilitates working and having equal opportunities.

Within academia, mentoring programmes need to be offered in a structured way, especially to young women. The critical period is after their thesis, where I have noticed the gender balance changes and we lose a lot of women. Women need to know that yes it is difficult to juggle this stage of a career with starting a family, but it is possible and there is support. If you like to work in physiology and science, go for it! Everything is possible and there are no limits.

What are the challenges of doing physiology in different countries?

Here in Sweden, you receive just payment for your work. In other countries, this isn’t always the case and it has a negative impact. This means that acknowledgement isn’t taking place and it must be addressed.

There are lots of talented people in different countries where a science career is more difficult due to lack of funding, facilities or support. I have seen many cases where people are well trained in physiology and go away and do successful post-doc work, but then find it difficult to return to their home institution. I believe the international community would benefit if there were mechanisms to facilitate reinsertion back into home institutions, especially in countries where it is more difficult to do science. An increase in mobility would prevent the talent being drained from the developing system.

Women in Science at IUPS 2013

Three one-hour lunchtime sessions at the IUPS Congress in Birmingham, 21–26 July 2013, will explore why women are consistently under-represented in senior positions in academic science across the world and will consider how to overcome these potential obstacles, as well as highlighting some success stories.

Hosted by an international organising committee, the sessions will focus on different stages of the academic career where women may encounter difficulty in progressing:

• Early-career (why mentoring and sponsorship works) with Caroline McMillen – Tuesday 23 July
• Mid-career (juggling balls – family and physiology) with Sue Wray – Wednesday 24 July
• Career success (what glass ceiling?) with Bridget Lumb – Thursday 25 July

Sue Wray, University of Liverpool, who led the organising committee, discusses the upcoming lunchtime series:

Why did you plan these events?

The idea for the sessions emerged from a symposium held in Kyoto at the last IUPS. Junko Kimura invited several of us to compare experiences of gender and careers in physiology. It was great fun, with animated discussions. I wanted to make this female focused idea a regular feature of IUPS, because it is another mechanism to bring together physiologists from across the globe in an informal manner, to gain from each other’s experiences and to have some fun networking. I think females still need some extra TLC at all stages of their career, and events that highlight and address these issues are important.

What can people expect?

In the first session, discussions will form around mentoring and introducing the idea of sponsorship to support women in the early stage of their career.

I am co-chairing the session addressing how to manage working and having family responsibility. There will be six snap-shot, informal presentations from physiologists from Nigeria, Malaysia, Brazil, Mexico, USA and Australia, followed by an audience panel discussion. We will see what factors helped and what hindered, and if there are differences across the globe. My co-chair will be Luciana Venturini from Sao Paulo, and as the next IUPS will be in Brazil, we hope that elements of the sessions will continue there.

The final session should be very exciting as we consider the topic of glass ceilings, real or imaginary. Dame Nancy Rothwell and Ole Petersen will be leading on this to make a lively session.

I’ve enjoyed helping put these sessions together and hope you will feel tempted to grab a sandwich and join us at one! You do not need to book and I need to stress that, of course, all IUPS delegates, not just women, are warmly invited to each session.

If you have any questions, please email policy@physoc.org.

Women in Physiology Booklet

2015 will mark 100 years of female membership of The Physiological Society. Moving towards this anniversary, The Society is developing a booklet – entitled Women in Physiology – celebrating some of our female Members, each working in different roles and at different stages of their life and career.

The booklet, which has been led by Sue Wray with support from The Policy Committee, will complement the sessions being hosted at IUPS, but will provide a longer-lasting legacy. The booklet will be available at the IUPS Congress and, afterwards, distributed at relevant meetings. It will, of course, also be available from The Society’s website. www.physoc.org.

Women in Physiology will illustrate the varied career paths our Members have taken and share some milestones, anecdotes and experiences along the way.

“My family mean everything to me but I think that my career has genuinely made me a better mother” -Maria Fitzgerald

“A lab with a door that can be locked from the inside is what I still hope for” -Kristine Krug

“Despite succeeding at research, I couldn’t get a lectureship (I’ll tell you my thoughts over a drink)” -Sue Wray