Focusing on the real issues

I detested chemistry when I was at school. I couldn't see the point of it, and I didn't make any connection between it and the real world. Yet, because of chemistry I am alive today. Having had Hodgkin's disease 20 years ago, I survived because of platinum chemistry, steroids and anti-emetic drugs. I was lucky, and chemistry has played a large part of my life ever since.

While I may still not fully understand every aspect of it, I know it is a vital part of the community we live in; that without the scientists and forward thinking venture capitalists, all of us would be worse off, which makes it disturbing to hear and read about the problems both chemistry and, more specifically, the pharmaceutical industry are going through at the moment.

The two sectors are, of course, irrevocably linked. Without highly qualified scientists, the development of new chemical entities, and hence new treatments, would be delayed even more than they already are.

The fact that universities in the UK are closing their chemistry departments in favour of more 'trendy' courses, such as, dare I say, media studies and journalism, is a worrying trend indeed. Where does the problem lie?

Some suggest that students are put off the 'difficult' A level science subjects in favour of 'easier' ones and that there are fewer qualified teachers to teach the benefits of chemistry. However, many of the difficulties must surely be laid at the door of the mass media. The reaction of the daily papers to chemistry-related subjects is often ill-informed and sensationalist.

Just last month the 'storm' over whether Celebrex (celecoxib) should follow Vioxx (rofecoxib) into oblivion was played out by journalists who have scant knowledge of the processes involved in getting a drug to market, and the risks involved. Many spurious arguments were used, often in conjunction with emotional writing that wins over common sense.

The sad irony was that on the same day as Pfizer was defending Celebrex, AstraZeneca was releasing disappointing data about the failure of Iressa to increase cancer patients' lives - a real set back to thousands of patients for whom this treatment could have been a final saviour.

Compared with the small probability of cardiovascular problems from taking COX-2 inhibitors, the problems of Iressa - and cancer treatments such as antisense more generally - highlighted the need for all concerned to focus on the real issues.

Reducing the time for such drugs to get to market, managing the risks involved sensibly, without emotion, and ensuring we have the scientists to develop new treatments is an aim that the pharmaceutical industry needs to get across to not only government, but to the general public as well.