Anna Miller is the Managing Editor for JYI and also has served as an Associate Editor in the Biological Sciences. She recently graduated from Rice University.

Dr. Enriqueta Bond is the current president of the Burroughs-Wellcome Fund - "an independent private foundation whose mission is to advance the medical sciences by supporting research and other scientific and educational activities". Dr. Bond received her undergraduate degree in zoology and physiology from Wellesley College, her master's degree in biology and genetics from the University of Virginia, and her Ph.D. in molecular biology and biochemical genetics from Georgetown University. Dr. Bond served as the Executive Officer for the Institute of Medicine from 1989 to 1994 before serving as president of the Burroughs-Wellcome Fund (July 1994-present). In addition to her current position, she has also served on the Board of Health Sciences Policy at the Institute of Medicine, the Board of the Society for the Advancement of Research on Women's Health, and the Board of the North Carolina Biotechnology Center, and as the Vice Chair of the Board of Scientific Counselors for the National Center for Infectious Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the chair of the Board of Regents of the National Library of Medicine.

AM: Can you tell us a little about your background? What is your particular field of interest in science? Where did you do your undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral work?

EB: I got my Ph.D. in molecular biology from Georgetown University, and I did my undergraduate work at Wellesley College. I had a post-doc at the N.I.H. (National Institutes of Health), but could not complete it because I had to move with my husband to Pittsburgh. I worked for a short time at the University of Pittsburgh with an N.R.S.A. [National Research Service Award] grant, then at Chatham College.

AM: How did you first become interested in science? Were there any specific people or events that prompted you to become a scientist?

EB: I first became interested in science in high school. I went to a small, all-girls school, and there was woman who taught all of the science classes. She got me excited in science because of her manner of teaching and how she got us involved with hands-on projects. When I then went on to Wellesley, there was a very good science department there, which just furthered my interest.

AM: What major obstacles did you encounter on the way to your current position?

EB: Probably the biggest obstacle has been trying to combine my life with my husband and his life. Especially when we first started out, he was on a fast track career, which involved moving between different cities very often. Because of this, I had to move my lab a lot, but I was fortunate because it eventually led me to my current career in science policy.

AM: Were there any major turning points in your career?

EB: When I moved from teaching at the medical school in Springfield, Illinois to Washington, D.C., I had a few options open to me. I could either work for the government, at the N.I.H., or I could go back to teaching at the university level. My other option, which I chose, was work in science policy at the National Academy of Sciences, at the Institute of Medicine. From this position, I went through many jobs with gradually increasing realms of responsibility, and eventually became the Executive Officer in 1989. One major thing that influenced me in my work at the National Institute of Science was that everything I did was on a very broad perspective, which helped me learn about many different aspects of science.

AM: How do you see your field changing in the coming years?

EB: I think the field of science policy will continue to be very important. In my line of work, decisions are made at many different levels that affect all of science and health policy. It will be important for us not only to continue to encourage science on the whole but to ensure appropriate facilities and infrastructures are in place for science to continue to grow. Also, it is important for us to inform the public and keep them interested in science. We must increase public understanding of science and give adequate attention to ensuring the public is aware of scientific ethics and reasoning.

AM: What is the role of scientific communication in your field?

EB: Communication is very important in science policy because to get good decisions made, it is critical for people to know about and fully understand the issues at stake. This can only be accomplished by effective communication. It is important for us to communicate our ideas to the public so that they will remain interested in science, and to the policy community so that we, as a whole, know what is going on in science. We must work to get as scientific-literate a public as possible. We need well-trained people in science, and knowledgeable people to support science.

AM: What do you do on a daily basis?

EB: As you know, I am president of the Burroughs-Wellcome Fund. I consider myself to have two main jobs. On the "inside", I am a member of the staff, a board member, and I help direct the Fund's broader vision. "Outside" the company, I represent the Burroughs-Wellcome Fund in many different venues. These include acting as a representative to the policy-making community, including community boards, and making sure issues that we care about have a place on the table.

AM: Can you give us some career advice for undergraduates wanting to do something similar to your line of work?

EB: For going into science policy, I believe it is important to have a good, strong stint actually doing science first. If you gain credibility as a successful scientist first, you will have more respect when you enter the policy community. There are other ways to get involved in science policy, such as from a writing perspective, but I believe that people with a strong science background have the most success. A couple of ideas for younger people getting started are with both the A.A.A.S. (American Association for the Advancement of Science) and the N.A.S. (National Academy of Sciences). The A.A.A.S. offers many fellowships for young scientists who may want to just try out policy for a year or two to see if it's right for them. The N.A.S., in either the Academy of Engineering or Institute of Medicine, is also more short-term than a full career - people usually end up staying there for a few years to do only policy-relevant work for a while, then [they] move on to something else.

AM: Do you have any other advice for getting young people interested in science?

EB: The Burroughs-Wellcome fund believes that hands-on experience is very important for K-12 science. We fund, through grants, both middle and high school student science classes here in North Carolina. We sponsor both summer experiences, such as doing research on the Cape Fear River, and year-long programs involving zoos, museums, and university courses. In addition, for later in high school, we have intensive programs where these students get to work directly with university professors. Overall, I think it is important to get people involved in science at as early an age as possible. In addition, though many people are currently disillusioned with the overall structure of careers in science, better career ladders are being developed, and hopefully this will keep people interested in science as a career.

AM: Thank you, Dr. Bond, for all of your time and compelling comments.