Just a Job?

All the recent studies and popular press stories about emerging contaminants, like PFAS, may have you thinking not only about the extent of the problem, but also the role of analytical scientists as part of wider efforts to combat environmental threats. For example, would you put your job on the line to fight against PFAS?

The story of Kris Hansen reflects a harsh reality: how an analytical chemist working at 3M Corporation showed, using mass spec, that the company’s PFAS chemicals were in people’s bodies – before she was sidelined and her work halted.  

We may often imagine that we’d be the ones fighting against injustice in the face of corporate pressure and ensure such findings come to light. Indeed, that is what Kris did – her findings trickled through to the EPA and 3M eventually discontinued its PFAS-related chemicals. However, it isn’t always so black and white: Hansen continued to work for 3M for 19 years, even after being pushed out of the environmental lab, and didn’t ask questions about the company’s claims that PFAS, at the levels she was detecting, is harmless. Indeed, she repeated the claims. 

Hansen’s story raises questions about the moral responsibilities of analytical scientists. What more could she have done? How should one balance family and scientific/environmental responsibilities? Could the broader scientific community be doing more to help people in these kinds of situations? 

In general, do analytical scientists have a moral responsibility to protect our planet? Here, some of our 2024 Power Listers and Planet Protectors weigh in.  

“Environmental science would be dead in the water (pun intended) without analytical scientists and experts in analytical chemistry are largely driving the discovery of fundamental biogeochemical processes today,” says Michael Gonsior. 

“Not all analytical scientists have this moral obligation, but I certainly do,” says Susan Richardson. “Coming from a U.S. EPA National Lab before I joined the University of South Carolina, I had this vision instilled in me. I am not just about publishing nice papers, but I want to make a difference. That is what drives me.”

Torsten Schmidt argues that although analytical scientists do play a crucial role, the broader responsibility lies with humanity as a whole. “Other calamities have passed, but we, as the first intelligent species on the planet, have yet to demonstrate that we won't be the next planetary catastrophe,” he says. “Sometimes people who think that resources need to be spent on seemingly more pressing issues ignore that safeguarding the planet is our humanity's foundation for everything else.”

Stefan van Leeuwen concurs: “I believe all citizens of planet earth have the responsibility to protect our planet,” he says. “Analytical scientists have the power to provide meaningful data so as to visualize where problems may rise, the effectiveness of mitigation and risk management measures. My contribution is to investigate the impact of pollutants in the food production chain and thereby contribute to safe food to protect humans from too high pollutant exposures.”  

For Diana Aga, the role of analytical scientists in protecting the planet is clear. “Analytical scientists are the ones who can develop the methods that can detect harmful chemicals lurking in our environment,” she says. “And when remediation is implemented, the only way we can determine if cleanup efforts are successful is if we can monitor both disappearance of the parent compound and the appearance of by-products that are no longer toxic.” 

Finally, Teresa Rocha Santos reflects on her role as a planet protector: “As an analytical scientist, I contribute to the development of analytical methodologies for the determination of emerging compounds and microplastics allowing us to assess their fate and behavior in the environment, and finally contributing to the establishment of measures of environmental protection and remediation.” 

As we reflect on the opinions shared by our 2024 Planet Protectors, one thing is clear: the role of analytical scientists in addressing environmental challenges extends beyond the lab. The question of moral responsibility is not just theoretical – it's an urgent call to action. In a world where scientific discoveries have the power to shape our collective future, the ethical choices we make become critical.

What is the role of analytical scientists in safeguarding our planet? How should we balance professional duties with the moral imperative to act?

Let us know!