When David Soler (Bioq 02) finished his Degree of Biochemistry at the School of Sciences of the University of Navarra, he had already decided that research was his goal and he did not stop, after three years looking for funding, until he managed to land in the USA, at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. There he has just developed a blood test, or liquid biopsy, to identify one of the most deadly tumors: glioblastoma multiforme.

From the other side of the Atlantic he relates his vision of science, its difficulties and rewards, while acknowledging that he wants to return to Spain, as long as he can continue to devote himself to his passion: research.

- After studying Biochemistry , what motivated you to look for your doctorate in the United States?
I had an idea to investigate an aspect of the AIDS virus and thanks to the committee of Javier Novo -my professor of human Genetics -, I managed to contact Dr. Quiñones-Mateu, a researcher who worked at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (USA). He was interested in my new line of research, but I had to find the funding to go to the U.S. And that was the really difficult part. The process was tough. In fact, it took me more than three years. During that time I applied for many scholarships - those of La Caixa, Ramón Aceres... -. In the end I managed to win a Fullbright, but I had to give it up because I was already in the US.

- You did the doctorate at Kent State University. What was the topic of your research?
I obtained my PhD in Molecular Biology under the direction of Dr. Srinivasan Vijayaraghavan. My topic of research focused on describing the role of a protein, phosphatase (PP1gamma2), core topic in spermatogenesis and human fertility.

- During the degree program, do you feel that you were given enough skills to do research with top level groups in the U.S.?
The University of Navarra trained me very well through good professors and its competitive learning system. And, above all, it nurtured my interest in pursuing a career at research. Perhaps that is why I have very good memories of professors who helped me at times core topic, who trusted me, such as Dr. Peláez, professor of Mathematics, or Dr. Peñas, my advisor.

In the world of science, which can be very "rough", being well surrounded, having positive influences, is core topic.

- How do you value the training received from the perspective of time and your experience?
The training level of licentiate degree is mostly focused on learning to 'read' the technology and knowledge available on various subjects. In reality, there are too many details for everything to be learned over 4 or 5 years. The licentiate degree is, therefore, the beginning. To handle the techniques that interest one needs to spend much more time on it. The doctorate is a good continuation.

It is also true that going to the U.S. requires adaptability, beyond the strictly scientific. The USA is different from Spain. Although it may sound cliché, there are many contrasts in the North American country. Its culture is different, and it is not realistic to think that one can live there, locked up in a laboratory. It is not very realistic to think that you can go there, lock yourself in a laboratory and live working. Doing research in the U.S. means working in one of the best countries for doing science, but to maximize your time and learning there you have to like something more than its purely scientific character.

- You are doing your second postdoc. Does the degree program of a researcher imply chaining one postdoc after another?
Not necessarily. It all depends on whether you can find funding for your work. If you have it, you can go from postdoc to Senior Associate Professor relatively easily. The problem is that this step now involves a lot of competition. In addition, I believe that reaching the Degree of PI (Principal Investigator) is not the end of the road, but quite the opposite. It implies more loneliness, more nerves and more pressure. You have to spend even more time writing for apply for grants.

What I am really passionate about is research. Doing experiments, solving problems, finding ways to achieve what no one else can, and assuming the monumental levels of failure that this challenge implies. In any case, our degree program also requires time. In my case, I would like that time to lead me to be an independent researcher .

 

"Science is the infinite frontier."

- What advice would you give to a 17 year old boy or girl who wants to study a science degree program in order to dedicate himself or herself to research?
I would first ask him or her "are you willing to work for free?" We would also have to see what his or her character is: if he or she is a persevering person, willing to solve problems, since the degree program of a researcher is not a sprint, but a marathon with multiple obstacles, which are almost never visible to the naked eye.

Although it may seem frustrating, the counterpart is given by the small or big discoveries that everyone makes: being able to photocopy a gene, or build a mouse, or change a protein as if you were doing a 'copy paste' in Microsoft Word. These are all techniques with incredible potential. And you are helping to make it a reality.

- Are your plans to return to Spain?
Yes, I would like to go back. I have family in Spain and in fact I am trying to find some group where I can continue to make progress. I have just developed a blood test or liquid biopsy to identify glioblastoma multiforme -the worst cancer you can be diagnosed with- and I am still working on the expression of membrane proteins to crystallize them. For me, science is the infinite frontier: there is so much to do and society needs more scientists. A lot more.