In Conversation With Prof. Rana Dajani

Rana Dajani is a Professor of Molecular Cell Biology at Hashemite University in Jordan, who alongside her world leading research on the genetics of Circassian and Chechen populations, and the epigenetic impacts of trauma, was key in establishing ethics laws in Jordan on the use of stem cells in research. Rana was named as one of the 100 Most Influential Arab Women 2015, and is the current President of the Society for the Advancement of Science and Technology in the Arab World. As well as her many achievements as a scientist, Professor Dajani has done several TEDx talks, wrote the book “Five Scarves: Doing the Impossible”, and is the Founder of the non-profit We Love Reading!

We were delighted to have the opportunity to interview Rana about her life and work, and with Youth STEM Matters volunteers Zainab Khan and Lucy Chen leading the discussion, here’s what she had to say...

Professor Rana Dajani. Credit: Evelyn Hockstein/UNHCR

Zainab: Thank you so much for joining us today Rana. To begin, would you mind briefly explaining your recent research with regards to your expertise?

Rana: As a professor of molecular cell biology, I have two fields of research that we're the experts on. Firstly, I study the genetics of ethnic populations in general. And the two populations that we’re the experts on are the Circassian and Chechen population, who have been forcibly displaced from southern Russia, and settled in many parts of the world, but mainly, there's a big population in Jordan. We have studied these two populations in a holistic way, looking at their anthropology, their epidemiology, as well as their genetics. And we've identified a novel gene for a risk factor for diabetes that we're currently trying to understand the function of that of the protein that is produced by that gene and how it impacts diabetes, and in order to do that we have we use induced pluripotent stem cells. Then, we reproduce them so that they become pancreatic cells to see the function of that gene. This is a long-term project, but that's where we are in terms of that research. Alongside that, we continue to study Circassian and Chechen populations from different aspects. So now we're trying to understand whether they are impacted differently by COVID-19 because of their genetic makeup. So, you go with the flow, whatever is the most relevant or important area of research is what we focus on.

The other field is looking at the impact of trauma on human beings in general, and we're talking about refugees, and in the context of Jordan, Syrian refugees. We're looking at not just the impact on physiology, but on genetics, which is the field of epigenetics. So, we're asking the question, how does trauma impact epigenetics and can it be transferred from generation to generation? This is a very unique question that has been proven in mice, but nobody has been actually able to show it clearly in human beings, so we received a big grant to work on this. We’ve collected our samples from, and are taking a maternal line through the grandmother, mother and daughter, and trying to understand how the trauma fingerprint is actually transferred.

Lucy: That's really, really interesting. We'll talk more about the details of your research later, but for now, we'd like to ask what inspired your route to becoming a molecular biology researcher?

Professor Rana Dajani in a lab. Credit: Evelyn Hockstein/UNHCR

Rana: It started when I was growing up. My father was a physician and a scientist - we didn't have TV at home, and I was an avid reader, so we would read. Even growing up in Jordan, we had a subscription to some magazines and journals like Scientific American and National Geographic, so we grew up reading a lot of novels and books. So on one hand, I was reading all these articles and having discussions and debates every evening with my father, about these different issues. On the other hand, I think I got this feeling from my mother of wanting to help others, like a feeling of responsibility to make a difference. So this pioneering spirit of discovering curiosity, combined with a feeling of ‘I want to make a difference’ were together, I think, what led me to want to be a scientist because as a scientist, you're actually doing both. You're pushing the envelope, the pioneer, the frontier, in the cell and the DNA molecules. And you're also helping humanity by discovering how diseases progress and how biological mechanisms work.

Lucy: I absolutely agree with that. There's something about the inside of the cell, where we just don't know all of the pathways and that's so interesting to me.

Zainab: For sure, that's very interesting. Within your research field, what do you think the future will look like, and what is one of the biggest challenges that you think your field may face in the next 5 to 10 years?

Rana: There’s 2 things here I think - first, the only constant is change. And then the other thing is to keep in mind is that all the preconceived dogmas and what is known and what is not known is changing; what is impossible and what is possible is changing. I think that's a very important thing to keep in our minds as we go forward. We need to challenge every assumption we had in the past and reassess it in the light of new discoveries, whether it's in technology, or even bringing in new people into the discourse, not just having a Western white way of looking at things. But the more we integrate more women, more people from other cultures and communities, we can start seeing the same scientific questions in a whole different light. And this is very, very important. So, I think having that outlook is what's going to change the future. That's where I'm going to focus my answer to your question, rather than saying stem cells or CRISPR, as all the time there's going to be something new - I think the thing we can anticipate is changing how we look at them.

Zainab: How do you think we can actually bring this change? Right now, the media is one of the biggest things in our world and I feel that if we had more representation that would make a big difference. Are there any other things that you think would allow other groups, like women or people from other cultures, be able to get involved in such things more?

Rana: That's a very important question and I think there are several barriers to make sure you have diversity and include everybody. One is language; most science is written in English, and therefore it's not accessible to millions, or maybe a billion or more people who speak different languages and therefore do not have access to that science. How to tackle that? There are different ways such as increasing translation, and Wikipedia, for example, is one of the ways of sharing information, which individual people can contribute to, of course with the regulations in place to make sure that it's all correctly written, it's monitored, and you're not just having anything written up or posted. But language itself is therefore one. And therefore, one way to do that is encouraging initiatives that talk about science in the native language. Last month (August 2020), there was a whole Arab Science Week where they had, I think, 24,000 registrants from across the world, and everything was in Arabic. So, you can imagine what that does, and the difference it would make if we did the same with other places and languages.

So, language is one barrier, but it’s a complex question you’ve asked as it’s a big issue globally. I’m not giving any sense of priority to these, but one way that I think that we can make things better, at least to a certain extent, is having quotas. Usually when people are involved in science, they call upon people they know when there’s an opportunity. They use their network but it means they keep calling on the same people. So, if it's men who are doing it, they're going to just keep on calling other men. And so even if they really want to do good, they just don't know how to do it. So, when you introduce a quota, such as for women or minorities, you change how the dynamics are and eventually, that will change how things are. Of course, you can still have the merits in place, I’m not saying not to have the merit, but to have a quota so that people have to go beyond who they already know [likely people like them] when they’re planning an event for example.

So, to begin with, sometimes you need to make sure that everybody's there. But even after you have everybody there at the table, you also need to make sure that the framework of how we look at things allows for them to have a voice, because you may have the quota, but some people are intimidated in saying their opinion. So that's another component we need to be aware of: how do we make sure that everybody really has the freedom to express themselves and have the confidence to do that? We need to look at the barriers to that...And I think actually having virtual conferences helps to overcome that barrier, because sometimes in a room with real people you feel intimidated or worried about interrupting, but through video calls you could do a lot of things that nobody's going to tell you off for, like just turn off your camera and say your mind. So although a virtual meeting has its cons, I think including people and more people having the courage to speak up is one of the pros of being digital.

Lucy: That's a really good point, actually, as somebody who's been to in person networking before, having virtual events actually sort of takes you away from the social aspects of that. This next question is quite specific to your research. So, I read a study that you did, on metabolic syndromes between the two ethnic minority groups in Jordan to study the risk factors that were linked to diseases like cardiovascular disease. So, for diseases that are highly variable that you've studied before, like CVD and diabetes, there's been importance placed on assessing the environmental causes or contributions to the development of disease, with epigenetics. How do you think genomics will play a role in understanding the underlying mechanisms of these sorts of diseases and then new changes in the genomic field that may be more important in the future?

Rana: That's a good question. Any phenomenon, whether natural or when it becomes malfunctioned or derailed and becomes a disease, is a complex of environmental and genetic factors. Even the simplest thing in reality is a combination of both. So, going forward, trying to understand that interplay between the environment and genetics is creating a whole new field. The impactome is the combination of the impact of both the genetics and the environment that produces who we are as human beings, with our disease and non-disease states. I think that's the future. So, as we studied genomics, we cannot no longer study genes and genomics in isolation- we need to also have a continuous discussion about what's happening with the environment. I think that's how things are going to go forward and this will require more data collection, algorithms and artificial intelligence, to combine all of this together to come up with something that makes sense and that we can use in a practical way to help people lead a better and healthier life, whether in prevention or in therapy later on.

I think that we cannot do anything in isolation. This idea sheds a light not just for the field of genomics and disease, but on every aspect of science. Whereas in the past, we had silos, chemistry, physics, biology, all separate, whereas now, the more we’re learning, the more we're realising that there is no separation and that all of these are connected together. You can't understand one without the other. You can't solve a problem without looking at it from the different aspects. And this is, I think, the new way going forward. Thinking back to Zainab's earlier question, it's having a more interdisciplinary approach, rather than a siloed approach, which requires changing how we look at things and including more people to talk about things.

Lucy: Absolutely, especially with the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as well. It seems like all of the medical fields are now moving more towards personalised medicine as we learn more about the genetic makeup of each individual person?

Rana: Yes, and this brings us to another challenge, which is the ethics. And especially the ethics of the data we have. How do we prevent the data being biased? Artificial intelligence is just building on data we have, so if the data is biased artificial intelligence is going to be biased. So those are a whole extra set of questions that need to be addressed.

Zainab: As a high school student, I am exploring my options for the future and a couple of months back I came across an article about stem cells and how they can literally change the world. I got really interested in it, and then I started thinking about it from an Islamic perspective and realised that I wanted to know more about its ethics before proceeding. So, what inspired you to bring change into the stem cell research ethics policies, specifically in Jordan?

Rana: That's a great question. And that actually leads me to another thing we should keep in mind: scientists have a responsibility beyond their labs and their classroom halls. How does their science affect the wider community? That's a responsibility that we should not shy away from as scientists, but actually engage and reach out and be part of those discussions. When I wanted to understand that gene that we discovered, I had to take cells from those patients, reprogram them to become stem cells and then reprogram them back into pancreatic cells to understand the function of that gene. That meant I had to work with stem cells, and when we were at the beginning of the field of stem cell research, people had not yet discovered induced pluripotent stem cells, so people were using human embryonic stem cells. That's where the ethical dilemma lies - can I kill an embryo to use those cells for research? When I realised that I would have to work with these kinds of cells, I had to take a step back and say, wait a minute, is it ethical to do this? After I had learned more about the technology and how to use stem cells, I took a step back and in Jordan, I thought, ‘how am I going to go about understanding whether this is okay or not’? So, the design I had in mind was to create a committee of people, including stakeholders from different fields, who would have an opinion on this topic. We had the scientists, physicians, bioethicists, lawyers and religious people all sitting together in multiple meetings, trying to understand whether it's okay to use stem cells or not. and what the rules and regulations are. What was different in this committee compared to other attempts in the past or now is that usually in the past, it would be the person the theologian, figuring it out on their own, with nobody beside them talking about the science, or the applications or the implications. Then you would have the scientists talking with only themselves - never together on one table on equal footing to really tackle this issue. That is what was novel about our approach and I hope it has been brought to the attention of other people around the world, so they can implement the same kind of methodology of recruiting a varied group of people to come to a consensus. Through this process, as a scientist I now understand the religion more and the religious person understands the science more, so we could really move forward. Another important point of such committees is that these are continuous committees, because science is changing every day, and there’s going to be a new dilemma tomorrow. Even if they had a verdict on a particular issue last year, that verdict may change next year, because the science is changing. So, what was allowed may become not allowed or vice versa. I compare it to a train… If you don't get on the train, the train will go without us. We need to be on that train all the time to keep up with what's going on, because in ethics, usually people are running after science, whereas really we should be going together at the same pace as we move forward. 

Zainab: Related to that, are there any misconceptions within the general public about stem cells that you think should be cleared up? And how do you think we can spread awareness of stem cell ethics to those without scientific backgrounds?

Rana: There’s plenty of misconceptions all over the world, regardless of religion or culture. Today, you see it with COVID-19, wherein countries like the US which claims to be the most advanced, yet people don’t want to wear masks, while you find people for lack of a better word, less developed places actually adhering to regulations a lot more than the others. In that way, I think that COVID-19 has been good at showing that there's not one specific country or culture that is better than another. We're all in this together, and the cracks are showing up in different civilizations or cultures, and it's become more of a level field going forward. Having said that, back to your question...The fake news is absolutely out there. How we deal with it is by having more science communication and talking about it in the media. Scientists don’t only need to step out of their comfort zone to engage in the community for policies and regulations, but they also have to engage with the community at the level of the lay-person and talk about science. One of the biggest challenges there is language again. Not just language in terms of the native language, but also in the simplicity of the language, as you need to simplify science in a way that people can understand. Being a researcher isn’t the only career in science - you could become a science journalist and raise awareness to people. 

As a researcher, there are other ways as well. One thing especially for scientists who work with human subjects is to actually not just treat them as subjects, but actually explain the science to them, thereby raising awareness of the science In my research, when we go and study a group of adults and youth to try to understand the impact of trauma on their genes, we don't just go and take a cheek swab and then say bye. We actually sit and explain the whole science and ask them “what do you think? What's the best way to do this?” and then we come back and share the results with them. This communication between the scientist and the subject is very, very important, but does not always happen.

Lucy: I absolutely agree, especially with the fact that we should be explaining science more to people who don't have scientific backgrounds. I think bridging that gap is one of the most important things we can do, especially as young people. Going back to when you were talking about the general barriers for people towards STEM, you mentioned language was one of them. But what has been a personal barrier for you that you've had to overcome yourself throughout your career?

Professor Rana Dajani. Credit: Evelyn Hockstein/UNHCR

Rana: That's an interesting question. Because when I get asked that, usually I say nothing, which of course doesn't make sense, right? But then I look really, really, where is it? And I think the reason I feel that I did not encounter a barrier is because I don't look at it as a barrier. I don't define it as a barrier. So when you ask me “did you have a barrier?” I'd say no, because whatever you define as a barrier, to me is an opportunity. So I had to rephrase the question to myself - when was there an opportunity that you seized to achieve what you want? And I think just having that mentality of redefining a barrier from something negative to something positive, is one way of tackling barriers. Being positive, having that framework of “how can this help? How can I use this to reach my goal?”

For example, I wanted to be a scientist ever since I was a child. I finished my Bachelor's and Master's in biology in Jordan, but there were no PhD programmes in Jordan, so although I got accepted by the University of Cambridge in England, I couldn't afford to go. So I became a school teacher for 10 years, and I was teaching science and biology in different languages in Jordan. I took all that energy of loving science and wanting to make an impact to try to instill that into my students. I even got a job teaching at the university when I first finished my Master’s but I left that job after a year because I thought “if I'm going to change the brains of children who think of science, I have to start much younger”. When I went and became a primary school teacher everybody thought I was crazy, and asked “who would leave teaching at a university to teach at a school?”, but I did this because to me it was where you make a difference. I decided if I couldn't be the scientist actually making the difference, let me be the one who creates the scientists who will make the difference. That kind of attitude meant I would try to find these novel creative ways to encourage students to think outside the box and to make science fun. That dream of being the person who does the actual science was always there, so after my husband and I got married, he had seen an advertisement in the newspaper for the Fulbright Scholar Programme. He encouraged me, knowing a scientist is what I’d always wanted to be, and so even though I was 30 years old, had three kids and was actually pregnant with my fourth, I went and reapplied, took all the exams with the GRE and went to the interview the day I was due to have my baby. And I got the scholarship. 

If you want something, you may not find it in the timeframe you thought you would. But if you really want it, it'll stay there until the right time comes. Dealing with that, if you want to call it a barrier, was, for me, doing what you can today, making the best of the circumstances, but always being open to when the circumstances change, to jump in and do it. And in order to do that, you need to make sure that what you’re aiming for is your passion. If it's not your passion, you're going to find an excuse not to do it. But if it is your passion, you'll turn every excuse into an opportunity, and that's why I always say life is long. If you want to do something and can’t do it now, it's okay. You'll do it in the next 10 years. Next 20 years. I have a notebook full of things I want to do. And I can't wait till I'm 60 so I have more time so I can actually do all those things. 

When something doesn't work the way I think it should work, I just take it in my stride, and ask “what did I learn from this? How can I use that to make something better rather than saying, ‘this is the end of the world!’”. I think that's the spirit of being a scientist- you know you're going to fail 100 million times. It's okay to make a mistake every day, so long as you're not repeating the same mistake.

Lucy: Absolutely, that's very, very well said. I think one thing that resonates with me is the fact that you said that age isn't necessarily a limit either. My mum migrated from China to the UK when she did her PhD. She started off with no idea how to type on a keyboard, so she taught herself everything whilst also taking care of me, which was a monumental task. So I understand that completely, it's such a good point. You never really stop learning, do you?

Rana: Exactly, that's it. If you have the passion, everything becomes wonderful. It’s not just that you never stop learning, but if you're actually in something you like, you never stop playing. It's always fun.

Zainab: For sure, that's such a great mindset! I wanted to ask about an article you wrote for Nature, and you said something along the lines of the feminist movement being a good thing, but it was too focused on equality with men and failed to enable us to respect ourselves as women and to be proud of who we are. When I came across this quote, it really did resonate with me and I ran to my mom and told her about it! I feel like if anyone talks to me about Muslims in Muslim countries, females especially, and how they're treated or their perception overall, I think I'm just going to reference your article, because I feel like it was just so perfectly phrased. So related to that, how do you feel that we can help change the often negative point of view of a woman's work, especially in the Middle East? And how do you feel this perception was originally formed?

Rana: First of all, this impression is not just in the Middle East. This is everywhere. Women are not represented equally in every sector in senior positions, not just in science, law, business, you name it. It’s the same in every culture, whether you're talking about the USA, Europe, Middle East, Asia, Africa, it's all the same. So this is not specific to the Middle East, and we should be very careful not to be caught into the media's negative perceptions of Middle Eastern people or Muslims. There's a lot of research that has shown that in terms of women in STEM, the Middle East have more women in STEM positions compared to the US or Europe. We definitely have a problem in senior positions, but this is not unique to the Middle East, it's all over the world. 

There’s this really important thing, which I talk about in my recent TED talk, and in my book (Five Scarves - English & Arabic), around changing the framework of how we perceive not just women and men, but humans in general, because in this context, we're talking about women and men, but you also have minorities. You have different orientations of people. And all of those are misrepresented and not equally out there, with a lot of misunderstanding, so it's not just about women, it's about anybody, humans in general. My philosophy is that humans are diverse, you have a diversity of humans that are very different from each other, in many different ways. The way forward is to acknowledge these differences and the implications of those differences. Acknowledge that because people are different, they are going to have different versions of how they define success. Even their definition of success can change with time, depending on exposure or their priorities at different stages of their life.

For example, a female will also relate to her biological clock. So maybe at the age of 20, my priorities are having a child, but then at 30 my priorities are that I want to explore science, and at 50 I want to help the community or save the world. Why should I be restricted to one path versus another? This should be the natural way of how things are but this is not how things are. The thing is that in the world success is very, very strictly defined as how senior you are, how much money you have and how much power you have, and those are the only traits that we measure our success with. This reminds me of that cartoon of asking all the animals can you climb a tree and rating them if they can climb a tree or not. So if you're a monkey, you can climb a tree, but if you're a fish, you can’t. Does that mean a fish is not successful? It's not successful if you ask it to climb a tree, but it's very successful if you ask it to swim in water. So the issue is, we're using one stick to measure everyone. One definition, when really we should take a step back and say no, people are different. We need to allow them to find their passions, pursue what they want to do, and allow them to define what success is to them, and not judge them. This is about trusting members of society and allowing everyone to explore who they are. 

This relates to that quote you mentioned, because women in senior positions around the world have told me in interviews that they always have to show that they are serious about their job because they're comparing themselves to men and they want to be just like a man. There's at least one biological difference between the sexes that nobody can argue has any societal influence: I have a uterus, he does not. Therefore, at some stage in my life, my priorities are going to be different, and I feel I should never deny my biology - I have a uterus and I'm very proud of that. I'm actually taking care of producing the next generation, so this is important. Female scientists shouldn't have to hide that they're pregnant and that they want to check on their kids. This affects men negatively too because they feel intimidated by a very macho and dominating definition of what is male and that's not fair either.

Lucy: Following on from Zainab’s question, in the same article you also talked about how women were limited by the resources that they had available to them in the Middle East, especially to do with STEM. So how do you think we can encourage STEM networking in groups that have a lack of support or resources?

Rana: That's a question that we need to be very specific about. When we say there's a lack of resources - if we're talking about resources in terms of funding or materials - this is a challenge for all scientists in the Middle East or developing countries. However, I think what is lacking for women in particular - and, again, this is not just in the Middle East, this is for women all over the world - is having a good strong network of support. Women don't have the same luxury of going out for a coffee, or whatever way they socialise, to get that support, share an idea or talk about the next conference, because they are taking care of their children. What I propose in that article is creating a mentoring network to support women all over the world, therefore doing it in a different way. So I developed a mentoring programme, which has a very simple framework of pairing women together to support and share advice with each other in both personal and professional ways, through a very loose mentoring relationship. So it's holistic, where you could be a mentor and you're younger, because you have some experience that the mentee doesn't have. Most mentoring networks are actually for either students or post grads and graduate students, not for career or mid career people. If you have some mentoring networks that recruit professionals in industry, it's usually in business, not in science. So our programme - which I called Three Circles of Alemat - filled a gap in mentoring programming around the world. It then became not just for women or for minorities or those in science, but for other industries such as law and business because they have the same challenges. It's not a mentoring network that needs a hierarchy or an organisation to implement it, anybody can start it, wherever they are in their career, and in any organisation. It's now a free toolkit online that anybody can download.

Lucy: That is a really important thing to consider, especially when you're having that stage of going into your career and you're not quite certain where you're going. I'm definitely going to research that later.

Zainab: So you’ve mentioned social entrepreneurship before, especially with establishing libraries across Jordan. Your We Love Reading program has now reached over 56 countries - congratulations! So what’s been one of your favourite parts in setting up We Love Reading and are there any projects you are currently working on? 

Professor Rana Dajani. Credit: Evelyn Hockstein/UNHCR

Rana: I set up We Love Reading because I had a feeling of responsibility towards my community. I was doing work in science diplomacy and science communication but I wanted to add a third component to the scientists.  The knowledge and experience we have means we also hold a responsibility to use those to solve challenges in our communities. I realised that children don’t read for fun, and because I am a scientist I started to think about that issue in a scientific way; trying to understand why, asking questions, trying to find answers and developing hypotheses. Through that thought process, I realised that often children don’t read not because they don’t have enough books, but because they don’t have a love of reading inside them. The question then evolved to become “how do I help a child fall in love with reading?”, which made me realise that children didn’t have role models - parents were not reading aloud to their kids. And so my question became “how do I make parents read aloud to their kids?”, but I figured I couldn’t make people listen, so I decided I would start reading to the kids in my neighbourhood. So, like Gandhi said, “be the change you want to see in the world, don’t wait for somebody else to do it”, or like from Islam, “everyone is a guardian,” we have responsibilities towards our community. 

It started as a family project with my husband and kids, and we gathered the kids in a public space which I chose to be the mosque because it’s public and easily accessible, and that’s when I started reading aloud to kids in 2006. From that humble, small beginning in a little neighbourhood, it has grown to a social movement in 56 countries, impacting half a million children around the world. It’s called the butterfly effect - when a butterfly flutters its wings in China, there’s a hurricane in the Atlantic. I was doing one little thing in my neighbourhood, and now it’s all over the world, so do not belittle any little thing you do. It counts. All you need to do is think “what can I do as one person?”. Don’t worry about changing the whole world, just think of doing a small thing, and don’t worry about the results. Just worry about what you can do now. There’s this saying “if someone says that you’re just a drop in the ocean, but what’s the ocean? Millions and billions of drops.” So if we have trust in ourselves and start, everyone eventually will make a difference. 

Lucy: That’s a really good point. And I think you mentioned quite a lot of that in your TED Talk about the five scarves that you wear. So speaking of that TED Talk, you’ve mentioned that you were listed as one of the top 100 most powerful Arab women, which is incredible. But that you were labelled, in that list as an Islamic feminist, which you said put you in a box, and that you didn’t like that label because you were trying to move away from that title. Could you elaborate more on that and how you approached that, in STEM or in your personal life? 

Rana: I didn’t like the label of Islamic feminist because it means different things for different people, whether negative or positive, and I never claimed to be either. To me, I was just Rana, doing what I thought was right. When I emailed them to ask them to change it they didn’t, so I took it head-on and chose to define it in my own terms. That led me on a journey of discovery, both for myself and interviewing many hundreds of people around the world. From that I concluded that people can call you whatever they want, and people are always calling other people things. The idea is not to succumb to that but to proclaim who you are, and your actions will describe who you are. So If I were to go back, I would describe myself as just a human being doing what I think is right.

Lucy: Absolutely, yeah. I remember at one point in my life when I was younger, I was afraid of calling myself a feminist, because of the backlash I would get from people I knew. But now I’ve decided to retake the title because it’s something that matters to me and it is important to the people around me, so I think we should definitely be proud of who we are. 

Rana: Absolutely.

Zainab: For sure, and related to the five scarfs talk at the Radcliffe Institute, you mentioned that success is not what matters, what matters is that you tried. For many though, it is easy to lose that perspective when you’re in a system that compares you to others, whether in an academic sense, or otherwise. Do you have any advice on how to stay in a positive, productive mindset when faced with what is perceived by others as failure?

Rana: There’s three things, first, you have to embrace failure, because it’s something that lets you move forward. Failure is not an exception, failure is not something negative, it’s actually something expected - if failure doesn’t happen there’s something wrong. Second, and more importantly, that positive, productive mindset should be the internal mindset of you - you need to be the one who believes it. If you don’t believe in that you’ll end up being intimidated, but if you really believe in it, people can say whatever they want. If you believe that failure is important and that it’s expected, then you can embrace it and move on. Have confidence in yourself and trust. And the third point on that issue is most importantly, you have to choose something that you have a passion for, because if you’re passionate about something you won’t care about what people think. and you’re always going to be optimistic and support it. But also more importantly, that passion leads you to work hard on it, to have the patience and the perseverance to work on it, and when you’re giving so much energy, patience, and perseverance, you’re bound to succeed in whatever you’re doing. 

If there’s anybody out there ridiculing you, thinking wrongly of you, they will be proven wrong because you are the most passionate person about this topic. And so you’ll push it forward, and it will shine - it’s contagious. People realise it. Some of the biggest success stories of all were the people going against the mainstream. For example, when Harald Hausen came up with the idea in the 1970s that cancer could be caused by viruses, everyone said that he was crazy, and he was swimming against the current all the time. But because he loved science and he believed in what he was doing was right, he didn’t care, and in the end he won a Nobel Prize. Or, Yamanaka, when he said he could make stem cells from adult cells, lots of people thought he was crazy. If he had made sure that he was pleasing everybody, he would have never discovered it, but he had that gut feeling which drove him to prove it, to persevere, and at the end he also won a Nobel Prize. 

The same concept applies to everything in life - you have to love what you’re doing, and that will make you strong in the face of all the challenges in the world and allow you to not be distracted by people or failures, but instead taking them as an incentive to go forward. That reminds me of Mohammad Ali Clay’s quote ‘Nothing is impossible.” and somebody tells you that something is impossible, that means it’s temporary, it's a dare, and you know, it’s nothing. And people who use the word “impossible” are just looking for an excuse because they’re really not passionate. They wanted an excuse and they used that as an excuse.

Zainab: I totally agree. I think right now in our education system I sometimes notice that either it's going to be instilled in the child, or it’s a robotic mindset where there is a herd mentality and one person does something so most people follow it.

Lucy: Moving on from this discussion, towards more about you and your love for teaching, you have mentioned that there was an incredibly important part of your life when you were a school teacher. Is there anyone who has mentored you or that you've mentored, being a teacher, that has inspired you?

Rana: That is another question I am asked quite a lot. Actually, I am inspired by every human being I get to know. Because, every person has something to give. There’s not one person that has something that is better than anyone else. Everybody has something to give that I learn from and take to heart and hopefully integrate and go forward. So, everybody, all humans, future, past and existing, are my mentors and people that I've learned from and feel very grateful to.

Lucy: That’s such a good answer!

Zainab: I think for these last few questions, we’d really like to hear advice for young people. The field that you specialize in, molecular biology is very research-intensive. Is there any way that people can participate in this field with limited experience?

Rana: Of course! One first fundamental way is to read about it! You have to learn. Reading, reading, reading is very, very important. There's a lot of material out there for a lay person, including magazines like Popular Science, which is available in Arabic and English and I’m sure in other languages. For those who want something a little bit more sophisticated Nature and Science are top-notch journals, but they also have news and highlights and versions in different languages that people can access and read. Second, getting to know people. Emailing, meeting, engaging with scientists and labs. COVID-19 means that this is more accessible as many conferences are now free and available virtually. 

Lucy: Absolutely! Just going off that point, what advice would you give to young people who are going into STEM or generally? You mentioned trying to find the passion, but what if people haven't gotten to that stage or are trying to get there, if that makes sense?

Rana: When you're young, you don't necessarily have to have found your passion yet. You're exploring. You're being curious. I think what's important is fostering that feeling of curiosity. Working on “let’s try this”. Having the boldness to try things because most school education systems stifle our curiosity. To rekindle that and don't feel obliged that you have to find something. Just have fun. Being a child, going back and being a kid is the recipe and allowing yourself to keep on exploring because life is long. You may go to college, you may try different courses. You may even finish your degree. That’s okay, you can go and take another degree. In the world there is so much unemployment, pretty much whatever you do, you can create your own job. Don't worry about a structured life because I think that’s going to be something of the past. As we see with COVID-19, everything that was normal has been overturned. So just being curious, being bold, following your passion, and having fun is good advice. And dream big. Dream. Nothing is impossible. Having that mentality is very important. And being sincere that you are really seeking what you want and not doing it because of others or because you have another agenda. Just sincerely following your passion. I think that would be the advice for young people going out into the world. All of this is based on reading, reading, reading. I believe that is the only way you are empowered to go forward. 

I want to add here, we’re talking lots about STEM but I think one important thing we are forgetting is the humanities and philosophy. STEM fields do not exist in a vacuum. They exist in culture and philosophy. We cannot divorce them from each other. I would encourage young people as they pursue STEM to also expose themselves to philosophy, culture, and religion, because this gives them the baseline and the framework with which they pursue STEM. They must go together, they cannot be divorced at all. All arts are very important and we need them because they will guide us going forward.

Science right now is dominated by the west whether we like it or not, and therefore, the western philosophy is dominating. Now, however, we see that there are a lot of challenges that scientists in the west are facing in terms of civilization, so I think other cultures who may not be as advanced in science can actually contribute to the global conversation from their own culture and philosophy. Maybe, they will find the solution not just for themselves but for the west and globally. We can't continue seeking answers and solutions only from the west because solutions and answers for our existential questions can come from other cultures and communities. It doesn't mean one is better than the other, but we have a responsibility and duty to showcase other ways of thinking to the younger generation growing up. This is important for them to boost their identity, because one problem with all of what we're talking about is having confidence and dealing with the identity crisis that is happening because of globalisation. Looking at philosophy and humanities is one way of dealing with the identity crisis.

Zainab: At Youth STEM 2030, our main focus is not just on STEM but also the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and making sure that whatever we do, we’re making a positive impact in the world. How do you feel that we as young people can really advocate equality in STEM with the SDGs?

Rana: There’s a lot out there about SDGs, but the thing I can add that is innovative is that we need to reach those SDGs in a way that respects everybody. Meaning, there may be 10 different ways to reach one of the SDGs, but we need to acknowledge that there are many ways of reaching the goals. Rather than saying that “this is the only way you can reach it” and imposing things on people from different places in the world, it’s about trusting people on the ground and allowing them to develop their own solutions to achieve the SDGs.

Zainab: That’s a really important point! And I think that actually concludes our questions!

Rana: Great, thank you! These were very deep and stimulating questions that are different from the traditional ones I get asked.

Lucy: Thank you so much for coming, it was really lovely talking to you!