Monoclonal antibodies: the invisible allies that changed the face of medicine

Preparation of monoclonal antibodies in the lab Linda Bartlett/Wikimedia Commons

They are tiny magic bullets that are quietly shaping the lives of millions of patients around the world. Produced in the lab, invisible to the naked eye, relatively few people are aware of these molecules' existence or where they came from. Yet monoclonal antibodies are contained in six out of ten of the world’s bestselling drugs, helping to treat everything from cancer to heart disease to asthma.

Known as Mabs for short, these molecules are derived from the millions of antibodies the immune system continually makes to fight foreign invaders such as bacteria and viruses. The technique for producing them was first published 40 years ago. It was developed by César Milstein, an Argentinian émigré, and Georges Köhler, a German post-doctoral researcher. They were based at the UK Medical Research Council’s Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge.

Harnessing the power of the immune system

Milstein and Köhler wanted to investigate how the immune system can produce so many different types of antibodies, each capable of specifically targeting one of a near-infinite number of foreign substances that invade the body. This had puzzled scientists ever since the late 19th century, but an answer had proved elusive. Isolating and purifying single antibodies with known targets, out of the billions made by the body, was a challenge.

The two scientists finally solved this problem by immunising a mouse against a particular foreign substance and then fusing antibodies taken from its spleen with a cell associated with myeloma, a cancer that develops in the bone marrow. Their method created a hybrid cell that secreted Mabs. Such cells could be grown indefinitely, in the abdominal cavity of mice or in tissue culture, producing endless quantities of identical antibodies specific to a chosen target. Mabs can be tailored to combat a wide range of conditions.

When Milstein and Köhler first publicised their technique, relatively few people understood its significance. Editors of Nature missed its importance, asking the two scientists to cut short their article outlining the new technique; as did staff at the British National Research Development Corporation, who declined to patent the work after Milstein submitted it for consideration. Within a short period, however, the technique was being adopted by scientists around the world, and less than ten years later Milstein and Köhler were Nobel laureates.

A transformation in therapeutic medicine

In the years that have passed since 1975, Mab drugs have radically reshaped medicine and spawned a whole new industry. It is predicted that 70 Mab products will have reached the worldwide market by 2020, with combined sales of nearly $125bn (£81bn).

An artist’s rendering of anti-cancer antibodies. ENERGY.GOV

Key to the success of Mab drugs are the dramatic changes they have brought to the treatment of cancer, helping in many cases to shift it away from being a terminal disease. Mabs can very specifically target cancer cells while avoiding healthy cells, and can also be used to harness the body’s own immune system to fight cancer. Overall, Mab drugs cause fewer debilitating side-effects than more conventional chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Mabs have also radically altered the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune disorders like rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis, moving away from merely relieving symptoms to targeting and disrupting their cause.

Aside from cancer and autoimmune disorders, Mabs are being used to treat over 50 other major diseases. Applications include treatment for heart disease, allergic conditions such as asthma, and prevention of organ rejection after transplants. Mabs are also under investigation for the treatment of central nervous disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease, metabolic diseases like diabetes, and the prevention of migraines. More recently they were explored as a means to combat Ebola, the virus disease that ravaged West Africa in 2014.

Fast and accurate diagnosis

Mabs have enabled faster and more accurate clinical diagnostic testing, opening up the means to detect numerous diseases that were previously impossible to identify until their advanced stages. They have paved the way in personalised medicine, where patients are matched with the most suitable drug. Mabs are intrinsic components in over-the-counter pregnancy tests, are key to spotting a heart attack, and help to screen blood for infectious diseases like hepatitis B and AIDS. They are also used on a routine basis in hospitals to type blood and tissue, a process vital to ensuring safe blood transfusion and organ transplants.

Monoclonal antibodies can be used to rapidly diagnose disease and determine blood type. U.S. Navy/Jeremy L. Grisham

Mabs are also invaluable to many other aspects of everyday life. For example they are vital to agriculture, helping to identify viruses in animal livestock or plants, and to the food industry in the prevention of the spread of salmonella. In addition they are instrumental in the efforts to curb environmental pollution.

Quietly triumphant

Yet Mabs remain hidden from public view. This is partly because the history of the technology has often been overshadowed by the groundbreaking and controversial American development of genetic engineering in 1973, which revolutionised the manufacturing and production of natural products such as insulin, and inspired the foundation of Genentech, one of the world’s first biotechnology companies.

Looking back, the oversight is not surprising. Mabs did not transform medicine overnight or with any major fanfare, and the scientists who made the discovery did not seek fame. Instead, Mabs quietly slipped unobserved into everyday healthcare practice.

An Argentinian and a German came together in a British Laboratory and changed the face of medicine forever; their story deserves to be told.

Can genetics find a 'cure' for autism?

Writing out a cure? genes by gopixa/shutterstock.com

We live in an age of genetics. Major genetic success stories such as breakthroughs in treating cystic fibrosis and breast cancer inspire hope that it can one day provide a cure for all ills. So when we hear that mental disorders are at least partially genetically determined, we may wonder what progress is being made.

A paper in the journal Cell into the psychiatric condition autism shows not only the condition’s daunting genetic complexity, but also how we may combine different genetic approaches to pinpoint a potential cure. The study of an autistic child with a rare genetic mutation of a specific gene, UBE3A, has indicated a possible treatment.

Autism, or more correctly Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), affects around one in 100 individuals and is usually first seen during early childhood. Symptoms are diverse, but include difficulties with communication and social interaction, and repetitive behaviour or movements. ASD is associated with high intellectual and artistic ability in some individuals, but around half of patients have learning difficulties of varying severity. The disorder is currently incurable.

Big changes, big effects

Evidence indicates that genetics present a significant risk of developing ASD. Genes, written as DNA stored on chromosomes, contain a blueprint for proteins that control how cells work, and there is evidence that brain cells of children with ASD operate differently to those without.

But, unsurprisingly given the diversity of its symptoms, there is no evidence for a single genetic mutation. In fact, current evidence suggests that hundreds of genes may be involved, with each one having only a small effect. Only when many detrimental mutations occur at the same time is there a significant risk.

As most genes are identified by Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS), which averages the genomes of hundreds of thousands of patients and compares them to the general population, it’s not possible to link a specific DNA change to a particular individual. We can see the smoke, but not the gun.

A DNA double-helix model. Ude

Identifying the culprit

So can genetic studies of ASD risk ever lead to a discovery of a treatment? Occasionally geneticists find rare individuals where a large loss or gain of a chromosome segment either reduces or increases the numbers of genes. These very rare chromosome abnormalities tend to have strong effects, making it easier to determine which genes contribute significantly to a disorder.

But things are not always that simple. A missing part of chromosome 15 causes Angelman Syndrome, which has many similarities to ASD. However, Dup15 syndrome, when the same region is duplicated, is one of the most frequently found chromosome change in ASD patients.

A gene called UBE3A, common to both deleted and duplicated DNA regions, is thought to be the risk gene. However, as there are other genes in these regions how can we know that UBE3A is responsible? The authors of the study report an extremely rare case of a small UBE3A mutation in a child with ASD. It is not present in their unaffected parents, so it must have newly mutated in that individual.

Genes can act like on/off switches for the protein they are responsible for coding. Usually mutations like this one would deactivate the protein and permanently turn the switch off, but in this case the change permanently switches it on. This is a rare instance where mutations detected by Genome-Wide Association Studies can be assigned to a specific change in a protein – and here it arises in an individual who then develops ASD.

What goes up, must come down.

This is very strong evidence, but it raises the question of how both a gain of UBE3A activity (as seen in the new mutation and in Dup15 syndrome), and a loss of UBE3A (as seen in Angelman syndrome) can be associated with ASD. The answer may lie in how UBE3A works.

UBE3A turns out to be important for learning. When nerve cells in the brain fire, UBE3A activity rises, but it then switches itself off. This activity cycle in the brain is required when we learn, but loss or gain of UBE3A prevents the cycle from occurring. This may explain why either loss or gain could be associated with the learning difficulties experienced by people with ASD.

Does this help towards a treatment? Zylka and Yi show that the drug Rolipram may suppress overactive UBE3A. By using genetic screening to identify individuals with increased UBE3A, it may be possible to design precise treatments to alleviate some ASD symptoms. Whether or not UBE3A ultimately makes it as a clinically useful target, it shows how finding rare genetic cases offers a powerful strategy in the search for a cure.

What has nuclear physics ever given us?

Joel Kramer, CC BY

This year marks the 103rd anniversary of the birth of nuclear physics, when Ernest Rutherford, Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden’s experiments at the University of Manchester led them to conclude that atoms consist of tiny, positively-charged nuclei orbited by negatively-charged electrons.

This year is also the 70th anniversary of the first nuclear bomb, dropped on Hiroshima. Though their discoveries led to the harnessing of nuclear energy as a weapon, it should not be forgotten that the purpose of Rutherford, Geiger and Marsden’s experiments, as with much of scientific research, was simply to understand nature. And in this they succeeded, handing us an understanding that has changed forever how we see the fabric of the world, and one which had led to much good, too.

Nuclear physics, a window on the world

So much science and technology has followed from the nuclear model of the atom. It spurred Danish physicist Niels Bohr to develop the nascent quantum theory into a fully-fledged quantum mechanics that could describe the way atoms worked. That in turn has paved the way for so much of modern technology, not the least of which of course is the silicon chip and computerisation.

Of particle accelerators, big… Tighef, CC BY-SA

Rutherford’s experiments fired the nuclei of helium atoms at other nuclei, making use of the fact that radioactive decay generates fast alpha particles to emerge from the nucleus.

To provide much more control, particle accelerators were developed in order to fire the basic building blocks of matter such as alpha particles, protons, or electrons at other objects. They didn’t know it at the time, but this set in motion the entire field of research now known as particle physics. The grandchildren of those first accelerators are devices such as the CERN Large Hadron Collider, at which the Higgs boson was discovered last year, inching us closer to understanding the universe.

Nuclear understanding permeates everything

…and small particle accelerators too. TV by Sergio Stakhnyk/shutterstock.com

A century is a long time in science, and things move quickly. It wasn’t long ago that we all had particle accelerators in our homes – the cathode ray tubes in our televisions. These have been superseded by LCD, LED and plasma displays, which are founded on our development of quantum technologies.
Perhaps the most prevalent application of particle accelerators today is in hospitals in the form of radiotherapy machines for the treatment of cancer.

In addition, Nuclear physics is the key to more or less all diagnostic imaging such as such X-ray, PET, CT, MRI, NMR, SPECT and other techniques that allow us to look inside the body without resorting to the knife.

If you’ve ever benefitted from one of these, thanks are due to many people, not least the nuclear physics pioneers who just wondered “what is this stuff?” and “what if…?”.

Nuclear science gives us a different view. scan by T-Photo/shutterstock.com

From power stations to carbon dating

The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, those most infamous uses of nuclear physics, shocked the world 70 years ago. Nuclear processes are extremely energetic and can be manipulated to generate devastating explosive power. Yet the atomic bombs of World War II pale in comparison to the destructive force of modern thermonuclear weapons, which mimic the nuclear reactions taking place in the stars.

Nuclear power comes in all shapes. Dave Croker, CC BY

Less well-known are the applications of nuclear physics in earth sciences. It’s our grasp of nuclear physics that helps us understand the Earth’s historical temperature record, through studying the ratio of oxygen isotopes in ice cores from Greenland and the Antarctic. Isotope tracking helps us understand the flow of ocean currents, the nature of aquifers in parts of the world where water is scarce, the migration of long-dead human populations, and the geological evolution of the earth as well as what is happening in stars.

It’s hard to disentangle one field of scientific research and place it in isolation. The words we use to isolate one from another are only to help humans categorise them – nature does not see it that way. Nuclear physics is so closely interwoven with so much of science and technology, and the social, cultural impact it has had in the last century, that it is interwoven with everything we know and use – we should be thankful for it, not fear it.

City transport needs saving from itself – here's how to do it

Clemens v. Vogelsang/flickr, CC BY-SA

Cities are growing rapidly. According to UN estimates, the world’s urban population grows by two people every second, 7,200 every hour. This means that within two decades, nearly 60% of the world’s population – five billion people – will be city dwellers. In Europe, this figure is already higher – four out of five people (80%) live in cities.

Rapid urbanisation comes with a series of challenges and opportunities for cities. For example, urban areas are responsible for 70% of greenhouse gas emissions and consume three-quarters of the world’s resources. But there are ways cities can address these and other challenges in an integrated way providing safety, security, good quality of life and environmental sustainability.

To do this we must make cities “smart”, by using computer systems and the internet to better balance demand for things like energy, transport and waste management with secure and reliable supply. This will increase the resilience of our infrastructure to both man-made and natural disasters, and reduces cities’ ecological footprint.

Cars as batteries

Already cities are electrifying their mobility services, with electric cars gaining popularity alongside the electrification of rail networks, trams and bus routes. This reduces transport emissions – a major cause of air pollution in cities, but which also has an impact on the grid. The challenge is to integrate them.

Some smart phone apps already do this in a way, allowing drivers to schedule the charging of their electric vehicles (EVs) at night when electricity is cheaper. But through smart grid technologies, cities are moving towards dynamic demand responsive charging, where EVs are automatically charged at times when electricity demand is lowest or when excess renewable energy is available. Smart grids can match charging patterns to the intermittency of renewables such as wind and solar.

Ultimately, EVs could be used as a back-up power supply for our homes during peak times or in emergencies. What’s more, old EV batteries could be reused as back-up to meet short-term peak demand in other systems – for example anaerobic digesters (which break down organic waste to produce biogas) or other energy technologies that otherwise would require costly upgrades to connect to the grid.

Complex intelligence needed Gaellery/flickr, CC BY-NC-ND

Many cities are grid-locked and are struggling to address congestion on their roads and rail networks. To increase capacity, we have a choice between expanding our existing infrastructure, or to use it more intelligently. Instead of infrastructure upgrades that take decades to plan, smart cities use high-speed internet access and sensors to inform, manage, and nudge individuals and freight operators to optimise their journeys.

A trial from the EU-funded Compass4D project equipped key routes in seven EU cities with intelligent traffic lights that provide speed advice to drivers that cross them. This allows the drivers to receive information on a sat nav on how fast to drive in order to get through a series of green traffic lights. It reduces fuel consumption and helps the driver adopt an eco-driving style, reducing emissions in congested urban areas. Early results from the trial show that the use of Compass4D yielded improvements in average journey times, speeds, time spent stationary and power consumption.

Smarter traffic control

The same technology can be used to give priority at intersections for certain vehicle types, such as emergency vehicles to allow them to reach an incident more quickly. Similarly, delayed buses could be given priority at smart intersections, making public transport more reliable and attractive to commuters. Estimates have shown that implementing this technology along all bus priority routes in the northeast of England (approximately 65km of road) would cost the same as laying 200 metres of new asphalt.

Ultimately, this technology could be used to better manage the movement of freight vehicles within urban areas. Trucks could be platooned together and drive autonomously in a convoy or they could be given priority on roads designated as freight corridors, making logistics operations both more energy efficient and reliable.

There are a wide variety of benefits to smart cities but to take full advantage of them they need to be tested at scale and within different contexts as not all cities are the same. They require thinking differently about how we live in cities and improving our understanding of the interaction between cities’ energy, water, transport, waste and digital control systems.

Smart cities are not without risks. The scale and complexity of these urban networks coupled with their ever growing interdependencies could also potentially increase vulnerabilities to climate change and terrorist threats. But the opportunities for managing cities in a more efficient and cost-effective manner are simply too great to not be taken up.

Cutting emissions through biofuels will lead to water shortages – study

Peripitus via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Climate change mitigation could actually increase water shortage in some areas rather than reduce it, according to new research. The source of the problem is clear: greater demand for biofuels, intended to reduce emissions from fossil fuels, requires massive increases in irrigation in productive but relatively arid American farmland.

The study, published in the journal PNAS, is alarming as it suggests one of the major strategies for dealing with global warming may lead to greater political strife. One of climate science’s most confident findings is that an increase in the average surface temperature will lead to greater extremes in amount of rainfall. That is likely to mean more damage from floods and storms in already vulnerable regions, and increased drought in areas that currently experience water shortage. Climate change mitigation strategies are, in theory, designed to avoid or reduce these consequences.

If the unhelpful impact of biofuels comes as a surprise to some, that will be because current models of energy systems typically ignore the fact that water is a limited resource. Links between different aspects of models are often missing or broken. Biofuels require land as well as water, using up valuable farmland that could be used to grow food. Meanwhile irrigation relies heavily on groundwater, a system that functions on longer timescales than most climate models as groundwater is only very slowly replaced.

The Earth is a complex system of interconnected processes; when all of these are accounted for, the “safe operating space for humanity” is significantly reduced, leaving little room for maneouvre.

The new results come with several caveats. Different models project significantly different patterns of change in precipitation, potentially changing the results; results are also likely to depend strongly on projections of population and technology used in the models. There is also disagreement with some previous studies, which do not predict possible increases in drought as a result of climate mitigation. Despite this, there is a clear need for integrated policies that balance the competing and sometimes conflicting demands of closely connected climate, water, energy and food systems.

Modelling local responses to global pressures

A key obstacle to understanding the interaction between the climate, energy and water use is the difficulty of predicting local responses to climate change. The planting decisions of individual farmers are driven by global socio-economic and environmental factors, but these are filtered by, for example, local geography and the tastes of consumers in the region. These small-scale interactions are important but tricky to model.

The new research addresses this, but increased detail at the local level comes at the expense of modelling the full range of possible scenarios.

Most of America’s biofuel comes from corn. Phil Roeder, CC BY

Another major problem is that integrated models, with only a few exceptions, represent the economic system as a single agent with perfect information. In fact, individual behaviour and choices are as critical to future change as geographical variation of climate. Socio-economic background dictates how climate change is likely to affect people – the poor and vulnerable are likely to experience the most damaging effects, while the adoption of new technologies that provides the basis for economic growth is mostly driven by more privileged groups. Representing this diversity is critical, but it is rarely addressed.

Wider problems beyond climate models

Many essential aspects of global change lie outside the modelling domain altogether. Climate policy must also be considered from a legal viewpoint; two solutions that appear to be equally valid from economic and environmental perspectives may have radically different implications with respect to international law. Techology subsidies, for instance, may be ruled out by trade agreements where taxes or tariffs are not. National and international politics – and ethical considerations – add further layers to the analysis of what steps are practically possible.

It is a messy problem, but the fundamental message is clear: we need better integrated modelling for policy solutions that account for all aspects of the Earth system, both natural and sociological. We need integration of approaches between modellers and experts from beyond the modelling sphere and we need new mitigation options that do more than simply reduce atmospheric carbon.

Enhanced weathering – produced by distributing finely ground silicate rock over the land surface, increasing the amount of carbon absorbed during erosion – is one intriguing example that reduces atmospheric CO₂ and ocean acidification, and enhances crop productivity at the same time. With the aid of more informative models, we can find other innovative solutions to solving Earth’s climate crisis.

Researchers would make smarter cuts than management accountants

David Iliff, CC BY-SA

When the government published its long-awaited science and innovation strategy with some fanfare last year it contained largely predictable (if laudable) enthusiastic platitudes. What was new was the announcement of the Nurse Review of the Research Councils.

This was to many minds surprising if not alarming, because the last standard triennial review of the Research Councils had only recently been completed. So that surprise and alarm is greatly increased now that, with no fanfare whatsoever and indeed a slightly under-the-counter feel about it, the government has declared there will be yet another review of Research Council funding. Conducted by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), this new review is expected to report back by September 2015 – potentially several months before that of Sir Paul Nurse.

Clash of the reviews

According to Research Fortnight this review, due to be carried out by McKinsey and Company, is part of a wider review commissioned by BIS aimed at identifying £450m in cuts the chancellor George Osborne has imposed on the department. Efficiency savings are the name of the game. Or in other words, short-term gain regardless of long-term cost.

It is too easy for a management consultant, unfamiliar with the world of science and research, to look at the existence of seven Research Councils and see a quick saving by cutting their numbers. Those in the UK research system are unlikely to see that as a good solution. The recent triennial review concluded that the number of research councils was right. The fact that money is tight doesn’t itself change the validity of that conclusion.

I doubt anyone involved with the Research Councils would presume to say there are absolutely no savings to be made. However, if someone has to decide where the axe should fall, I’m sure all would prefer it to be a respectable bunch of researchers – such as the panel Paul Nurse, the President of the Royal Society, has convened – than high-powered individuals unfamiliar with their world. Objective outsiders challenged to save money may not appreciate the vital parts of the funding ecosystem that they are destroying in the interests of streamlining.

Where does this leave the Nurse review?

Many questions are raised by the McKinsey review. What happens if the resulting report wants drastic changes? Will these be implemented before Sir Paul’s ink is even dry on his own report? Should he and his panel resign straight away? This is a very curious situation for a government-convened panel to find itself in, even if both the government and the relevant secretary of state have changed since it was created.

It could be argued that the two reviews serve different purposes. The remit of the Nurse Review covers many more things than merely efficiency savings, and in fact this is not mentioned in its terms of reference. The McKinsey review is intended to look across the whole of BIS’s work rather than focus on the Research Council structure. Nevertheless, the more recent McKinsey review will undoubtedly impact on the former.

Streamlining in the interests of saving money could, for example, totally scupper any plans to improve interdisciplinary working. What happens if Sir Paul suggests costly new mechanisms to support research that crosses disciplinary boundaries? Is this a non-starter before the ideas are on the table? In summary, is the whole Nurse review turned into a lame duck overnight?

The damage posed by short term cost-cutting

Finally let me return to the point of short-termism. For the long-term growth of our economy, BIS should worry first about how to deliver the productivity and innovation that Osborne’s speeches have highlighted. As is well documented by the Science Campaign and in Mariana Mazzucato’s book The Entrepreneurial State, the UK’s research base is vital in enabling industry to deliver the the productivity and innovation the government desires. University research, funded in large part by the Research Councils, needs long term stability to deliver.

Paul Nurse was challenged to “examine and produce recommendations on how Research Councils can evolve to support research in the most effective ways … that best contribute to sustainable growth”. He has consulted widely, and his work has the potential to produce well-informed decisions that will encourage growth in the UK economy. It may, as it now turns out, be pointless.

So let me make my own recommendation for an efficiency saving. If Osborne, as is claimed, “gets” the importance of research, why doesn’t he suggest that the secretary of state saves money by scrapping the McKinsey Review and sticking with the one already underway? I’m not holding my breath.

#ILookLikeAnEngineer shines a welcome light on industry's diversity

Haters gonna Hate. Isis Wenger/Medium

When a software engineering firm revealed on billboard adverts that at least one of its employees was a young woman who liked her job, the predictable outpouring of sexist trolling was promptly drowned out by a torrent of positive responses. But in truth it should never even have raised an eyebrow.

The advert, shown above, features Isis Anchalee Wenger, a software engineer at OneLogin in San Francisco. In an article posted to Medium she describes herself as a “passionate self-taught engineer, extreme introvert, science-nerd, anime-lover, college dropout, hip hop dancer, yoga teacher/hoop-dance teacher” and states the image is a pretty authentic representation of her, in a black company t-shirt and glasses.

Looks like an engineer to me. Isis Wenger/Medium

Yet when this advert appeared around San Francisco it prompted immediate disdain from commenters on social media. One wrote that it was an “implausible” representation of “what a female software engineer looks like”, while another called for a “friendly smile rather than a sexy smirk”. The implication is: its not possible to be both an “attractive” woman and an engineer. Isis however, is both those things and so much more.

Wenger’s response in the article has gone viral, prompting engineers of all stripes to post to the Twitter hashtag #ILookLikeanEngineer. At a stroke, this breaks down professional stereotypes, posting photos of themselves and explaining what they do. Out of trolling comments has come a celebration not only of women, but of engineering itself.

The advert in situ in the San Franciso metro. Isis Wenger/Medium

Break unhelpful stereotypes

It’s estimated that around 5.5% of engineers in Britain are women, a figure that has remained depressingly stagnant over the past 20 years. For me, this campaign highlights three important aspects of our continuing efforts to support women in engineering and scientific careers.

The first is that of restrictive stereotypes. These are the stereotypes that say women should be pretty, gentle, kind, emotional and quiet. They are the stereotypes that suggest that engineering is about power, strength, logic, getting dirty and making explosions. Fed on a diet of these stereotypes an Ofsted study has shown that, by the age of seven, children have a gendered understanding of what constitutes a suitable career.

Both the Wellcome Trust and the Aspires Project at King’s College London have found that girls and young women are less likely to see themselves in a career in science. Parents also discourage girls’ participation in engineering – only 3% describe engineering as a “desireable” career for their daughters, compared with 12% for their sons.

It’s evident that stereotypes restrict real choice among young women who struggle to bring together the competing identities they’re asked to manage. We must not underestimate the impact of such categorisation that not only blocks women from entering an amazing profession, but also may lead them into less skilled and lower-paid work.

We all hold stereotypes, it’s a sort of cognitive shortcut that allows us to make sense of the world quickly and make judgements. Most of us been brought up in a white-dominant, hetero-normative, patriarchal society. We’ve been steeped in it since birth and it’s hardly surprising that we may all revert, however subconsciously, to ingrained societal norms. But we’re also all capable of understanding where these stereotypes come from, challenging them and recognising the impact they have on people’s real experiences and choices. This campaign is a great way to show the real diversity of the engineering profession and demonstrate that it really can be for everyone.

Overturn cultural sexism

The second key issue this campaign successfully highlights is the ingrained cultural misogyny running within those in the engineering industry, where a failure to recognise one’s “playful" or “harmless” behaviour is making another uncomfortable. As Wenger explains:

This industry’s culture fosters an unconscious lack of sensitivity towards those who do not fit a certain mold. I’m sure that every other women and non-male identifying person in this field has a long list of mild to extreme personal offences that they’ve just had to tolerate.

It’s hard to find a woman in engineering that won’t echo her words. I’ve been groped at work, been told my boss only likes me because I’m pretty, or that I should get on with my career before I start wanting babies. It’s not just that much of this behaviour illegal, it contributes to the narrative that says to women: “this is not for you”. We must, all of us, challenge that narrative wherever we see it.

Future is promising

I am delighted, however, to see such boundless enthusiasm for engineering – tens of thousands taking to social media to declare that they love what they do. I hope this ignites passion in the next generation and reminds those women who are struggling why they chose this career. Because when we restrict people to single stereotypes we limit their opportunities when we should be striving for workplaces that allow everyone to thrive, regardless of their gender or background.