Marisa Roberto has lived and worked as a researcher in the United States for 11 years but would be prepared to return to Italy if a good opportunity were to arise. An Associate Professor in the Committee on the Neurobiology of Addictive Disorders at the Scripps Research Institute in California, and a member of the Aspen’s “Italian talent abroad” group, Dr. Roberto makes no attempt to conceal her pride in reciting the capabilities of Italian scientists. In the following interview with the Aspen Italia website team, she maintains that in order to shine with renewed luster and attract scholars once more, Italy needs to adopt a less pessimistic approach – the only way to trigger a new virtuous cycle of economic and cultural prosperity.
What research pursuits took you to California?
After graduating in biology at Pisa in 1996, I chose to continue my studies by embarking on a PhD in neuroscience. In my third year, I was at a good point with my thesis, and a professor on the committee offered me an opportunity to spend a period of time abroad. I took him up on it. I left for San Diego with just a smattering of English and I was immediately assigned to a project that went beyond what I was doing in Italy. It was a crucial experience for me: the professor set me the task of studying the effects of alcohol on the amygdala and told me we would discuss the results within six months, leaving me with complete freedom to get on with the project. I spent nine months in San Diego, generating data which I would later include in my doctoral thesis. After receiving my doctorate, I continued to do lab work for 8 months, looking for a job opportunity in an Italian university, but I was offered further work in San Diego and so I packed my bags and left again.
You had the opportunity of putting your skills to the test whilst still a postgraduate student. What did your colleagues in the field think of the training you received in Italy, and what advantage did it give you?
In Italy, we receive a good grounding in the fundamentals, so when we go abroad, we are better-equipped and can adapt easily – that’s why many Italians do well. Without a doubt, I had a better grounding than what I came across in the United States, plus I knew how to get on with things on my own in the laboratory, without technicians or assistants. Besides, I’d already realized this in the UK, where I had spent some time after graduating. I found the US to be a fertile ground: I had a good foundation, but I still worked my way up. I’m dedicated to what I do, and I’m grateful for the opportunity that the American university system has given me. I’m aware that I would probably never have been able to achieve the same results in Italy. But although I’ve lived in the United States for more than 11 years now, my country is Italy and I hope to return “home” in the future.
So the training Italian researchers receive makes them “attractive”, but what could make Italy equally attractive from a research perspective?
Things would all be better in Italy if there was “brain circulation”, as being able to point to positive developments would help counter the pessimism. Unfortunately, there is an entrenched perception abroad that Italy lacks meritocracy and doesn’t invest enough in research. We need to make Italy more competitive and try to attract international talent. It takes years to turn things around as they tend to go in cycles, but if we manage to pull it off, Italy will experience a new wave of economic and cultural prosperity. I’m trying to do my bit at this end by working with the University of Camerino and organizing international conferences in Volterra, my hometown, where 200 scientists come together to discuss stress and alcoholism. Italy is Italy, and if I can do something for the country I will.
What work are you currently engaged in?
I’m studying the effects on the brain of alcohol and drugs of abuse in general, such as nicotine, cocaine and opioids. It’s a fascinating area, and especially for me seeing as – despite being the daughter of a Tuscan wine producer – I’m a teetotaler. Alcohol and the addiction it can cause are problems that are much underestimated both here and in Europe, because it is considered a legal drug that is part of our everyday lives, and not as a substance of abuse. The issue is taken particularly lightly by young people, who start drinking at 12 years of age in spite of minimum legal age limits and the fact that the damage caused by drugs of abuse taken in adolescence can be quite disastrous. Nor should the costs associated with alcoholism be overlooked: governments spend billions of dollars on related healthcare expenses and dealing with indirect costs such as domestic violence and car or work accidents. As a research team, we’re studying new molecules that could potential be developed into treatments to limit the damage caused by alcoholism and to help prevent people from starting to drink again once they’ve stopped.
