The day he was informed that he had won the Nobel Prize in Medicine, Charles Rice (Sacramento, 1952) learned how to take a selfie. The American virologist still remembers with laughter the craziness of that day in 2020. Or, more precisely, that night in October that didn't start off well. A phone call woke him up.
The paradox is that, after a lifetime dedicated to studying viruses, Rice received the Nobel Prize during the coronavirus pandemic. That did have its positive side, he confesses. "I'm a bit shy, and at least I could do the interviews via Zoom and Skype." This time, we spoke with him in Valencia, taking advantage of his recent participation as a judge in the Rey Jaime I scientific awards.
Did the news catch you in bed?
Yes, I was sleeping when they called me at four-thirty in the morning. Naturally, I got upset. I was in my apartment in New York, and nothing good ever comes through the landline, so I ignored it. But the phone started ringing again, and I thought someone might have trouble in the lab. When I answered, worried, a lady with a Swedish accent told me that I had won the Nobel Prize along with Harvey Alter and Michael Houghton. I thought those guys truly deserved the award, and I started to believe it.
What did you do then?
Half an hour later, the phone rang again. It was a guy asking for a photo. I told him that there was no one to take a picture of me at that moment, and that's when he suggested I take a selfie. I had never taken one before and didn't know how to do it. There I was, learning at that moment, with the guy telling me which button to press, taking pictures of the ceiling, the floor... I won't say I took the perfect photo, but I managed to get it more or less right.
The paradox is that, after a lifetime dedicated to studying viruses, the Nobel Prize came to Rice in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic. That did have its positive side, he confesses. "I am a bit shy, and at least I was able to do interviews via Zoom and Skype." This time, we spoke with him in Valencia, taking advantage of his recent participation as a judge in the Rey Jaime I scientific awards.
Your work led to the discovery of the hepatitis C virus. Will the day come when a vaccine is found?
I hope so because I don't believe we have yet managed to control the virus despite the incredible therapies developed in recent years. One would think that with that capability, it should be easy to identify all infected individuals and treat them. But things are more complex in the real world.
Why is it so difficult to develop a vaccine?
Due to several factors. Despite its fairly simple genomic structure, between 60% and 70% of infected individuals develop a chronic infection, regardless of their immune status. The virus is also highly variable, so developing a specific vaccine that protects against that variability is ambitious. Another aspect has to do with the natural history of the infection. There are many viral infections that make a person immune. However, in the case of hepatitis C, individuals can become reinfected. Additionally, the vaccine should be tested in individuals at risk of infection. The problem is that currently, hepatitis C transmission mainly occurs among drug users, especially injectable drugs. And that is a challenging population for a clinical trial. The other factor is economic. Many vaccines and medications we have are sought because the company holding the rights gains some economic benefit. However, what we still don't know is what kind of immune response the vaccine should produce to protect us. In any case, public health systems vary greatly from country to country.
Experts believe that Spain could eliminate hepatitis C before 2030.
I think the medical community and, in general, the Spanish healthcare system have done an excellent job. The incidence of chronic infection in Spain is probably 10 times lower. It is a great achievement. In the United States, we are not doing as well. We thought that by being able to diagnose hepatitis C infection and having medications, the incidence of acute infections would decrease. However, new cases of acute infections progressing to chronic infections are increasing in the United States due to the opioid epidemic.
A time of great scientific progress coincides with a rise in the anti-vaccine movement. How do you interpret this?
People no longer value science or expert opinions based on facts. It is very frustrating and difficult to explain. Measles, mumps, and rubella are diseases that disappeared thanks to vaccines. Anyone who knows someone who has died from an infection would prefer to get vaccinated rather than take the risk. But with vaccination, people have not experienced the anguish and trauma of seeing a loved one infected, and that's why denialism arises. On the other hand, when a vaccine is administered to millions of people, there can always be someone who reacts badly. And humans tend to focus on negative things and exaggerate them. I don't know how to avoid it.
In addition, scientific denialism has found an echo in an Administration like Donald Trump's...
To make things worse, a person like Robert Kennedy Jr., a staunch anti-vaccine advocate, heads the United States Department of Health. It's unbelievable. He had to tone down his speech: "Don't do what I do. Make your own decision." It's crazy considering that an official has a duty to recommend medical care to the population. It's better not to talk because this interview would last a week.
We recently learned about the death of a comic book legend like Peter David because the public health system in the United States refused to continue funding his medical treatment. What do you think of the healthcare system in your country?
I am not familiar with this specific case, but I am against the healthcare system, beyond Medicaid and Medicare, being based on for-profit companies. I believe that in the United States, there should be a level of universal healthcare that we currently do not have. Healthcare costs in the United States are among the highest in the world, and yet the effectiveness of our system is far from the best. It is unfair to the great diversity of the population we have. It has worsened income inequality. The very rich are getting richer while the middle class and the poor are not improving. And yet, they still believe what Trump tells them.
You are a university professor. Do you consider yourself a target of the president when he attacks institutions like Harvard?
It is a common formula for an Administration or person who wants to control the country. The first step is always to attack educational institutions. I am glad that Harvard is not giving up the fight, but we are discovering how difficult it is to resist. We can only resort to the judicial system. It is doubly irritating because Trump signs these executive orders against Harvard. Harvard sues the Government, and then the Government, with which we disagree, uses our taxes to oppose us. We don't know how this will end with a Supreme Court leaning to the right. Hopefully, a right-leaning judge will recognize that if they allow the executive branch to have more and more power, the judges will also end up not having a say.
Is science politicized?
Definitely. There is a movement underway by the Trump Administration to turn appointments to high-level positions at the National Institutes of Health into political appointments, rather than based on merit and capability. This basically means that the new appointees can dismiss anyone who does not enjoy the favor of the Trump Administration. Of course, we need to analyze the decisions that have been made and whether they truly make sense. In my opinion, they do not.
You wanted to be a veterinarian but ended up as a virologist. How was that change?
It's even crazier than that. I grew up in Sacramento, California, and just 15 miles from where I lived was the University of California, Davis, with a very good veterinary faculty. I have loved animals since I was a child because I don't have siblings. My siblings were the dogs, just as my children are today. So, I thought studying veterinary medicine would be a good experience. But when I got to college, I took an introductory biology course with a fantastic and very motivating professor who got me interested in developmental biology. I ended up studying sea urchins because you can get a sperm and an egg and observe fertilization with a simple microscope. I thought, "This is what I'm going to do." Then I didn't know if I wanted to pursue a graduate degree or not, so I traveled through Central and South America for a year. In the end, I decided to go to the California Institute of Technology, although I was not assigned to the sea urchin lab but to a virology lab. And that's how I became a virologist. It was a completely fortuitous event that was never on the path I wanted to follow. My life is like everyone else's. Some things just happen.
You were awarded the Nobel Prize in 2020. Did you ever imagine that the world would face a pandemic like Covid?
As a virologist, and knowing what I know about viruses, in a horse race, I would bet on the virus and win. The total number of viruses is inconceivable. There are many viruses that we cannot eliminate, like the flu virus. It's the Elvis of viruses, it never dies.