From the labs of Millersville University, to the halls of Yale University, to the classrooms of Georgetown University, Dr. Michael Parker '12 has built a distinguished career in science and higher education. As the current assistant dean at Georgetown University, Parker utilizes his bachelor's degree in biology from Millersville and his doctorate in immunobiology from Yale to support the next generation of researchers.

Parker teaches coursework in the Department of Biology and leads a team of undergraduate researchers focused on the history and implications of the select agent regulations, which are federal rules governing the possession, use and transfer of harmful biological agents and toxins.

"There is incredible power in the ability to manipulate biology, and thus an inherent need to do so responsibly," says Parker. "Understanding pathogens to better protect health necessarily includes decisions and infrastructures along the way to protect the user and the public from the threat of accidents, releases or malevolent use."

MU: How did your undergraduate foundation in biology at Millersville prepare you for your later work at Yale?

Parker: As I was applying to graduate school, it became clear to me that the rigor of the biology major at Millersville had been great preparation. While giving me a strong and broad foundation, the flexibility of the electives I could take for my major also allowed me to take a few courses in my specific discipline of interest (like virology, medical microbiology and immunology).

Critically, I was afforded the opportunity to conduct research with Millersville faculty members during my first year, which later became internships at other institutions each summer in Oklahoma, Iowa and California. Being an athlete on the men's track and field team and cross-country teams, I didn't have as much time to dedicate to research during the school year as I would have liked, so these summer opportunities were critical in preparing me for the laboratory component of a Ph.D. in science. I was fortunate to be accepted into the prestigious Amgen Scholars Program at the University of California, San Diego as a rising senior, and the research I conducted that summer was particularly crucial to my acceptance into selective graduate programs. Once I arrived at Yale, even though I still had a lot to learn, these undergraduate experiences had collectively provided the knowledge base and technical skills necessary for success.

Importantly, I also supplemented my undergraduate learning in college with minors in chemistry and art. Each played a role in my success as a scholar at the graduate level and beyond. Chemistry was an excellent preparation for technical work at the graduate level, most notably to understand the equipment and procedures behind the detailed molecular study of biological molecules. And while I didn't know it at the time, my minor in art would prove supremely useful in research, to this day. Art allows me to have an eye and talent for developing visual representations of scientific information to enhance the communication of my research. Further, it stimulated a larger interest and capacity to ideate creatively and in interdisciplinary ways. My current research (in science policy) is a large testament to that, and I use my training in art constantly.

MU: Could you explain the significance of your research on innate immune responses?

Parker: Having just lived through a pandemic, I think everyone understands how critical it is to understand the biology of how pathogens infect and affect us. Indeed, the ability to generate vaccines and drugs against a new virus was historically rapid in 2020, and the foundation for that success comes from studies that seek to understand the basic mechanisms of biology.

I'm most interested in innate immunity - the part of the immune system that quickly recognizes common features shared by many pathogens. These built-in defenses act as an early response to infection and also help create long-lasting, targeted immunity, like what we aim for with vaccines.

I'm especially interested in RNA viruses, which are some of the most significant threats to public health today. Surprisingly, research has shown that immune pathways that usually target DNA also help fight these RNA viruses - even though those viruses don't produce DNA during their life cycles.

I spent my Ph.D. trying to understand that. What we found was that there are many species of DNA in cells that may be generated, released or damaged during infection, and that seems to activate the DNA arm of innate immune responses. The field is still evolving, but this understanding is already shaping our approaches to developing applied therapeutics such as vaccines, both for infectious diseases as well as other diseases like cancer.

MU: As an accomplished curler, are there any parallels between the strategy and precision required in curling and the focus required in your scientific research?

Parker: By the end of college, my knees were telling me that I should probably find a new sport. What drew me to curling initially was its uniqueness. I think many of us, watching curling for the first time, furrow our brow and think "how odd," but then half an hour later, we're yelling "sweeeeeep!!!"

And that isn't so far afield from the idea of scientific inquiry. The part of science I find intriguing is the unknown. While many people are repelled by uncertainty, scientists actively choose to live there. The process of generating hypotheses and performing experiments to uncover answers to those unknowns means that while you live in uncertainty, you're actively reducing it, too.

In curling, you're calculating, analyzing and strategizing how to get your desired result. And the conditions are constantly changing; as your opponent makes their shots, you make yours, all while the physical environment of the ice evolves throughout a game. In many ways, precise execution in curling is much like the enterprise of science, and that's born out in the idea that the number of years of experience is a stronger predictor of relative performance than age, strength, speed and physical talent. Practice makes perfect(ish). And, as a competitive person, it was also fun to have success at the national level!

So, while I was scratching many of the same itches on the ice, it was also an escape from the laboratory. I could turn my mind to something completely different, but still intellectually stimulating. Given my history as an athlete, pairing those feelings with physical exertion and precision was natural for me. But science is often a lonely endeavor - long hours by yourself (in my case) in a containment laboratory working in a biosafety hood. This was starkly different from curling, which is not only a team-cooperative sport but also has a strong social culture. I met many people and made friends on and off the ice while curling. That community was completely separate from the scientific one I was in, providing me with a well-rounded life.

MU: Would you like to share anything else?

Parker: While I'm no longer working hands-on in foundational studies at the lab, I continue to conduct research. I study the intersection of policy and science, leading a team of undergraduate researchers in that endeavor. What makes our group different is that we ask questions meant to inform modern policy based on historical actions and decisions, through deep analysis of those sources or by interviewing the players involved. All these years later, I'm still utilizing the concepts I learned as an undergraduate regularly, to hopefully contribute to a more bio-secure future.