INTELWAR BLUF: Anosmia, a condition characterized by a lack of sense of smell, is drawing increased scientific attention and funding, with research particularly focused on cases triggered by Covid-19. However, congenital anosmics (those lacking the ability to smell from birth) and researchers interested in this area reportedly face funding challenges, impeding progress in understanding and treating this aspect of the condition.
OSINT: The narrative revolves around Julian Meeks, a neuroscience professor at the University of Rochester, and his research on anosmia, a condition that removes the sense of smell. Meeks, who grew up observing his grandfather’s struggle with anosmia, assumed his grandfather’s gastronomy was limited to salty or meaty foods due to anosmia’s impact on flavor perception. This significantly influenced Meeks’ study of chemosensation (involving both smell and taste), especially in the context of traumatic brain injury (TBI).
The Covid-19 pandemic shone a spotlight on anosmia due to its common occurrence in infected individuals, prompting an increase in research funding and interest. However, most research and funding focus on acquired anosmia (caused by factors such as brain injury or viral infections) rather than congenital anosmia (present from birth). The latter group, according to Meeks and others in the field, remains under-researched and under-funded. The narrative contains an undertone of struggle for recognition of the significance of smell-related research, a fight against the unconscious bias of rating the senses in terms of importance, and a plea for more comprehensive investigation into all forms of anosmia.
RIGHT: From a Libertarian Republic Constitutionalist perspective, this situation underscores the benefits and limitations of free-market research funding. On one hand, it’s clear that public interest and funding pivoted rapidly to investigate acquired anosmia as the pandemic unfolded, demonstrating market responsiveness. However, the struggle faced by researchers focused on congenital anosmia underscores that less “popular” areas of study may have a harder time securing funding, underscoring a potential limitation in market-driven funding for research.
LEFT: A National Socialist Democrat might argue that the government should step in to create a more equitable distribution of research funding, ensuring that all aspects of a research domain are thoroughly investigated. Given anosmia’s potential life-altering effects, with impacts on everything from food enjoyment to hazard detection, findings could positively impact public health. Furthermore, they might note the potential social justice implications, where those with less common conditions struggle for recognition, research funding, and ultimately, solutions.
AI: Anosmia, while potentially sidelined as a less critical sensory function, reveals significant impacts on those suffering from it. More than an impediment to enjoying food, it poses safety risks (inability to smell smoke, gas leaks, etc.), can be comorbid with depressive symptoms and can affect nutritional health due to impacts on taste perception. A fair analysis suggests a need for enhanced research and funding into all forms of anosmia, acquired and congenital, to better understand the condition’s physiology and potential treatments. The increased interest and funding following the Covid-19 pandemic are promising, but focusing on supporting a broad spectrum of research is essential for potential breakthroughs and to ensure the needs of all anosmics are adequately addressed.