On May 16, during the 55th Annual Meeting of the Brazilian Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (SBBq), held in Águas de Lindóia (SP), the roundtable “Challenges and perspectives of the academic career: an SBBq Jovem meeting” brought together early-career researchers to discuss dilemmas, expectations, and possibilities within – and beyond – academia. Organized by Filipe Nogueira Franco (Unifesp), the session aimed to create a space for exchange and identification among participants, fostering dialogue about uncertainties, career trajectories, and different ways of building a career in science.

Throughout the discussion, moderators Gabriel Araujo (USP and CEPID B3), Amanda da Anunciação Farhat (USP), and Letícia Silva Ferraz (Unifesp), alongside Franco, shared their academic paths and raised important reflections on the concentration of scientific research in Brazil’s Southeast region. For Franco, it is essential to broaden perspectives. “Open your horizons to other places. Brazil is vast, with many fields and many opportunities”, he said.

The roundtable also addressed a recurring question among graduate students: what motivates people to remain in academia despite well-known challenges? “Why do we enter and stay in graduate school knowing the difficulties?” Farhat asked. According to her, choosing science involves constant reflection. “Academia is a daily choice. It is important to look at it from multiple perspectives – not necessarily all good, nor necessarily all bad,” she argued.

Among the main obstacles mentioned were financial instability, the limited availability of permanent positions, and uncertainty about the future – issues that also emerged in a prior survey conducted with the audience. The data indicate that most participants rate their satisfaction with a scientific career as moderate: on a scale from 1 to 5, 34% gave it a score of 3, while only 3.1% gave the highest score. Even so, many still intend to pursue academic paths: 53% expressed interest in teaching and research at public universities, and 43.8% in public research institutions. Alternatives such as industry (28.1%), entrepreneurship (12.5%), and scientific consulting (12.5%) also appear as possible career routes.

For Farhat, academic training prepares professionals to contribute across different contexts. “In academia, we do a lot with very little. Imagine how much we can add in environments that operate under different systems”, she said. Transitioning outside academia, however, is still seen as a challenge. “Many people end up staying in academia because of the insecurity surrounding this transition. We rarely discuss how to make that move,” noted one participant. Ferraz emphasized the importance of recognizing the value of skills developed during graduate training. “It is up to us to demonstrate that the abilities we acquire can indeed be applied in other contexts”, she argued.

In closing, the roundtable conveyed a clear message: rather than a single path, a scientific career is shaped by choices, adaptations, and, above all, continuous reflection on one’s role both within and beyond academia.