I don’t always have difficulty getting in touch with sources for an article, but it’s not always easy.

A couple of years ago, while researching transcranial magnetic stimulation, I was denied at every turn. Some PIOs didn’t return calls. One swore she had twice talked to the researcher I was trying to interview and that he said he would call.

He never did.

Another PIO responded to my request to speak to a particular researcher with something to the effect of, “I am sorry, I cannot help you.”

Dr. Stephen Hauser has been in the news a lot recently, thanks to the FDAs approval of Ocrevus, a new drug for MS. Hauser led the research team behind the new drug, which is the first to be approved for primary progressive MS.

I was asked to write a piece for NPR’s SHOTS blog about being a patient faced with this decision: to take or not to take the newest drug. The first thing I decided to do was call Dr. Hauser. The last thing I expected was the response I got from media relations: an upbeat email saying Dr. Hauser would like to speak to me and how soon could I talk?

Hauser was surely being bombarded with requests and he surely had no idea who I was. I wasn’t STAT, or the Washington Post, I’m a random freelancer.

We had such an interesting discussion; his passion all but reached through the phone and shook me. But, surprisingly, after a touching on the idea of a vaccination for MS – holy cow! – I understood that his passion wasn’t solely about ocrevus.

Because of today’s politics, he said, we need to make sure that people understand that science works.

Hauser picked up the pace, saying that young people considering a career in science need to know that they can make a difference. Financiers need to see what a good investment research is. And everyone needs to know that this process – investments, research, clinical trials – is how we get healthier.

Regardless of what happens with ocrevus — with its long-term safety, its affordability, its potential as a stepping stone to new treatments — this is something that I’d like to encounter more frequently, an understanding of how scientific research impacts different areas of society, and the drive to explain that impact to the public.

And, of course, the willingness to grant interviews.