The Scientist: NewsBlog:
Six biologists win Nat'l Medal
Posted by Edyta Zielinska
[Entry posted at 18th September 2009 03:12 PM GMT]
Francis Collins and J. Craig Venter, former adversaries in the race for sequencing the human genome, are two of the six life scientist who will receive the National Medal of Science this year.
Another winner, Elaine Fuchs, is a developmental cell biologist at The Rockefeller University and a Howard Hugh Medical Institute investigator. Her work focuses on multipotent stem cells of the skin. In 2006, she received the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology Award for Scientific Excellence. Biochemist JoAnne Stubbe from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, whom The Scientist recently profiled, is being honored for her work on enzymes involved in DNA replication and repair. Neuroscientist Michael Posner, professor emeritus at the University of Oregon, is being recognized for his studies involving genetic mutations and attention in the brain. Three other scientists -- mathematician Rudolf Kalman of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, astrophysicist James Gunn of Princeton University, and physicist Berni Alder of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -- will also receive the award. The awards will be presented at a ceremony at the White House on October 7th. Related stories: [9th July 2009] [4th September 2007] [2nd March 2008] |
Rate this article
Well done Craig!
by JOHN COLLINS
[Comment posted 2009-09-22 04:30:15]
[Comment posted 2009-09-22 04:30:15]
I wonder what Anonymous("Venter?") thinks are the qualities of a true scientist?
Perhaps someone driven by curiosity and wanting to contribute with his abilities to the improvement of knowledge that can profit mankind? Someone who has revolutionized technology by refusing to accept the narrow mindedness of a clique of nay-sayers? Someone with the intellect to see what was necessary to drive this advance rapidly and at a reasonable cost? Someone able of convincing other scientists to join his vision and able to find funding in innovative ways? If that is part of being a scientist, then Craig Venter certainly is THE scientist of the last decade of the last millenium.
But perhaps 'anonymous' was thinking of the "US in-crowd" of the late 70s and 80s, and their army of technicians, graduate students, and foreign post-docs who were constantly bickering over carving up the ? 3 billion public funded "human genome grant pie" they had set up for themselves. Has science come down to this? I think not.
In a similar vein of thought, perhaps it is also high time to ask for a re-evaluation (cost/benefit) of the scientific (or any other) use of the current massive expansion of genome-wide association (GWA) studies to define disease-associated regions. Could it be that on the eve of a massive price reduction in the area of sequencing technology a two year moratorium might be sensible, in order to better invest the money in other scientif projects?
Perhaps someone driven by curiosity and wanting to contribute with his abilities to the improvement of knowledge that can profit mankind? Someone who has revolutionized technology by refusing to accept the narrow mindedness of a clique of nay-sayers? Someone with the intellect to see what was necessary to drive this advance rapidly and at a reasonable cost? Someone able of convincing other scientists to join his vision and able to find funding in innovative ways? If that is part of being a scientist, then Craig Venter certainly is THE scientist of the last decade of the last millenium.
But perhaps 'anonymous' was thinking of the "US in-crowd" of the late 70s and 80s, and their army of technicians, graduate students, and foreign post-docs who were constantly bickering over carving up the ? 3 billion public funded "human genome grant pie" they had set up for themselves. Has science come down to this? I think not.
In a similar vein of thought, perhaps it is also high time to ask for a re-evaluation (cost/benefit) of the scientific (or any other) use of the current massive expansion of genome-wide association (GWA) studies to define disease-associated regions. Could it be that on the eve of a massive price reduction in the area of sequencing technology a two year moratorium might be sensible, in order to better invest the money in other scientif projects?
ECLECTIC GROUP OF WINNERS
by anonymous poster
[Comment posted 2009-09-18 20:58:46]
[Comment posted 2009-09-18 20:58:46]
Wonderful !!
Congratulation to all the winners . However
the eclectic nature of this " roster " of
selected winners is....disquieting .
It seems that the match-up is more than
science driven !! One has just to go for
the classic PubMed search and spice it up with
accceptable bio's (eg : without the spin )...
Life and life sciences is full of..surprises
OR NOT !!!!
May the next decades prove their individual
scientific resilience...The good old ,albeit
imperfect, test of time.
I shall be waiting another fifty years......
Congratulation to all the winners . However
the eclectic nature of this " roster " of
selected winners is....disquieting .
It seems that the match-up is more than
science driven !! One has just to go for
the classic PubMed search and spice it up with
accceptable bio's (eg : without the spin )...
Life and life sciences is full of..surprises
OR NOT !!!!
May the next decades prove their individual
scientific resilience...The good old ,albeit
imperfect, test of time.
I shall be waiting another fifty years......
Venter?
by anonymous poster
[Comment posted 2009-09-18 13:07:13]
[Comment posted 2009-09-18 13:07:13]
J. Craig Venter may be to human genome what Bill Gates is to computer operating systems, but he is no more a scientist than Gates is. They are, however, both genial entrepreneurs who have real scientists and engineers working for them, of course.
Comment on this blog