ABSTRACT
Since the publication of the first ancient DNA sequence in 1984, experimental methods used to recover ancient DNA have advanced greatly, illuminating previously unknown branches of the human family tree and opening up several promising new avenues for future studies of human evolution. The 2022 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded to Svante Pääbo, director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, for his work on ancient DNA and human evolution. On his first day back at work, he was thrown in the pond as part of his institute's tradition of celebrating award winners.
Subject(s)
Medicine , Nobel Prize , Male , Humans , DNA, Ancient , Genome, Human/genetics , GermanyABSTRACT
A. V. Hill was awarded the 1922 Nobel Prize, jointly with Otto Meyerhof, for Physiology or Medicine for his work on energetic aspects of muscle contraction. Hill used his considerable mathematical and experimental skills to investigate the relationships among muscle mechanics, biochemistry and heat production. The main ideas of the work for which the Nobel Prize was awarded were superseded within a decade, and the legacy of Hill and Meyerhof's Nobel work was not a set of persistent, influential ideas but rather a prolonged period of extraordinary activity that advanced the understanding of how muscles work far beyond the concepts that led to the Nobel Prize. Hill pioneered the integration of mathematics into the study of physiology and pharmacology. Particular aspects of Hill's own work that remain in common use in muscle physiology include mathematical descriptions of the relationships between muscle force output and shortening velocity and between force output and calcium concentration, and the model of muscle as a contractile element in series with an elastic element. We describe some of the characteristics of Hill's broader scientific activities and then outline how Hill's work on muscle energetics was extended after 1922, as a result of Hill's own work and that of others, to the present day.
Subject(s)
Muscles , Nobel Prize , Muscle Contraction/physiologyABSTRACT
Objective:Based on the analysis of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine from 1946 to present, summarize key factors of biomedical research management at universities, to provide suggestions for the improvement of biomedical research management in China.Methods:Using the official website of Nobel Foundation as database, combined with documents and literature review, data of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, which including the nationality of the winners, the age at which the Nobel Prize were made, the employer as well as the discipline were analyzed.Results:An evaluation system based on peer review plays important roles in scientific and technological innovation.The breakthrough works are usually achieved by the scientists in their youth, however, the time for the recognition of their work is gradually increasing.The interdisciplinary research is more and more important.Conclusions:By analyzing the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, China needs to establish a comprehensive talent evaluation system that focus on training young scholars and strengthen cross-disciplinary integration to improve the biomedical research management.
ABSTRACT
William Osler died on December 29, 1919, at the age of 70. Less than 1 year later, Frederick Grant Banting began a research project at the University of Toronto to find a treatment for diabetes mellitus. John James Rickard Macleod, director of physiology, gave him space, funding, and supplies. Charles Herbert Best, an undergraduate medical student, joined Banting. In 1921, Banting and Best isolated and purified insulin from pancreatic extracts of dogs. James Bertram Collip, a biochemist, helped in the purification process. The first American patient was treated with Toronto insulin in May 1922. Banting and Macleod were awarded the Nobel Prize in 1923 "for the discovery of insulin." George Richards Minot, a young hematologist in Boston, had an obsessive interest in the effect of diet on anemia. In October 1921, Minot developed weight loss and was diagnosed with severe diabetes mellitus. By January 1923, the pioneering diabetologist, Elliott Proctor Joslin, began to treat Minot with insulin. Minot's condition improved and he returned to work. In 1926, Minot and William Parry Murphy amazed the medical world when they eradicated anemia in 45 pernicious anemia patients by feeding them a half-pound of beef liver daily. Minot shared the 1934 Nobel Prize with Murphy and George Hoyt Whipple "for their discoveries concerning liver therapy in cases of anemia." Minot remained on insulin the rest of his life. Osler described the clinical findings and blood picture of pernicious anemia nearly a half century before Minot but his observations were largely ignored. Osler had an intriguing connection to Banting. Had he lived, Osler would have been ecstatic over these two monumental therapeutic breakthroughs.
Subject(s)
Nobel Prize , Physiological Phenomena , Muscles , Oxygen , Respiratory Physiological PhenomenaABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This paper provides for the first time an overview of orthopaedic surgeons nominated for the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine during the first six decades of the twentieth century. The study is part of the project "Enacting Excellency: Nobel Prize nominations for surgeons 1901-1960". METHODS: The nomination letters were gathered in the archive of the Nobel Committee at the Karolinska Institute in Solna, Sweden. RESULTS: Among the nominees, we find renowned scholars like Pierre Delbet, Themistocles Gluck, Gerhard Küntscher, Adolf Lorenz, Friedrich Pauwels, Leslie Rush, and Marius Smith-Petersen. The focus of the paper is on nominations for Pauwels (work on biomechanics) and Küntscher (the Küntscher nail). Both were nominated by German surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Although no orthopaedic surgeon has yet received a Nobel Prize for an orthopaedic achievement, Nobel archive files can help reconstruct important trends in the field during the twentieth century.
Subject(s)
Orthopedic Procedures/history , Orthopedics/history , History, 20th Century , Humans , Nobel Prize , SwedenABSTRACT
This special edition of the Biomedical Journal honors the awarding of the 2016 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine to Yoshinori Ohsumi for his pioneering work on elucidating the mechanisms of autophagy. We also highlight a study reporting a new and simple animal model for a widespread surgical technique called interbody spinal fusion. Finally, this issue also includes two articles reporting protocols that could produce specific cell types for cell based therapies.
Subject(s)
Autophagy/physiology , Nobel Prize , Animals , Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy , Humans , Models, AnimalABSTRACT
In 1902, the Berlin Jewish urologist James Israel was nominated for the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine. Taking scholar, social, and political aspects into consideration, this biographical essay traces how James Israel gained a sound scientific reputation especially in kidney surgery within Imperial Germany and its antisemitic attitude and how he promoted urology to become a specialty in its own right.
Subject(s)
Jews/history , Nephrectomy/history , Nobel Prize , Prejudice/history , Urologic Diseases/history , Urology/history , History, 19th Century , History, 20th Century , HumansABSTRACT
Public excitement over the award of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine to the Chinese medical scientist You-you TU for the discovery of a herbal anti-malarial, may mislead the Chinese people into believing that traditional Chinese herbal medi-cine can be used to cure all disease without any ad-verse effects. The aim of this paper is to explain the advantages and disadvantages of herbal traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) objectively.
Subject(s)
Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use , Malaria/drug therapy , Medicine, Chinese Traditional/adverse effects , Nobel Prize , China , Humans , Plant Preparations/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Por ocasião do sexagésimo aniversário da atribuição, em 1949, do prêmio Nobel da Medicina ou Fisiologia a Egas Moniz e a Walter Rudolf Hess, foram evocadas as circunstâncias que explicam a singular nobelização. Chama-se atenção para os traços biográficos de Egas Moniz, que são também os de muitos médicos da sua geração, asssim como dos pormenores que se prendem com o processo de nomeação e avaliação científica visando à candidatura ao prêmio Nobel. São também discutidos aspectos de ligação entre a cultura e a ciência, designadamente as controvérsias à volta do prêmio que lhe foi atribuído.
On the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the award in 1949, the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine granted to Egas Moniz and Walter Rudolf Hess, the circumstances that explain the unique Nobel award require elucidation. Attention is drawn to the biographical traits of Egas Moniz, which are also those of many doctors of his generation, as well as the details which relate to the process of nomination and scientific appraisal to be eligible for the Nobel Prize. Aspects of the link between culture and science are also discussed, including the controversies surrounding the award conferred upon him.
