Slashdot Mirror
Nobel Prize in Chemistry Awarded to Trio of Evolutionary Scientists (theguardian.com)
Three scientists have won the Nobel prize in chemistry for their work in harnessing evolution to produce new enzymes and antibodies. From a report: British scientist Sir Gregory P Winter and Americans Frances H Arnold and George P Smith will share the 9m Swedish kronor ($1 million) prize, awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Half of the prize goes to Arnold, from the California Institute of Technology, for her work on directing the evolution of enzymes -- proteins that speed up chemical reactions. In a nutshell, Arnold introduced genetic mutations into enzymes, and then looked to see what effect the mutations had. She then selected the cases where a particular mutation proved useful -- for example, allowing the enzyme to work in a solvent it would otherwise not work in. Her work has made it possible to cut out the use of many toxic catalysts and has led to the development of enzymes for all manner of fields, including the development of biofuels and the production of pharmaceuticals.
The other half of the award goes to Winter and Smith, for their work on "phage display of peptides and antibodies." A phage is a virus that can infect bacteria, "tricking" bacteria to reproduce it. Smith genetically engineered phages so that they would include a certain molecule on their outer capsule which allowed him to that encompasses out particular proteins crop up on the outer. Winter used this technology to develop new drugs that have transformed medicine, offering therapies for diseases ranging from cancer to autoimmune conditions. Arnold is only the fifth woman to be awarded the prize for Chemistry -- the last female scientist to scoop the award was Ada E. Yonath in 2009 who shared the prize for her work on understanding the structure of ribosomes: the protein-manufacturing structures inside cells.
The other half of the award goes to Winter and Smith, for their work on "phage display of peptides and antibodies." A phage is a virus that can infect bacteria, "tricking" bacteria to reproduce it. Smith genetically engineered phages so that they would include a certain molecule on their outer capsule which allowed him to that encompasses out particular proteins crop up on the outer. Winter used this technology to develop new drugs that have transformed medicine, offering therapies for diseases ranging from cancer to autoimmune conditions. Arnold is only the fifth woman to be awarded the prize for Chemistry -- the last female scientist to scoop the award was Ada E. Yonath in 2009 who shared the prize for her work on understanding the structure of ribosomes: the protein-manufacturing structures inside cells.
Maybe the phage treatment will get the attention it deserves as a viable alternative to antibiotics!
IANAC, but wouldn't it be more accurate to say she programmed those enzymes?
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
For the first time, Physics _and_ Chemistry, 2018.
Congratulations Strickland and Arnold!
Now, Slashdot, you may commence your usual loathsome misogynistic/racist rants.
We no longer expect any better from you.
Ima let you finish but scientists who believe in God had the BEST RESEARCH EVER!
Fixed those quotation marks for you.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Here in Sweden.
Considering both this prize and the previous on yesterday include a female one gotta ask whatever they went with merits and it's just a coincidence it happened now or whatever these are kinda forced political choices due to media/political pressure.
"arnold is only the fifth woman to be awarded the prize for chemistry. the last female scientist to scoop the award was ada e. yonath in 2009"
does that matter? it shouldn't. in my opinion.
and shouldn't be highlighted. as if noting the fulfillment, or not, of some quota.
Yes, this is exactly the question. And the problem.
There should be no doubt that these women deserve those laurels. Their accomplishments are groundbreaking, both in physics and chemistry those Prizes went to the right people. This will change the world and we will soon see research jump forwards due to those accomplishments. These women worked hard for those goals and I do not doubt that they dedicated years if not decades of their life to be where they are now.
And without the constant whining from the alleged feminists (I can't in good faith believe they actually give a shit about the advancement of gender equality anymore, sorry), this would stand by itself. There would be NO doubt, from anyone, that these merits are fully deserved.
Thanks. Thanks a lot, you whiny, self absorbed bitches who never accomplished, or ever will accomplish, anything in your lives for ruining this for these great women. Thank you so much. You know that you'll never amount to anything and can only ever hope to get any kind of accolades if you skew and twist the rules until you get your participation trophy for belonging to a certain group. And you don't give a FUCK about anyone else from the group that actually CAN and DO accomplish anything.
Go to hell, assholes!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
what is wrong with this sentence?: "Smith genetically engineered phages so that they would include a certain molecule on their outer capsule which allowed him to that encompasses out particular proteins crop up on the outer."
"arnold is only the fifth woman to be awarded the prize for chemistry. the last female scientist to scoop the award was ada e. yonath in 2009"
does that matter? it shouldn't. in my opinion.
and shouldn't be highlighted. as if noting the fulfillment, or not, of some quota.
Because women in science is a rarity - especially those that win Nobels. And I think it would encourage some young women to continue with science because they will have role models.
And maybe get some men to chill out. I've seen female students be ignored and even actively discouraged from going into science and engineering. "Do you plan on having a family one day? A scientific career is very challenging and requires your full attention." - heard that one myself.
It's all these little things that build up over time that discourages people. Let's try some empathy here: how many of you learned "through osmosis" that you suck at sports? Do you really or were you told by others who had no business telling you that? I had a chemistry professor years ago who told us that he loved playing football but his graduate advisor said, "Scientists don't play football."
It's the same with people of color. Fortunately, Neil De Grasse Tyson was lucky enough to have caught the attention of Carl Sagan who encouraged him. I wonder how many unfortunate brilliant kids are stuck in some inner city shithole and would never even consider a career in science because it's just off their radar. And it's a loss to all of us.
Your a product of your environment and it is very very difficult to break out of it. And with upward mobility becoming a thing of the past here in the USA, I think we're headed for some dark times - a definitely times were we are going to fall behind the rest of the World.
I notice that Wikipedia politically corrected itself already today. Earlier, it had the story of this (joke of an) award on its front page, with one of the men's photos featured. His photo has been deleted and been replaced with the woman's photo. Not because she's the best, but because she's a woman.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
They should use evolution feedback to continuously respond to bacteria that are developing immunity to antibiotics.
E Proelio Veritas.
You should read Alfred Nobels testament. His idea of who should receive the prize probably differs a lot from your idea of it.
Sharing a prize for research in the same field I've seen plenty of times before, but these are clearly two entirely separate areas of research. Is this split weird or have I just been paying too little attention?
If this trend continues women will be half the Nobel Prize winners. We need some alpha males to go show all these cucks how real men do science, by pushing men and women out of the way with pure masculine energy. Science is theirs by right!
No joke. Half of our software team is women. They're fine developers and engineers equal in knowledge and ability to any man here. There's never any question that they know what they're doing and they always approach problems as technical issues to be solve rationally. The fact that that needs said is fucking embarrassing. If someone is constantly whining about women in tech, the problem isn't the women, it's that the person doing the whining is a weak, emotionally stunted, bitchy little man-child.
You can't even get your propaganda right. Fossils aren't satanic. They were placed there by God himself as a test of faith for his flock. Because we all NEED to be tested and PASS THAT TEST or we are not worthy of his love. So pull your head out, and get your shit straight, or you'll burn in hell for all eternity. And there's nothing that pisses off Lucifer more than being falsely accused of something his father did, so you'll get "the special treatment."
IMHO, Nobel Prize for chemistry better be divided in 2, permanently, for organic and inorganic chemistry!
(Otherwise, I highly doubt, originally, chemistry prize was intended for advances in organic chemistry (which is, also, like a sub-branch of biology)!)
Once again the Chemistry Nobel is given to people who would not even have an office, let alone a lab, in their institution's Department of Chemistry.
4.3.15 The rulers find it hard to manipulate the population: so they use materialism to manipulate the intellectuals and use religion to manipulate the workers. Before the communists can conquer the world, they will have to have some rational religion. The present ideal is not a sufficiently strong motive. Can't reform the world with a wrong philosophy. The founders of science were not atheists or materialists. Materialists began to appear only in the second half of the eighteenth century. (A logical journey: from Godel to philosophy, Hao Wang, p. 146)
1. Toute proposition divine est vraie.
2. Celui [deux mots illisibles entre parenthèses] qui croit à la négation d'un dogme commet un péché mortel.
3. Celui qui ne croit pas à un dogme tout en sachant qu'il s'agit d'un dogme commet un péché mortel.
4. Celui qui enseigne publiquement la négation d'un dogme comme étant la vérité commet un péché mortel.
5. Celui qui affinne en privé [la négation d'un dogme comme étant la vérité commet un péché mortel].
6. Le monde existe depuis approximativement 6000 ans.
7. Le ciel est fait de matière solide
Ce sont les sept premières propositions d'une liste de quarante. Manifestement, le problème vient de ce que la science donne pour vraies des propositions contraires à celles de la Bible. La Bible permet de faire remonter l'origine du monde à quelque six mille ans. (Les démons de Gödel, Pierre Cassou-Noguès, pp. 202-203)
Le problème du rapport entre science et religion, que soulèvent les premières propositions, réapparaît par exemple en 1961 dans les lettres de Godel à sa mère, sur l'immortalité de l'âme. Le conflit est alors considéré comme résolu:
Nous sommes loin de pouvoir justifier scientifiquement la vue théologique du monde, mais je crois qu'il est déjà aujourd'hui possible de montrer de façon purement rationnelle (sans le secours de la foi ou d'aucune sorte de religion) que la vue théologique du monde est tout à fait compatible avec les faits connus. Dans la liste de 1939, Gödel donne deux propositions suggérant une résolution du conflit en faveur de la religion. L'une d'elles est anecdotique :
25. Les fossiles sont-ils l'uvre du diable?
Le diable nous tromperait en nous livrant des fossiles, et toutes sortes d'indices, du reste, qui donnent à penser que le monde est plus vieux que ne le dit la Bible. (ibid. p. 204)
John Bahcall was a promising young astrophysicist when he was introduced to Godel at a small Institute dinner. He identied himself as a physicist, to which Godel’s curt response was "I don’t believe in natural science." The philosopher Thomas Nagel recalled also being seated next to Godel at a small gathering for dinner at the Institute and discussing the mind—body problem with him, a philosophical chestnut that both men had tried to crack. Nagel pointed out to Godel that Godel’s extreme dualist view (according to which souls and bodies have quite separate existences, linking up with one another at birth to conjoin in a sort of partnership that is severed upon death) seems hard to reconcile with the theory of evolution. Godel professed himself a nonbeliever in evolution and topped this off by pointing out, as if this were additional corroboration for his own rejection of Darwinism: “You know Stalin didn’t believe in evolution either, and he was a very intelligent man.”(Incompleteness: the proof and paradox of Kurt Gödel, Rebecca Goldstein, pp. 31-32)
from anyone, that these merits are fully deserved. Thanks. Thanks a lot, you whiny, self absorbed bitches who never accomplished, or ever will accomplish, anything in your lives
The irony is positively staggering.
There should be no doubt that these women deserve those laurels. Their accomplishments are groundbreaking,...
I've already forgotten what the physics prize was for this year. But, when I saw the chemistry prize this morning, I was like "Wow, slow year! I guess nobody has made any interesting discoveries in chemistry lately."
Back when I worked in academic research, the people at the very top were always putting on the pressure to win a Nobel prize. But the way the funding was allocated, scientists were generally not allowed to do research on topics that would be capable of winning a Nobel prize. The only thing that was allowed was small little incremental research that could be be understood even by the small-minded bureaucrats on the grant funding committees.
The molecular evolution stuff that the chemistry prize was awarded for was clever and interesting - but also kind of obvious and hardly ground breaking. That's not to say that women are inherently any better or worse than men at doing science. But if you were trying argue for the scientific superiority of women then this particular chemistry Nobel prize is not a good place to start.
Enough edge in your post there, edgelord?
Smith genetically engineered phages so that they would include a certain molecule on their outer capsule which allowed him to that encompasses out particular proteins crop up on the outer.
Sounds complicated indeed!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Really, do we "gotta ask" that question? Because that question sounds insecure as hell to me.
This post getting a +5 insightful is just an embarrassment. Ever stop to think that all of these doubts swirling around in your head weren't put there by the "feminists", and may be more about the frustrations of not getting a date until you were out of high school?
This years Nobel prize is awarded for work in evolutionary biology, medical biology, and genetic engineering. Nothing to do with Chemistry.
It needs ERs to appreciate its antibacterial value.
The clearance system sounds logical. It is not. It is completely arbitrary. -- John Bolton
There's never any question that they know what they're doing and they always approach problems as technical issues to be solve rationally. The fact that that needs said is fucking embarrassing.
I believe you just reiterated the same point that you are attempting to descredit. I'll explain.
Ignoring the divisive tone and the rant in the last paragraph, there is a valid point being made.
There should be no doubt that these women deserve those laurels.
... this would stand by itself. There would be NO doubt, from anyone, that these merits are fully deserved.
Honestly give this some thought, I believe that an individual who can avoid projecting a sexist ideology should not have completely missed that.
Don't use Wikipedia, it's a hopeless mess now.
The clearance system sounds logical. It is not. It is completely arbitrary. -- John Bolton
His argument is that people like you make it impossible to know if a woman's achievement is due to her actual merit, or just people pandering to the "women are oppressed!!1" narrative. Literally the only reason why this was posted to /. was because it's a woman. That's it. Otherwise this isn't news at all. And why should it be? It's just another day in scientific advancement, another Nobel prize for something new and useful in their field. Nothing super ground breaking. So yeah, this is being shoved in our faces because... Female. Really? Really. In 2018 we seriously feel the need to pay special attention to this because she's female. How about don't? If we just let people do what they want, and buried anyone who says "hey you can't do that, you're an X!", then parent comment wouldn't be upset. If the last sentence were left off then there'd be no drama.
Just stop giving people special treatment (positive or negative) over their sex / race already! Doing so is ALWAYS sexist and ALWAYS racist BY DEFINITION. As someone who is completely against both, just stop.
Actually, my post was entirely sarcastic. I don't believe primitive superstition in which the threat of eternal punishment by monsters is used to coerce specific behavior demanded by preachers. I stopped believing in monsters and Santa Claus when I was about 5 years old.
Prayer has never accomplished anything. The computer on which you're typing superstitious nonsense and the network that brings it to my computer are the products of centuries of science, as are the farming techniques and medicines that keep you alive and relatively comfortable, and transport you and everything else by land, sea, and air.
Godel sounds like a real idiot.