Skip to main content

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020


 The Nobel Prize in Chemistry acknowledged a remarkable contribution in to health and medicine: Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna received it for the development of a method for genome editing known as CRISPR. 

CRISPR has revolutionized all the life sciences, from plant breeding to genetic therapy.

Charpentier is a French microbiologist, and Doudna is an American biochemist affiliated with UC Berkeley. In 2012, they were studying the immune system of a Streptococcus bacterium. They discovered that they could use "genetic scissors" already present in the metabolism of the bacterium so that they could make precise cuts in the DNA sequences.

Just as one illustration of the ramifications, consider that early this year researchers tested a cancer treatment in which the body's immune cells are CRISPR-edited to get them to hunt down and attack the body's cancer cells. The results were not such as to declare a breakthrough cure, but they have encouraged continued work along those lines.

There is also the matter of ALS. Early this month, pharmaceutical giant Biogen Inc. and start-up Scribe Therapeutics announced a joint project to develop therapies for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease. Scribe was co-founded by the above mentioned Jennifer Doudna, and CRISPR will be at the heart of this project.

ALS is a progressive condition that attacks the nervous system. It is famously associated with Gehrig, the Yankees great who was part of the "murderers row line-up" that terrified opposing pitchers through the 1920s and '30s. It is associated, also, with Stephen Hawking, the English theoretical physicist who suffered from a slowly developing form of the disease.

This is not Biogen's first press on the ALS front. Years ago it invested a lot of money in dexpramipexole, which seemed to hold promise against ALS. In 2013, though, dexpramipexole failed in a critical trial and Biogen had to stop development. Its return to the front in partnership with Scribe may prove an old truth: nothing is settled until it is settled right!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak