Nobel Laureates and Limitations: The Perils of Unearned Omniscience

All accounts balanced

James Watson, who died at the age of 97 on November 6, 2025, was a DNA pioneer who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962 jointly with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins at the age of 34.

When I received news of his death, I remembered that I might have written something about him. That was back in 2007, when, during a book launch, he veered from the science of genetics to the pseudoscience of eugenics by suggesting that intelligence could be genetically differentiated by race.

There was swift retribution for that aired opinion: a suspension followed by a resignation. The controversy became the benchmark by which Dr Watson was judged, rather than on his more significant work with DNA.

Intelligent monkey talk

I had also forgotten that in writing my first blog in October 2007, I recounted a story of someone suggesting I was a monkey and how I was blessed with the wit to respond, not out of offence, but with a willingness to engage. If I were a monkey, I would have become so intelligent that I could communicate with human beings; alternatively, my interlocutor would have acquired the ability to cavort with simians.

An apology followed, of course, but the damage had been done. Way back in innocent 2007, Dr Watson was cancelled, ostracised, and consigned to a scrapheap of ignominy. His groundbreaking work in discovering the double helix structure of DNA at the age of 25 and subsequently winning the Nobel Prize was overshadowed by controversy. His eugenics remarks created a dual legacy of brilliant scientist versus reprehensible public intellectual.

Dr Craig Venter, known for leading one of the first draft sequences of the human genome, had this to say at that time: "Skin colour as a surrogate for race is a social concept, not a scientific one. There is no basis in scientific fact or in the human genetic code for the notion that skin colour will be predictive of intelligence."

The folly of universal expertise

The Nobel Prize is a high accolade, but it does not confer polymath status on the recipient. Upon being named, laureates do not suddenly become omniscient or experts in every imaginable field outside the sphere of their expertise. They should also possess the self-awareness and presence of mind to dismiss questions that seek their opinions on issues beyond where they have been accorded due recognition.

Contrasting Dr Watson with Dr Arthur Kornberg, who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1959, for his work on RNA & DNA, and died around the same time as the 2007 controversy, one sees that Dr Watson could have learnt how to carry oneself and manage one's opinions when conferred with the Nobel Prize. There should be a resounding memento mori in the ears of a Nobel laureate, for in the mortality of man lies the enduring power of memory.

Though he paid a heavy price for his indiscretion, the work he accomplished was worthy of celebration and commendation. May his soul rest in peace.

References

Blog - Doctor Neutralises Africans [October 2007]

Blog - Happy Retirement, Dr Watson [October 2007]

Blog - Arthur Kornberg - DNA Pioneer, dies [October 2007]

Arthur Kornberg - DNA Pioneer, dies

Another DNA genius in the news

Arthur Kornberg and Severo Ochoa shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine 1959 “for their discovery of the mechanisms in the biological synthesis of ribonucleic acid and deoxyribonucleic acid.”

I looked for other explanations of this citation beyond the fact that they had done some pioneering work with DNA, which has been in the news and my blogs quite prominently lately.

According to Wikipedia, he was experimenting with enzymes that created DNA. In 1956, he isolated the first DNA polymerising enzyme, now known as DNA polymerase I, for which he won the Nobel Prize.

That still looked like a big chunk till I found bite-sized bits I could digest with this – “Kornberg discovered the chemical mechanism that demonstrated how DNA - the blueprint of heredity - gets constructed in the cell.”

These studies laid the foundation for genetic engineering and the techniques used in creating certain drugs for cancer and viral infections. This area of discovery differs from Dr. Watson’s area of research, which won the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine in 1962. Although James Watson and Francis Crick had proposed a formal model of how DNA is replicated in the early ’50s, Kornberg discovered the actual chemical mechanism by which the huge amount of DNA that comprises a chromosome gets constructed in the cell.

An exemplary legacy

Dr. Arthur Kornberg died yesterday at the age of 89 after respiratory failure at Stanford Hospital and he was said to be working literally up to the time of his death.

In 1959, he took his 12-year-old son to Stockholm to collect his prize. What great father’s pride he would have had when his son Roger won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2006 outright, “for his studies of the molecular basis of eukaryotic transcription.” To which he said, “I have felt for some time that he richly deserved it, his work has been awesome.” That work was essentially a continuation of his father's work on enzymes.

They both returned to Stockholm, 47 years after his award, to attend the one for his son. However, I note that in all the tributes paid to this great scientist, there is no mention of any controversy or the legendary Nobel Syndrome that has ravaged the persona of Dr Watson to an advanced stage of debilitation.

Unpretentious

Spyros Andreopoulos who in 1963 became the director of the Office of News and Public Affairs at the Stanford University Medical Center said this of him, when he was to meet the Nobel laureate the first time, “I was scared. Someone had warned me that Nobel laureates behaved like God-like princes, to my surprise, he was entirely unpretentious. Our first meeting was the beginning of an enduring friendship in which he let me share his challenges and triumphs.”

If he had survived, he would have been promoting his latest book which is scheduled for release on November 15 called Germ Stories, a book for children telling of the essence and wonder of bacteria in stories.

I must not fail to add that Sylvy Ruth Levy Kornberg his wife of 43 years who died in 1986 worked full-time in Dr Kornberg’s laboratory contributing to his DNA research, and was heard to say. “I was robbed!” the day after the Nobel Prize for her husband was announced.

Dr Kornberg leaves a great legacy to science, not only through his work but also his children who are in fields such as biochemistry and biophysics, as well as the architecture of laboratory design.

Rest in peace.

References

Arthur Kornberg, MD, 1918-2007 - Office of Communications & Public Affairs - Stanford University School of Medicine

Photos - Arthur Kornberg, MD, 1918-2007

Other DNA Blogs

Happy Retirement, Dr. Watson

Gone with the wind of controversy

The humanity in me entreats me to commiserate with the resignation-retirement of Dr James Watson, the DNA pioneer from the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, which he has headed for about four decades.

Last week, the board of the laboratory suspended the esteemed Nobel laureate from his administrative duties after the furore that erupted from his assertion that blacks were genetically inferior to whites.

I feel sorry for the fact that even if he had scientific proof of this assertion, he chose the wrong forum to publicise such a volatile and seemingly racist view – definitely not a newspaper interview whilst promoting a book – tact properly a recessive gene in this man.

Now, Dr. Watson is given to stirring up controversy, it is however debatable if he is genetically predisposed to rubbing people up the wrong way when he should have advanced his scientific prowess at discovering something else worthy of another Nobel accolade.

For instance, Dr. Watson was 34 when he was cited for the discovery of DNA amongst other esteemed colleagues and a pioneering lady would died, years earlier, 45 years on, one would wonder if he is resting on his laurels, because 4 people have achieved that accolade with Maria Skłodowska-Curie and Linus Pauling winning in two different fields of endeavour.

But, one should not do Dr. Watson down; as an academic, he has lead a very distinguished career, it is a shame that all that might end up being reviewed through the keyhole of an unguarded moment of a candid expression of views.

I wish Dr. Watson a great retirement, his singular work of achievement is helping people seek and attain a greater equality to opportunity and the great things to be enjoyed in this world and for that, we would be ever so grateful enough to forgive the hereditary strains of incipient racism.

Happy Retirement, Dr. Watson.

African American Lives

African-American Lives 1 of 6

African-American Lives 2 of 6

African-American Lives 3 of 6

African-American Lives 4 of 6

African-American Lives 5 of 6

African-American Lives 6 of 6

Doctor Neutralises Africans

The mystique of Nobel accolades

Nobel Prize laureates are considered prime brain-boxes of intelligence and are in the unique situation of having brought great good to humanity. This is sometimes less expressed in the peace and literature prizes but more evident in the sciences.

At 34 in 1962, James Watson jointly shared the prize with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins who were both 12 years older and both died in 2004, quite uncanny.

Their prize, The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1962, was “for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material.” In common parlance, he was involved in discovering the structure of DNA a field of endeavour that has brought significant progress and understanding about the make up of living organisms and their hereditary factors.

Avoid Boring People

45 years on, Dr. Watson was out promoting his new book - Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science and part of that promotional tour included an interview with an English newspaper which is par for the course, and as a Nobel laureate, there are many who would have flocked to hear him wherever he was speaking along with those would want to read about him.

Before I get into the substance of this matter, I remember chatting online years ago and the moment my correspondent learnt I was African I was hit with a diatribe that started with him saying he does not have time for monkeys. Much as I was quite slighted by this turn of conversation, I responded saying that either this monkey was so smart it could interact with humans or he had lost his humanity and was now cavorting with simians.

It makes you wonder where people get all these crazy ideas from, and this not helped when a respected and celebrated Nobel laureate gives oxygen to such views by implying that black people are less intelligent compared to white people.

Of evidence or generalisation

Obviously, there are some events and situations in Africa that would almost allow this esteemed scientist to draw more than inference and be able to give contrived and believable examples to support this claim, to that extent I can share the position that many are “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa”, but I cannot assimilate the extension that portends that in the West “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says not really.”

He goes on to say that whilst he hopes everyone is equal – “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true - there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the lower level.”

Now, I would not know what testing has taken place to arrive at these conclusions, and it is no surprise that the aversion to gene research is sometimes the fear that certain elements of the research can lead to eugenics, xenophobia, or unacceptable pronouncements, albeit from learned persons.

DNA debunking

Dr. Craig Venter, who is a contemporary authority in gene science and a man I dislike for probably the media portrayal of his seeming arrogance but respect for his grasp of his science and the relevance of his endeavour, debunks this claim with this statement – “Skin colour as a surrogate for race is a social concept not a scientific one, there is no basis in scientific fact or in the human genetic code for the notion that skin colour will be predictive of intelligence.”

Many would breath a sigh of relief to that, though an unhealthy debate has started with the accompanying backlash which the malevolent would dismiss as the onslaught of the political correct rather that the offensiveness of opinions that should never be expressed.

The greater concern here is DNA is so fundamental to understanding the physiology of the human-being, adding social dimensions to purely physiological issues complicates the matters, relating that to race allows for elements of race supremacy to develop and the vicious cycle of man’s inhumanity to man is given impetus by those who should know a lot better.

Backslash backlash

In any case, doors began to close in the face of Dr. Watson, the Science Museum cancelled a talk, the Bristol Festival of Ideas cancelled an appearance stating Dr. Watson’s opinions were unacceptably provocative and now the Board of Trustees of the New York’s Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory where Watson was chief for four decades has suspended him from his administrative responsibilities pending a review of his comments.

It would appear Dr. Watson has now gone to ground, cancelled all engagements in England and returned home, but not before he tried to extricate himself from the quagmire he sank into with all his Nobel-lauded faculties about him.

Mortified and almost remorseful, he contends that the reportage of his words do not reflect his position properly and appreciates why people would have reacted in the ways that they have about his comments.

However, a new area of study is emerging as genetic intelligence which is not in and of itself racism as Dr. Watson does agree that there is no scientific basis for considering Africans inferior and the apology reads further as thus – “To all those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only apologise unreservedly.”

Well Dr. Watson, before I step up to hug you, I might as well just do some research to see if this is a simple error of judgement or getting away with form has inadvertently deserted you at this hour.

Nobel Syndrome

Roger Highfield in The Telegaph comment section contends that Dr. Watson is suffering from a mental condition called Nobel Syndrome, a tendency for laureates to stray from their knitting to create controversy and worse.

There is however a great risk in suppressing scientific ideas if we attack contrary commentary, but a man of Dr. Watson's stature should understand his position of responsibility and the import of his opinions which may not be subjected to the quality of peer review as “lesser mortals” would suffer, in fact, many might read his words as incontrovertible truth.

Worse still, his actions bring into disrepute and dishonour the good name of one lady whose work was the precursor to his work on discovering DNA, as the Nobel Prize is not awarded posthumously Rosalind Franklin’s good name and work depends on how the other recipients conduct themselves, she died in 1958 and these activities 49 years on are definitely not what all who were involved in the discovery of DNA would want to be associated with.

References

James Watson: To question genetic intelligence is not racism – The Independent

The elementary DNA of Dr. Watson – Times Online

Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA

Chew your butts

Blink for the litter

Being a pedestrian, cyclist or user of public transport, it is amazing the amount litter one sees on the pavements, the bike paths and at the transport stops.

Usually, it is not the usual crisps or chocolate wrappers or cans of fizzy drink but patches of discarded chewing gum and cigarette butts of various lengths depending on the finished state of the cigarette as the bus or tram approaches.

Even with the no-smoking areas in stations and specially designated areas for smoking we still have those butts on the ground despite the fact that stubbing bins and sand dishes are provided at those locations.

I find that I frown at people who just discard their litter no matter how close they are to a proper discarding container known to many as a rubbish bin, but it appears that many are oblivious of its function.

A menace, a real menace

Cigarette butts and chewing gun are usually surreptitiously cast off either with a flick for the cigarette or some hand-mouth contact then hand-furniture contact as the chewed gum finds a home after the mastication.

By comparison, it probably no worse than picking ones nose and flicking the rotten greenish yellow grime or using ones hand to transfer spittle from mouth to desired destination.

The chewing gum problem is so bad that one dares not touch the undersides of seats or table as there is the possibility that an “Oink woz here” gum marker has been a stuck there.

With DNA testing and so on, by the time we all have biometric passports and databases full of information that the computers would puke at their content, it might be possible to decipher the marker and fine the culprit for vandalising public places or littering the street.

Stuck with it, annoyingly

The humongous machines needed to remove the gum makes one appreciate the intolerance of chewing gum inSingapore. That ban has since been relaxed but it shows just how much this littering can be the bane of a permissive and free society.

If you have had to scrap chewing gum off your shoe soles, you will understand, but worse still having to get it off your clothes because some asocial twerp has stuck it on a seat or rest then you only have recourse; be livid with rage as you surf the Internet for ideas.

I do wonder if properly policed and enforced fines for littering can help change attitudes to stop this eye-sore.

I have nothing against smoking but I am having serious problems with accompanying poor social graces that allows for the disregard of non-smokers and the littering of our streets. It is like being allowed to relieve oneself in any place one might choose rather than the conveniences.

The cleaning up of the butts is easier and is done either by street sweepers or vagrants looking for unfinished cigarettes.

New edibles – science and nature collide

Starting with chewing cum, I would suggest that it be reconstituted that after enjoying the satisfaction of chewing the gum it can be swallowed.

Better still, once the gum is put in the mouth, it should have some genetic affinity material that makes it want to slither down towards the tonsils that it becomes impossible not to swallow it.

Moving on to cigarettes; tobacco companies can have a major money making new lease of life by making those butts, stubs or filters edible.

Once the smoker and drawn in all the nicotine they can through smoking, they get the final nicotine fix by being able to chew what is left of the un-smoked cigarette having flicked off the ashened part with the possibility of flavouring the bit with a flavour applicator that doubles as a lighter.

Something like a vanilla lighter or strawberry lighter if not chilli or curry lighter comes to mind.

Anybody would quit smoking after a few of these.

Gum profiling and butt identity

Just as our liberties, freedoms and secrets are being sold down the line of outrageous anti-terrorism laws masquerading as patriotism, Big-Brother can analyse discarded cigarette butts to and send notices to the homes of the culprits.

The global market-place is rejuvenated for the food and flavours industry, the tobacco companies can move into health flavours, the DNA profiling and instant identification business would be rife.

Imagine wireless computer terminals at every lamp-post with finger-print and retina scanning sign-on and a biometric analysis rod which can assess DNA material from all sorts of litter, mine databases and send off the notices.

You get a gift voucher for your civic duties and the culprit lives in a world that would soon be too real to forget you first read about it here.

References

Commercial cleaning supplies - Chewing Gum Removal - Gum-Out

Cigarette Butt Litter- Two Billion Littered Butts a Day

CigaretteLitter.Org - The Facts About Cigarette Butts and Litter - Cigarette Litter