biomedicine - Science History Institute Digital Collections Search ResultsScience History Institute Digital Collectionshttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/collections/gt54kn818?q=biomedicine530252024-03-28T08:04:34-04:00Oral history interview with Robert P. Goldstein2023-09-14T10:19:41-04:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/79gv4dbhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/9eo6rtb/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Robert P. Goldstein (Bob Goldstein) grew up in Massapequa, New York, the second of three boys. His father was both a lineman for the telephone company and a bus driver. His mother was a nurse. He attended public schools until high school, when he went to a Roman Catholic school. He did well in his classes, even obtaining a year's worth of college credit, but he had not yet displayed a special interest in science. He held jobs as a hotdog seller and a stockboy when he was in high school. He decided to enroll in Union College, originally thinking he would go to medical school. He liked Union and college life; he rediscovered his childhood guitar and his interest in music, and learned to play the carillon there. For a while he thought about a philosophy major, but a class in symbolic logic, taught by Jan Ludwig, and a class in embryology, taught by Ray Rappaport, persuaded him to use his biology major in research. While working in Michael Frohlich's lab, Goldstein was also manager of the campus radio station and worked in campus security for spending money. When Goldstein decided that he wanted to study embryology, Ray Rappaport recommended Gary Freeman's lab at the University of Texas for graduate school. Prior to matriculating at Texas, Goldstein spent the summer with Freeman at Friday Harbor Laboratories in Seattle, Washington, conducting research during the day and camping out at night—he continued this tradition at Friday Harbor in subsequent summers. His first two years in Texas produced nothing substantive, and so he switched from ascidian and snail embryos to C. elegans and began to see results. His data differed from the accepted scientific findings, and so his first talk caused him some anxiety. Goldstein went on to win the year's Outstanding Doctoral Dissertation award. For a postdoc Goldstein chose John White's lab at the Laboratory of Molecular Biology of the Medical Research Council in Cambridge, England. No sooner had Goldstein arrived than White left for Wisconsin, but he left behind marvelous equipment, including the original confocal microscope. Goldstein also shared a 4D microscope with Steven Hird, who had independently developed a similar project on axis specification in C. elegans. His love of scientific discovery and enjoyment of his postdoc years led Goldstein to another postdoc at the University of California, Berkeley, in David Weisblat's lab. Working on evolution of development, Goldstein and his collection of snails, worms and leeches met his future wife in a lab across the hall. They married after their postdocs, spent their honeymoon in Hawaii, and set off on a road trip to North Carolina, where Goldstein had accepted an assistant professorship. At the end of the interview Goldstein talks about his parents; his brothers' careers; his first postdoc, Jean-Claude Labbé; and music in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. He describes his lab set-up and management (including a story about gluing his sock to his foot) and the way his lab writes papers. He explains his administrative responsibilities and his need for independence in his work, and the role that the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award played in his research. He discusses his grants, and he compares those from the National Institutes of Health with those of the National Science Foundation; he then goes on to compare funding in the United States with funding in England. He gives his definition of biomedicine, his opinion about the role of politics in science, and his praise of cultural diversity at the University of North Carolina.</p> Oral history interview with Esther S. Takeuchi2023-09-01T16:33:45-04:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/1fyoeevhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/2uay1hf/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Esther Takeuchi grew up in Akron, Ohio, the youngest of three children. After escaping Soviet Latvia, her father became an electrical engineer for Goodyear Aerospace and her mother a home health worker who also had an economics degree. From an early age, Takeuchi enjoyed science and math. She majored in history and chemistry at the University of Pennsylvania, where she was often the lone woman in her classes.</p>
<p>Takeuchi completed her PhD in Harold Shechter’s lab at the Ohio State University. She also met her future husband, an inorganic chemist, in a German class at Ohio State. Preferring to “make things rather than measure them,” Takeuchi chose industry over academia, taking a job at Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), working on catalysis. She did postdoctoral work at the University of North Carolina, and, when her husband took a job at SUNY Buffalo, she did another postdoc at Buffalo. Still interested in a career in industry, Takeuchi accepted a position as senior chemist at Greatbatch, Inc., a developer of implantable medical devices. She rediscovered the use of silver vanadium oxide (SVO) in oil-drilling batteries and adapted the chemistry for an implantable cardiac defibrillator. During her twenty-three years at Greatbatch, Takeuchi rose up in management positions, culminating in Chief Scientist at the Center for Excellence. From there she went to SUNY Buffalo, becoming Greatbatch Professor of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Chemistry. While there, she was awarded the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. Takeuchi’s interest in battery development extended into energy storage, so she moved to SUNY Stony Brook, where she is the Distinguished Professor of Chemistry and Materials Science and Engineering in a joint appointment with Brookhaven National Laboratory, to work on large projects with large groups.</p>
<p>Takeuchi has won numerous awards and holds numerous patents. She has published articles and given presentations at Electrochemical Society meetings. Her experience in both industry and academia has given her an unusually broad perspective into the practice of chemistry.</p> Oral history interview with Thomas E. Wilson2023-09-01T16:36:00-04:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/o66chh9https://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/3lj3yjt/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Thomas E. Wilson's oral history begins with a discussion of his childhood in Neenah, Wisconsin where his father was a chemical engineer with Kimberley-Clark. While his father often brought work and work-related discussions home, his mother, a teacher, also encouraged the academic and inquisitive environment of the household. Nature activities, building projects, and music heavily influenced Wilson's childhood. Although there was brief interest in attending college to pursue a study of music, Wilson matriculated at the University of Wisconsin from which a number of his family members had graduated. During his undergraduate studies Wilson was involved in the Medical Scholars Program for pre-medical studies, pursued biology research with Charles B. Kaspar, and built musical instruments. The developing field of molecular biology and the excitement of research lessened Wilson's interest in pursuing the medical degree, however, Wilson decided upon a combined MD/PhD program at Washington University in St. Louis where he could continue his longstanding interest in medicine but pursue a laboratory research program as well. While Wilson acknowledges the flaws in combined programs, he still believes in the ideological and practical benefits of integrating the clinical and laboratory aspects of the two degrees. Joining Jeffrey D. Milbrant's laboratory for his PhD research, Wilson undertook a DNA binding project that allowed him to collaborate with yeast geneticist Mark Johnston. Wilson and his wife, who was also in the MD/PhD program at Washington University in St. Louis, started their family while still in graduate school, which changed the amount of time Wilson spent in the lab, but taught him an increased level of efficiency. Wilson experienced difficulty transitioning from the PhD program back to the clinical rotations of medical school, leading him to focus less on clinical work and more on research. He set his sights on pathology which enabled him to work with tissue in a medical context but not directly with patients. After earning his MD and PhD degrees, Wilson began his residency and post-doctoral research on DNA repair mechanisms with Michael R. Lieber. After Lieber moved to the University of Southern California, Wilson stayed at Washington University and used space in Milbrandt's lab in order to finish his work. He secured a position at the University of Michigan within the pathology department which would allow him ample laboratory opportunities while maintaining ties to the clinical world. Shortly after beginning as a principal investigator, Wilson earned the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award. Throughout the oral history interview Wilson discussed funding, balancing clinical and laboratory duties and work and family, and the public understanding of science.</p> Oral history interview with Patricia F. Ducy2023-12-04T15:28:54-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/8irrwkvhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/oo3guan/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Patricia F. Ducy grew up in Lyon, France, an only child. Her father was in insurance and her mother was a secretary. She attended a very good school a fair distance from her home, so she spent much time with her grandparents who lived near the school. She had a happy, busy childhood in a close family who all spent weekends renovating an old farmhouse. She also loved music and studying guitar. Schooldays were very long and required a lot of homework, but Ducy was self-motivated and had no trouble doing well. When she was about twelve she had a biology teacher who inspired her to go into genetics. After high school, she wanted to go into genetics but had to study pharmacy and then general biology before she was accepted into Université Claude Bernard's PhD program in genetics. She worked in Robert Garrone's histology lab, where she conducted research on actin in fresh-water sponges. She expected to stay in France and do research, but when she heard Gerard Karsenty give a talk she knew she had found what she wanted to do. She accepted a postdoc in Karsenty's lab at MD Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas. Though she had published no papers during her PhD years, she published sixteen as a postdoc; one especially—on osteoblastic-specific transcription factor—has been crucial to the field. She went back to France to look for a job, but facilities in France were limited such that she could not have the large number of mice she needed for her work, so she decided to stay in the United States, accepting a research associate position, then an assistant professorship, at the Baylor College of Medicine. Ducy and Karsenty divided their research, Ducy taking her work on osteoblasts, seeking a connection between fat and bone; they continued to collaborate, and eventually married. Then they moved to Columbia University, where they joined their labs and some of their research. Throughout the interview Ducy describes the French educational and scientific systems and compares them to the American systems. At the end of the interview she talks about getting the Pew award and about the Pew annual meetings; she analogizes science to cooking, both requiring "magic"; and she decries the need to take time away from the bench to seek funding. She speaks about continuing her work on osteoblasts, with a view to preventing and treating bone loss diseases; she also talks about how she and her husband's labs are beginning to work on diabetes. </p> Oral history interview with Mark B. Van Doren2023-12-04T15:28:53-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/th7leudhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/u3aq6lq/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Mark D. Van Doren was born and raised in upstate New York with his three siblings. Although Van Doren's father was a physician, he did not discuss medicine or science at home much; Van Doren's interest in biology developed mainly during the course of his high school science classes. He undertook summer research in photoporphyrin derivatives at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York in an attempt to further this interest in biology. After matriculating at Cornell University—a family tradition—Van Doren began research with Efraim Racker in the field of bioenergetics. While working with Racker, Van Doren was exposed to some of the complexities of scientific practice, including research ethics and the need for experimental replication and validation. During his time at Cornell, he was able to publish a paper in a scientific journal, an experience that helped him decide upon laboratory science as his career. After graduating from Cornell, Van Doren worked at Oncogene Science prior to starting graduate work at the University of California, San Diego. While doing a rotation in James W. Posakony's laboratory, Van Doren developed an interest in Drosophila; he then decided to pursue research on the biochemistry of Drosophila BHLH proteins for his degree, which quickly resulted in a 1991 Development paper. In an effort to expand his interest in and knowledge of relevant science early in his graduate career, Van Doren studied at the Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory taking a course on embryology. He did his postdoctoral research with Ruth Lehmann, first at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research and then at the Skirball Institute for Biomolecular Medicine. In the Lehmann laboratory, Van Doren began his work on Drosophila germ cells that had first piqued his interest at Woods Hole. His HMG-CoA reductase work led to a 1998 Nature publication. Upon completing his post-doctoral research, Van Doren accepted a position at Johns Hopkins University where he has continued his Drosophila research. He received the Pew Scholars in the Biomedical Sciences award shortly after starting as a principal investigator, an award that provided him validation as a young researcher. Throughout the interview Van Doren discussed his current research, the challenges of running a laboratory, and funding.</p> Oral history interview with Jay D. Horton2023-12-04T15:28:54-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/xt30n7c
<p>At the request of the interviewee, the abstract of the interview and interviewee’s biographical data have not been included. For more information, please contact the Center for Oral History.</p> Oral history interview with Hans C. Oettgen2023-01-10T15:33:28-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/ols6lrhhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/qzn1zbk/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Hans C. Oettgen was born in Cologne, Germany, spent some time in Nairobi, Kenya, but was raised mostly in New Canaan, Connecticut, the eldest of three children. His mother was a teacher; his father was a researcher in immunology and a physician in internal medicine who, eventually, worked at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City. Oettgen enjoyed school, especially math, reading, and spending time outdoors. His family often went camping in the Adirondacks and spent summers traveling by train and/or by boat throughout Europe. He had a chemistry set though his interest in math led him more towards computer programming than performing experiments. He spent time in his father's lab during his childhood, but in high school he worked in some of his father's colleagues labs, mostly doing technical work without understanding the fundamental scientific questions being investigated, until he had the chance to do research involving the isolation of a particular protein from peanuts, called peanut lectin, which binds to a sugar structure and is expressed on some cancer malignancies. He was also in the Boy Scouts of America, was (and is) an avid photographer, and knew that he wanted a broad liberal arts education even though he intended to pursue science or medicine as a career. Oettgen matriculated at Williams College, majoring in chemistry, but ultimately choosing to attend medical school. He began his medical studies at the Harvard Medical School; the summer after his first year, though, gave him the chance to work with Cornelius P. Terhorst at the Dana-Farber Cancer Center conducting research on B lymphocytes, using protein chemistry to describe B-1 and B-2. While at Harvard he decided to move into the MD/PhD program and continued to work with Terhorst, writing his thesis on the biochemical characterization of T-cell-receptor structure. After completing his residency in 1990, Oettgen was slotted to undertake a postdoctoral fellowship with David Baltimore at the Whitehead Institute, but Baltimore's move to Rockefeller University in New York City prompted Oettgen to do his fellowship with Philip Leder in genetics. As a postdoc he developed a mouse without the gene for immunoglobulin E (IgE). He then accepted a position at Children's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, researching the role of IgE in immune function. At the end of the interview Oettgen talks about the process of writing journal articles; balancing family and career; his leisure activities; the source of his ideas; and the impact of technology on his work. He concludes the interview with a discussion of competition and collaboration in science; the grant-writing process; the role of the scientist in educating the public about science; the impact of the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences on his work; his children; and the benefits of having a clinical practice and doing basic science. </p> Oral history interview with David J. Sullivan, Jr.2023-09-01T16:32:48-04:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/fccxitdhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/tss2y0c/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>David J. Sullivan, Jr.'s interview begins with a discussion of his childhood in Birmingham, Alabama during which he was surrounded by a large and supportive family. He cites the importance of his family's Catholicism, strong work ethic, and their emphasis on Scouting in fostering his interests. After deciding to attend the University of Virginia, Sullivan's scientific interests blossomed throughout the 1980s against the backdrop of HIV and other infectious diseases. While undertaking his medical education at the University of Alabama, Birmingham, Sullivan developed an interest in scientific research with clinical applications. Concurrent with his medical education, Sullivan pursued a study of bioethics that he brought to his residency and fellowship work at Washington University in St. Louis. Before moving to St. Louis, Missouri, however, Sullivan worked at a clinic in Mussoorie, India, during the last few months of medical school. Throughout the interview, Sullivan described his service work in the community, including his time in India, and how community service allowed him to meet the Dalai Lama. While in St. Louis, Sullivan worked with Daniel E. Goldberg and concentrated his infectious disease research on the field of malaria. Continuing his efforts on heme crystallization and Zinc photoporphyrin-9, Sullivan brought his malaria research to Johns Hopkins University. Shortly after beginning as a principal investigator, Sullivan received a Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award. He described the impact of the award as well as his perceptions of the annual meetings held during his four years as a Scholar. The interview concludes with Sullivan's discussion of biomedical funding, science after September 11th, and biomedical ethics in relation to funding. </p> Oral history interview with Torsten N. Wiesel2023-12-04T15:28:53-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/wx0n9bbhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/d5hqnjx/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Torsten N. Wiesel was born and grew up near Stockholm, Sweden, the youngest of five children. His father was a psychiatrist at Beckomberga Hospital, a mental institution comprising 30-40 fenced acres, and the whole family lived in the compound, as did other staff members and their families. Wiesel attended a private school in Stockholm, but was more interested in soccer and orienteering than studying. When he was in his teens his parents divorced, and he decided to become a doctor. He attended medical school at Karolinska Institute and worked there for a few years before coming to the United States as a postdoc in Stephen Kuttler's lab at Johns Hopkins University. There he worked on epilepsy. One of his brothers had become schizophrenic; this, along with his frustration with the lack of insightful care for the mentally ill in the 1940's and 1950's, prompted Torsten's interest in neuroscience. Working in Kuttler's lab with Kenneth Brown, he dealt with retinal ganglion receptive fields/responses to light stimulation, using cats and monkeys as his lab animals. David Hubel arrived at Hopkins, and the two men began a very long collaboration that in 1981 garnered them the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Eventually, after moving through several departments at Harvard University, Wiesel ended up in the neurobiology department, where he ultimately became the chairman. In 1983, after Torsten had been chairman for ten years, he and Charles Gilbert, with whom he was then working, moved to Rockefeller University. There he became chairman of the faculty, and was thus asked to be president when David Baltimore resigned. Wiesel brought together again the disillusioned faculty and, with a substantial gift from David Rockefeller, recruited more good scientists. He now spends some time in Sweden, where he visits his two sisters and one brother twice a year, and in Strasbourg, where he is Secretary General of the Human Frontier Science Program. He has many professional affiliations and directorships; he has won many, many awards, and he has published much.</p> Oral history interview with Carlos T. Moraes2024-02-07T16:38:51-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/hdplvduhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/srxdchq/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Carlos T. Moraes grew up in São Paulo, Brazil, one of three children. His father was in the military at first, but then became a mechanical engineer and a professor. His mother completed a degree in physical education. He discusses some of his childhood activities, which he says were much like those of American children's, and some of his memories of his private-school education. After assessing the value of his education at a private school he discusses his reasons for attending Escola Paulista de Medicina and describes some of his college experiences. Moraes then pursued a master's degree; he explored several career options after his internship, including a course at the Instituto de Investigaciones Bioquimicas Fundacion Campomar, where he worked under Armando J. Parodi. He eventually enrolled in a doctoral program at Columbia University, where he worked in the Eric A. Schon lab. Moraes's decision to come to Miami was abetted by his love of windsurfing. He professes no religion, but in his youth was involved in Pró-Vida; he feels that one can define God to be compatible with science. Moraes continues with his first impressions of the United States; his admiration for Alex Tzagoloff; obtaining dual citizenship; the shortage of American students in American science; and his funding history. He talks about the grant-writing process, explaining why he believes that he writes better than he speaks. Lab management for him includes the difficulties of article writing in a lab with many native languages. Moraes's administrative duties are substantial, but he has few teaching responsibilities. He compares American and Brazilian graduate students in medicine; discusses the ethnic makeup of graduate students at the University of Miami; describes a typical workday; again talks about his love of windsurfing; and gives us his thoughts on the underrepresentation of women on science faculties. A major reason for Moraes attending Columbia University was his fascination with mitochondrial abnormalities. He accepted a position at University of Miami to study mitochondrial diseases; he also has devised some related projects and possible applications of his DNA mutation studies. He discusses the advantages and disadvantages of being a principal investigator and of competition and collaboration in science. Moraes explains his thoughts about ethical issues in science; his concerns about overpopulation; and his thoughts about the use of animals in scientific research. Moraes concludes the interview with an assessment of his professional and personal achievement and an intimation of his future plans. </p> Oral history interview with David Ron2023-01-10T15:34:31-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/cxpizuzhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/l15k18s/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>David Ron was born in Ein Carmel, a kibbutz near Haifa, Israel. The kibbutz provided room and board for the family while Ron's parents were studying at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, his mother chemistry and his father physics. While Ron was still a young child, his parents joined the faculty at the Technion, and the family moved to Haifa, where David mostly grew up. When he was about six his parents took postdocs, and the family, now including David and two sisters, moved to Princeton University. After two years there they spent a year at University of California, San Diego, and then went back to the Technion. When David was in junior high school the family again spent a year in the United States, this time at the University of California, Los Angeles. David chose the mathematics-chemistry-physics track in high school, the most difficult. School was intended to be "a grind"; learning was not an end in itself, simply a means. Family dinner discussions centered on politics; David says there was not much "fun stuff" in his household. He liked to read, especially history; he was not much interested in sports. The family was strongly atheistic, despite the extreme Orthodoxy and Zionism that brought many of his ancestors to Israel from mostly Eastern Europe, so David was not even Bar Mitzvah. After finishing high school at seventeen, David entered medical school. He had to make an arrangement with the army to do his compulsory service after college; this meant promising summer boot camps and five years of service after graduation. He spent part of his third summer working in Avraham Hershko's lab, where he learned about protein degradation. The experience discouraged him from bench science; and he spent the following summers at Hammersmith Hospital in London, where he did rotations in endocrinology, neurology, and hematology. He returned to the Technion for a year, after which he went into the army for five years. He was a medic assigned to the Golan Heights during a war with Lebanon; soldiers there suffered crash injuries, and Ron published a paper on forced bicarbonate infusion as a treatment for renal failure. He then did his residency in internal medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City and decided he wanted to do bench science as well. He chose endocrinology because it afforded him more time for the bench. He accepted a fellowship at Massachusetts General Hospital, working in Joel Habener's lab. There Ron became interested in possible genetic regulation of responses to stresses on the endoplasmic reticulum. He has discovered that CHOP (CIEBP homologous protein), which can be a marker of endoplasmic reticulum stresses, is induced in some disease states, like Crohn's disease. He is trying to discover where that information leads him. Ron accepted an assistant professorship at the Skirball Institute for Biomolecular Medicine at New York University, where he continues his research into CHOP and the IRE-1beta gene. He has won a number of awards, including the Pew Scholars in the Biomedical Sciences award and an award from the Leukemia Society of America. He and his wife, who is also a scientist and who works at the Population Center, have found a way to balance their professional lives with their life at home with their son. </p> Oral history interview with Ann B. Hill2023-01-10T15:34:16-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/guky309https://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/4ms0u3n/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Ann B. Hill was born in Melbourne, but was raised primarily in Sydney, Australia, the second youngest of four children. Her father took advantage of opportunities for returning soldiers after the Second World War and pursued a degree in electronic engineering; her mother worked as a teacher until her children were born. Hill was a voracious reader throughout her childhood; she did not develop an interest in science until high school. She had a number of influential educators in her life, including teachers, principals, and family members. Ultimately she decided to study medicine at the University of New South Wales. She participated in a summer research program in Robert V. Blanden's laboratory at the Australian National University before interning at Sydney Hospital with a specialization in internal medicine. She continued to train in clinical immunology at St. Vincent's Hospital in Sydney, where she also worked to set up an immunology clinic for AIDS patients. Wanting to combine clinical medicine and scientific research, Hill returned to the Australian National University for her doctoral degree, working in Arno Mullbacher's laboratory on immunodominance and the cytotoxic T-cell response to flaviviruses. After winning the Oxford Nuffield Dominions Medical Fellowship she attended Oxford University as a postdoctoral fellow in Andrew J. McMichael's laboratory, researching HLA-B51, cross-presentation, and immuno-evasion. At the end of her postdoc, Hill took another postdoctoral fellowship at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Hidde L. Ploegh's lab to study immuno-evasion by herpes simplex viruses. This last postdoctoral fellowship proved quite influential scientifically and Hill continued work on immune-evasion as a member of the Oregon Health Sciences University. Hill used the remainder of the interview to reflect upon her own career, as well as various contemporary issues in scientific research and practice, like her decision to enter medicine rather than the humanities; the impact of her senior high school education on her career; patents and the privatization of scientific research; and competition in science. She ends the interview with thoughts about her family and the role that the Pew Scholars Program in Biomedical Sciences has played and continues to play in her work.</p> Oral history interview with Frank H. Field2023-01-10T15:32:23-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/9p290b05khttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/as8oxpd/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Frank H. Field was raised in Cliffside Park, New Jersey, by an aunt, an uncle, and a grandmother. He entered Duke University, placing a year ahead in chemistry, but had very little money. To meet his expenses he worked in the school dining hall and graded math papers. He continued on at Duke for his graduate education and worked on using fluorocarbons as hydraulic fluids to replace hydrocarbons on warships. He then took a position at the University of Texas and began his mass spectrometry career. He worked first on measuring the ionization potential of cyclopropane. Field left the University of Texas to work with Joe Franklin at Humble Oil, and then after time at Esso, he was recruited by Rockefeller University as a full professor. He shifted into biochemical mass spectroscopy to be more in keeping with the biomedical orientation of Rockefeller. He built the second Californium-252 mass spectrometer in the world. A talk in Bordeaux, France, excited his enthusiasm for matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) and he persuaded his postdoc, Brian Chait, to build one.</p> Oral history interview with Phillip A. Sharp2023-12-04T15:28:53-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/t89tifghttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/x951dca/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Phillip A. Sharp's interview begins with a discussion of his family. He details his genealogy, from his great grandparents to his current extended family. Sharp then discusses his childhood in Falmouth, Kentucky, near Cincinnati, Ohio. After graduating from Falmouth High School, Sharp attended Union College, where he met his wife, Ann Holcombe. He received his BA in chemistry and math from Union College in 1966. Then, Sharp went on to earn his PhD in chemistry from the University of Illinois. Sharp went to Caltech initially for his post-doctoral studies, but after three years he joined James Watson's virology lab at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory to learn more about cell biology research. In 1974, Sharp accepted an invitation to join the research team at the newly created Center for Cancer Research at MIT. In 1977, Sharp and Richard J. Roberts discovered split genes, which led to the discovery of RNA splicing. This was a significant discovery for which Sharp and Roberts shared the Nobel Prize in 1993. Phillip Sharp worked his way up through the ranks of MIT's administration, eventually becoming head of the biology department and director of the Center for Cancer Research. Moreover, Sharp was instrumental in the establishment of one of the first biotech companies, Genentech, Inc. He also worked with a team of researchers to establish Biogen, Inc. In 2000, Sharp became the director of the McGovern Institute for Brain Research. Sharp concludes the interview with reflections on his rapid rise through MIT's administration and the significance of the neuroscience research community that currently surrounds and includes Harvard University. </p> Oral history interview with Andrew Koff2023-01-10T15:33:19-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/21gw9sghttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/cwwdowj/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Andrew Koff was born and raised in New York the elder child of four siblings, with three younger sisters. He attended Long Beach High School in New York, influenced by Jeffrey Elias, his high school biology teacher. Koff matriculated at the State University of New York, Stony Brook, majoring in political science. While an undergraduate he worked as a technician in Peter Tegtmeyer's lab on SV40 large T-antigen; he decided to remain at Stony Brook for his graduate studies and researched herpes simplex virus replication. From there he began a postdoctoral fellowship in James M. Roberts's laboratory at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Washington, studying cyclin E; he collaborated with Joan Massague on cyclin E-CDK2 activity. After Seattle, Koff accepted a position at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York, and focused his lab on p27 interactions and regulation, on developing mouse models mimicking p27 activity, on cyclins in meiosis, and on angiogenesis. The interview concludes with his thoughts on grant writing and the peer review process; balancing family and career; the importance of being familiar with the history and context of a particular field of research; the pressures of publication and production in the scientific community; dealing with a stutter; what it is like to be a primary investigator at a prestigious research institute; and the impact of the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences on his career.</p> Oral history interview with Dean H. Kedes2023-09-01T16:32:18-04:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/4bg3v89https://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/lw1xybf/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Dean H. Kedes' oral history begins with a discussion of his childhood and family life. Heavily influenced by his father, also a biomedical scientist, Kedes developed an interest in science early in life. He would visit his father's laboratory at Stanford University often and he became aware of its friendly and productive atmosphere. During his youth, he traveled abroad with his family in support of his father's research. Time spent in Italy and England, while also traveling to other parts of Europe, proved enriching. Kedes applied to college while in Europe and he subsequently chose to attend Stanford University. Upon matriculation, though, the ‘living on campus' experience made it seem as if he had gone to school farther away from home than was actually true. Starting from enrollment, Kedes pursued a major in biology with the intention of applying to medical school. His coursework and laboratory research in the neurobiology laboratory of Eric Shooter, however, increased his interest in pursuing basic science as well. Kedes decided to undertake a joint MD/PhD program at Yale University. After an uninspiring first laboratory rotation working on a descriptive Drosophila project, Kedes eventually joined the laboratory of Joan A. Steitz to study pre-mRNA splicing. Upon earning his MD/PhD, Kedes returned to Stanford University to undertake his clinical residency, though he experienced difficulty transitioning between laboratory research and clinical medicine. After completing his residency, Kedes built upon his laboratory research with post-doctoral studies in Donald Ganem's laboratory at the University of California, San Francisco. There Kedes developed his interests in the molecular biology of infectious diseases including Hepatitis B and Kaposi's Sarcoma-associated Herpes Virus (KSHV). Following his successful work with Ganem, Kedes was offered a position at the University of Virginia—a location at which both he and his wife could find work—and began the “thrill and excitement” of running his own laboratory. Throughout the interview Kedes emphasized the importance of balancing family life with laboratory work and creating a positive atmosphere within the laboratory, something that he works hard to maintain at the University of Virginia. Shortly after becoming a principal investigator, Kedes was awarded a Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award and he reflected upon the importance of the award with respect to scientific funding and collaboration. Kedes also discussed funding in the United States more broadly, especially the problem of the attrition of science students due to a lack of funds as well as the national push towards translational research. The interview concluded with Kedes' reflections on the field of biomedical science, on scientific publishing, and on the public perception of science.</p> Oral history interview with Monica L. Vetter2023-01-10T15:33:29-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/tcmbzrxhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/3mmxj9v/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Monica L. Vetter grew up in Markham, Ontario, Canada, the eldest of three siblings. Vetter's father worked for Honeywell and in the computer industry generally—and was gifted musically—and her mother was a nurse who, later in life, founded the Head Injury Association of Toronto, in part in response to a family tragedy. Vetter's parents provided her with access to all the things typical of childhood: gymnastics, swimming, and piano lessons; she loved reading, spending much time in the library, playing soccer, and having fun with her brothers outdoors. She entered McGill University, deciding to major in biosciences. Her interest in science led to several summers spent in various academic labs working on muscle contraction at the University of Ottawa, motor cortex and motor control in primates at the University of Toronto, and eye movements and the neural control of eye movements at McGill. Wanting to experience the academic world beyond the confines of the traditional Canadian/American school systems, Vetter spent a year abroad at the Free University in Berlin, Germany. During her time there, she applied to and was accepted at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), where she conducted research in the lab of J. Michael Bishop on molecular genetics and signaling pathways in neuronal cells. She remained at UCSF to undertake a postdoctoral position in Yuh Nung Jan's laboratory focusing on ath5 transcription factor and the regulation of the initial events in vertebrate retinal neural development. From there she accepted a faculty appointment at the University of Utah, developing her research on retinal neurogenesis. At the end of the interview, Vetter talks about the biomedical revolution and her decision to pursue academic research rather than work in industry; the issue of patents; her interest in the history of science; and the role of the scientist in scientific public policy and literacy. She concludes with thoughts about the impact of the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award on her work and the process of conducting scientific research.</p> Oral history interview with Douglas J. Epstein2023-09-01T16:35:36-04:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/skryysqhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/mkfrn0w/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Douglas J. Epstein was born in St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada, where he lived for about five years. At that time his parents divorced, and he and his mother and three older siblings went to live in Montreal, Québec, Canada; his father remained in St. John’s, so the two did not see each other much. Epstein’s best childhood memories are of summers spent at camp, with a week-long canoe trip at one of the nearby national or provincial wildernesses. School he found uninspiring, though he thought his education was relatively good. Because of the Separatist movement 70-80% of his classes in junior high were in French; in high school only about 40%. He did like his high-school science classes, taking as many as he could. He liked the order and logic of science. He spent his CÉGEP (Collège d’enseignement général et professionnel) year fascinated by tapeworms and the logic of their design.</p>
<p>Because his friends were all going to McGill University, Epstein thought he would go there too. Accepted into the arts division, he decided to matriculate instead at Concordia University, which had a good science program. There he discovered genetics. He believes that the small classes and the access he had to good teachers at Concordia were very beneficial to him, allowing him to transfer to McGill after a year. There he did very well and received an excellent education. He had expected to go to medical school, but spending several summers as an orderly at the Sir Mortimer B. Davis Jewish General Hospital, where his mother worked, convinced him otherwise. He had found Michel Vekemans’ lectures about Down syndrome embryos fascinating, and he decided to pursue a PhD.</p>
<p>It was customary then to get a master’s degree, so Epstein joined Vekemans’ lab, where Epstein used his Down syndrome lab work as his master’s thesis. He did not think, though, that he could go further with this research subject, so he decided to investigate the genetic basis of neural tube defects using Daphne Trasler’s mice, hoping to identify the mutation. Since Vekemans was moving to France, Epstein worked in Philippe Gros’ lab, and Trasler became Epstein’s de facto advisor. During his graduate school career Epstein published eight papers, five as first author. He also met his future wife.</p>
<p>By this time the neural development field was booming. Andrew McMahon moved from Roche Institute of Molecular Biology to Harvard University and offered Epstein a postdoc in his (McMahon’s) lab. Epstein then decided to move to Alexandra Joyner’s lab at Skirball Institute of Biomolecular Medicine at New York University School of Medicine to work on sonic hedgehog gene expression in the nervous system.</p>
<p>After this postdoc Epstein accept an assistant professorship of genetics at the University of Pennsylvania, where his research continues to find new ways in which hedgehog is crucial to neurogenesis; he believes that this work will provide a clearer understanding of diseases caused by alteration in gene function and expression. In addition to running his own lab, Epstein continues to publish, to write grants, and to attempt to balance life with his wife and two children with his life at the lab. He has won numerous awards, including the Pew Scholars in the Biomedical Sciences Award.</p> Oral history interview with Kenneth A. Dill2023-01-10T15:35:14-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/vnbewg9https://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/8uh0ds3/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Ken A. Dill grew up in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, one of two children. His father was an engineer for the telephone company and his mother a housewife. Having displayed an early interest in electronics, Dill attended Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), obtaining a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and a master’s degree in bioengineering. His master’s degree experience convinced him he wanted to do research so he applied for and received a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant and matriculated at the University of California, San Diego. Rotations there gave him an interest in questions about the origins of life. He settled in Bruno Zimm’s lab because he liked Zimm’s personality and his bio-related physics lab. Dill finished his PhD when he got reproducible results with the DNA separator he had designed and built. He went next to a postdoc at Stanford University, to Paul Flory’s lab to study micelles, hoping that their simpler structures would help him understand the more complex structures of proteins. Dill says that Flory “thought like molecules do.”</p>
<p>Dill accepted an assistant professorship at the University of Florida, where he worked on protein folding, molecular evolution, and the origins of life. Although he liked Florida, Dill left there for the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), where there were many more groups doing similar work. At the beginning of Dill’s career Cyrus Levinthal declared that learning how sequence determines structure was the grand challenge in their field; Dill published his paper using polymer statistical mechanics to postulate that requirements for compactness limited proteins’ structures. Others questioned the use of statistical mechanics for thinking about proteins, but Dill developed simple exact models, especially the hydrophobic-polar model. He also developed funnel-shaped energy landscapes.</p>
<p>Dill moved to studying peptoids, or artificial molecules, collaborating with Ronald Zuckermann, to see if they could make the peptoids fold the way proteins do. They called these folding peptoids foldamers and believe that foldamers could have many important biological applications. Dill’s lab now works in three main project areas: computer modeling of structures; water; and nonequilibrium statistical mechanics. Dill’s work was originally funded by Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences but has since been supported by NIH. He still loves to work with pencil and paper.</p>
<p>Wanting to contribute to science policy, Dill cofounded, with Mary Barkley, the Bridging the Sciences Coalition, which is composed of fifteen basic research organizations. Dill discusses Representative John Porter’s help with legislation and procedures; the Coalition’s white papers; Congress’s responsiveness; and the importance of a large vision for science. He believes deep innovation is important for the future of science. He points out some other countries’ approaches to science policy and stresses the importance of public outreach. Dill shares thoughts on science education and grant reviewing. At the time of the second interview Dill had just been elected to the National Academy of Sciences and had yet to attend the inauguration.</p> Oral history interview with Bruce L. Goode2023-12-04T15:28:53-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/v2f31n7
<p>At the request of the interviewee, the abstract of the interview and interviewee’s biographical data have not been included. For more information, please contact the Center for Oral History.</p> Oral history interview with Michael B. Eisen2023-12-04T15:28:54-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/56kwsil
<p>At the request of the interviewee, the abstract of the interview and interviewee’s biographical data have not been included. For more information, please contact the Center for Oral History.</p> Oral history interview with Caroline Kisker2023-12-04T15:28:53-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/6rcio1ahttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/z6metar/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Caroline F. Kisker grew up in West Berlin, West Germany, where she attended the John F. Kennedy German-American grammar school. After completing her Abitur, Kisker planned to study medicine, but due to the complicated university placement lottery system Kisker was not able to matriculate at a university. In the interim, while working as a medical apprentice, she decided to pursue biochemistry at the Freie Universität in Berlin. With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, Kisker witnessed an influx of East German students to West Berlin and the universities there. She joined the large laboratory of Wolfram Saenger and throughout the course of her Diplom and PhD , Kisker had the opportunity to conduct laboratory work in Zürich, Switzerland, and Frankfurt, Germany, with Nobel Laureate Hartmut Michel. Her doctoral thesis centered on the determination of medically relevant tetracycline repressor protein, the results of which she published in Science. While working in the Saenger laboratory, Kisker met her husband Hermann Schindelin. After completing their doctorates, they both pursued postdoctoral research in Douglas C. Rees's laboratory at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). At Caltech, Kisker solved the sulfite oxidase structure and published it in Cell. At the end of her time as a postdoctoral fellow, Kisker accepted a position as a faculty member at State University of New York, Stony Brook. In 2000 Kisker received the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award and in 2006 she moved to the Rudolf Virchow Center at the University of Würzburg, in Germany. She continues her research on structure-based drug design and DNA repair through the tools of structural biology. Throughout her oral history Kisker discusses the differences between the German and American educational and scientific systems and many of the challenges associated with being a woman in science, especially having to balance work with family life during the transition from Stony Brook back to Germany. Kisker also talks about the ways in which structural biology has changed throughout her career in response to new technologies and the ways in which funding affects her research and research choices.</p> Oral history interview with Michael Farrar2023-12-04T15:28:54-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/kabzaojhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/9el2a6c/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Michael A. Farrar was born in Washington, DC, where his father was a chemist for the Bureau of Standards. Farrar's mother, a housewife, was German, and Farrar and his younger brother and sister grew up bilingual. As his father changed jobs, the family moved near to New York City, back to the DC area, and finally to Madison, Wisconsin, where the senior Farrar joined the faculty of the University of Wisconsin. By that time Farrar had begun high school. He liked to read and was interested in physics and astronomy, but not so much in biology. He crewed for his high school team and continued rowing throughout college. Thinking of becoming an astrophysicist, Farrar entered the University of Wisconsin, intending to major in physics and mathematics. At the end of his junior year he attended some lectures given by Oliver Smithies and found them fascinating. In general, he found biology better taught and more interesting at the university, and so he changed his major to biology; during the summers he worked in a chicken lab trying to manipulate genes. Having started the biology program later in his undergraduate career, he decided to stay for a fifth year to complete a senior thesis. During his last semester he was diagnosed with Addison's disease. Farrar decided to attend Washington University in St. Louis for a PhD in immunology. There he began work on interferon receptors in Robert Schreiber's lab; he won the Olin Medical Scientist Foundation Fellowship. He also took up bicycle racing. Taking advice from Schreiber and a number of others, Farrar accepted a postdoc at the University of Washington, working in Roger Perlmutter's lab on Ras signaling and B-cells, as well as developing a novel, chemical-induced dimerization system. He enjoyed new outdoor activities in Seattle, Washington, and continued biking as well. After Farrar had been in Seattle for about four years, Perlmutter moved to Merck and Company, taking most of his lab, including Farrar, with him. There Farrar was able to design his own lab, to interview and recommend for hire the lab staff and technicians, and to buy whatever equipment he wanted. He learned a great deal about setting up and managing a lab from this experience. He was able to continue his previous work there too, but he had to find new athletic activities, this time rock climbing and ballroom dancing. He also met his future wife, a medical student at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. When it was time to look for a job Farrar had an offer from the University of Minnesota, and his wife was able to transfer her residency. At the end of the interview Farrar discusses his continuing work on STAT; the politics of publishing; ethics in science; the increase in administrative duties, with its corresponding decrease in time for bench work; grants in general; the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences award in particular (and its annual meetings); recruiting students and getting his lab going; and patents. He describes how he tries to balance work life with spending time with his two children and his wife. He concludes his interview by discussing his newest work and its implications for human leukemia.</p> Oral history interview with Jason G. Cyster2023-12-04T15:28:53-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/gpzic6lhttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/ujfob1c/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>Jason G. Cyster was born and raised in Western Australia, the younger of two brothers. Cyster lived and worked on a farm for much of his early life. His father worked as a hired laborer on others' farms before buying his own (for a time later in life he made a brief foray into software engineering—due, in part, to his elder son's interests—developing software for farmers, before returning to farm life); Cyster's mother, once the children were in school, worked first as a secretary and then as a real-estate agent. Cyster's school was a seventy-five minute bus ride from his home, so commuting to and from school, school, and work on the farm did not leave much time for activities not related to academics or farm life. He did well in his local school throughout most of his childhood; both he and his older brother went to a boarding school in nearby Perth to finish the last two years of school, principally because the local public high school was close to fifty miles away. While completing high school, Cyster obtained the highest aggregate score on Australia's Tertiary exams in his state, receiving the Beazley Award. He matriculated at the University of Western Australia to pursue science rather than veterinary medicine (his older brother was there as well, though focusing on computer science). In part, his decision to study biology was based upon his own childhood inclinations and interests (he and his mother started a piggery, and he occasionally dissected a pig), and in part on the caliber of lecturers at the university. By his third year, he developed an interest in immunology and began working in the lab of, and being mentored by, Wayne R. Thomas with whom Cyster conducted his honors thesis. After receiving a Commonwealth Overseas Studentship, Cyster decided to undertake his graduate studies at Oxford University instead of remaining in Australia. At Oxford he worked with Alan F. Williams characterizing the CD43 molecule; he also collaborated with Paul C. Driscoll and Ian Campbell on a structural analysis of the T lymphocyte CD2 antigen. Early on in his graduate study Cyster began thinking of where to do his postdoctoral work, and though Australia was certainly a consideration, Cyster also entertained the notion of going to the United States. He decided to work with Christopher C. Goodnow at Stanford University studying immunological tolerance and the follicular exclusion process. From there, he accepted a position at the University of California, San Francisco. Near the end of the interview, Cyster comments on the tenure system in the United States and in Europe; his mentoring style; the Tetrad and Biomedical Science programs at University of California, San Francisco; and the broader applications of his work. He concludes the interview with thoughts on the advantages and disadvantages of competition in science; the peer review system; the role of industry in research; and the impact that the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Sciences had, and has, on his work. </p> Oral history interview with William A. Muller2023-01-10T15:29:44-05:00https://digital.sciencehistory.org/works/fkn30cohttps://digital.sciencehistory.org/downloads/deriv/46rirg8/thumb_large_2X?disposition=inline
<p>William A. Muller was born in Manhattan but grew up on Long Island; he is the oldest of three brothers, among whom might be found typical sibling rivalry. He is of Jewish ancestry, but his parents and his extended family are not especially observant. Muller had a childhood fear of dying that led him to want to "cure death;" he began to think of medicine as a career from that early age. He did well in school, being salutatorian in his high school. He believes, though, that his youngest brother is the most intelligent, and he discusses Toby's academic career. When Muller entered Harvard University he was shocked at the intense level of competition there. He describes his undergraduate curriculum and his experience purifying DNA under lab director Lynn C. Klotz. He also ran track and cross country. During his college summers he participated in a vaccination project in Central America. Feeling that clinical and research work should complement each other, Muller chose to attend the Rockefeller University-Cornell University Medical College MD/PhD program. At that time the draft was still an important factor in Muller's life. David Baltimore came to Rockefeller at this time, and transformed the nature of the Rockefeller community. Muller decided to work in the Zanvil A. Cohn/James Hirsch lab, where he actually worked with Ralph M. Steinman on endocytosis-iodination techniques. He explains showing that membrane recycles and describes the reaction of the scientific community. He talks about his clinical training in medical school and the practical nature of medical education. He accepted a residency at Massachusetts General Hospital and began a pathology residency at Brigham and Women's Hospital. Muller talks about his social life during medical school and residency; how residencies differ; how clinical experience enhances research; the empirical nature of medicine; and the importance of basic research. He studied endothelial cells in the Michael A. Gimbrone, Jr., lab, showing that angiotensin converting enzyme is apically polarized. His experimental methods included testing the validity of the data on slaughterhouse aortas. He took a monoclonal antibody approach and brought biochemical expertise to the Gimbrone lab. Muller discusses his work examining how leukocytes bind to endothelial cells and his fellow Pew scholars who work on endothelial cells. His research on cell adhesion molecules led to his discovery that PECAM-1 is required for transendothelial migration of leukocytes; this discovery may have clinical application. He continued researching multiple functions of PECAM and searching for unknown adhesion molecules. Although he was anxious at first about returning to his first graduate-school lab, Muller accepted a position at Rockefeller University and in pathology at Weill Cornell Medical College. His first grant application rejected, Muller shifted the focus of his research; he now studies proteins that mediate monocyte binding and transmigration. Muller concludes his interview with a discussion of the process of scientific discovery, especially as he experienced it while establishing the role of PECAM in endothelial cell adhesion; and an explanation of the significance of the Pew Scholars in the Biomedical Sciences award and the RJR Nabisco Research Scholars Award in his career development. </p>