The new Breakthrough Prize In Life Sciences carries a rich reward for the winners--$3 million for each of five annual awards “to recognize excellence in research aimed at curing intractable diseases and extending human life.” The foundation administering the prize is dedicated to “advancing breakthrough research, celebrating scientists and generating excitement about the pursuit of science as a career.”
The foundation website is silent about whether any of the prizes will be posthumous. It seems likely, though, that death will be a disqualifier. After all, a purpose of the rewards is to provide “recipients more freedom and opportunity to pursue even greater future accomplishments.” Death has a way of discouraging future accomplishments.
The richer the prize, the more sense it makes to confine it to scientists able to continue to make contributions. But that creates its own set of problems. Among them, the way premature death can deny recognition to deserving scientists. I am reminded of a gifted relative, the co-discoverer of Carbon 14, who was denied full recognition because of his premature death in a laboratory accident while his co-discoverer enjoyed winning the prestigious Fermi Prize.
The foundation says “There are no age restrictions for nominees.” As laudable as that sentiment is, it would scarcely further the aims of the foundation to honor people on their deathbed or those too old and feeble to do significant creative work.
The Breakthrough Prize’s ground rules state that its prize “can be received more than once.” That makes an award potentially worth tens of millions of dollars. It’s obviously wonderful that so much money is to be invested to extend human life. But with so much prize money at stake, there are bound to be unintended consequences. One could well be an incentive for the precise opposite of what founders of the prize intend: the proliferation of scientific misconduct and its close cousin, junk science.
The Scientist Magazine reported in a recent issue that it found “no shortage of stories to discuss in this year’s roundup of misconduct stories.” There followed a litany of seamy goings-on in the nation’s research laboratories. Much of it was due to an overzealous search for prestige and status. The Breakthrough Prize adds riches to the mix. It may not be possible to quantify how much this super-rich prize contributes to scientific misconduct, but it will be surprising if it doesn’t add to what is now a worrisome ongoing problem. The Breakthrough Prize will need to be on guard to be sure that it does more good than harm.
No comments:
Post a Comment