Every October, the world learns who will be the newest members of a very elite circle known as Nobel Laureates.
Whether or not you agree with the selection committee’s choices, the Nobel Prize is considered a career pinnacle of success and the annual announcement continues to captivate the media and general public in addition to the scientific community. This in part is due to the hefty prize purse, roughly $1.1 million, but also because of the body of work that the winners represent and its contributions to societal advances.
At the New York Academy of Sciences, we believe prizes like the Nobel and others help to advance scientific discovery, which in turn is good for the world. And if athletes and celebrities can be recognized for their achievements why shouldn’t scientists? But we also believe that acknowledgement of early-career work is equally important.
We administer two scientific prizes that in the past 15+ years have helped boost the careers of more than 450 young scientists pursuing unconventional ideas and new directions with the fearlessness and creativity of youth: the Blavatnik Awards for Young Scientists and the Innovators in Science Award. While many people may be familiar with the concept of a science grant, the purpose of a scientific prize—such as the Nobel or the Blavatnik Awards—may be less clear. Here are just a few of the reasons scientific prizes are important to the pursuit of science, the scientific community, and the public, at large.
1. Recognition
In addition to receiving cash and prestige, awardees receive recognition for their instrumental role in making key advances in areas of science in the service of humanity. This type of recognition can lead to acceptance of a paradigm-shifting idea, allocation of funding and resources to a particular area of research, and increased awareness of a research topic. For rising young talent, it can cement the shift from local player to the global stage. And while not every discipline’s importance may be readily understood by lay audiences, such as Astrophysics or Mathematics, the attention drawn from the award can still confirm the importance of the achievement.
2. Platform
Scientists are not always the most proactive advocates for their own work. So a nomination for an award, typically made by nominees’ respective institutions and/or colleagues, is itself a validation of their work. Being one’s own spokesperson also involves flexing a set of communication skills, not often utilized in the lab. Whether it is vying for a nomination, distilling complex ideas for a broader audience or giving TV or radio interviews about the research—these experiences help scientists fine-tune their skills in communicating science, not only to other scientists and stakeholders, but to funders and the general public.
3. Public Awareness and Engagement
Media buzz around awards can boost public awareness and engagement in science. Scientific innovation continues to shape the nature of modern life as we know it: from antibiotics and vaccination to the internet and smartphones. Actively promoting the role of science, and scientists, in the development of the tools and technologies we often take for granted today, reinforces the need for continued public funding of science. The voices of scientists and a scientifically literate public are equally important in the critical ongoing dialogue on science and evidence-based policy-making.
4. Role Models
Awards create positive role models in the scientific community. These men and women, drawn from across the globe, inspire young students to pursue careers in science, and drive current scientists to strive for excellence. Both are key to maintaining a strong pipeline of talent in STEM and essential if America is to remain competitive in a global economy.
5. Flexibility
As the funding climate for scientific research continues to grow increasingly challenging, awards can help ease financial tensions, whether personal or in the lab. More stable funding allows scientists to take on additional or high-risk, high-return projects not otherwise supported by traditional avenues of funding.
By recognizing and honoring those individuals that have made significant contributions to science, through the presentation of scientific awards, we continue to elevate the bar of scientific progress and its positive impact on humanity and promote the breakthroughs in science and tech that will define how our world will look over the next century.
This post was originally published on LinkedIn and has been updated.
Nine outstanding scientists from six U.K. academic institutions receive a total of $480,000.
Published December 8, 2017
By Marie Gentile and Richard Birchard
The New York Academy of Sciences and the Blavatnik Family Foundation announced the first Honorees of the Blavatnik Awards in the United Kingdom.
Three Laureates, in the categories of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences & Engineering, and Chemistry, will each receive an unrestricted prize of $100,000. In addition, two Finalists in each category will each receive an unrestricted prize of $30,000. To date, the Blavatnik Awards in the U.K. are the largest unrestricted cash awards available exclusively to young scientists.
The Blavatnik Awards, administered by the New York Academy of Sciences, were established by the Blavatnik Family Foundation in 2007. The awards honor and support exceptional early-career scientists and engineers under the age of 42 across the United States. In 2017, the Awards were launched in the U.K. and Israel. This recognized the first cohort of international Blavatnik Award recipients. To date, the Blavatnik Awards have conferred prizes totaling U.S. $5 million, honoring 220 outstanding young scientists and engineers.
In this inaugural year of the Blavatnik Awards in the U.K., 124 nominations were received from 67 academic and research institutions across England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. A distinguished jury of leading senior scientists and engineers selected the Laureates and Finalists. The 2018 Laureates are:
These inaugural Blavatnik Awards Laureates and Finalists in the U.K. will be honored at a gala dinner and ceremony at London’s Victoria and Albert Museum on March 7, 2018. In addition, the Award recipients will be invited to attend the annual Blavatnik Science Symposium at the New York Academy of Sciences this summer, which is an opportunity for former and current Blavatnik Awardees to exchange ideas and build cross-disciplinary research collaborations.
The Blavatnik U.K. honorees will become members of the Blavatnik Science Scholars community, currently comprising over 220 Blavatnik Award honorees from the decade-old U.S. program and three inaugural 2018 Laureates from Israel. Honorees will also receive Membership to The New York Academy of Sciences.
The 2017 Blavatnik Awards for Young Scientists Laureates exemplify the kind of fearless thinking that can make revolutionary ideas become reality.
Published October 1, 2017
By Hallie Kapner
As physicist Niels Bohr (among others) has said: “Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.”
Just ten years ago, it would have been a stretch for even the most optimistic prognosticator to predict that the iPhone, then a newborn technology, would be in one billion hands or that the human genome could be sequenced affordably in 24 hours. These examples of the dizzying pace of progress are good reminders that while attempts to peer into the future of science and technology are essential for growth and inspiration, reality sometimes exceeds the wildest visions.
The 2017 winners of the Blavatnik National Awards for Young Scientists, materials scientist Yi Cui, chemist Melanie Sanford, and bioengineer Feng Zhang, are no strangers to vision. Chosen from a pool of more than 300 nominees from universities around the country, this year’s Laureates exemplify the kind of fearless thinking that upends norms and breaks boundaries, ultimately bringing revolutionary ideas and advances into reality.
Asking any of them to discuss their day-to-day research would provide a fascinating peek into some of the most cutting-edge work in their respective fields, yet just as intriguing are their thoughts on the future. When asked to fast-forward ten or twenty years to discuss what’s next in their fields, each readily dove headlong into the world to come, shedding light on achievements that are both probable and possible, then reaching further to describe potential advances that seem far-fetched today, but may be the ultimate achievements of tomorrow.
Deleting Disease
Feng Zhang
Ten years is a long time for Feng Zhang, as he recalls that the technology he helped pioneer, CRISPR-Cas9, didn’t exist a decade ago.
As Zhang, a Core Member of the Broad Institute at MIT and Harvard, talks excitedly about the rapid pace of advancement in the field of genome editing, he highlights that there’s still plenty of room for growth. Zhang was among the first to conceive of using CRISPR, an adaptive immune function native to bacteria, as a DNA-editing tool, a breakthrough that has turned the ability to quickly, cheaply, and precisely edit the genomes of plants and animals from science-fiction into an everyday occurrence.
From Zhang’s point of view, developing the tools was just the beginning — the work of the future is in refining and applying those tools to alleviate suffering and disease.
The advent of rapid, affordable genome sequencing has allowed researchers to identify many of the mutations that cause disease, which fall into two categories: monogenetic diseases, such as Huntington’s, caused by a single mutation, and polygenetic diseases, which comprise the majority of illnesses, wherein multiple mutations are implicated.
Today, most of the work being done with CRISPR targets monogenetic diseases. Even in those cases, a fix is far more complex than simply cutting and replacing.
“The major issue is that we don’t know how to repair the mutation efficiently, nor what exactly needs to be done to have a therapeutic consequence,” said Zhang. “I think we’ll develop techniques for delivering gene therapy to the right tissues, which is still a big challenge.”
Advancing CRISPR technologies
Zhang also projects a future where CRISPR technologies can be adapted to treat patients with diseases so rare that they are often overlooked by the therapeutic pipeline.
“The economics don’t work for drug companies to focus on rare diseases, but as gene editing becomes more mature, we could feasibly create individualized therapies that would circumvent the typical drug development process,” he explained.
But the ultimate CRISPR application — editing multiple genes to treat complex polygenetic diseases — remains the stuff of fantasy. Two decades from now, Zhang expects we’ll be much closer.
“Even if we have the technology to make multiple genetic changes, we don’t know enough about how multiple genes interact in disease at this point,” he said, noting that the interplay of different gene variations can produce effects we don’t fully understand. “There are variations known to protect people from HIV, but they increase susceptibility to West Nile Virus,” he said. “That’s just one example — we need a much better understanding of these connections in order to achieve these bigger goals.”
Big Ideas from the Smallest Structures
Yi Cui
For Yi Cui, professor of materials science and engineering at Stanford University, the buzzword of the future is energy.
Specifically, inexpensive, widely-available clean energy, along with new battery technologies that will transform cars and other consumer products as well as the electrical grid itself. Cui, whose research focuses on using nanoscale materials to tackle environmental and energy issues, has several breakthrough technologies to his credit — including a water filtration technology that uses electrified silver nanostructures to puncture viral and bacterial membranes, purifying water faster and more cheaply than chemical treatments, and designs for ultra-long life, low-cost batteries that may pave the way for what Cui sees as the major potential achievement of the next two decades: grid-scale energy storage.
Solar cells have become more efficient and renewable energy costs are dropping, yet energy storage remains the major hurdle for scientists, who recognize both the economic and environmental advantages of a future dominated by clean power. Continual improvements in the energy density of today’s batteries will yield rewards in the relatively near term, says Cui, who sides with experts who predict mass adoption of electric vehicles over the next 10-15 years.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re seeing cars that can run 400 miles on a single charge,” he said, but the greatest gains in clean energy won’t be achieved until batteries can store enough energy to allow for the integration of solar, wind and other renewable power sources into the mainstream electrical grid. “Energy storage is the missing link,” Cui said, “and if we can solve that, it will be the most extraordinary achievement we can hope to have in this field in the next 20 or 30 years.”
The potential for nanomaterials to help mitigate the impacts of environmental pollution also looms large for Cui. As the global population grows and resource needs increase, he predicts a starring role for nanoscale structures in efforts to purify water and remediate soil pollution, and is developing a nano-driven “desalination battery,” which removes salt from seawater using less energy than reverse-osmosis, as well as air and water purification technologies that use nanostructures to capture particulates and pollutants with remarkable speed and efficiency.
The Best Molecule for the Job
Melanie Sanford
In a future envisioned by Melanie Sanford, there will be no compromise to designing molecules for some of the most important chemical tasks in the world, namely medical imaging, drug development, energy production and fields where the characteristics of a chemical reaction, or the process by which a molecule is made or utilized, can mean the difference between mediocre performance and excellence.
Sanford is making this vision a reality, developing customized approaches for the goals of various industries.
“Depending on the target for the reaction we’re developing, the dreams for the future are different,” she said.
The pharmaceutical and medical industries are two areas where Sanford believes that astonishing advances will be realized in the coming decade. Among them, the ability to customize the tracer molecules that are crucial to obtaining quality images in positron emission tomography, or PET, scans used in cancer, cardiac and brain diagnostics.
“Right now, the tracers used aren’t the best or the most appropriate, they’re the ones we can make with the limited set of reactions we have for adding a radioactive tag to a molecule,” said Sanford. “Ten or twenty years from now, the only constraint will be our imaginations — the reactions and catalysts in development now will allow us to ask, ‘What molecule do I want to make to get the best result for this application?’ and then be able to make it.”
Customization plays an equally important role in another field Sanford sees poised for transformation through the design of novel reactions — agricultural chemicals. Using reactions that yield the desired result, but do so using readily available materials with minimal energy consumption or waste production, would represent significant improvement and a major sustainability overhaul of some of the largest-scale chemical processing activities on earth.
“These syntheses are being performed at such a massive scale that waste really matters,” said Sanford.
The ability to make the best molecule for the job will be key to making Cui’s grid-scale energy storage a reality through new battery technologies. Sanford animatedly described the potential for developing new molecules to store energy, as well as tools for understanding and predicting the behavior and characteristics of those molecules.
“It’s going to be very exciting to both develop molecules with huge storage capability, but also to be able to use them to balance various needs and parameters — high storage capacity with high solubility — so we can really understand how to modify structures to yield the best performance for an application,” she said.
Zhang, Cui and Sanford harbor no delusions of ease when it comes to the dreams they’ve set forth. Rather, they greet the challenges ahead with equal measures of determination and hope.
“We have an enormous amount of work to do in the coming decades,” said Cui. “But everything we’re working towards is so important for the sustainable growth of the world and for the health and future of our children. I’m confident we can do it.”
Blavatnik Awardees advance the breakthroughs in science and technology that will define how our world will look tomorrow.
Chris Chang presents at the Blavatnik Science Symposium
Published May 1, 2017
By Victoria Cleave, PhD
The scientific equivalent of magic can happen when you put outstanding researchers together in a room. At the 2016 Blavatnik Science Symposium, a neuroscientist met a physicist, and they realized that the tool the neuroscientist needed to further his work was being developed within the physicist’s lab. Both were Blavatnik honorees, and they might never have met had it not been for the Blavatnik Awards for Young Scientists.
The Blavatnik Science Symposium is just one aspect of this distinctive awards program, established with the vision of Len Blavatnik, founder and Chairman of Access Industries and head of the Blavatnik Family Foundation, now celebrating its tenth anniversary.
The New York Academy of Sciences has administered the Awards since their inception, when they focused on the New York, New Jersey and Connecticut tri-state area. The basic tenets of the awards are simple: find brilliant researchers age 42 or under in chemistry, physical sciences and engineering, and life sciences, and award them financial support and exposure for their work.
“The Future of Scientific Thought”
Len Blavatnik explained the significance of that vision, “Young scientists represent the future of scientific thought. By honoring these young individuals and their achievements we are helping to promote the breakthroughs in science and technology that will define how our world will look in 20, 50, 100 years.”
In 2014, the Foundation supported the expansion from a regional to a national program, recognizing academic researchers across the United States every year with awards of $250,000, one of the largest unrestricted prizes ever created for researchers under the age of 42.
After seeing the success of the current Awards the Foundation was keen to support even more young innovators, so the program will expand with two new sets of Awards in the United Kingdom and Israel in early 2017. The Academy is delighted to be partnering with the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities to manage the Awards in Israel. Nominations for both new Awards will open in May 2017 and the first Blavatnik UK and Israel laureates will be honored in early 2018.
Amit Singer and Deborah Silver listen to a presentation during the 2016 Blavatnik Science Symposium
“World-Changing Discoveries”
“We know that this kind of recognition is particularly important because of the focus on scientists at the crucial juncture of their career when they are transitioning from trainee to independent researcher,” said Ellis Rubinstein, President and Chief Executive Officer at The New York Academy of Sciences. “Such recognition not only rewards past successes, it directly enables continued research—the kind of research that leads to world-changing discoveries.”
During the Awards’ first decade, more than 2,000 scientists and engineers were nominated from more than 200 institutions, with prizes totaling more than $4 million.
Michal Lipson, 2010 Blavatnik Awards Faculty winner and Given Foundation Professor at Cornell University, explained: “There are a few awards for young scientists, but almost all of them are based on proposals that you submit, and not on the actual work that you do as a young scientist. The Blavatnik Awards program is true recognition of the work of young scientists; it is unique in that sense. There is no equivalent.”
But it is the honorees themselves that are the most remarkable part of the Blavatnik Awards for Young Scientists. Chosen for both their achievements to date and the potential of what’s yet to come in their careers, the Awards aim to recognize truly outstanding scientists and engineers forging creative paths in research.
Trailblazing Science
Yueh Lynn Loo enjoying a networking break at the 2016 Blavatnik Science Symposium
Beyond accolades, these brilliant young men and women carry out their trailblazing science across the breadth of the Awards categories. From deciphering how memories are formed and stored in the brain, to targeting genetic mutations that drive the growth of aggressive cancers. They have probed the complex physics of dark matter pulling galaxies apart, and designed nano-devices that can purify water or detect disease in low-resource settings.
The downstream impact of supporting such exceptional honorees is clear. As Anthony Guiseppi-Elie, Professor and Division Director at Texas A&M University, who serves on the jury for the Awards, said, “We are, in fact, just touching the lives of a few, but those few have the capacity to influence whole new vistas of enquiry, and so the ripple effect is quite substantial.”
Indeed, some immediate effects of the awards have arisen thanks to the generosity of two of the inaugural Blavatnik National Awards Laureates, who chose to donate part of their prize winnings to support even younger scientists: Adam Cohen and Marin Soljačić have established prizes of their own for talented students at Hunter College and high-schoolers in Croatia, respectively.
An Environment for Ideas and Collaborations
And of course, the Blavatnik Science Symposium has proven to be a fertile environment for ideas and collaborations, with almost 200 scientists and engineers in the Blavatnik community, and many nationalities represented.
“There are too few opportunities for scientists to actually come together and share the really big ideas. One of the really great things that we get out of the annual Blavatnik Symposium is that you have this community of young scientists that come together in many different fields,” said David Charbonneau, 2016 Blavatnik National Laureate and Professor of Astronomy at Harvard University.
“The best scientific research is collaborative and we want our Blavatnik Scholars to be able to tap into the best talent around the world,” said Len Blavatnik. “I look forward to the next ten years of finding and supporting exceptional young researchers and helping to promote transformative scientific discoveries.
Following his new award, renowned immunologist Dan Littman, MD, PhD, explains his fascination with the immune system, as well as his hopes for the future of molecular medicine.
Published June 1, 2013
By Diana Friedman
Dan Littman, MD, PhD, received the Inaugural Ross Prize in Molecular Medicine from Betty Diamond, MD, a member of the Ross Prize Committee, and investigator & head, Center for Autoimmune and Musculoskeletal Diseases, The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research.
According to the committee for the Ross Prize in Molecular Medicine, Littman is an active investigator who produces innovative, paradigm-shifting research. He was recognized for his early discoveries, as well as his ongoing research to better understand viral, immune, and inflammatory diseases.
Below, Dr. Littman discusses his research, as well as his predictions and aspirations for the field of molecular medicine.
What drew you to the field of molecular biology?
I grew up during a time when molecular biology was in its infancy. I was interested in biology in general and I became interested in studying the immune system in college where we had a fantastic course that exposed us to new ideas in this area. We didn’t know, at the time, about T cell antigen receptors, and how they specified. So it was around that time that these really fascinating questions that could be addressed by molecular biology techniques started cropping up. In the late ‘70s and ‘80s the progress in molecular biology techniques started leading to breakthroughs in many fields, including immunology and virology.
How did you get involved in studying the molecular mechanisms of HIV infection?
I got interested in it because of a molecule called CD4 that I discovered in my postdoc. It became clear that it was a receptor for HIV, so we wished to understand how it is exploited by the virus to enter the cell and whether it might be possible to block its function to prevent infection and viral spread. We discovered that CD4 is not sufficient for the virus to enter the cell, but that a second molecule, CCR5, is also required on the cell surface for virus infection.
A drug that binds to CCR5 and blocks HIV infection has been developed. It’s not widely used today because it’s not the most effective therapy, but it can be used for those patients whose infection is refractory to the commonly used anti- retroviral drugs.
Our interest has shifted over the years as we try to understand how the virus depletes the cells of the immune system. Most people with HIV can mount an anti-viral immune response, but it’s not sufficient to eradicate the virus. Even people who are controlled with medication have a residual reservoir of HIV-infected cells. That reservoir often becomes reactivated once people go off therapy. The question is whether we could get rid of the reservoir, thereby curing patients of HIV.
Can there be a protective vaccine?
We are still interested in contributing to this important goal, and our work has been focused recently on trying to understand how the virus evades a branch of the immune system called the innate immune response. The virus does have an Achilles heel, but this Achilles heel is very well concealed as far as it is recognized by the innate immune system. We want to understand how to uncover it in people who are already infected with the virus or are given a prophylactic vaccine. If we can do that, we may be able to elicit much stronger anti-viral immunity.
What is your current research focus?
Dan Littman participates in a press briefing following his reception of the Ross Prize in Molecular Medicine.
The problems that are energizing me the most have to do with how the immune system is shaped to be able to deal with various environmental stresses and microbial challenges. We are trying to understand how the different branches of the immune system are kept in a homeostatic state in which they are ready to handle any kind of environmental threat, but at the same time, avoid being overly activated— as occurs in autoimmunity or inflammation.
The way we got to this is through our research of T lymphocytes, which are needed for establishing an adaptive microbial response to pathogens. We discovered a particular type of T cell in the intestine, where there is an enormous number of microbes that are required for these cells to appear. We have co-evolved with this commensal microbiota, which provides many benefits to us. There must be a balance where there is no threat to the host or to the microbiota. This evolutionary pas de deux is what we are interested in, from the point of view of the immune system.
What did your research on T cells teach you about autoimmune diseases and their relation to the microbiota?
In the process of studying T lymphocytes we found that there is a particular type that can be especially inflammatory and can cause tissue damage. These T cells are involved in autoimmune diseases, like rheumatoid arthritis (RA), multiple sclerosis (MS), and inflammatory bowel diseases like Crohn’s disease, but they are also important for protecting the mucosal barrier. It’s important that these T cells be kept in balance. If there is a shift in the microbiota, called dysbiosis, it can result in these T cells becoming harmful to the host.
This theory has been fully established in animal models, and now there’s some evidence in humans. We now have some hints that RA is associated with dysbiosis and that there may be particular bacteria that may be responsible for eliciting T cells that attack our own cells (within the joints, in RA). We think that there is a good possibility that this is precipitated by an imbalance in the intestinal microbiota.
How could further research on the microbiota impact disease treatment?
Right now, we’re at a very early stage. We have over 1,000 different types of bacteria that compose our intestinal microbiota and we know the functions of only a handful of them. Is it possible to rebalance the microbiota? Interventions like fecal transplantation do so, and are actually a highly effective way of treating certain types of infection and may also be effective in treating inflammatory diseases.
The hope is that in the future we will have a much better definition of the components of the microbiota and how they interact with the epithelial barrier and the immune system. This would allow us to essentially create and deliver a formula of specific bacteria to target certain diseases.
We think of the impact of this on classical autoimmune diseases, like MS and type 1 diabetes, but it’s very likely that this extends much further to other diseases that can be impacted by inflammatory processes, like Alzheimer’s disease, atherosclerosis, and possibly even behavioral disorders. We think that this type of research could have far-reaching implications.
What pressing question has yet to be answered in the field of molecular biology?
We still don’t understand fundamentally how the development of an organism occurs. Stem cell research is a huge exciting field these days, and it pertains to how an entire organism can be derived from a single cell (a zygote). The mechanisms by which organisms regulate their size and their function throughout a lifetime are things we don’t yet have a great grasp on.
One of the interests in our lab, and to biologists in general, is how interaction with the environment affects developmental and physiological processes, such as the onset of chronic diseases that can be precipitated by infection or induced stress. We want to know how the environment changes the expression of genes.
The big advances in the past 30 years have come from cell biology and understanding how genes work, but whole organism physiology has taken a backseat, and for good reason—we haven’t yet had the tools to study it in the ways that we can study cell biology.
Where do you see the field of molecular medicine in 20 years?
I think the technology is moving forward very fast with regard to genomics and detecting and identifying molecules relevant to disease processes. There will be much more rapid and precise molecular diagnosis, through both genetic approaches (identifying genetic lesions) and metabolomics, and hopefully better interventions as we better understand how these relate to disease.
An imprisoned Cuban physician and a Guatemalan forensic scientist have been awarded The New York Academy of Sciences Heinz R. Pagels Human Rights of Scientists Award for 2008.
The Academy’s Human Rights Committee bestowed the awards on Oscar Elias Biscet, MD, and Fredy Peccerelli. The presentation took place during the Academy’s September 18 Annual Meeting. Dr. Angel Garrido of the Lawton Foundation for Human Rights, of which Dr. Biscet is president, accepted the award on his colleague’s behalf.
Dr. Biscet, a 46-year-old community organizer and human rights advocate, is a widely known Cuban political prisoner who began serving a 25-year term in 2002. He is the founder of the Lawton Foundation, a human rights organization that peacefully promotes the rights of Cubans through nonviolent civil disobedience. In 1998, Dr. Biscet and his wife, Elsa Morejon, a nurse, were both fired from the Havana Municipal Hospital for his open criticism of the Cuban government. In 2007, President George W. Bush awarded Dr. Biscet the Medal of Freedom, one of many honors he has received for his human rights work.
Peccerelli is a founding member of the Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation. Since 1992 his Foundation has carried out exhumations of unmarked mass graves containing the remains of individuals murdered during that country’s 36-year armed conflict. Despite repeated threats against him and his family, Peccerelli has continued to carry out their work. This work has provided forensic investigation teams with crucial scientific evidence in the few cases where perpetrators of human rights abuses have been convicted in Guatemala.
About the Award
The Pagels Awards were conferred on the two honorees by Henry Greenberg, chair of the Human Rights Committee. Greenberg, associate director of cardiology at St. Luke’s Roosevelt Hospital and associate professor of clinical medicine at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, says the committee has been aware of the work of the two honorees for several years and selected them for the award this year based to recognize their heroism and “to raise the noise level in their support.”
First presented in 1979 to Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov, the award has gone to such imminent scientists as Chinese dissident Fang Li-Zhi, Russian Nuclear Engineer Alexander Nikitin, and Cuban Economist Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello. The 2005 Pagels awards went to Zafra Lerman, distinguished professor of Science and Public Policy and head of the Institute for Science Education and Science Communication, Columbia College, Chicago; and Herman Winick, assistant director and professor emeritus of the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory, Stanford University.
