Reuters Events | Pharma

Thought leadership and innovation for the Pharmaceutical Industry

A group of Silicon Valley moguls have launched an awards program that eclipses the Swedish Nobel Prize in terms of winnings. Over the next two years alone, $50m has been pledged to reward medical science innovation but will this scheme inspire new research or simply foster ‘old boy’ syndrome?

By Louise Kelly on Feb 21, 2013

Some of the world's richest internet entrepreneurs have awarded eleven disease researchers $3m (£1.9m) each – more than twice as much as the award money for a Nobel Prize – in the inaugural Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences. The first winners, mostly hailing from the US were announced on Wednesday (20^thFebruary 2013).  The impressive prize fund is intended to go towards the research of the scientists in the fields of cancer, genetics, and stem cells.

Last July, Russian billionaire and social media magnate Yuri Milner awarded the first Fundamental Physics Prizes to theoretical physicists.  Now, in sponsor collaboration with former Genentech CEO Art Levinson, Google co-founder Sergey Brin, 23andMe founder Anne Wojcicki, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan, Milner intends to offer the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences to biologists on an annual basis.

Eureka

The science prize is the latest in a line of well-intentioned initiatives from cash-rich software/high-tech entrepreneurs, Bill Gates and Larry Ellison among them.  When it comes to the time and cost associated with essential advancements in medical science, many IT kingpins have recognized the stark difference in comparison with the speedy, (relatively) cheaper development of web and tech, and seen fit to lend a financial hand.

The Life Sciences Foundation describes itself as a non-profit corporation “dedicated to advancing breakthrough research, celebrating scientists and generating excitement about the pursuit of science as a career”.  In a leap away from the application criteria of the Nobel, the Breakthrough Prize rules allow anyone around the world to go online and nominate a candidate for consideration. Winners are also encouraged to give open lectures to stimulate enthusiasm for science among the general public.

Absolute zero?

Yet the new awards have not been received warmly by all in the scientific community. The Foundation also says that new prizes will be awarded for “past achievements in the field of life sciences, with the aim of providing the recipients with more freedom and opportunity to pursue even greater future accomplishments”.  Some scientists feel that by rewarding existing talent, the new prize reflects a traditional approach to praising past success rather than necessarily stimulating new ideas or approaches.

Furthermore, following the prize giving last summer, Peter Woit, a mathematician at Columbia University in New York says the prize winners came from a few elite institutions, warning “the net effect may be to reinforce the old guard, rather than encouraging new thinking”. Will the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences simply further raise the profile of biomedical researchers (who are already well known in research circles) or will the draw of the impressive reward actually motivate credible innovation from new sources?