11 ms·

As a few other commenters have mentioned, this is a story about how Karikó was sidelined early in her career. The Penn demotion occurred in 1991. She eventually

As a few other commenters have mentioned, this is a story about how Karikó was sidelined early in her career. The Penn demotion occurred in 1991. She eventually left in 2013 when, despite publishing groundbreaking research in the mid 00s, she was never returned to a tenure-track position. Nonetheless an impressive story of conviction and perseverance. Penn has decades-old egg on its face, rather than months-old fresh egg.

lou1306 6y ago
It's also a depressing tale for wannabe academics, however. mRNA vaccines are an impressive, groundbreaking development. Dr Kariko (and others) may get a Nobel for that. And yet, she was kicked off the tenure track because she failed to secure VC investments, for chrissake.
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  University research is a business now, like most things in higher-ed.
  - whatshisface 6y ago
    If it was really a business, they would support ideas like "developing a revolutionary and extremely important technology." It's worse than a business - it's an amorphous political and bureaucratic mess.
    - pimlottc 6y ago
      I mean, there are plenty of actual businesses that also do short-sighted things (and up going out of business).
      - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
        there are also plenty of business that do short-sighted things but continue making money because they have a cash-cow or two which allows them to be idiots everywhere else. I mean this is really the ABCs of modern business.
eastendguy 6y ago
7 year old egg (but in hindsight good for the world). They pushed her out, so she went to BioNTech. There she helped to create the world's first Corona vaccine: https://biontech.de/sites/default/files/2019-08/20140202_BioNTech_Katalin%20Kariko_ENG_final.pdf https://biontech.de/sites/default/files/2019-08/20140202_Bio...
- tormeh 6y ago
  She's a senior vice president at BioNTech now. I guess she laughed last.
Bukhmanizer 6y ago
This is a story about how the academic system failed twice to retain talent due to short-sighted metric gaming. It's a story where if Karikó believed that life would be easier if she just started churning out meaningless papers, we likely would not have an mRNA vaccine. edit: Also very curious about the "attempt to have her deported" as I've heard of many threats of that nature against foreign post-docs.
- rramadass 6y ago
  >how the academic system failed twice to retain talent due to short-sighted metric gaming Very right! I fear that the cancer of "shortsighted quick returns" in the Research field has been the death of many a talented researcher. Research/Education should really be treated very differently from Industry/Productization and the same yardstick should not be applied to both.
simpleguitar 6y ago
I did my PhD at a top US institution in the 00s, and post-doc in the late 00s, working on somewhat related stuff. Working with synthetic mRNA was hard during my time. I would imagine that it was many times more difficult in the 90's. Just as an EE analogy, working on mRNA in the 90s is like working on extreme UV lithography in the 80s. It was too far into the future to be useful, and there were better research funding opportunities for other things. But if one was smart, one could see the potential. It's not so surprising that she got passed for tenure, working on something so crazy wild. It was around 2005-2010 time frame when mRNA synthesis became affordable enough to become an applied science rather than basic research. It sounds like Kariko lost her associate professor position in the 90s, but continued her work as a postdoc for more than 10 years. That's some awesome dedication to something that almost nobody thought would work out. It's not so surprising she jumped ship around 2010 when the mRNA tech caught up. I hope she gets her Nobel prize. She deserves it.
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  Reading this, it struck me that we're quite fortunate that COVID-19 hit in 2020, and not in say 2000, when there would have been much less hope for development of a quick and effective vaccine.
  - treeman79 6y ago
    It would have just been noted as a really bad fLu season.
    - PhasmaFelis 6y ago
      Epidemiologists existed in 2000 and were quite capable of recognizing the difference between a global pandemic and "a really bad flu season". Hell, the 1918 pandemic literally was flu, unlike COVID, and it predated a lot of what we think of as modern medicine, and it was heavily censored by governments around the world, and it was still obvious that it was more than just "bad flu season."
      - 6y ago
nextos 6y ago
Plus, Karikó said UPenn sold her patents for just $300k to CellScript as they wanted quick cash: https://elpais.com/ciencia/2020-12-26/la-madre-de-la-vacuna-contra-la-covid-en-verano-podremos-probablemente-volver-a-la-vida-normal.html https://elpais.com/ciencia/2020-12-26/la-madre-de-la-vacuna-...
- rramadass 6y ago
  Is UPenn being run by "Administrative Tools" or do they still have somebody with a "Scientific Mind" in charge of things?
  - teorema 6y ago
    "Administrative tools" is the name of the game at most or many universities now.
  - NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
    The Penn president is an inauthentic talking head whose primary qualification for the job is being able to schmooze with Joe Biden and Comcast executives.
chasd00 6y ago
1991 was a long time ago, is she even close to the same person today as she was then? I don't know the details but she may have very well deserved the demotion. Just because someone does something amazingly great now doesn't mean they were always great.
- rramadass 6y ago
  Oh, come-on ! We don't have to get into "ad hominem" space. The article makes it clear that it is her research from that time period (whether nascent or otherwise) which has led to today's success.
wittyreference 6y ago
I think a relevant point is that UPenn has been publicizing their past affiliation with her and her research, in order to bask in some reflected glory for developing the vaccine technology. If not for that, it would indeed be decades-old egg on their face. I think they’ve done a fair job of freshening up that egg, though.
titzer 6y ago
I think you're being too hard on the University. The reality is that Universities are full of a spectrum of brilliant people, some of whom become superstars, some of whom don't. Some of them work really hard and spin their wheels, go down blind allies, or just miss their luck. From a University perspective, how should it evaluation its faculty? How does it measure the output of minds that are pretty much by definition beyond simple comprehension? How do you measure brilliance when you cannot possibly absorb their output due to the sheer size of it? There isn't a good answer. But the machine cranks on. It makes mistakes. It looks like an unfortunate one here, and I'm glad that her persistence paid off. But there are thousands of stories like this, some of them with ground-breaking top-notch scientists in there, and some not. If you're sniffing around for a villain here, I don't think you'll find it.
trustfundbaby 6y ago
Something similar to this actually happened to Neil Degrasse Tyson too ... the University of Texas basically failed him out of his PHd, he went to Columbia, got his Phd and the rest is history https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/02/star-power/ https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/02/star-power/
- notsureaboutpg 6y ago
  But isn't the big difference there that Tyson is a science communicator and not actually a researcher?
ksk 6y ago
It's a bit like getting fired from a job (w/o recognition) or rejected at an interview, and then proceeding to do exceedingly well in life. Happens very rarely, but you do tend to hear about the famous cases. Good for that person, but I don't believe in karma.
jjk166 6y ago
Removing her from tenure track prior to her reasearch gaining traction may have been short sighted but excusable - more an embarrassment than anything. Not returning her to tenure track once her research proved fortuitous is much more concerning. Trying to take credit now for facilitating her research when they actively worked against it at the time is damning.
- rusticpenn 6y ago
  All of this seems to be normal in most universities. I have seen my PhD advisor's video for a TV channel recorded, later presented in TV with his face cut off and another Professor (unrelated to our team) explaining it on TV. The response from the TV channel ?, We signed off the video rights to do as they please with them.
shellfishgene 6y ago
Ugur Sahin, who now leads BioNtech with his wife, where Kariko now works, told a story in an interview: His elementary teacher recommended that he be enrolled in the "Hauptschule", the lowest of the three-tier German high school system. A neighbor intervened, and had he not Sahin would not have been able to study medicine.
rolandog 6y ago
Not only was she demoted, Penn is trying to portray her as if she played a minimal role: > "We are grateful for Dr. Karikó's important contributions both during her time at Penn," said university spokesperson Maccarthy, "where she continues to hold an appointment as an adjunct associate professor." The school's promo video about mRNA technology focuses on Weissman, mentioning Karikó only in passing. It should be pointed out that the university holds the patent for the vaccine: > In 2005, Karikó and Weissman published their groundbreaking study. The University of Pennsylvania licensed the technology and patented it. (Researchers' patents are often held by the institutions where they work). It seems unfair that UPenn gets the patent in spite of practically thwarting the research on the subject (cutting Dr. Karikó's salary).
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
j45 6y ago
It's a little gobsmacking how many, and how often post-secondaries stifle and ostracize research and development that is more than a safe and comfortable stretch from existing bodies of knowledge. Is innovation required to be only in safe and comfortable baby steps.. Or whatever can be controlled or understood..? Maybe this is in part a reason why so many of our leaders, institutions and experts in so many fields revealed themselves not to be .. during COVID. There are more voices starting to speak that the clock is starting to tick on some academic brands for failing to exist in the future, and the digital transformation of society has already left them behind.. While some remain at maintaining a present that is anchored in the past. I'm passionate about the value of an education to improve your life and hope this rapidly improves with the the other rapid changes occurring during the pandemic. Still, devaluing someone, marginalizing their contributions, and then continuing to own their intellectual property for the long game doesn't seem entirely reassuring behavior for any post secondary. If it wasn't valuable then, why not let the prof walk with IP ownership if it's so worthless?

lou1306 6y ago

It's also a depressing tale for wannabe academics, however. mRNA vaccines are an impressive, groundbreaking development. Dr Kariko (and others) may get a Nobel for that. And yet, she was kicked off the tenure track because she failed to secure VC investments, for chrissake.

throwaway201103 6y ago
University research is a business now, like most things in higher-ed.
- whatshisface 6y ago
  If it was really a business, they would support ideas like "developing a revolutionary and extremely important technology." It's worse than a business - it's an amorphous political and bureaucratic mess.
  - pimlottc 6y ago
    I mean, there are plenty of actual businesses that also do short-sighted things (and up going out of business).
    - bryanrasmussen 6y ago
      there are also plenty of business that do short-sighted things but continue making money because they have a cash-cow or two which allows them to be idiots everywhere else. I mean this is really the ABCs of modern business.

eastendguy 6y ago

7 year old egg (but in hindsight good for the world). They pushed her out, so she went to BioNTech. There she helped to create the world's first Corona vaccine: https://biontech.de/sites/default/files/2019-08/20140202_BioNTech_Katalin%20Kariko_ENG_final.pdf https://biontech.de/sites/default/files/2019-08/20140202_Bio...

tormeh 6y ago
She's a senior vice president at BioNTech now. I guess she laughed last.

Bukhmanizer 6y ago

This is a story about how the academic system failed twice to retain talent due to short-sighted metric gaming. It's a story where if Karikó believed that life would be easier if she just started churning out meaningless papers, we likely would not have an mRNA vaccine. edit: Also very curious about the "attempt to have her deported" as I've heard of many threats of that nature against foreign post-docs.

rramadass 6y ago
>how the academic system failed twice to retain talent due to short-sighted metric gaming Very right! I fear that the cancer of "shortsighted quick returns" in the Research field has been the death of many a talented researcher. Research/Education should really be treated very differently from Industry/Productization and the same yardstick should not be applied to both.

simpleguitar 6y ago

I did my PhD at a top US institution in the 00s, and post-doc in the late 00s, working on somewhat related stuff. Working with synthetic mRNA was hard during my time. I would imagine that it was many times more difficult in the 90's. Just as an EE analogy, working on mRNA in the 90s is like working on extreme UV lithography in the 80s. It was too far into the future to be useful, and there were better research funding opportunities for other things. But if one was smart, one could see the potential. It's not so surprising that she got passed for tenure, working on something so crazy wild. It was around 2005-2010 time frame when mRNA synthesis became affordable enough to become an applied science rather than basic research. It sounds like Kariko lost her associate professor position in the 90s, but continued her work as a postdoc for more than 10 years. That's some awesome dedication to something that almost nobody thought would work out. It's not so surprising she jumped ship around 2010 when the mRNA tech caught up. I hope she gets her Nobel prize. She deserves it.

throwaway201103 6y ago
Reading this, it struck me that we're quite fortunate that COVID-19 hit in 2020, and not in say 2000, when there would have been much less hope for development of a quick and effective vaccine.
- treeman79 6y ago
  It would have just been noted as a really bad fLu season.
  - PhasmaFelis 6y ago
    Epidemiologists existed in 2000 and were quite capable of recognizing the difference between a global pandemic and "a really bad flu season". Hell, the 1918 pandemic literally was flu, unlike COVID, and it predated a lot of what we think of as modern medicine, and it was heavily censored by governments around the world, and it was still obvious that it was more than just "bad flu season."
    - 6y ago

nextos 6y ago

Plus, Karikó said UPenn sold her patents for just $300k to CellScript as they wanted quick cash: https://elpais.com/ciencia/2020-12-26/la-madre-de-la-vacuna-contra-la-covid-en-verano-podremos-probablemente-volver-a-la-vida-normal.html https://elpais.com/ciencia/2020-12-26/la-madre-de-la-vacuna-...

rramadass 6y ago
Is UPenn being run by "Administrative Tools" or do they still have somebody with a "Scientific Mind" in charge of things?
- teorema 6y ago
  "Administrative tools" is the name of the game at most or many universities now.
- NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
  The Penn president is an inauthentic talking head whose primary qualification for the job is being able to schmooze with Joe Biden and Comcast executives.

chasd00 6y ago

1991 was a long time ago, is she even close to the same person today as she was then? I don't know the details but she may have very well deserved the demotion. Just because someone does something amazingly great now doesn't mean they were always great.

rramadass 6y ago
Oh, come-on ! We don't have to get into "ad hominem" space. The article makes it clear that it is her research from that time period (whether nascent or otherwise) which has led to today's success.

wittyreference 6y ago

I think a relevant point is that UPenn has been publicizing their past affiliation with her and her research, in order to bask in some reflected glory for developing the vaccine technology. If not for that, it would indeed be decades-old egg on their face. I think they’ve done a fair job of freshening up that egg, though.

titzer 6y ago

I think you're being too hard on the University. The reality is that Universities are full of a spectrum of brilliant people, some of whom become superstars, some of whom don't. Some of them work really hard and spin their wheels, go down blind allies, or just miss their luck. From a University perspective, how should it evaluation its faculty? How does it measure the output of minds that are pretty much by definition beyond simple comprehension? How do you measure brilliance when you cannot possibly absorb their output due to the sheer size of it? There isn't a good answer. But the machine cranks on. It makes mistakes. It looks like an unfortunate one here, and I'm glad that her persistence paid off. But there are thousands of stories like this, some of them with ground-breaking top-notch scientists in there, and some not. If you're sniffing around for a villain here, I don't think you'll find it.

trustfundbaby 6y ago

Something similar to this actually happened to Neil Degrasse Tyson too ... the University of Texas basically failed him out of his PHd, he went to Columbia, got his Phd and the rest is history https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/02/star-power/ https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/02/star-power/

notsureaboutpg 6y ago
But isn't the big difference there that Tyson is a science communicator and not actually a researcher?

ksk 6y ago

It's a bit like getting fired from a job (w/o recognition) or rejected at an interview, and then proceeding to do exceedingly well in life. Happens very rarely, but you do tend to hear about the famous cases. Good for that person, but I don't believe in karma.

jjk166 6y ago

Removing her from tenure track prior to her reasearch gaining traction may have been short sighted but excusable - more an embarrassment than anything. Not returning her to tenure track once her research proved fortuitous is much more concerning. Trying to take credit now for facilitating her research when they actively worked against it at the time is damning.

rusticpenn 6y ago
All of this seems to be normal in most universities. I have seen my PhD advisor's video for a TV channel recorded, later presented in TV with his face cut off and another Professor (unrelated to our team) explaining it on TV. The response from the TV channel ?, We signed off the video rights to do as they please with them.

shellfishgene 6y ago

Ugur Sahin, who now leads BioNtech with his wife, where Kariko now works, told a story in an interview: His elementary teacher recommended that he be enrolled in the "Hauptschule", the lowest of the three-tier German high school system. A neighbor intervened, and had he not Sahin would not have been able to study medicine.

rolandog 6y ago

Not only was she demoted, Penn is trying to portray her as if she played a minimal role: > "We are grateful for Dr. Karikó's important contributions both during her time at Penn," said university spokesperson Maccarthy, "where she continues to hold an appointment as an adjunct associate professor." The school's promo video about mRNA technology focuses on Weissman, mentioning Karikó only in passing. It should be pointed out that the university holds the patent for the vaccine: > In 2005, Karikó and Weissman published their groundbreaking study. The University of Pennsylvania licensed the technology and patented it. (Researchers' patents are often held by the institutions where they work). It seems unfair that UPenn gets the patent in spite of practically thwarting the research on the subject (cutting Dr. Karikó's salary).

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

j45 6y ago

It's a little gobsmacking how many, and how often post-secondaries stifle and ostracize research and development that is more than a safe and comfortable stretch from existing bodies of knowledge. Is innovation required to be only in safe and comfortable baby steps.. Or whatever can be controlled or understood..? Maybe this is in part a reason why so many of our leaders, institutions and experts in so many fields revealed themselves not to be .. during COVID. There are more voices starting to speak that the clock is starting to tick on some academic brands for failing to exist in the future, and the digital transformation of society has already left them behind.. While some remain at maintaining a present that is anchored in the past. I'm passionate about the value of an education to improve your life and hope this rapidly improves with the the other rapid changes occurring during the pandemic. Still, devaluing someone, marginalizing their contributions, and then continuing to own their intellectual property for the long game doesn't seem entirely reassuring behavior for any post secondary. If it wasn't valuable then, why not let the prof walk with IP ownership if it's so worthless?