The 1987 Nobels: Keep Your Eyes on the Prize: All Washed up at 35? Nonsense!

Does a scientist reach a peak in productivity at age 35? My experience indicates that’s not true for chemists, and it probably isn’t true for other disciplines in science. I am 75 years old. I reached retirement age (66) in 1978. The university held a grand retirement party. Many of my former coworkers, both graduate students and postdocs, numbering about 300 at that time, came to the festivities. I might easily have retired to a life of comfort and vegetation. But my wife urged me to continue. Her observations had led her to the conclusion that people last longer, in better health, if they continue to be active. Fortunately, the university came to me with an exceptional opportunity. I was invited to continue my research activities within the same space. There would be just two changes. First, I would no longer accept graduate students training for their Ph.Ds; I would restrict myself to postdocs. Second, I would no longer receive a salary. Now, some might wonder why I would continue my research activities without salary. But there is nothing more enjoyable to me than the continued exploration of nature and the series of discoveries that research uncovers. I accepted with thanks. That was nine years ago. With one exception, the various granting agencies have continued to support my work at the same level. I have continued to work with a group of approximately 16 postdoctoral co-workers. They have come to me from all over the world: Japan, Korea, Taiwan, India, Israel, Italy, Germany, France, Great Britain, Australia, Poland and the United States. I hold the position of Wetherill Research Professor Emeritus at Purdue University. My research over 50 years has received much recognition. In 1969 I received the National Medal of Science. In 1979 I was awarded the Nobel Prize for Chemistry. More recently I achieved the "Triple Crown” of chemistry: the Priestley Medal of the American Chemical Society (1981), the Perkin Medal of the American Section of the Society of Chemical Industry (1982), and the Gold Medal of the American Institute of Chemists (1985). Finally, this year I received the National Academy of Sciences Award in the Chemical Sciences. All but the first of these major honors came after my so-called “retirement.” My publications haven’t suffered since my so-called retirement; in fact they’ve increased from an average of 30 a year to as many as 40 a year. My 1,000th paper appeared recently. It is noteworthy that the 250 papers published since I turned 66 equal fully one-third of my productivity (750 papers) up to that time. First Retirement, Then Nobel Before my “retirement,” I delivered some 25 invited addresses per year. The next year, I received the Nobel Prize, which brought an increased number of invitations to speak, often extended in such a manner that I could not decline. As a result, my lectures have increased to approximately 50 per year. I used to make about three trips abroad each year to attend conferences and give lectures. Now I make as many as six trips a year. My wife always accompanies me on these tripe. (That is one of my secrets for maintsining a happy marriage for 50 years.) I should emphasize that I am not unusual I know many other chemists who have continued to do productive research long past the usual retirement age. There is no doubt that one’s energy decreases with the years, but it is equally true that one’s knowledge increases. In a university where a senior scientist is working with a junior one who is full of energy but low in knowledge, the combination can be exceptionally productive. But what of my creativity? One can count one’s publications and invitations, but bow dces one judge his own creativity? Well, I can say that three years ago I announced a development that I believe is the most importent finding of my career. Many organic compounds exist in nature as a pair of optical isomers related to each other in the way a right hand is related to the left. They cannot be superimposed, but the mirror image can be superimposed. Living organisma, including humans, commonly produce only one optical isomer and can generally utilize only one. A particular isomer may be an important pharmaceutical, whereas its mirror image may have no effect or may even be a serious poison. Unfortunately, when organic chemists synthesize such compounds in the laboratory, they commonly obtain a 50-50 mixture of the two optical isomers. These usually can be separated only by a long, tedious process, often very expensive. Such expense can add greatly to the cost of pharmaceuticals. Three years ago we discovered a simple way to prepare optically active groups attached to boron. We can now transfer these groups from boron to carbon, retaining all of the optical activity. For the first time, organic chemists have available a general synthesis of either isomer of a pair of optically active compounds. When I began my career in the 1930s, the conventional wisdom was that one’s more creative work was done by age 35. After that, it was said, it was all downhill (see Alan Lightman’s “A Soul-Searching Scientist at 35,” THE SCIENTIST, April 20, 1987, p. 18). I married my classmate, Sarah Baylen, in 1937 when I was 24. That was before the days of women’s liberation, and husband and wife were considered to be a single unit with common goals. Accordingly, I discussed this problem with Sarah and she agreed to give me every possible opportunity to do such creative work as I could by relieving me of all routine duties. She would handle the bills, do the banking, take care of the house and yard work, handle the income tax (a small matter in those days!), and so forth. I have now come to the conclusion that this age limit of 35 is sheer nonsense, at least for chemists. I was 44 when my students and I discovered a new reaction, hydroboration, which made organoboranes readily available for the first time. I was 54 when we initiated our systematic study of organoboranes and discovered their rich potential—the work that led to the Nobel. I was 64 when we discovered we could achieve 100 percent optical purity in many hydroborations. Finally, I was 72 when I realized we had in our hands a truly general procedure to synthesize optically pure compounds. When this happened, I went to Sarah and apologized. Evidently, I had been mistaken when I had accepted conventional wisdom. But she brushed off my apologies. She had enjoyed our joint efforts and had no regrets. Indeed, her responsibilities had had their compensation. When we went to Stockholm to receive the Nobel Medal and Award, she let me carry the Medal back. But she took charge of the $100,000 Award. Brown’s address is Department of Chemistry Purdue University. West Lafayette, IN 47907. Adapted from testimony before the House Subcommittee on Health and Long-Term Care on September 9, 1986.

The 1987 Nobels: Keep Your Eyes on the Prize: All Washed up at 35? Nonsense!

Become a Member of

Meet the Author

Herbert Brown

Published In

November 1987

Related Research Resources

Study Confirms Safety of Genetically Modified T Cells

Research Resources

Podcasts

Webinars

Videos

Infographics

eBooks

Detecting Residual Cell Line-Derived DNA with Droplet Digital PCR

Making Real-Time PCR More Straightforward

Characterizing Immune Memory to COVID-19 Vaccination

Applied Biosystems™ VeriFlex™ System: True Temperature Control for PCR Protocols

Products

Product News

Latest AI software simplifies image analysis and speeds up insights for scientists

BioSkryb Genomics and Tecan introduce a single-cell multiomics workflow for sequencing-ready libraries in under ten hours

Agilent BioTek Cytation C10 Confocal Imaging Reader

Sapio Sciences Introduces Biorepository Management Solution