Banks

Laura Sofía Solórzano C – lsolorzano@larepublica.com.co

The participation of women in the world of science and research has gained strength in recent years, which can be seen, for example, in the Nobel Prize in Medicine, Physics or Chemistry, that of 23 awards given to women during 119 years, about 27% have been in the last five years.

The truth is that before women’s suffrage, with the exception of the Polish scientist, Marie Curie, who won two Nobeles; one of physics in 1903 for investigations on the phenomena of radiation; and one of chemistry in 1911 for the discovery of radium and polonium, the women did not sound in the delivery of these awards more than as companions.

But 24 years later, more women would begin to be recognized. Following in her mother’s footsteps, Irène Joliot-Curie, daughter of Marie Curie and Pierre Curie, became the second woman to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, she received the award in 1935 for her synthesis of radioactive elements; Dorothy Crowfoot from the UK received an award in chemistry in 1964 and almost half a century later, in 2009, Israeli Ada Yonath won the award for studying the structure and function of the ribosome.

This year, two women made history again, the scientists Emmanuelle Charpentier, from France and Jennifer Doudna, from the United States, received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry; for discoveries related to DNA editing, a breakthrough that could help treat hereditary diseases and cancer.

In the case of medicine, Gerty Theresa Cori was the first woman to win a Nobel, she obtained it in 1947 for discovering the mechanism of the catalytic conversion of glycogen; in 1983, the American Rosalyn Yalow was added to the list and three years later the Italian Rita Levi-Montalcini also won the award.

The Nobel Prizes in Medicine are the ones that have awarded the most women in these three categories, 12 in total; the last one was handed over to Chinese scientist Tu Youyou five years ago for discovering a new treatment for malaria.

Furthermore, 58% of the prizes that have been given to women in this category correspond to American scientists; in the list it is the only nationality that is repeated; the other nobel winners are from Italy, Germany, France, Norway and China.

For the Nobel Prize in physics, the appearance of more women was a little slower, as 60 years passed for there to be a second award; Maria Goeppert-Mayer, an American national, was recognized in 1963 for discoveries related to the nuclear structure of layers.

In total four women have been awarded in this category; two of them in the current century: the Canadian scientist, Donna Strickland, received the award in 2018 for her contributions to laser physics and the American, Andrea M. Ghez, who obtained it this year for discoveries related to black holes.

In her award speech the scientist invited more women to get involved in the world of science, “I hope I can inspire other young women to the field. It is a field that has so many pleasures, and if you are passionate about science, there is much that can be done, “said Ghez.

A curious fact is that of the 22 women who have won the chemistry, physics and medicine nobles, only two studied at the same university, they are Rosalyn Yalow and Gertrude B. Elion, who were trained at New York University.

Catherine Cesa Luna, PhD in Microbiological Sciences from the Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, in Mexico, comments that the work of women in science is becoming more and more noticeable and the struggle to remain visible continues over the years.

“One of the efforts is the creation of networks of scientists to support each other, share ideas, generate jobs, disseminate the work, and mainly promote sisterhood,” says Cesa against the advances of women in scientific cooperation.

Some of the factors that have led to more and more noblemen having a woman’s name is their inclusion in the workplace and education, access to more management positions and a considerable decrease in stereotypes.

However, in a world where 602 awards for medicine, physics and chemistryAs less than 0.3% were delivered to female scientists, there remains a great challenge for current and future generations to match the numbers.

Laura Sofía Solórzano C – lsolorzano@larepublica.com.co

Nobel prizes are known and respected throughout the world for recognizing the best in certain categories. But what do these geniuses have in common? At least, when it comes to physics and medicine, 45% of the winners since 2000 are American nationals.

The British also play an important role, representing 15% of the winners, Germany, in third place, has 5% of these awards. Precisely, in the 2020 edition, the nobels of physics and medicine have these three nationalities.

Roger Penrose from the UK; Reinhard Genzel from Germany and Andrea M. Ghez from the USA were awarded in physics for the discovery of a black hole. Ghez, joins the list of four women who have won this recognition since the first edition of the Nobel. It is curious that this scientist has made a TED talk before winning the Nobel in which she explained the theory that would lead her to have this great recognition (see QR).

For their part, Harvey J. Alter and Charles M. Rice from the USA and Michael Houghton from the United Kingdom, were awarded in medicine for discovering the Hepatitis C virus. Nobel juries recognized the importance of the discovery to treat the pathogen that causes diseases such as cirrhosis or liver cancer.

Faced with the nationalities of the nobels of physics and medicine, Claudia Marcela Vargas, professor in the Department of Pharmacy of the National University of Colombia and director of the Ifarma Foundation points out that the panorama responds to greater investment in science and technology by the countries.

“They are countries that invest more than 2% or 3% of their GDP in research and development, in addition, the relationship between research and industry is much closer,” explained Vargas.

Another interesting point is the universities in the world through which more nobles in physics and medicine have passed in the last 20 years. LR surveyed the universities that awarded the winners’ undergraduate degrees and found that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has the most graduates with this distinction. According to the accounts of the last 20 years this educational institution has had seven nobels; four in medicine and three in physics.

Harvard University equates him with seven Nobles; five in physics and two in medicine, which makes these two universities, both in the United States, have an important prestige in the world of science.

“Many developing countries still depend on the granting of support and financing to carry out activities related to scientific and technological research,” added Catherine Cesa Luna, Doctor in Microbiological Sciences from the Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, who highlighted the importance of having the necessary resources for the investigation.

Continuing with the universities, in medicine the University of Oxford in England, Cambridge and Columbia also stand out, all of them in the top of the best institutions in the world. In terms of physics, the University of Tokyo, Nagoya and Berkeley stand out.

Research topics in the last 20 years have been very diverse, physics has gone through mega-resistances, communication fibers, black holes, astrophysics and others. In medicine, the cell, DNA, diseases such as cancer, hypertension and studies on viruses have been awarded.

Nobel Prize in Chemistry, Literature, Economics and Peace are next on the list

The awarding of the Nobel prizes began this Monday and the list of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry that will be awarded today, the one for Literature next Thursday, on Friday is the turn for the Nobel Peace Prize and on Monday, October 12 will meet the nobel of economy.

It should be noted that the Nobel Foundation announced that it would increase the amount awarded for individual awards to 10 million crowns (US $ 1.1 million), to reflect an increase in the returns generated on its capital in recent years.

Despite the difficulties it has brought with it, the current situation opens a historical window to measure the seriousness of smuggling and assess the importance of combating it.

Since the arrival of the covid-19 pandemic in the country, there have been several perspectives to analyze its outcome: access to vaccines and testing capacity, subsidy schemes, unemployment, fiscal decisions and digitization of the economy, among other urgent issues that are they incorporate the so-called “new normal” into the agenda. In the midst of this plurality of views, a common denominator that the national conversation has had has been the inevitable impact on the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which in addition to conditioning a large part of the economic and social policy goals for the coming years , poses great challenges for the development and regional growth of Colombia.

For this reason, and taking into account that the outlook for the recovery is still adverse – the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently adjusted its growth projection for the country in 2020, which went from -7.8% to -8 , 2% -, it is essential that all initiatives in favor of guaranteeing the resources of the departments acquire a greater role, since they constitute the main way to promote the well-being of the local population and facilitate their adaptation to current dynamics.

In this sense, aspects such as the fight against smuggling and the promotion of legality are emerging as essential axes of the socio-economic reactivation of each of the territories in the country. It should be remembered, for example, that the collection via Consumption Tax in the liquor and cigarette trade is an important source of income for departmental income, with which each governorate can invest in public programs and facilities for health areas, education and sports.

And it is that talking about smuggling in Colombia is not a minor issue or a waiting task: it is a real scourge. In 2019 alone, this activity, in addition to having saved the nation revenues of US $ 4,899 million, about 2% of its GDP, represented the loss of around 200,000 formal jobs, according to data from DIAN and ANDI .

To this panorama, to make its importance more sensitive, are added the consequences that the evolution of the pandemic has brought on regional finances. So far this year, according to a recent report prepared by the technical team of the National Federation of Departments (FND), the average departmental income has suffered a decrease of 52% compared to last year’s values, which translates to $ 1.3 trillion less in public resources.

Thus, efforts such as those carried out by the FND’s Anti-Smuggling Program, in alliance with strategic entities such as the Fiscal and Customs Police (POLFA), DIAN, the different governorates and their operational teams and the multinational Philip Morris, among several others. actors, are vital for territorial progress in the short and medium term.

At this point, it is relevant to mention that legality is not only a concept of strength and authority, but above all, a task with a social face that, in the case of the Anti-Contraband Program, includes socialization actions towards the end consumer, pedagogy towards the group of shopkeepers, training sessions with the Public Force and strategies to favor the design of public policies.

Faced with Colombia’s challenge to return to its natural productive dynamism, overcome the profound impacts caused by covid-19 and completely reactivate its labor scaffolding, the fight against smuggling requires the solidarity of the entire population. This fight, over and above the confiscations, seizures, and dismantling of criminal gangs, begins by recognizing the human component behind legal trade.

The country is facing an exceptional opportunity to assimilate the relevance of its departmental heritage. To the extent that consumers, merchants and wholesale and retail distributors and related authorities and institutions manage to tune towards the same goal, legality, the national reactivation will not only be a matter of numbers and indicators, but it will be a social achievement in the that the main indicator will be well-being.