Medicine Prize Research Articles

On the occasion of the centennial of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, 1923: Nicolae C. Paulescu-between scientific creativity and political fanatism.

On the occasion of the centennial of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, 1923: Nicolae C. Paulescu-between scientific creativity and political fanatism.

Gerty Cori, a Life Dedicated to Chemical and Medical Research

This article shows the life and work of Gerty Cori, a woman born in Czechoslovakia and who later became a naturalized American, who spent her whole life researching, together with her husband, in the laboratory to find the cause of some diseases, particularly those of a metabolic type, and to be able to find substances that alleviate their effects. The result of this joint work was the obtaining by both, together with the physiologist Bernardo Houssay, of the Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology in 1947. The objective of this article is to complete the scarce existing biographies about this woman with new data that highlight the most outstanding events of her life, quite a few of which are still largely ignored. A relatively complete information on the presence of female chemists in the awarded Nobel Prizes is also shown.

H16 Arsenic to biologics: psoriasis treatment through the ages

Abstract In the 19th century when arsenic was the recommended treatment for psoriasis, little consideration was given to the toxic side-effects of the potent carcinogen. Thomas Girdlestone, an English physician, is said to have been the first to advocate for the use of arsenic to treat psoriasis. Girdlestone prescribed Fowler’s solution, a solution of potassium arsenite 1%. In 1876, Alexander John Balmanno Squire inadvertently discovered dithranol, a known treatment for ringworm, to be efficacious in treating psoriasis. However, it was Eugen Galewsky, in 1916, who then went on to synthesize anthralin, a synthetic form of dithranol, to target psoriasis. A key historical figure was William H. Geockerman, an American dermatologist, who developed Goekerman therapy—a regimen that combined the use of coal tar and ultraviolet (UV) light to treat moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. In 1953, John Ingram, an English dermatologist, discovered that the beneficial effects of dithranol paste could be enhanced by adding it to coal tar and UV light—later coined the ‘Ingram regimen’. Philip Showalter Hench, Edward Calvin Kendall and Tadeus Reichstein received the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology for the development of cortisone; it proved to be useful in topically treating many skin diseases, but it had a limited effect on psoriasis. The production of synthetic corticosteroids soon followed, which, conversely, proved to be successful in treating psoriasis. However, the daunting side-effects of corticosteroids limited their long-term use. In 1951, a patient with rheumatoid arthritis showed dramatic improvement in their psoriasis when treated with aminopterin, as recorded by Richard Gubner, a New York cardiologist. PUVA was developed in the 1970s—a photochemotherapy for psoriasis that combined psoralen with UVA radiation to clear skin lesions. Interestingly, in 1500 Bc, the ancient Egyptians were known to use a combination of psoralen and sunlight to treat vitiligo. Furthermore, in the 1980s, researchers noted complete clearance of psoriasis in a patient with osteoporosis who was prescribed an oral form of vitamin D. This chance observation then led to the development of topical vitamin D analogues for the treatment of psoriasis that work by encouraging normal skin growth and slowing down overproduction of skin cells. Finally, in 2003, the first biologic treatments were approved for psoriasis by the US Food and Drug Administration—a significantly safer and more efficacious alternative to the controversial arsenic treatments that were used over 200 years ago.

Nobel prize winners Arvid Carlsson, Paul Greengard and Eric Kandel: the research of signal transduction in the nervous system

For many decades, scientists have tried to unravel the mysteries of the nervous system – the complex phenomenon that receives messages, processes information, and sends signals to the rest of the body. The most important scientific discoveries of the 19th and the 20th centuries paved the way for the 2000 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine awarded to Arvid Carlsson, Paul Greengard and Eric Kandel “for their discoveries concerning signal transduction in the nervous system”. So, the beginning of the new millennium was “marked” by pioneering research into the chemical transmission of signals in the central nervous system, which created the foundation for a deeper understanding of the mediatory role of dopamine, the processes of slow synaptic transmission, short-term and long-term memory, and the mechanisms of action of antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs. The paper aims to outline the main stages of scientific activities of a Swedish neuropharmacologist Per Arvid Emil Carlsson and the American neurobiologists Paul Greengard and Eric Richard Kandel. Keywords: Arvid Carlsson, brain, dopamine, Eric Kandel, learning, memory, nervous system, Paul Greengard, slow synaptic transmission, the 2000 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

The Nobel Prize of Physiology or Medicine, 1923: controversies on the discovery of the antidiabetic hormone

AimsTo analyze the main contributions to the discovery of the antidiabetic hormone in the period between 1889, the year in which Oskar Minkowski demonstrated that complete pancreatectomy in dogs caused diabetes, and the year 1923, the date in which the clinical use of insulin was consolidated. A main objective has been to review the controversies that followed the Nobel Prize and to outline the role of the priority rule in Science.MethodsWe have considered the priority rule defined by Robert Merton in 1957, which takes into account the date of acceptance of the report of a discovery in an accredited scientific journal and/or the granting of a patent, complemented by the criteria set out by Ronald Vale and Anthony Hyman (2016) regarding the transfer of information to the scientific community and its validation by it. The awarding of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in October 1923 has represented a frame of reference. The claims and disputes regarding the prioritization of the contributions of the main researchers in the organotherapy of diabetes have been analyzed through the study of their scientific production and the debate generated in academic institutions.Main results and conclusions(1) According to the criteria of Merton, Vale and Hyman, the priority of the discovery of the antidiabetic hormone corresponds to the investigations developed in Europe by E. Gley (1900), GL Zülzer (1908) and NC Paulescu (1920). (2) The active principle of the pancreatic extracts developed by Zülzer (acomatol), Paulescu (pancreina) and Banting and Best (insulin) was the same. (3) JB Collip succeeded in isolating the active ingredient from the pancreatic extract in January 1922, eliminating impurities to the point of enabling its use in the clinic. (4) In 1972, the Nobel Foundation modified the purpose of the 1923 Physiology or Medicine award to Banting and Macleod by introducing a new wording: "the credit for having produced the pancreatic hormone in a practical available form" (instead of “for the discovery of insulin”).

In response to Nobel prize in physiology or medicine by the Indian medical education system: How far and how close?

In response to Nobel prize in physiology or medicine by the Indian medical education system: How far and how close?

A controversy about chance and the origins of life: thermodynamicist Ilya Prigogine replies to molecular biologist Jacques Monod.

The ancient, interlinked questions about the role of chance in the living world and the origins of life, gained new relevance with the development of molecular biology in the twentieth century. In 1970, French molecular biologist Jacques Monod, joint winner of the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, devoted a popular book on modern biology and its philosophical implications to these questions, which was quickly translated into English as Chance and Necessity. Nine years later, Belgian thermodynamicist Ilya Prigogine, 1977 winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, published a popular book on the history and philosophy of natural sciences with Belgian philosopher Isabelle Stengers. Translated into English under the title Order out of Chaos and widely discussed, the whole book can be seen as a response to Monod on these biological and philosophical questions. This study will trace this intellectual controversy between two Nobel Prize winners defending two opposing scientific and philosophical visions of the living world, rooted in two different scientific disciplines.

A Reappraisal of the Pathophysiology of Cushing Ulcer: A Narrative Review.

In 1932, Harvey Cushing described peptic ulceration secondary to raised intracranial pressure and attributed this to vagal overactivity, causing excess gastric acid secretion. Cushing ulcer remains a cause of morbidity in patients, albeit one that is preventable. This narrative review evaluates the evidence pertaining to the pathophysiology of neurogenic peptic ulceration. Review of the literature suggests that the pathophysiology of Cushing ulcer may extend beyond vagal mechanisms for several reasons: (1) clinical and experimental studies have shown only a modest increase in gastric acid secretion in head-injured patients; (2) increased vagal tone is found in only a minority of cases of intracranial hypertension, most of which are related to catastrophic, nonsurvivable brain injury; (3) direct stimulation of the vagus nerve does not cause peptic ulceration, and; (4) Cushing ulcer can occur after acute ischemic stroke, but only a minority of strokes are associated with raised intracranial pressure and/or increased vagal tone. The 2005 Nobel Prize in Medicine honored the discovery that bacteria play key roles in the pathogenesis of peptic ulcer disease. Brain injury results in widespread changes in the gut microbiome in addition to gastrointestinal inflammation, including systemic upregulation of proinflammatory cytokines. Alternations in the gut microbiome in patients with severe traumatic brain injury include colonization with commensal flora associated with peptic ulceration. The brain-gut-microbiome axis integrates the central nervous system, the enteric nervous system, and the immune system. Following the review of the literature, we propose a novel hypothesis that neurogenic peptic ulcer may be associated with alterations in the gut microbiome, resulting in gastrointestinal inflammation leading to ulceration.

Professor Raphael Mechoulam.

Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchAhead of Print Free AccessProfessor Raphael MechoulamDaniele PiomelliDaniele Piomelli*Address correspondence to: Daniele Piomelli, PhD, Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, School of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Gillespie NRF 3101, 3216, Mail Code: 1275, Irvine, CA 92697, USA. E-mail Address: piomelli@uci.eduDepartment of Anatomy and Neurobiology, School of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:9 May 2023https://doi.org/10.1089/can.2023.29020.memAboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail It is with great sadness that we mourn the passing of Dr. Raphael Mechoulam, a pioneer in the field of cannabis and cannabinoid research. Raphi, as his many friends called him, died on April 6, 2023, at the age of 92 years.Born in Bulgaria in 1930, Dr. Mechoulam later emigrated to Israel, where he began his career as a chemist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot. It was there that he started his groundbreaking research on the cannabis plant, which would ultimately lead to some of the most significant discoveries in the fields of pharmacology and neuroscience.Dr. Mechoulam's work on the compounds found in cannabis—including the definitive chemical characterization of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in 1964—was transformative. His groundbreaking research helped to unlock the plant’ secrets, advance our understanding of its medical properties, and ignite the discovery of the endocannabinoid signaling system in the human body. Through his tireless efforts, Dr. Mechoulam paved the way for numerous studies on the therapeutic uses of cannabis, including its potential to treat chronic pain, epilepsy, and other conditions.Over the course of his career, Dr. Mechoulam received numerous awards and honors for his contributions to the field of pharmacology, including the prestigious Rothschild Prize in Chemical Sciences and Physical Sciences, the Israel Prize in Chemistry, and the Wolf Prize in Medicine. But Dr. Mechoulam was more than just a brilliant scientist. He was a wonderful colleague and a compassionate and caring human being who was deeply committed to improving the lives of others. His work on cannabis was driven by a desire to alleviate suffering and improve the quality of life for those who suffer from pain and chronic illness. He was a true inspiration to those who knew him, and his legacy will continue to inspire and guide future generations of scientists.We are deeply saddened by the loss of this extraordinary man, but we take comfort in the knowledge that his work will continue to make a profound impact on the lives of people around the world.Rest in peace, Raphi, and thank you for everything you did to make the world a better place.Cite this article as: Piomelli D (2023) Professor Raphael Mechoulam, Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research 8:3, 1, DOI: 10.1089/can.2023.29020.mem.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 0Issue 0 InformationCopyright 2023, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:Daniele Piomelli.Professor Raphael Mechoulam.Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research.ahead of printhttp://doi.org/10.1089/can.2023.29020.memOnline Ahead of Print:May 9, 2023PDF download

Role of hypoxia inducible factor HIF-1α in heart valves.

The 2016 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award and subsequently the 2019 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine were awarded to William Kaelin, Jr., Sir Peter Ratcliffe, and Gregg Semenza for their work on how cells sense and adapt to hypoxic conditions. Their work showed that the changes in gene expression, cell metabolism, and tissue remodelling that occur in response to low oxygen concentrations are orchestrated by the transcription factor, hypoxia inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α). While the effects mediated by HIF-1α have been widely studied, its role in heart valves has only recently been investigated. These studies have shown that HIF-1α expression is evident in mechanisms that regulate the structure and function of heart valves. These include embryonic development, the regulation of the extracellular matrix, angiogenesis and the initiation of the calcification process. This review provides a background on the role and function of HIF-1α in response to hypoxia and a discussion of the available evidence of its involvement in the regulation of heart valves in health and disease.

The pursuit of noble prize in physiology and medicine: Current challenges in Indian research environment-A new frame of reference.

The pursuit of noble prize in physiology and medicine: Current challenges in Indian research environment-A new frame of reference.

Genome secrets of extinct hominids, or can paleogenomics answer the question: humankind, who we are? Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2022

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2022 was awarded to Professor Svante Pääbo, a Swedish­ paleogenetic researcher, specialist in the field of evolutionary genetics, Director of the Department of Evolutionary Genetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology of Leipzig (Germany), for “discoveries concerning the genomes of extinct hominids and human evolution”. Explaining the significance of S. Pääbo’s work, the Nobel Committee noted that “he pioneered the methods to isolate and analyze DNA from archaic bone remains. In ancient bones, DNA has decayed, been chemically damaged and massively contaminated with DNA from bacteria and contemporary humans who work with the samples. Having utilized modern genetic methods, S. Pääbo created his own methods of sequencing the ancient DNA”. Keywords: genome, hominids, human evolution, Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2022, Svante Pääbo

Laveran, the military doctor

Son of Louis-Theodore Laveran, holder of the Chair of Diseases and Epidemics in the Armies at the Val-de-Grâce and grandson of an artillery commander through his mother, Alphonse, born in Paris on June 18, 1845, follows in his father's footsteps by entering the Imperial School of Military Health in Strasbourg at the age of 18.After his thesis, he participated in 1870 in the war against Prussia. He was taken prisoner in Metz. He then prepared for the competitive examination to become a professor, which he passed in 1874. He was appointed to the Chair of the Val-de-Grâce, which his father had created. He then went to Algeria. It was at the military hospital in Constantine on November 6, 1880 that he indisputably discovered the haematozoa responsible for malaria in the blood of a soldier in the crew train.In 1884, he was appointed to the Chair of Military Hygiene and Legal Medicine at Val-de-Grâce. At the end of his professorship in 1894, after being refused a posting to Paris to continue his research and not being consulted for the preparation of the Madagascar expedition, which turned into a health disaster in 1895, he retired prematurely in 1897. Hosted by Émile Duclaux and Émile Roux at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, he continued his research mainly on protozoa as agents of human and animal diseases until his death. His work in medical protozoology earned him the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1907. During the Great War, with the benefit of his experience, he warned the Minister of War in January 1916 about the risk of malaria incurred by the army of the East in the delta of the Vardar River in Salonika. The spring would prove him right.An illustrious military doctor and scientist of international renown, Laveran died on May 18, 1922 in Paris.

Laveran and the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

This article recalls the conditions under which the first Nobel Prizes were awarded. The scientific personalities who nominated Alphonse Laveran for the prize from 1901 to 1907 are recalled, among them Ronald Ross, winner in 1902. In 1907, Karl Axel Hampus Mörner submitted Alphonse Laveran for the prize. He was then the rector of the Karolinska Institutet, as well as the chairman of the Nobel Committee and the Nobel Assembly, and had never before expressed an interest in one scientist more than another. The previous year, the Nobel Assembly had for the first time awarded the prize for physiology or medicine to two laureates, Camillo Golgi and Santiago Ramón y Cajal "in recognition of their work on the structure of the nervous system". In 1907, the numerous, repeated and simultaneous nominations of Élie Metchnikoff and Paul Ehrlich were probably the subject of an important debate, which finally turned out in favour of Alphonse Laveran. We explain why we think the choice of the president prevailed. In 1908, when Laveran became one of the nominators of the prize, his main competitors of 1907 were finally crowned simultaneously "in recognition of their work on immunity".The long delay between the discovery of the malarial parasite (1880) and the award of the prize "in recognition of his work on the role played by protozoa in the appearance of diseases" is put into perspective and illustrates what will almost always be the practice, contrary to Alfred Nobel's rule of awarding the prize within a year after the discovery. The particular circumstances of the award of the prize in 1907 are described.The donation that Alphonse Laveran made on December 22nd 1907 to the Pasteur Institute out of the amount of his prize was 100,000 francs, i.e. a little more than half of the 190,000 francs grant received from the Nobel Committee. Its value, in terms of purchasing power in euros 2021, is estimated at over 400,000 euros. The use made of it by the Pasteur Institute is clearly shown in the minutes of its Board of Directors in 1908, as having been mainly devoted to the fitting out and equipment of the Laboratory of Tropical Diseases that Laveran was calling for in the buildings recently purchased on Rue Falguière (Paris); the donation was not used for the construction of new buildings.

Laveran, the Pasteurian researcher

At the end of his professorial mandate at the Val de Grâce hospital, Alphonse Laveran, who was Chief Doctor, was appointed to Lille and then Nantes. These assignments however deprived him of a hospital service where he could carry on his research. In 1896, faced with the inflexibility of his military hierarchy, he applied for early retirement; he was then 50 years old. Dr Roux welcomed him to the Pasteur Institute as a honorary department head, where he started a second career as a volunteer. He would spend the following 25 years there, addressing the great protozoology issues. Together with Félix Mesnil, he undertook the study of trypanosomiasis and leishmaniases. In 1907 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in physiology and medicine to honor "his work on the role of protozoa as pandemic vectors". He allocated a large part of his prize money to set up a parasitology laboratory at the Pasteur Institute, where all the discoveries and observations carried out in the colonies would converge. In 1908, he funded the Society of Exotic Pathology. He authored no less than 600 publications where his memorable research is recorded. Despite his somewhat outwardly rigid appearance, the man proved to be of amiable approach thanks to "the simplicity of his manners, his amenity and his great heart".

ИСТОРИЯ ИЗУЧЕНИЯ БОЛЕЗНИ ПАРКИНСОНА

This article discusses the history of studying Parkinson’s disease (PD), one of the most common neurodegenerative diseases in the world and Russia. Many famous personalities suffer from this disease, including a Hollywood actor Michael J. Fox. However, the history of studying PD consists of several stages. The phenomenological stage is associated with the work «An Essay on Shaking Palsy» by James Parkinson, where the author described six patients. Fifty years after the essay was published, Jean Martin Charcot drew attention to patients with shaking palsy, and based on the Parkinson’s essay, put forward the theory that the main symptom of the disease is slowness. At the pathomorphological stage, the role of the loss of substantia nigra neurons in the development of PD was determined. The key work was the nigral theory of Konstantin Tretyakov. At the beginning of the 21st century, German scientists led by Heiko Braak put forward the stages of the neurodegenerative process theory, which explained the preclinical non-motor symptoms of PD, as well as a wide range of severe non-motor and axial disorders in the late stages of the disease. The neurobiological stage is associated with the establishment of the role of dopamine in the development of PD and the start of levodopa therapy. Since 1911, levodopa had been studied in the laboratory, but it was not until the 1950s that the Swedish pharmacologist Arvid Karlsson put forward the theory about the role of dopamine deficiency in the development of PD and suggested the therapeutic effect of levodopa. For his outstanding discovery, Arvid Karlsson was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2000. The clinical use of levodopa is associated with the names of Oleg Hornykiewicz and George Cotzias. In parallel, neurosurgical treatment of PD is being developed, deep brain stimulation and thalamotomy under the influence of focused ultrasound are being introduced. At the moment, there is a further improvement in the diagnosis of the disease, the genetics of PD is being studied, along with it, the range of treatment options is expanding.

Metrology and visualization analysis of literatures related to tumor immunotherapy based on CiteSpace

AbstractTo explore the development of global tumor immunotherapy in the past 20 years, and analyze the research status, hotspots and trends to provide theoretical support for subsequent research. CiteSpace 5.6.R2 software were used to analyze 290 articles related to tumor immunotherapy research from the Web of Science core data set from 2000 to 2019. CiteSpace was used to draw related visual maps and tables of coauthors, cooperating countries, cooperating institutions, literature and journal co‐citation, keyword co‐occurrence, and cluster analysis. The total amount of papers published in the field of tumor immunotherapy research has gradually increased. After receiving the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2018, the number of papers published in the field of research in tumor research reached 20. We found that the United States has the largest number of papers in all countries and China ranks 6. “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,” “Journal of Immunology,” “Cancer Research,” “New England Journal of Medicine,” “Blood” is the top five core academic journals in this field. Cancer, disease, and tumor necrosis factor are the three keywords with the highest highlighting intensity. Comprehensive analysis shows that the coauthors, co‐institutions, and co‐cited journals of the literature are mostly concentrated in the United States. The rise of immunotherapy provides a new direction for tumor treatment. From 2018 to 2019, the number of literatures on tumor immunotherapy worldwide increased sharply. Immunotherapy combined with specific diseases is the current research frontier and hotspot.

100 years flashback

100 years flashback

Penicillin and the Antibiotics Revolution Global History

Alexander Fleming was one of the 100 most important people of the 20th century for his discovery of Penicillin '' It was the discovery that would change the course of history. The active ingredient in the mold, which Fleming named penicillin, turned out to be an infection-fighting agent of enormous potency'' A revolutionary development in science is a change in the way scientists perceive a certain idea or belief. The finding of Penicillin by Alexander Fleming in 1928 was a revolutionary development in the field of science. The discovery revolutionized the way infections were treated as well as impacted the scientific field, the medical field, the pharmaceuticals industry, and all humanity. Alexander Fleming's discovery of Penicillin sparked the development of antibiotics, which has continued to save People's lives since the revolution, making him a revolutionary figure. Despite the fact that Fleming was not only solely responsible for the revolutionary development, it was also his discovery of Penicillin that led to the development of antibiotics. In October 1945 Alexander Fleming, Howard Florey, and Ernest Chain each received an almost identical telegram from Stockholm, Sweden. The Nobel prize committee, these messages read, was pleased to inform the three British - based scientists that they had been awarded the Nobel prize for Medicine, for the discovery of Penicillin and its curative action in various disease1. This was not surprising news, In Fact, a year earlier, two major newspapers had informed their readers that Fleming would receive the prestigious award in 19442. Although reporters' stories were a year a hand of their time, they were right that the global scientific community had generally agreed that the world's first antibiotics were a landmark in medical history worthy of Nobel prize recognition. While the committee's decision to award the Nobel prize to the scientists who had developed penicillin was not controversial, the precise choice of whom to award the prize to was more fraught. The uncertainty arose because of the long and complicated process of drug development. The story began in 1928 when Alexander Fleming a Scottish bacteriologist working at St. Mary's Hospital Medical school in London, noticed that a specific strain of mold, Penicillium notatum, inhibited the growth of bacteria setting out to understand more about the mold s unusual properties, Fleming conducted additional experiments concluded that the antibiotics solution that he had made from the mold into a useable drug, convinced that further research on the substance would not be fruitful, Fleming turned to other matters. For a decade, Fleming's discovery attracted little attention then in 1938, two scientists working at the University of Oxford's Sir William Dunn School of Pathology. Howard Flory, an Australian Pathologist, and Ernest Chain, a German biochemist began researching a selection of antibacterial compounds. Over the next two years, chain and Florey, and their oxford colleagues experimented on Penicillium notatum. During that time, the scientists made several important discoveries and thwarted Fleming. By the spring of 1940, Florey and chain had developed a drug, which they mice. The following year, they carried out the first preliminary clinical trials on oxford. After the second world war, the battle for credit also acquired important national overtones. In telling the story of Penicillin's development, journalists and politicians incorporated the drug into celebratory narratives about national inventiveness, innovation, and character. In Britain and the united states' particularly myths of corporate ingenuity, economic opportunities missed and discoveries stolen would shape subsequent antibiotics development and the global production of Pharmaceuticals.

Bernardo Houssay and endocrine research

Background: Bernardo Houssay (1877-1971) was the first Latin American scientist to receive the Nobel Prize in medicine and physiology in 1947. His academic training took place entirely in Argentina, where he founded and directed the Institute of Physiology of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Buenos Aires. He later created the Institute of Biology and Experimental Medicine. He taught hundreds of young people and carried out with his disciples multiple experimental investigations in the areas of endocrine physiology, neuroendocrinology, comparative endocrinology, biochemistry and pharmacology. The result was the publication of about two thousand scientific articles and several academic awards. Methodology: The main endocrinological research undertaken by Dr. Houssay has been described in detail, interpreting the historical and epistemological framework that allowed him to develop a conceptual horizon and laboratory techniques that were able to compete with the most sophisticated research centers in Europe and the United States. Results and conclusions: It has been hypothesized that the work of Claude Bernard, read in depth by Dr. Houssay, led him to conceive and structure his scientific method of experimentation, being a self-taught man, and without having been trained in any foreign laboratory of physiological research. However, the breadth and depth of his scientific work put him on a par with such distinguished figures as Santiago Ramón y Cajal, Walter Bradford Cannon, Lawrence J. Henderson and Charles Scott Sherrington, among others. In addition, it highlights and analyzes his pioneering vision in the integral conception of the pituitary gland and its regulatory relationships with the rest of the endocrine glands, with the body metabolism and the preservation of homeostasis.