Watson received the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his role in elucidating the structure of DNA. 1 credit
James Dewey Watson – Nobel Prize winner for discovering the structure of DNA; played an important role in initiating and promoting Human Genome Project; and which became famous for its history racist and sexist comments – died at 97 years old.
The discovery of the structure of the double helix of DNA opened the way for scientists to unravel the mechanisms of genetic inheritance and how cells synthesize proteins. Gene therapy, sequencing of the human genome, and the development of monoclonal antibodies to treat cancer are just some of the developments that would not be possible without understanding the structure of DNA.
“The elucidation of the structure of the double helix ranks among the three greatest discoveries in biology, along with those of Mendel and Darwin,” says Bruce Stillman, president of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, where Watson held various positions.
Paper reference
Watson and Francis Creekwho worked together at the University of Cambridge, UK, solved the structure of DNA within a few years of their first meeting. In 1953 they published a seminal article.1 V Nature entitled “Structure of Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid”. Watson just turned 25.
“Nothing was impossible for him,” says Robert Martienssen, a Cold Spring Harbor geneticist. “Nothing was out of reach.”
But the discovery of the DNA helix also caused controversy. Watson and Crick explained the complex structure using data and ideas from Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins, who were then working at King's College London. Some of this data was shared without Franklin's permission. Wilkins was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962 along with Watson and Crick. Franklin had died of ovarian cancer four years earlier at the age of 37 and was therefore ineligible for the award.
How did Rosalind Franklin really contribute to the discovery of the structure of DNA?
Watson and Crick “could—and should have—requested permission to use the data and explain exactly what they had done, first to Franklin and Wilkins and then to the rest of the world,” wrote Matthew Cobb and Nathaniel Comfort, historians of science at the University of Manchester, UK, and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, respectively, in an essay published in 2023.2 about Franklin.
After this discovery, Watson was particularly unkind towards Franklin and disdainful of the role of women in science in general. In a best-selling book about the discovery of the double helix, he criticized Franklin's appearance and wrote: “It is impossible to escape the idea that the best home for a feminist is another man's laboratory.”
No answers
Colleagues close to Watson have long struggled with his controversial legacy. Nancy Hopkins, a molecular biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, says Watson convinced her to pursue a doctorate at a time when few women pursued careers in science. When she opened her own laboratory and feared she might not get tenure, Watson convinced her to continue. “Just keep working, and when you get to the position, if the letters are good enough, you'll get the position. Or I'll sue them,” Hopkins says Watson told her.
Hopkins later became an outspoken advocate for women in science and says she is just one of many women Watson taught and supported. She also says she is confused by Watson's rhetoric about race.
Ending racism in science
A 2001 lecture at the University of California, Berkeley, stunned many in the audience when Watson made remarks linking skin color to sexual libido and thinness to ambition.
“It was the beginning of the end,” Hopkins says of the lecture. “What happened next, I just don’t know the answer.”
In 2007, Watson pulled out of a book tour, saying he believed black people were less intelligent than white people. At the time, he was still working at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, where he had once been director and helped make the laboratory a preeminent scientific institution. But he was removed from leadership positions at the laboratory for remarks about race and intelligence. The institution cut ties with him completely after he made similar remarks in 2020. He also has a history of anti-Semitic comments, such as a 2007 remark that “some anti-Semitism is justified.”
