1. Centenary of the Birth of Modern Biochemistry. Arthur Kornberg. FASEB J., 11:1209-1214 (1997).
2. The NIH Did it! Arthur Kornberg. Science, 278:1863 (1997).

• We must make clear to the public that science is great, although scientists are still people. Karl Popper, an eminent philosopher of science and society, said that "next to music and art, science is the greatest, most beautiful and most enlightening achievement of the human spirit".

• In science, we now possess phenomenal capacities to acquire and integrate unprecedented quantities of sophisticated data. Yet, we are beset by many serious problems, some of which threaten the foundations of our scientific enterprise. The three problems I want to consider are the antiscience attitudes in society, the consequent lack of support for basic science, and conflicts such big science against small science.

• Chemistry has had a poor image for some time. "Better things for better living through chemistry" had been the DuPont slogan for many years. The slogan has now been abbreviated to "Better things for better living". The image of biologist has not doing well either. Hollywood has chosen them as their villains in recent years. Some hit movies have demonized doctors and scientists: "Lorenzos Oil", "The Fugitive", and "Jurassic Park".

• As a result of an uninformed or misinformed public, we have a second problem: the lack of an adequate support for science.

• It may seem unreasonable and impractical even to scientists to solve an urgent problem, such as a disease, by pursuing apparently unrelated questions in basic biology or chemistry. Yet, the pursuit of understanding the basic facts of nature has proved throughout the history of medical science to be the most practical, the most cost effective route to successful drugs and devices.

• "Necessity is not the mother of invention". Rather the reverse has proved to be true: Inventions only later become necessities! The future is invented, not predicted. A common illusion is that strategic objectives are necessary to discover the cures for cancer and AIDS and that groups of sufficient size need to be mobilized for wars and crusades against these enemies. Nothing could be more misguided. In the history of triumphs in biomedical science such wars and crusades have invariably failed because they lacked the necessary weapons- the essential weapons: the essential knowledge of basic life processes. Instead some of the major advances –X-rays, penicillin, polio vaccine, and genetic engineering– have come from efforts of individual scientist to understand Nature, unrelated to any practical objective.

• Biomedical basic scientist fear for continued grant support. This is clearly a state that discourages young people from entering science and drives others to abandon science for business, law and others pursuits.

• Well over 90% of the past and present current support of basic science in the United States has come from federal government and always will. Support by industry and philanthropy can be helpful and catalytic, but will never be sustained and substantial. Training and research in biomedical science is an essential investment by the nation of a magnitude that only our federal government can make. A message must be delivered to legislators daily: "If you think research expensive, try disease".

• In the United States there has been a proliferation of disease centers for cancer, AIDS and a variety of other diseases. Once created, these centers grow and last forever, sustained by strong political support from organized constituencies. In Europe, research programs, rely on grants from the European Union. The EU requires that investigators from three or more countries find a consensus project that can be parceled up among them. This leaves no room for scientist to do something utterly original and unpopular, and much time is wasted in bureaucratic maneuverings. Within Japan, the recent expansion of research grants is laudable, but the mechanism is all too familiar: a very large sum is awarded to a "center of excellence" where the director has complete authority over what is done and who does it.

• The most remarkable innovation in the history of research support anywhere in the world we owe to the National Institutes of Health. Grants are awarded to individuals, young and old, rather than to department heads, university deans or directors of institutes. Awards are made on scientific merit as judged by panels of scientist drawn outside government. The greatest danger I see is a dampening of individual creativity and reversion to the old politics that infect every group and institution.

Basic Biomedical Research Support, by Arthur Kornberg
Basic Research, the Lifeline of Medicine, by Arthur Kornberg
Nobel Prize Winners Seek Stronger Support for Basic Science
Of Serendipity and Science, by Arthur Kornberg
Research at Stanford's Department of Biochemistry
Arthur Kornberg: Biochemistry at Stanford, Biotechnology at DNAX
Biochemist Arthur Kornberg: A Lifelong Love Affair With Enzymes
Arthur Kornberg: Remembering our teachers