"The reward for work well done is the opportunity to do more" -Jonas Salk
I first came across this proverb doing my tenth class summer homework. We were supposed to read and write one page every day, and one fine day, I picked up a book on quotations and found this gem. For a very long time, I followed it, thinking the only reward I need is the opportunity to do more. And I did get those opportunities, and I was happy. But lately, I have started craving for acceptance from my peers, awards, and what not. I have been swept away by the rat race around me and I have succumbed to temptation. But, I came across a not so well known scientist who nevertheless changed the world. And all he ever asked was the opportunity to do more.
The first time I heard the name Yellapragada Subba Rao was when I was in primary school, studying in Telugu Primary School. Being an Andhra school, we had to take compulsory Telugu classes, and read about people who made Andhra great. There was Potti Sriramulu, and others. One guy who we learned about was Yellapragada Subba Rao. He went to Harvard University and did some great work etc etc. At the time, his discoveries did not seem all that great. After all, everyone has heard of Pauling, Kornberg etc, but whoever heard of the name Yellapragada Subba Rao ?
The next I saw his name was in college, when we were doing phosphate estimation using the Fiske-Subba Rao method. I thought it was quite elegant, and I wondered how he must have come up with the idea of using the reagents that he did. He seemed quite a remarkable fellow. From then on, I kept an eye open for good work. However, I missed many of his achievements in my reading. He was always in the background. Recently, I came across his work again. I am planning on working with GTPases, and one of the easiest things you can do to measure GTPase activity is to measure the phosphate that is generated when GTP is hydrolyzed. Fiske-Subba Rao method is surprisingly still alive, although some modifications have been made to the original method to improve the stability of the colored product.
It was during the recent time, that I more intensively tried finding about him. My mother once claimed (a bit incorrectly) that he was the first one to discover antibiotics. Now, everyone knows Alexander Fleming was the first guy. But it turns out that Subba Rao indeed was the first guy to discover a tetracycline. The history of the work is quite fascinating. Fiske, who was Subba Rao's supervisor, was quite jealous of him, and tried to stop him from getting tenure in Harvard. Combined with the state sponsored racism of the 1940s, you can imagine it must have been hard for Subba Rao to find a good position. During his PhD work, he had actually discovered the essential role ATP and creatine play in muscle contraction. I have no doubt that had he been given a faculty position, he would have discovered the exact mechanism that ATP plays in muscle contraction. But, as such, it was not fated to happen. Instead, he joined Lederle Laboratories, which later became Wyeth pharmaceuticals recently acquired by Pfizer.
It was at Lederle that Subba Rao did his greatest work. He spear headed a large distributed experiment, in which US army was asked to bring back soil samples from all over the world during the second world war. From those samples, his lab isolated the first tetracycline which became a runaway hit during the early days of antibiotics. Tetracyclines did not have the side-effects that Penicillin had, and it became an important antibiotic in the war against infection. Lederle Labs, located near Boston also brought him in contact with some of the pioneers of cancer chemotherapy. Sydney Farber at that time noticed that Folic acid seems to worsen the leukemia in children. He wanted to check if adding folic acid analogs could help reverse the effect. He turned to Subba Rao, and he synthesized Aminopterin, which showed great promise as an antineoplastic agent. Not content with the compound, Subba Rao went on to develop and synthesize Methotrexate, a chemical still being used for chemotherapy.
Throughout his career, he (some would say foolishly) never tried to patent any of his inventions. He worked for the simple reason that he enjoyed working and that was his only reward. For some strange reason, his story has never been told as widely as that of others. The one that I keep hearing is GN Ramachandran's story. He no doubt did great work, but I feel a large part of why it appeals to us Indians, has to do with him defying established Cambridge scientists. Cambridge scientists ridicule his work, so he sets out to do something even greater. That David vs Goliath story seems to assuage our deep seated lack of confidence. When you hear stories of people like Subba Rao being denied tenure, but still doing great things, it somehow seems insufficient. He did not vanquish anyone, he did not shame Fiske, and he did not get any product named after him. So, what is the big deal here ? That seems to be the attitude. But, in some sense, he achieved more than GNR, since he made himself invaluable to the community he chose to live in. He was approached by a number of pioneers prcisely because they understood his talents and held him in great esteem. It is that part of the story that needs retelling. And more importantly, it teaches me that no matter what people think, there will always be people who remember great work. So, all that any scientist really needs is the opportunity to do more.
The first time I heard the name Yellapragada Subba Rao was when I was in primary school, studying in Telugu Primary School. Being an Andhra school, we had to take compulsory Telugu classes, and read about people who made Andhra great. There was Potti Sriramulu, and others. One guy who we learned about was Yellapragada Subba Rao. He went to Harvard University and did some great work etc etc. At the time, his discoveries did not seem all that great. After all, everyone has heard of Pauling, Kornberg etc, but whoever heard of the name Yellapragada Subba Rao ?
The next I saw his name was in college, when we were doing phosphate estimation using the Fiske-Subba Rao method. I thought it was quite elegant, and I wondered how he must have come up with the idea of using the reagents that he did. He seemed quite a remarkable fellow. From then on, I kept an eye open for good work. However, I missed many of his achievements in my reading. He was always in the background. Recently, I came across his work again. I am planning on working with GTPases, and one of the easiest things you can do to measure GTPase activity is to measure the phosphate that is generated when GTP is hydrolyzed. Fiske-Subba Rao method is surprisingly still alive, although some modifications have been made to the original method to improve the stability of the colored product.
It was during the recent time, that I more intensively tried finding about him. My mother once claimed (a bit incorrectly) that he was the first one to discover antibiotics. Now, everyone knows Alexander Fleming was the first guy. But it turns out that Subba Rao indeed was the first guy to discover a tetracycline. The history of the work is quite fascinating. Fiske, who was Subba Rao's supervisor, was quite jealous of him, and tried to stop him from getting tenure in Harvard. Combined with the state sponsored racism of the 1940s, you can imagine it must have been hard for Subba Rao to find a good position. During his PhD work, he had actually discovered the essential role ATP and creatine play in muscle contraction. I have no doubt that had he been given a faculty position, he would have discovered the exact mechanism that ATP plays in muscle contraction. But, as such, it was not fated to happen. Instead, he joined Lederle Laboratories, which later became Wyeth pharmaceuticals recently acquired by Pfizer.
It was at Lederle that Subba Rao did his greatest work. He spear headed a large distributed experiment, in which US army was asked to bring back soil samples from all over the world during the second world war. From those samples, his lab isolated the first tetracycline which became a runaway hit during the early days of antibiotics. Tetracyclines did not have the side-effects that Penicillin had, and it became an important antibiotic in the war against infection. Lederle Labs, located near Boston also brought him in contact with some of the pioneers of cancer chemotherapy. Sydney Farber at that time noticed that Folic acid seems to worsen the leukemia in children. He wanted to check if adding folic acid analogs could help reverse the effect. He turned to Subba Rao, and he synthesized Aminopterin, which showed great promise as an antineoplastic agent. Not content with the compound, Subba Rao went on to develop and synthesize Methotrexate, a chemical still being used for chemotherapy.
Throughout his career, he (some would say foolishly) never tried to patent any of his inventions. He worked for the simple reason that he enjoyed working and that was his only reward. For some strange reason, his story has never been told as widely as that of others. The one that I keep hearing is GN Ramachandran's story. He no doubt did great work, but I feel a large part of why it appeals to us Indians, has to do with him defying established Cambridge scientists. Cambridge scientists ridicule his work, so he sets out to do something even greater. That David vs Goliath story seems to assuage our deep seated lack of confidence. When you hear stories of people like Subba Rao being denied tenure, but still doing great things, it somehow seems insufficient. He did not vanquish anyone, he did not shame Fiske, and he did not get any product named after him. So, what is the big deal here ? That seems to be the attitude. But, in some sense, he achieved more than GNR, since he made himself invaluable to the community he chose to live in. He was approached by a number of pioneers prcisely because they understood his talents and held him in great esteem. It is that part of the story that needs retelling. And more importantly, it teaches me that no matter what people think, there will always be people who remember great work. So, all that any scientist really needs is the opportunity to do more.
Comments