Domingo Sidoti, primer Director de la Escuela de Enfermeros, Preparadores de Farmacia y Laboratorios de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, año 1943

Fotografía del Dr. Domingo Sidoti, quien fuera el primer Director en 1943 de la Escuela de enfermeros y preparadores de farmacia y laboratorios de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. La Escuela funciona desde 1941 a 1947 bajo la Dirección General de Higiene dependiente del Ministerio de Obras Públicas desde el 8 de febrero de 1919. Solo dos de los 1.200 enfermeros que se desempeñaban en la Provincia estaban inscriptos como profesionales por lo cual era necesario revertir esa situación

Understanding Opioid Actions, Pain and Analgesia: A Tribute to Dr. Gavril Pasternak.

This special issue is a tribute to our mentor, colleague and friend, Gavril W. Pasternak, MD, PhD. Homage to the breadth and depth of his work (~ 450 publications) over a 40 career in pharmacology and medicine cannot be captured fully in one special issue, but the 22 papers collected herein represent seven of the topics near and dear to Gav's heart, and the colleagues, friends and mentees who held him near to theirs. The seven themes include: (1) sites and mechanisms of opioid actions in vivo; (2) development of novel analgesic agents; (3) opioid tolerance, withdrawal and addiction: mechanisms and treatment; (4) opioid receptor splice variants; (5) novel research tools and approaches; (6) receptor signaling and crosstalk in vitro; and (7) mentorship. This introduction to the issue summarizes contributions and includes formal and personal remembrances of Gav that illustrate his personality, warmth, and dedication to making a difference in patient care and people's lives.

In Memory of Two Pioneers in the Complement Field-Sir Peter J. Lachmann, 1931-2020 & Robert B. Sim, 1951-2021.

With deep sadness, we have to accept that two cornerstones, not just of British immunology, but also world-famous scientists in the field of complement research, passed away within the margin of a few weeks: Peter Julius Lachmann on 26 December 2020 (Figure 1), and Robert Braidwood Sim (known to everyone as Bob) on 6 February 2021 (Figure 2) [...].

[CRISPR Nobel, at last ]. / CRISPR : le Nobel, enfin .

The 2020 Nobel Prize in chemistry rewards two brilliant scientists who have followed quite different career paths but have collaborated very successfully. Of course, the history of the CRISPR system is complex and involves many other individuals, but their contribution has been essential. It is difficult to overstate the importance of this system for the functional interpretation of massive genome data as well as for (sometimes problematic) clinical applications.

TITLE: CRISPR : le Nobel, enfin…. ABSTRACT: Après Marie Curie, en 1903 et 1911, Irène Joliot-Curie en 1935, Françoise Barré-Sinoussi en 2008, Esther Duflo (franco-américaine) en 2019, Emmanuelle Charpentier est la cinquième française à décrocher un Prix Nobel (le Nobel de chimie 2020) qu'elle partage avec l'américaine Jennifer Anne Doudna. C'est la première fois qu'un prix Nobel scientifique est décerné conjointement à deux femmes. Emmanuelle Charpentier (née le 11 décembre 1968 à Juvisy-sur-Orge, France), obtient un doctorat à l'Institut Pasteur, après un master à l'université Pierre et Marie Curie (UPMC, maintenant Sorbonne Université, Paris). Microbiologiste, généticienne et biochimiste, elle poursuit un cursus international au sein d'institutions américaines avant un retour en Europe (Suède et Allemagne). Elle est aujourd'hui professeure à l'Institut Max Planck de Science des Pathogènes à Berlin qu'elle a créé et qu'elle dirige. Jennifer Anne Doudna (née le 19 février 1964 à Washington) est une professeure américaine de biochimie et de biologie moléculaire à l'université de Californie à Berkeley. Elle est titulaire d'une licence en chimie obtenue au Pomona College en 1985. Sa thèse de doctorat en biochimie, centrée sur l'étude des ribozymes, a été menée à l'université Harvard. Par la suite, elle a effectué un postdoctorat à l'université du Colorado à Boulder.

Geoffrey Burnstock - An accidental pharmacologist.

Geoffrey Burnstock, the founder of the field of purinergic signaling research passed away in Melbourne, Australia on June 3rd, 2020, at the age of 91. With his death, the world of biomedical research lost one of its most passionate, creative and unconventional thought leaders. He was an inspiration to the many researchers he interacted with for more than 50 years and a frequent irritation to those in the administrative establishment. Geoff never considered himself a pharmacologist having being trained as a zoologist and becoming an autonomic neurophysiologist based on his evolving interests in systems and disease-related research. By the end of his life he had: published some 1550 papers; been cited more than 125,000 times; had an h-index of 156 and had supervised over 100 Ph.D. students. His indelible legacy, based on a holistic, data-based, multidisciplinary, unconventional "outside the box" approach to research was reflected in two of the seminal findings in late 20th century biomedical research: the purinergic neurotransmitter hypothesis and the concept of co-neurotransmission, both of which were initially received by his peers with considerable skepticism that at times verged on disdain. Nonetheless, while raising hackles and threatening the status quo, Geoff persevered and prevailed, becoming a mentor for several generations of biomedical researchers. In this review we provide a joint perspective on Geoff Burnstock's legacy in research.

Perspectives on Geoff Burnstock as researcher, teacher and friend.

Geoffrey Burnstock, one of the most talented and brilliant scientists of his generation, was born on the 10th of May 1929 in London and died on the 2ndof June 2020, aged 91, in Melbourne (Australia). Geoffrey Burnstock started his research studies with an interest in the nerves controlling the guts of guinea pigs, and discovered a completely unexpected and ubiquitous signalling system mediated via extracellular nucleotides (the "purinergic theory"), which revolutionized our understanding of how cells communicate between each other. He made the highly controversial discovery that ATP (adenosine triphosphate), a molecule well known to biochemists for its role as a source of energy inside cells, could also transmit signals between them. Initially, his somewhat heretical theory, that did not fit conventional views, found considerable resistance in the scientific community. However, he continued to accumulate evidence in favor of his hypothesis, extending it to a variety of organs and systems and demonstrating a role for purinergic signaling in the cardiovascular, respiratory and nervous systems, and in the pathophysiology of pain, blood clotting, cell proliferation and differentiation, and immunity. For his entire life, he struggled to attract scientists to this new field and, finally, in the early 1990s, did evidence emerge that convinced the doubters, due to new molecular biology techniques making it possible to isolate and identify the cell surface receptors for ATP and its breakdown product, adenosine. His death clearly impacted a huge number of scientists who have lost their pioneering leader. In this Review, I will not talk of the many discoveries made by Professor Burnstock, nor of his enormous scientific contributions to the field and of the incredible number of prizes and public recognitions that he has received after his theory was accepted worldwide. Instead, I will share some personal memories on him as a teacher and scientist, and, most of all, as a loyal and reliable friend. Geoff was an extraordinary human being, always eager to collaborate and share data, never jealous of his findings and capable of learning even from young people. He was known for his enthusiasm, empathy and ability to motivate young scientists. I was lucky to meet him when I was still very young, and the collaboration and friendship that we established and maintained across the years has profoundly conditioned my professional and personal life. For me, Geoff was what in Italy we call a "Maestro", one of those leading figures who are fundamental not only for mentoring an individual's career but also their growth as a scientist and as a human being.

[Jules Bordet, a man of conviction. Centenary of his Nobel Prize]. / Jules Bordet, un homme de conviction - Centenaire de l'attribution de son prix Nobel.

Jules Bordet came to the Institut Pasteur soon after his MD graduation at the Université libre de Bruxelles, thanks to a grant from the Belgian government. He joined there the laboratory of Elie Metchnikoff, the father of phagocytes and cellular immunity. Amazingly, he will decipher there some of the key mechanisms of humoral immunity initially discovered by the German school against which his mentor was fighting. He described the mechanisms that govern bacteriolysis and hemolysis, following the action of immune sera. Even if he favored the term alexin coined by Hans Buchner, he is indeed one of the founding fathers of the complement system (term coined by Paul Ehrlich). It is for these works that he was awarded in October 1920 the 1919 Nobel Prize. Back in Belgium, he became the director of Institut Pasteur du Brabant and made another landmark discovery, namely the identification of the bacillus of whooping cough, now named Bordetella pertussis.

TITLE: Jules Bordet, un homme de conviction - Centenaire de l'attribution de son prix Nobel. ABSTRACT: Docteur en médecine, bénéficiant d'une bourse du gouvernement belge, Jules Bordet vint se former au sein du laboratoire du père de l'immunité cellulaire, Elie Metchnikoff, à l'Institut Pasteur. Paradoxalement, il va y déchiffrer certains des mécanismes clés de l'immunité humorale, initialement découverte par l'école allemande. Il y décrit notamment les mécanismes qui aboutissent à la bactériolyse et l'hémolyse par l'action d'immunsérums. Même s'il favorisa le terme d'alexine, créé par Hans Buchner, c'est bien le système du complément (terme inventé par Paul Ehrlich) dont il est un des pères fondateurs. C'est pour ces travaux qu'il se verra attribué en octobre 1920 le prix Nobel de physiologie ou médecine millésimé 1919. Il identifia aussi le bacille de la coqueluche, qui porte son nom Bordetella pertussis.

Troy D. Zars: a personal tribute to a scientist, colleague, and friend.

I knew Troy for nearly 15 years, and in that time I don't recall hearing any childhood stories like those in seemingly every personal statement I've read from aspiring scientists or medical students. No stories about hours spent gazing at an anthill. I don't recall hearing about shelves crowded with insects collected on Styrofoam, or animal skulls kept in a shoebox under his bed. If these collected crania existed, it was more likely because Troy was a crack shot with a pellet gun than a need to know adaptations in the dentition of local squirrel populations. I don't recall hearing about science projects taken to the Iowa State Capitol to share with politely interested legislators. But I do recall hearing about spending the entirety of the daylight hours in the summer, with his brother Doug, finding where the crappie were biting. About crystal clear water on a lake in Minnesota that you didn't quite need to know the exact location of, just in case you were thinking of going and plundering the walleye within. I definitely heard about triumphs as a starting lineman not only for his high school football team, but the mighty Norse of Luther College. I heard about summer warehouse jobs in sweltering Iowa Julys. And I saw, firsthand, love and commitment and family. Troy's story demonstrates that the finest scientists are not just cultivated in narrow STEM curricula that begin at age 5. They are just as likely to be football-playing fishermen, fathers, husbands, and friends who can navigate an operant conditioning paradigm during the week, and dance a polka and produce a magnificent smoked pork shoulder on Saturday. Nature and an independent spirit and a little bit of mischief is a different kind of Magnet school. And it gave us truly one of the best.

Pioneers in CNS inhibition: 2. Charles Sherrington and John Eccles on inhibition in spinal and supraspinal structures.

This article reviews the contributions of the English neurophysiologist, Charles Scott Sherrington [1857-1952], and his Australian PhD trainee and collaborator, John Carew Eccles [1903-1997], to the concept of central inhibition in the spinal cord and brain. Both were awarded Nobel Prizes; Sherrington in 1932 for "discoveries regarding the function of neurons," and Eccles in 1963 for "discoveries concerning the ionic mechanisms involved in excitation and inhibition in central portions of the nerve cell membrane." Both spoke about central inhibition at their Nobel Prize Award Ceremonies. The subsequent publications of their talks were entitled "Inhibition as a coordinative factor" and "The ionic mechanism of postsynaptic inhibition", respectively. Sherrington's work on central inhibition spanned 41 years (1893-1934), and for Eccles 49 years (1928-1977). Sherrington first studied central inhibition by observing hind limb muscle responses to electrical (peripheral nerve) and mechanical (muscle) stimulation. He used muscle length and force measurements until the early 1900s and electromyography in the late 1920s. Eccles used these techniques while working with Sherrington, but later employed extracellular microelectrode recording in the spinal cord followed in 1951 by intracellular recording from spinal motoneurons. This considerably advanced our understanding of central inhibition. Sherrington's health was poor during his retirement years but he nonetheless made a small number of largely humanities contributions up to 1951, one year before his death at the age of 94. In contrast, Eccles retained his health and vigor until 3 years before his death and published prolifically on many subjects during his 22 years of official retirement. His last neuroscience article appeared in 1994 when he was 91. Despite poor health he continued thinking about his life-long interest, the mind-brain problem, and was attempting to complete his autobiography in the last years of his life.

Essential Contributions of Pathologists and Laboratory Physicians Leading to the Discovery of Insulin.

CONTEXT.­: Frederick Banting, Charles Best, J. Bertrand Collip, and J. J. R. Macleod contributed to the discovery of insulin in 1921-1922. Recent advances in anatomic pathology, experimental pathology, and clinical pathology were necessary for the research in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, to begin and to succeed. OBJECTIVE.­: To explore the role of pathology and laboratory medicine in laying the foundation for the discovery of insulin. DESIGN.­: Available primary and secondary historical sources were reviewed. RESULTS.­: During a 3-decade period, pathologists, through autopsy pathology and experimental animal studies, were able to provide solid evidence that the pancreatic islets were the source of the internal secretion responsible for proper carbohydrate metabolism. Banting, a surgeon with no previous research experience, read about these studies in a case report with an extensive literature review by pathologist Moses Barron; this piqued Banting's interest and caused him to approach Macleod, a Toronto physiology professor, with an idea that initiated the research. Advances in clinical laboratory medicine, which allowed them to measure blood glucose levels using small blood volumes, were critical to their success. CONCLUSIONS.­: By 1921-1922, the pieces necessary to solve the puzzle were available. The primary reason that the time was ripe for the discovery was the contributions of pathologists and laboratory physicians in the preceding 3 decades. As the 100th anniversary approaches, our profession can take pride in its important contributions to the discovery of insulin, which is broadly recognized as one of the most important medical research advances of the 20th century.