If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.



Re: Nobel snubs

May 2, 2016 | A version of this story appeared in Volume 94, Issue 18

After reading Stu Borman’s story on those given the cold shoulder by the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, online readers couldn’t help but name more overlooked scientists as well as pass along an idea for a future ACS national meeting symposium.

For the use of NMR in organic chemistry alone, Jack Roberts deserves the Nobel Prize and should have been awarded it many years ago.

David Schuster via C&EN’s website

Raymond Lemieux of the University of Alberta could have been awarded the Nobel for his advances in the area of carbohydrate chemistry. He was fighting a lone battle in this area, and we now know that carbohydrates are one of the most important areas from chemistry to biology to vaccine development!

Shankaran. K via C&EN’s website

Very interesting theme for the History of Chemistry Division. I would (tentatively) suggest a provocative follow-up symposium on Nobel Laureates who should not have been awarded the prize.

Paul J. Karol via C&EN’s website

There is a great quote from physicist Freeman Dyson who was left out of the Nobel Prize for quantum electrodynamics, mainly because including him among the three well-deserved winners would have exceeded the limit on the number of awards for a single prize. When asked in his later years whether he resented being left out, his reply was “It is better to be asked why you did not win a Nobel Prize than to be asked why you did.”

Ronald Lawler via C&EN’s website


This article has been sent to the following recipient:

Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.