Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 76
1
The Life and Legacies of Joshua Lederberg
OVERVIEW
The essays in this chapter offer three personal perspectives on Joshua
Lederberg’s many contributions to science, society, scholarship, and to the lives
and careers of his colleagues, students, and friends. The first contributor, David
A. Hamburg of Cornell University’s Weill Medical College, recounts Lederberg’s
legacies as scientist and humanist through the lens of nearly 50 years of friend-
ship. In the second essay, Stephen S. Morse, of Columbia University, recalls
meeting Lederberg, who was then president of Rockefeller University, when
Morse was “the most junior of junior faculty members.” Thus began a friendship,
rooted in a shared interest in emerging infectious diseases, that lasted for more
than 20 years—a collaboration that embraced the ideas upon which the Forum
on Microbial Threats was founded.
Former Forum chair Adel Mahmoud, of Princeton University, notes in the
chapter’s final essay that “this Forum is the brainchild of Joshua as he was explor-
ing how to respond to the multifaceted challenges of microbes.” After reviewing
and celebrating the breadth of his accomplishments, Mahmoud concludes that
Lederberg “needs no monument to ensure that his life and work are long remem-
bered.” Rather, his ideas and example will continue to be “an inspiration and a
reminder that our work can truly change the world just as the life and career of
Joshua Lederberg certainly did.”
OCR for page 77
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
REFLECTIONS ON THE CAREER OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
David A. Hamburg, M.D.1
Carnegie Corporation
I am honored to speak about Josh Lederberg on the occasion of this important
meeting. It was my great privilege to have nearly half a century of joint efforts
and deep friendship with him. Let me start with a citation for his achievements
written three decades after he received his Nobel Prize in Medicine. In 1989, our
nation’s highest honor in science and technology, the National Medal of Science,
was awarded to him with a concise and illuminating citation:
For [Joshua Lederberg’s] work in bacterial genetics and immune cell single
type antibody production; for his seminal research in artificial intelligence in
biochemistry and medicine; and for his extensive advisory role in government,
industry, and international organizations that address themselves to the societal
role of science.
I could add more—and will, to some extent. All of us here respect his
truly great scientific achievements and creative leadership in science and public
policy.
How did all of this happen? In childhood, he had prodigious intellectual gifts,
along with a reverence for learning and scholarship—powerfully reinforced by
his family. From then on, his life was characterized by boundless curiosity—a
fresh look at everything.
He took deep satisfaction in discovery—and then raising the next question,
and the next, and challenging the scientific community to pursue many ramifica-
tions. This interrelated set of attributes characterized him all his life and had much
to do with his great accomplishments.
One dramatic feature of his career: he was a school dropout—medical school,
that is. He entered medical school with his typical intense curiosity and sense of
discovery. This was a learning moment: the emergence of the new biology. He
shifted to graduate school in biology to pursue the frontiers of knowledge. There
began a line of inquiry that led before long to the Nobel Prize.
This was groundbreaking, highly imaginative work on the nature of micro-
organisms, especially their mechanisms of inheritance. He opened up bacterial
genetics, including the momentous discovery of genetic recombination. This
work was one of the crucial foundations for subsequent discoveries in cellular
and molecular biology. Many of us stood on his shoulders. He won the Nobel
Prize in 1958 at the age of 33—one of the youngest winners in any field from
any nation.
Another attribute was his remarkable capacity for institutional innovation.
1 President emeritus.
OCR for page 78
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
He created a department of genetics in the medical school at Stanford University.
Until then, genetics had been marginal—or nonexistent—in medical schools.
There was a widely shared assumption in the middle of the twentieth century
that genetics might be intrinsically interesting but that it would never have much
practical significance for medicine. How wrong that assumption was!
While actively stimulating and fostering basic research, Josh also sought
applications, and he helped to create the biotechnology industry. In teaching and
in institution building, he emphasized the mutually beneficial interplay of basic
and clinical research.
In this context, he was very generous in helping to establish new clinical
departments and new kinds of clinical departments. At Stanford, he helped with
psychiatry, pediatrics, medicine, and neurology. He inspired us with the classic
experiments of Oswald Avery, Colin MacLeod, and Maclyn McCarty at Rock-
efeller University in the 1940s. Their clinical inquiry into pneumonia led to a
great discovery on the most basic level: DNA is the genetic material. He helped
us to build on basic components and to create interdisciplinary groups. He also
helped us to identify research opportunities and promising lines of innovation.
He was a wide-ranging mentor. The world is full of people grateful to Josh
for his powerful insights, creative suggestions, and generosity of spirit.
Within his own remarkable department at Stanford, he fostered many lines of
inquiry: molecular genetics, cellular genetics, clinical genetics, population genet-
ics, exobiology (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s [NASA’s]
Mariner and Viking missions to Mars), immunology, and neurobiology.
He always had a worldwide view and brought in superb people, not only
from the mysterious east of the United States, like New York City, but also, for
example, Walter Bodmer (United Kingdom), Luca Cavalli-Sforza (Italy), Gus
Nossal (Australia), Eric Shooter (United Kingdom), and others from afar—all
of whom were major contributors. His global outlook, long-term vision, intense
curiosity, and unfailing kindness inspired all of us seeking to create new kinds of
clinical departments. Moreover, he did much to strengthen the scientific capabil-
ity of the World Health Organization (WHO).
Thus, his rare capacity to range widely with open eyes and an open mind—
and also to dig deeply into a specialized topic, and to combine these capacities
in research, education, and intellectual synthesis—led to fruitful stimulation in a
variety of fields and nations.
His knowledge, curiosity, and imagination have been expressed in many
ways. For example, he was instrumental in the creation of a highly innovative
undergraduate major at Stanford, now past its thirty-fifth year as one of the most
sought after majors at Stanford, drawing in faculty from across the university.
It is broadly integrative across the life sciences, linking basic science, hands-on
experience (including field research), biological aspects of behavioral science,
and in the senior year, applications of the life sciences to policy (e.g., in health
OCR for page 79
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
and environmental problems). He even found a way to make this a permanent
program by insisting that we find a way to get endowed chairs.
Early in the computer era his interest in computer science grew and he
became a pioneer in artificial intelligence, especially in relation to biochemistry,
genetics, and medicine.
He believed deeply in education of the broad public, opening complex and
emotionally charged topics for informed public discussion. One major vehicle
was a column in The Washington Post during the 1970s, in which he interpreted
science for the public and for several years produced fascinating, highly informa-
tive columns.
He was a pioneer in the scientific assessment of the human impact on
the environment—and especially on the health implications of environmental
conditions.
All of this rich experience, knowledge, skill, and wisdom were brought
to bear on Rockefeller University under his presidency, where he broadened
the scope of its great faculty, opened new opportunities for young people, and
greatly improved the facilities. His deep respect and concern for the well-being
of faculty—young and not so young—was remarkable. This was a crucial aspect
of his leadership.
Josh was a pioneer in biological warfare and bioterrorism, applying his far-
sighted vision in efforts to understand the danger and find ways to cope with it.
He strongly influenced the negotiation of the biological weapons disarmament
treaty.
He advised the U.S. government in many agencies, including: the National
Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA,
the Navy Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the Department of
Energy, the Defense Science Board, and others. So too on the world stage. In
addition, his deep sense of science’s contributions to the well-being of humanity
was expressed in his role as co-chair of the Carnegie Commission on Science,
Technology, and Government, producing multiple publications on most branches
of government, strengthening their science and technology capacities and their
decision-making processes. He served with distinction on the National Acad-
emies’ Committee on International Security and Arms Control (CISAC), heading
its efforts in biology.
Altogether, I know of no eminent scientist who produced so much serious
analysis of public policy and social problems, giving wise advice and stimulating
new lines of inquiry. Our country and the world are in his debt.
Those of us here today profoundly appreciate what he did for humanity. His
life exemplified the finest attributes of the great institution in which we meet
today, and we honor his magnificent legacy.
OCR for page 80
0 MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
JOSH LEDERBERG REMEMBERED
Stephen S. Morse, Ph.D.2
Columbia University
Josh would have loved this meeting. He loved this institution. He loved the
Forum on Microbial Threats and the efforts that preceded it.
I keep looking around the room thinking that Josh has got to be here some-
where. He is, in a very real sense. It was Ralph Waldo Emerson, I think, who
said that an institution is the lengthened shadow of a man—well, in those days he
would have said “man,” but today we would say “person.” In many ways, Josh’s
shadow was a very long one, indeed. I think we are all very much in his debt.
It’s especially humbling to follow David Hamburg and to be in a room where
many of the people—and I see several here—knew Josh far longer and far better
than I did. During the discussion period, I hope they’ll add their own thoughts,
which are sure to be very valuable and instructive.
I said it’s humbling to follow David Hamburg on the podium. Let me give
a small anecdote to illustrate what I mean. After Josh retired as president, the
Rockefeller University gave him an office suite and lab, of course. His outer
office was basically a library—this was very much in Josh’s character—with
rows and rows of files, books, and journals on just about every subject you can
imagine. That was the outer office. His ever-loyal administrative assistant, Mary
Jane Zimmermann—some people referred to her as Josh’s gatekeeper during his
days at the Rockefeller University, but personally I always found her benevolent,
and very considerate—had a desk there as well, in this library-like outer office,
which was not quite the size of this meeting room.
He had several of his many awards displayed next to the door in this outer
office, but when you went into his private inner office, he had only three things
on the wall, as I recall. He had a certificate as a ham radio operator (apparently he
was very proud of that) and his certificate as a fellow of the American Academy
of Microbiology—and a picture of David Hamburg! All the other things were in
the outer office, but this showed what Josh kept close to his heart.
Everybody has spoken, of course, of Josh’s unique and indisputable greatness
as a scientist and his interests in many areas that I think we can only touch on.
He began or pioneered in many fields. Those of us who worry about emerging
infections in this world, and feel that’s really challenging, came to realize how
far beyond even that Josh’s purview extended. David Hamburg mentioned Josh’s
starting the field of exobiology, a term that he himself coined. There are even
many people who think (although I haven’t gone back to verify this) that the
hero in The Andromeda Strain (Crichton, 1969) was based on Josh Lederberg.
2 Professor
of epidemiology and founding director of the Center for Public Health Preparedness at
the Mailman School of Public Health.
OCR for page 81
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
It wouldn’t surprise me. In any case, some years ago, the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA) had asked him for advice on how to properly
decontaminate returning spaceships and samples sent back from space, on what
precautions should be taken. As you know, he always gave very generously of
his time and advice. This led to one of the most interesting job descriptions I
have ever seen. After receiving Josh’s advice, NASA created a position called
“planetary quarantine officer.” I always thought that was quite impressive, rather
like the film Men in Black. Apparently, however, unlike in the film, they were
fortunately never called upon to exercise their functions.
Josh’s interest in evolution, of course, has been mentioned many times. On
one occasion, Josh mentioned to me that he saw the unifying theme of his sci-
ence: the sources of genetic diversity (and natural selection, I’d add). I think this
was apparent in many ways. It was apparent in his work in microbiology, but it
was also apparent in his interest in immunology, as David mentioned in passing.
Josh went down to Australia, where he met Mac Burnet, Sir Frank Macfarlane
Burnet, later to win the Nobel Prize for his work on “clonal selection,” which
we now know is how the immune system is able to recognize and respond to the
great variety of molecules that it does. The developing immune system generates
a great number of cells with different, essentially random specificities and then
selects from among them and maintains these populations of cells, the “immu-
nologic repertoire.” When a new antigen is presented, immune cells can bind to
the antigen attach and are stimulated to replicate, hence, “clonal selection.” It is
basically a Darwinian system that selects from among a large number of variant
cells. That idea of clonal selection, Josh told me, was actually a direct applica-
tion of the evolutionary ideas that Josh brought with him and worked on when
he was in Australia.
So his shadow—indeed, his presence—can be found in many places, and
no place, of course, more than in the area of infectious diseases. That’s why I
think this particular meeting would have made him very happy, to see so many
of his old friends, and particularly to see so many of the fruits of his hard work.
I think all of us—and this certainly applied to Josh—do the things we do in the
hope of leaving the world a better place and leaving something that will inspire
future generations to keep improving the world. So this meeting, with scientists
of several generations describing their work that was started by some of Josh’s
interests, is very much a testament to Josh’s legacy.
Unlike David, I had the pleasure of knowing Josh for only a little more than
20 years. When I came to Rockefeller, Josh was the minence grise (a role he car-
ried as well as he had his earlier one of child prodigy, becoming a Nobel Laureate
at age 33), the president of Rockefeller, and the distinguished Nobel laureate; and
I was among the most junior of junior faculty members. (I eventually worked
myself up to being a more senior junior faculty member.)
It was actually just by a happy coincidence that Josh and I got involved in this
issue of emerging infections. I went to a faculty party that was given periodically
OCR for page 82
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
at the president’s house. Just as I was leaving, Josh’s wife, Marguerite, who is
also a psychiatrist—maybe it’s just a coincidence, but now that I know from
David Hamburg’s background, I have a feeling Josh had a special affinity for
psychiatrists—reminded Josh about something he had wanted to do. She said,
“Sweetheart, didn’t you have some questions about virology? Steve’s a virolo-
gist, you know.”
Josh said, “Oh, yes.” It turns out that he had had dinner with Carleton
Gajdusek. Many of you may remember Gajdusek (and, sadly, his later legal
problems), but he was also a very innovative and brilliant scientist himself, with
many interesting ideas. He was very interested in the hemorrhagic fever viruses,
such as the hantaviruses, and discovered Prospect Hill virus, the first American
hantavirus. At that dinner, he was talking with Josh and suggested he should think
about the researchers and workers in the university’s animal facilities, who might
be exposed to a hantavirus such as Seoul or Hantaan (once known as Korean
hemorrhagic fever), which had been a known problem. There were schoolchildren
in Russia who had contracted a hantavirus from laboratory rats while touring the
animal facilities on a school trip. Obviously, Carleton, in his usual forceful man-
ner, had succeeded in getting Josh concerned about it.
So Josh asked me that evening if this was something we should worry about.
I replied, “I’ll look into it.”
So, of course, I went and looked into it. It turned out that it wasn’t a problem
for us, I was relieved to find. Not only did we not have any cases of disease, but
all our rodents were routinely tested. I wrote my reply to Josh’s question in a
letter dated February 17, 1988, saying “I enjoyed our conversation about Korean
hemorrhagic fever and other emerging viruses,” thinking of those viruses and
mechanisms of pathogenesis not yet identified in humans but known to exist in
other species.
Josh wrote back quickly, on his personal notepaper—and here I must digress
for a moment. Everybody who has received a note from Josh knows these are
not to be compared with Donald Rumsfeld’s now famous “snowflakes”: Josh’s
were much more substantial. I know it’s a digression, but Josh’s wonderful notes
deserve a digression. All of Josh’s colleagues and friends know that Josh had a
personal notepad with his name in light blue at the top, and that the notes were
always date-stamped. There were also some markings, like hieroglyphics at the
top or bottom—a check mark with two dots, or an “x” with three dots; Mary
Jane once sent me a chart that explained these meant things like, “Keep copy in
files” or “Send a copy and retain original.” I don’t know if he had that habit at
Stanford.
To return to the narrative: Josh wrote me a note in his usual magisterial style,
date-stamped February 22, which said “Thank you for the information, which I
read with great interest. I am of course reassured. . . . We need some high-level
policy attention to what needs to be done globally to deal with the threat of
emerging viruses, and I would welcome your thoughts on that.”
OCR for page 83
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
Naturally, not knowing any better, and only knowing Josh slightly at that
time, I took that as a call to action. Shortly thereafter, at a Federation of Ameri-
can Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) meeting, I ran into Gaylen
Bradley, a former postdoc of Josh’s from his Wisconsin days, who had also been
my department head when I was a postdoc (he has recently written his own bio-
graphical memoir of Josh). I asked Gaylen for advice on how to respond to this
oracular statement. The obvious conclusion was to have some sort of conference
to deal with this question of emerging viruses.
Some colleagues (I recall particularly Sheldon Cohen, now retired from
the NIH) sent me to John LaMontagne at the National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases (NIAID), who was very sympathetic and said he had similar
interests. We organized a conference under NIAID’s auspices, held on May 1,
1989, at the Hotel Washington (Washington, DC). We could afford it then because
it was undergoing major renovations, as everybody who ever stayed there during
that period for the conference knew, since they could hear the renovations going
on. We got a very good rate. I know that because I never could afford to stay
there afterwards.
In this big ballroom, we had perhaps 150 people, with a number of distin-
guished speakers on various subjects (and an equally distinguished audience). Of
course, Josh was very much the star of the meeting. He opened it with a keynote
address and participated in discussions at the end of the meeting. There was a
summary of that meeting, for those who are interested, in the Journal of Infec-
tious Diseases in 1990, and then in my book, Emerging Viruses, which was sort
of a by-product of that meeting.
Josh gave very thoughtful and philosophical opening remarks, of course. One
thing about Josh that never failed to surprise me was that he would say things that
were truly gems, often profound, and they wouldn’t strike you until days later,
when suddenly you realized what he meant by that. It was an “aha” experience,
in many ways like the joy of a scientific discovery.
I always enjoyed seeing the reactions of people having this experience for
the first time. One year, I was fortunate enough to have him address my Colum-
bia graduate class in emerging infectious diseases, as the grand finale for the
semester. He talked about the toll of the 1918 influenza pandemic, its effect on
life expectancy curves, and many other things. By then, I was familiar with Josh’s
often very philosophical and discursive style. The students listened to Josh and
mostly looked very pensive. I suspect that most of the students were probably
mystified by parts of his talk, but many were stimulated days, weeks, or even
months later, when one of his comments hit them, and they were inspired to take
some of those thoughts and pursue them.
Josh was very good at inspiring people. He had a special gift for that. In
terms of mentorship, he cared deeply about the people he worked with. He was
passionate about the many issues with which he was concerned, none more than
the threat of microbes, perhaps, or as he summarized the situation in an article,
OCR for page 84
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
“Our Wits Versus Their Genes” (Lederberg, 2000). Their genes have been evolv-
ing a lot longer than our wits, I needn’t tell you. In another paper he made the
analogy to bacteriophage infecting a dense culture of bacteria in a tube of broth
and how suddenly—and this was a classic observation—the tube became clear.
That was in a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) article that
he wrote, in which he used the term “humankind” in the title. (Josh was not a
sexist.)
Ruth Bulger, who was then director of the Board on Health Policy, and
Polly Harrison, who was director of the Board on Global Health at the Institute
of Medicine (IOM), came along to the 1989 meeting, and we had several discus-
sions together. This helped to galvanize the IOM into doing a study that Josh had
been advocating for some time. The study committee, which was originally the
Committee on Microbial Threats to Health but which was rather quickly renamed
the Committee on Emerging Microbial Threats to Health in the United States,
eventually authored the famous report, Emerging Infections: Microbial Threats to
Health in the United States that came out in October 1992. Several of you who are
here today were on that Committee. As you know, the report has become a clas-
sic and, I am told, one of the IOM’s best-sellers of all time. By the way, Richard
Preston had an article in the New Yorker that was timed to coincide with the
release of the report. The article was later expanded into the book The Hot Zone
(Preston, 1995). More recently, Peggy Hamburg and Josh co-chaired a 10-year
reappraisal, the report of which I think is destined to become another classic.
The report called for better infectious disease surveillance, a better under-
standing of pathogenesis, and a better understanding, in fact, of many, many
things, including the political will to deal with emerging infections.
Science was one of Josh’s real passions. As David Hamburg pointed out, no
matter how sick Josh may have been in his later days, whenever the talk turned
to science, he was all ears. His eyes would light up and he would be eager to take
in all of that knowledge—and, of course, ask probing and often very informative
questions. Josh had a knack for putting together words in wonderful ways and a
knack for asking the right questions—often very profound questions. I think it
was absolutely remarkable the way he combined those two talents. I’ll give an
example or two later.
He also had a passion for scientific advice and scientific policy, for which he
gave of himself selflessly. I would always bump into him on the Delta shuttle or at
a meeting such as this one, or many others, and he was always shuttling back and
forth between New York and Washington. I knew he went many times to Wash-
ington. However, it wasn’t until an eightieth birthday party for Josh that Richard
Danzig and other friends organized at the Academy building that I realized—in
fact, Marguerite told us—that Josh used to go to Washington sometimes three
times a week, back and forth, to give scientific advice. He was the very model
of the perfect scientific adviser. His advice was honest, dispassionate, and never
self-interested. His interest was furthering the cause of science and humanity. He
OCR for page 85
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
was always the soul of discretion as well. I think that policy and technical advice
were things that those of us of a certain period—Josh’s period, certainly—felt
was a civic obligation. More and more, this has become a highly politicized
process, but Josh could always be depended upon to give honest advice and ask
good questions.
That belated eightieth birthday party was, I believe, the penultimate time
he went to Washington. The last trip to Washington was when he went to pick
up the Presidential Medal of Freedom (which, I recently discovered, David had
also received earlier). Josh was deservedly very proud of that recognition. He
had earned it.
I mentioned Josh’s unique way with words. As I said earlier, I used to see
him often at various meetings. Once we were invited to a World Health Organiza-
tion (WHO) meeting, and bumped into each other before the meeting at a hotel
that the WHO then used quite regularly, the Cornavin—some of you may know
it—right by the train station in Geneva. I had just registered and Josh walked
in, shook my hand, and said, “My, my, we always meet in the most expected
places”—just one small example.
Back at that 1989 conference on emerging viruses, Josh was also a star of
the show. There were several other Nobel laureates there, including my old friend
and former professor Howard Temin. Josh and Howard had a very interesting
debate, which unfortunately was not officially recorded, but as I recall, it cer-
tainly induced a lot of adrenaline. Later, somebody asked Josh, “When should
we declare that a newly recognized virus is a new species?” He said, “When it
matters.” I quoted this to my wife, who was duly impressed, and said, “What a
Solomonic answer!”
That was very much Josh’s way; to cut through all the red tape and all the
inconsistencies and see straight to the heart of the matter, to distinguish what was
really important and what was not.
Before I close (and I fear I’ve already taken up more than my space quota), I
think I should say a few words about the early history of the Forum on Microbial
Threats, or, as it was then known, the Forum on Emerging Infections. A number
of you in the room probably already know this history.
Of course, it started just the way that David showed in that slide of the Sistine
Chapel ceiling. However, the Institute of Medicine did not at that time have quite
so palatial surroundings. After the Committee on Microbial Threats and publica-
tion of its final report, many of us thought about what a possible follow-on could
be. It’s often said that American lives have no second act. Certainly, the report
was a very hard act to follow, but there was recognition of a need to continue the
momentum and advance the dialogue. After much deliberation, which included
Josh and the then-president of the Institute of Medicine, Sam Thier, who was
a great supporter of this effort, Polly Harrison, Ruth Bulger, as well as myself,
Polly and Ruth suggested that it would be appropriate to start a forum that could
bring together people from—I won’t say all walks of life, but from academe,
OCR for page 86
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
industry, and from the government, to talk about these issues. As you know, Josh
was delighted to chair this.
The very first issue that the Forum on Emerging Infections discussed was
something very close to Josh’s heart: vaccine capacity for microbial threats. It
led to our first report, Orphans and Incentives, which set out the problem and
suggested some alternatives.
The rest of what happened after that, of course, is history. It was very much
Josh’s energy that made it possible and remains a key part of Josh’s legacy.
A second thing that happened subsequent to publication of the report was
that several of us who were concerned about the international ramifications of
emerging infections decided to start the Program for Monitoring Emerging Dis-
eases (ProMED) to plan and promote global surveillance of infectious diseases,
especially emerging pathogens. In fact, it was the late Bob Shope, who was co-
chair of that original IOM committee with Josh, who came up with that name just
off the top of his head. Jim Hughes, Ruth Berkelman, and D. A. Henderson, along
with a number of others, were charter members of the steering committee.
One of the most successful spin-offs of the ProMED initiative is well known
to those of you who get the e-mails from ProMED-mail or read its website. 3
Josh was never officially a member, because I thought it might be a little too
political, and I didn’t want to put him in an awkward position. I always kept him
in the loop unofficially, and he was a great supporter of the effort, later publicly
as well as privately. But I can’t help thinking that part of the reason that Josh was
such a great fan of ProMED-mail may have been that it was an e-mail system,
and Josh was glad to see e-mail used to bring people together for a crucial and
worthy purpose.
In fact, Josh was one of the earliest adopters of e-mail I know of. In those
days, e-mail was almost impossible to use. You had to do all the formatting and
editing of the message by hand, line by line, and send it using a 1,200 baud
modem by dial-up. We had nothing more than that. I remember how technologi-
cally advanced I felt when I finally got a 2,400 baud model.
So I had not learned to use e-mail because it required such a lot of effort and
there was a steep learning curve. Josh once looked at me and said, “You really
should use e-mail, you know.” I replied it was just too much trouble, adding “I
don’t even have a modem.” He shamed me into it. He said, in his very typical
fashion, “That’s no problem. I’ll buy you a modem.”
I did have enough grant money at the time to buy myself a modem. It was
from that inspiration that, in fact, ProMED-mail was later born. So Josh really
can take the credit for starting many things, including that initiative.
I will add, in closing, that Josh served very happily as president of the Rock-
efeller University. The trustees loved him. He was one of their real favorites. I
know this because I did a trustees’ dinner with him on emerging infections. Of
3 See www.promedmail.org.
OCR for page 87
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
course, he was the star of the show, and I was sort of the appendage. What a star
to be the appendage for! I owe a great deal to Josh in many other ways as well.
My time at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) from
1996 to 2000 was because Josh convinced the people at DARPA (especially its
director at the time, Larry Lynn) that it was necessary to get into biology and
seriously consider biological threats. He asked me if I would be interested in his
nominating me for a job there. It was one of the most interesting chapters of my
own career and, I have to say, an exceptional place to work that was committed
to finding creative new ideas. I hope we managed to fund and stimulate a few.
(David Relman was one of the grantees, for work on gene expression profiling
in infections.)
At the time one of our concepts was to look at common pathways of patho-
genesis (Stan Falkow will remember his invaluable advice on this), as well as
the host response and possible host markers of infection. The rationale was fairly
simple: there was a tremendous number of pathogens, in addition to whatever was
lurking unrecognized out there in nature, plus the possibility of genetically engi-
neered threats in the future. Approaching the threats individually (what some of
my colleagues called “one bug—one drug”) would become impossible. Later, this
idea would be embodied in Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD)-18
and other current biodefense initiatives.
We really owe all these ideas to Josh’s vision in making us all think much
more globally.
At the Rockefeller University, he was, as I mentioned, very influential as
president, although after he stepped down I saw him on campus looking very
relaxed and wearing a Rockefeller baseball cap. I need not tell you that his office
as president had floor-to-ceiling bookshelves crammed with books, but there was
another room down the hall in the same building. Those of you who know the
Rockefeller will know it as the Cohn Library. It was in a public area and was
sometimes used as a conference room. It, too, was filled with books.
One day I was waiting there for a meeting to start and idly began browsing
some of the books on the shelves. I discovered that many of them were stamped
with Josh’s name. He had donated them to the library.
After he stepped down as president and had his own office, in deference
to his many interests and skills—he could not include them all—he named his
laboratory the Laboratory of Molecular Genetics and Bioinformatics, emphasiz-
ing the relationship of the two. I think that was the first time those terms had been
coupled, or at least the first time I had seen them together. He had always been a
great supporter of both, as well as a great innovator in both of these fields.
I hope this brief account gives some indication not only of how much a poly-
math he was but also how deeply he cared about people and science. I remember
talking later with Torsten Wiesel, another Nobel laureate, after he became presi-
dent of Rockefeller. He said, “You know, Josh was lucky. He got his Nobel Prize
early so he could spend the rest of his life doing what he wanted.”
OCR for page 88
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
What Josh wanted to do was to search for truth and inspire others in that
search, for the benefit of humankind. He was never happier than when he was
absorbing knowledge and questioning it. I like to think of this inspiration, with
all of us here because of Josh, as his greatest legacy.
THE LIFE AND IMPACT OF A LEGEND—JOSHUA LEDERBERG
Adel Mahmoud, M.D., Ph.D.4
Princeton University
It is fitting to dedicate this workshop of the Forum on Microbial Threats
(hereinafter, the Forum) to Joshua Lederberg and to a subject that was central to
his thinking of the past decade.
This Forum is the brainchild of Joshua as he was exploring how to respond
to the multifaceted challenges of microbes. Those of us old enough will remem-
ber that the Forum was Joshua’s response to the first Emerging Infections report
of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in 1992. Joshua opened the preface to that
volume as follows:
As the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease pandemic surely should
have taught us, in the context of infectious diseases, there is nowhere in the
world from which we are remote and no one from whom we are disconnected.
Consequently, some infectious diseases that now affect people in other parts
of the world represent potential threats to the United States because of global
interdependence, modern transportation, trade, and changing social and cultural
patterns.
He felt as if he always guided us; that the issues of infectious disease at hand
will not go away and that a platform for academia, government, industry, and oth-
ers to study, debate, and chart a path forward was necessary. It was my privilege
and honor to have succeeded Josh as chair of the Forum.
I am not here today to talk about the Forum, and I will only touch briefly on
the subject matter of our meeting. Rather, I am participating in a celebration of the
life and achievements of Dr. Lederberg. One can simply state that Joshua Lederberg
has been the dominant force that shaped our thinking, response, and intellectual
understanding of microbes for much of the second half of the twentieth century.
Infectious Disease Research
From his earliest work when, at the age of just 20, he discovered mating and
genetic recombination in Escherichia coli, to the discovery of viral transduction
4Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and the Department of Molecular
Biology, Lewis Thomas Laboratory, Room 228, Princeton, NJ 08544.
OCR for page 89
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
in bacteria, Joshua Lederberg helped to establish the new science of genetic
engineering and its fundamental contribution to the study of infectious disease.
There is a lot to share with you about these early days of Josh’s career. Most of
the fundamental breakthrough research on bacterial mating was performed while
he was on leave from Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons.
When the great results of his early studies were clearly opening new horizons,
he decided to extend his leave of absence from medical school for another year.
That was where we lost the budding physician in Joshua; during the subsequent
year, he was offered a faculty position at the University of Wisconsin, where
he conducted his seminal work on viral transduction in bacteria. But that did
not stop Joshua Lederberg from being at the forefront of those concerned about
human health and well-being as we witnessed his leadership over the past several
decades.
The “Stanford years” witnessed the maturation of the field of bacterial
genetics and the expansion of Joshua’s scientific horizon to areas that touched
upon human health and human biology. Equally important was his role in under-
graduate and graduate education. The human biology curriculum was one distinct
product of that era that Joshua championed.
Joshua, the Leader
Being awarded the Nobel Prize at the age of 33 gave Joshua a global per-
spective that he fully utilized in the subsequent half century. His platform became
the nation and the world, and his reach and impact touched every corner. A few
examples illustrate this point.
1. Joshua the science educator: From presidents to the global public, Joshua
consulted and advised every president since John F. Kennedy. He explored
and studied issues ranging from space sciences to human and artificial
intelligence to the human-microbial interplay.
2. Joshua the communicator: Few may still remember that Joshua contrib-
uted a weekly science column to The Washington Post in an attempt to
reach the general public and make science accessible.
3. Joshua the visionary: Equally important were his vision and his ability to
conceptualize for the nation and the scientific community. I was fortunate
to have worked closely with Josh on the subject that it was he and he
alone who articulated and brought to the forefront of scientific agendas
(i.e., emerging infections). In the late 1980s, the concept of emerging and
reemerging infections was born by Joshua’s insistence that it get attention.
The result is 25 years of focus that gave us two IOM reports (IOM, 1992,
2003), multiple plans from the Centers for Disease Control and Preven-
tion (CDC), NIH, WHO, and our Forum. More importantly, global events
proved how right and perceptive Joshua was then and now. Infections such
OCR for page 90
0 MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
as hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, severe acute respiratory syndrome
(SARS), H5N1 avian influenza, and multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus (MRSA) are all global events that shape the world today and will
shape it for years to come.
Perhaps, the most dominant feature of Joshua’s scientific contributions over
the last three decades is articulating a vision for understanding human-microbe
interplay with the dimensions that for many years remained fragmentary. An
ecological and evolutionary understanding of that relationship emerged in mul-
tiple publications and produced several revolutionary concepts. The introductory
statement of an article written by Joshua a decade ago sums it up (Lederberg,
1998):
Our relationship to infectious pathogens is part of an evolutionary drama. Here
we are; here are the bugs. They are looking for food; we are their meat. How do
we compete? They reproduce so quickly, and there are so many of them. They
tolerate vast fluctuations of population size as part of their natural history; a
fluctuation of 1 percent in our population size is a major catastrophe. Microbes
have enormous potential mechanisms of genetic diversity. We are different
from them in every respect. Their numbers, rapid fluctuations, and amenability
to genetic change give them tools for adaptation that far outpace what we can
generate on any short-term basis.
So why are we still here? With very rare exceptions, our microbial adversaries
have a shared interest in our survival. With very few exceptions (none among
the viruses, a few among the bacteria, perhaps the clostridial spore-forming
toxin producers), almost any pathogen reaches a dead end when its host is dead.
Truly severe host-pathogen interactions historically have resulted in elimination
of both species. We are the contingent survivors of such encounters because of
this shared interest.
In a subsequent masterpiece published in the journal Science in 2000, Joshua
added the elements of a rational understanding of what we are as superorgan-
isms and that the microbiota constitute the total interface between humans and
microbes (Lederberg, 2000). That article also points to the futility of the “war
metaphor” and proposes a more fundamental, nuanced, approach:
As our awareness of the microbial environment has intensified, important ques-
tions have emerged. What puts us at risk? What precautions can and should we
be taking? Are we more or less vulnerable to infectious agents today than in
the past? What are the origins of pathogenesis? And how can we use deeper
knowledge to develop better medical and public health strategies? Conversely,
how much more can the natural history of disease teach us about fundamental
biological and evolutionary mechanisms?
An axiomatic starting point for further progress is the simple recognition that
humans, animals, plants, and microbes are cohabitants of the planet. That leads
OCR for page 91
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
to refined questions that focus on the origin and dynamics of instabilities within
this context of cohabitation. These instabilities arise from two main sources
loosely definable as ecological and evolutionary.
Ecological instabilities arise from the ways we alter the physical and biologi-
cal environment, the microbial and animal tenants (humans included) of these
environments, and our interactions (including hygienic and therapeutic inter-
ventions) with the parasites. The future of humanity and microbes likely will
unfold as episodes of a suspense thriller that could be titled Our Wits Versus
Their Genes.
His mind never stopped analyzing and deeply exploring what comes next.
An example of this comes from his article “Metaphysical Games: An Imaginary
Lecture on Crafting Earth’s Biological Future” (Lederberg, 2005):
A vector of traits can be plucked from natural sources, or constructed with pres-
ent or proximate future bioengineering tools [see Box 1-1]. Taken without ques-
tion is the ultimate capacity to craft altered and hybrid genomes—“knockouts,”
“knockins,” “knockdowns and knockups,” and “shuffles.” Augmenting these
constructions is the deconstruction of what is disappointing, what does not
work as predicted. Mock or denounce, but get the arguments into the open for
the feasibility and utility of constructing or domesticating a target candidate. At
some point, there will be exhilaration or unease about the policy fallout, and col-
leagues will be consulted about the best avenues for technology assessment.
A Perspective Summation
Joshua was a discoverer, a leader, and a champion in the truest and best
sense of the words. His perceptiveness and impact had a fully positive effect on
mankind and on history. Joshua was truly a force of nature, a force of nature that
was able to unlock some of nature’s most enduring secrets. Joshua believed that
there are no limits to what the human mind can accomplish—especially when
its power is hitched to a willingness to think boldly and unconventionally and to
hard work.
Until almost the day he died, Joshua could be found in his office, in his apart-
ment, working. His mind was always thinking, always probing, always question-
ing. He has always been and will always be an inspiration to generations among
us and generations to come.
Thinking back to my own upbringing in Egypt, the constructions of monu-
ments such as the Great Sphinx and the pyramids at Giza likely grew out of the
enormous egos of the rulers who had them constructed. These rulers wanted to
be sure that long after they were gone, people would be able to gaze upon their
mighty works and remember that a great man once ruled here.
Joshua Lederberg, of course, needs no such monuments to ensure that his life
and work are long remembered, because, in a very real sense, his accomplish-
OCR for page 92
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
BOX 1-1
Traits That Could Be the Foundation of
Selection in Unfamiliar Genomic Settings
Fecundity: This is the fundamental measure of Malthusian fitness. Is obviously
the most complex of traits, and rarely given fully unhampered play except in natu-
ral or near-natural populations. It may also be entangled with efficiencies of diet,
infection, and social arrangements. The race is not always to the swift, paradoxical
selection sometimes favors a slower growing contender, with antibiotics that are
more effective on bugs that have lowered their guard during the most rapid growth.
What is the fastest-growing microbe? Perhaps a cousin of Vibrio natriegens, with
a doubling time of less than 15 minutes.
Life span: Research in this part of the matrix is well filled in yeast, roundworms,
fruit flies, mice, birds—for these species constitute a large part of the research
agenda of the National Institute of Aging.
Chemical secretion, defense, detection, virulence, or disease susceptibility:
What substance? What toxin? What function? Recall that secondary metabolism
comprises a large part of contemporary applied microbiology.
Desiccation: Survival and growth capacity of cells at reduced chemical activity
of water. This is closely connected with anabiosis and dormancy with explicit or
tacit spore formation. Large investments by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration are wrapped up with this issue because it is generally argued that
the surface environment of Mars is incompatible with proliferation of terrestrial
microbes. Depending on process details, the process of lyophilization may be toxic
or preservative. Additives like trehalose mitigate the toxicity of the lyophilization
process and may be emulated by other genetically engineered antifreeze under
extensive investigation. Persistence of viable bacteria in aerosols is a critical point
for a biological weapons attack.
Motor: Power and discriminatory skills; motility some specialized cells. Some
flagella are imputed to rotate at 50,000 rpm!
ments are embedded in the DNA of many whose lives have been shaped because
of his work. That work and those concepts will be passed on to every generation
yet to come, long after the Great Sphinx has crumbled into dust.
Joshua believed very strongly in the work of this Forum. He had a great
confidence in the ability of scientists and researchers to continue to solve some
of the riddles that still confront science in the fight against infectious diseases.
OCR for page 93
THE LIFE AND LEGACIES OF JOSHUA LEDERBERG
Flight, marine, navigation kinetic fragility/tenacity: One aspect testable with
acoustic energy in environment. Converse, more limited range in animals but what
is loudest emission, doubtless related to animal size. For smaller targets this is
tested by aerosolization.
Thermal-susceptibility: Easily assayed, and heat/cold shock responses are
under study.
Thermal emission and absorption: Should be secondary to metabolic rates.
Tropisms: To any part of EM [electromagnetic] spectrum: what are ultimate limits
to sensitivity of detection?
Vision-spatial acuity: Image formation at any wavelength.
Energy emissions: May carry acoustic signals. Luminescence may be acousti-
cally modulated, detected.
Integration of signal inputs—IQ: It involves coordinated social action. As an
outrageous question, “What could be measured, say in a bacterium, that could
map to what might be called ‘intelligence’?”
Geno-stability and pheno-stability (or instability); promiscuity: This trait may
be related to survivability of laboratory cultures, to maintenance of strain charac-
teristics, to production of variants as objects of selection, and to ease of research
protocols.
Genome size: An interesting trait in itself; related to “junk DNA.”
Currency of lateral gene transfer: Bears on management of genetic change.
SOURCE: Reprinted from Lederberg (2005) with permission from the American Medical As-
sociation. Copyright 2005.
By remembering him with this tribute we also are remembering the many things
that his life and career can teach all of us.
I hope, every time we meet at this Forum, Joshua Lederberg will be an inspi-
ration and a reminder that our work can truly change the world, just as the life
and career of Joshua Lederberg certainly did.
OCR for page 94
MICROBIAL EVOLUTION AND CO-ADAPTATION
REFERENCES
Morse References
Crichton, M. 1969. The andromeda strain. New York: Knopf.
Lederberg, J. 2000. Infectious history. Science 288(5464):287-293.
Preston, R. 1995. The hot zone. First Anchor Books Ed. New York: Random House, Inc.
Mahmoud References
IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1992. Emerging infections: microbial threats to health in the United
States. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
———. 2003. Microbial threats to health: emergence, detection and response. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press.
Lederberg, J. 1998. Emerging infections: an evolutionary perspective. Emerging Infectious Diseases
4(3):366-371.
———. 2000. Infectious history. Science 288(5464):287-293.
———. 2005. Metaphysical games: an imaginary lecture on crafting earth’s biological future. Jour-
nal of the American Medical Association 294(11):1415-1417.
