# Voice of experience

**Source**: https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/voice-of-experience/
**Parent**: https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/page/3/

The
Chairman
of the
board of
the
Nobel
Foundation
and an
esteemed
figure
in the
field of
cancer
research,
Dr
Carl-Henrik
Heldin
discusses
the
nitty-gritties
of the
Prize,
and what
challenges
lie
ahead —
both in
science
and
society

**Srivatsan
S**

A
celebrated
authority
in
molecular
biology
and
cancer
research,
and one
of
Scandinavia’s
distinguished
scientists,
Dr
Carl-Henrik
Heldin
was
appointed
as
Chairman
of the
board of
the
Nobel
Foundation
in 2013.
This
year
marks a
decade
for
Heldin
as
Chairman.
Describing
the
journey
as an
“interesting
learning
expedition”,
he is
particularly
impressed
by the
overall
interest
in the
Nobel
Prize,
which,
he says,
has only
increased
over the
years.

Heldin,
however,
clarifies
that the
board
doesn’t
involve
itself
in any
way in
the
selection
of Nobel
laureates.
That is
still
the task
of the
The
Nobel
Committee,
which
comprises
four
awarding
institutions
for a
total of
six
prizes
in each
field:
Chemistry,
Physics,
Economics,
Physiology,
Medicine,
Literature
and
Peace.
Heldin’s
role as
the
Chair
ensures
that the
reputation
of the
prize is
maintained.
“As well
as
monitoring
funds.
You need
money to
have the
Nobel
Prize,”
he quips
with a
disarming
smile.

Speaking
on
cancer
research
and the
Nobel
Foundation
as part
of
IITM’s
Eminent
Speaker
Lecture
Series,
Heldin
was in
Chennai
in the
month of
February
to
deliver
a series
of
lectures.
We
caught
up with
the
Professor
for a
brief
conversation,
where he
discusses
the
nitty-gritties
of
running
an
office
as
esteemed
as the
Nobel
Foundation,
and what
challenges
lie
ahead in
science,
research
and
society.
Excerpts:

**Dr
Heldin,
what
has
changed
in
the
last
10
years
ever
since
you
took
over
as
the
Chairman
of
the
Nobel
Foundation?**

I have
always
been
interested
in who
gets the
Nobel
Prize.
We
discussed
that a
lot
amongst
scientists;
who were
worthy
candidates
and
whether
the
selection
was good
or not.
So that
has been
part of
my life,
even all
the way
since I
became a
scientist.
I don’t
think
that has
changed
much in
the last
10
years.
Of
course,
now the
interest
in the
Nobel
Prize is
even
higher.

**Even
for
a
layperson,
the
Nobel
Prize
has
become
synonymous
with
prestige
and
honour.
Like
you
said,
there
is
more
interest
in
the
Nobel
Prize
among
researchers,
academics
and
journalists
as
well.
How
do
you
maintain
the
core
value
of
the
Nobel
Foundation
and
the
reputation
of
the
Prize?**

Well,
our task
is among
other
things
to guard
the
prestige
of the
Nobel
Prize.
There
have
been
instances
before —
particularly
with the
Literature
Prize —
where
there
was a
collapse
more or
less of
the
Swedish
Academy
[the
awarding
institution
responsible
for the
Literature
category]
some
three or
four
years
ago.
That
hurt the
reputation
of the
Nobel
Prize.
So we
tried to
help the
academy
to get
in
better
shape
again. I
think we
have
done
that. It
is in
much
better
shape.

**Dr
Heldin,
you
said
that
you
strongly
promote
multidisciplinary
research.
At
the
Nobel
Foundation,
what
are
the
different
parameters
you
consider
before
sending
out
nominations?**

Well,
transdisciplinary
research
is very
important.
I think
many of
the big
breakthroughs
that
have
been
made
recently
— and
will be
made in
the
future —
will be
in the
borders
of
various
disciplines.
Those
people
who
manage
to
crossover
or take
advantage
of
techniques
in one
area of
research
to solve
questions
on their
own or
vice
versa,
will
have a
better
chance
to win
the
prize,
which is
built on
originality.
I don’t
think
that
[transdisciplinary
research]
is any
criteria,
though,
for the
Nobel
Prize.
It can
be in
any
area.

**You
have
been
a
staunch
supporter
of
physical
presence
at
universities.
The
last
couple
of
years
have
been
particularly
hard
on
all
of
us
thanks
to
COVID-19.
What
has
been
the
impact
of
the
pandemic
on
education?**

It was
certainly
a
challenge.
In
Sweden,
schools
were
open for
kids but
others
had to
continue
distance
education
at
universities.
This
worked
well for
some
students
who had
the
discipline
to cope
with it
whereas
it was a
struggle
for
others.
We all
felt
that
this was
not the
way we
should
carry
out
teaching.
It was a
challenging
time
overall.
So we
are
happy
that
things
are back
to
normal.

**Funding
for
scientific
research
used
to
be a
huge
challenge
at
one
point,
especially
in
private
universities.
Today,
there
seems
to
be a
lot
more
awareness
on
research
projects
and
on
the
importance
of
backing
these
projects.
Yet,
if
there
is
something
lacking
in
the
field
of
science,
what
is
it?**

I think
it is
true
that the
funding
situation
has
improved.
And I
think in
Sweden,
where I
come
from,
the
government
spends
quite a
lot of
money on
research.
They
cannot
really
complain
about
that.
But the
way
money is
spent
can be
discussed
today.
There
has been
an
emphasis
recently
on
applied
research,
which is
important,
but one
should
not
forget
basic
research.
Because
without
basic
research,
it will
be
difficult
to
conduct
high
quality
applied
research.
There
will be
a
shortage
of new
breakthroughs.

**You
have
written
several
research
papers
on
cancer
and
you
have
also
been
the
Director
of
Ludwig
Institute
for
Cancer
Research
(Uppsala
branch).
Given
the
increasing
high
costs
of
healthcare,
how
do
you
ensure
that
cancer
treatment
penetrates
to
the
lowest
in
the
economic
pecking
order?**

This is
a very
relevant
question
since
the cost
of
cancer
treatment
has
escalated
now
because
of the
high
costs
for the
inhibitors
of
various
kinds,
and even
therapy
that is
being
adopted.
Hopefully,
patent
times
will
expire
after 20
years
and the
competition
between
companies
might
make the
prices
go down.
It is
clearly
a big
concern
because
we want
treatment
to be
equal to
everyone
and it
is going
to be a
challenge
for many
countries.

**You
had
said
in
an
interview
that,
“It
is a
formidable
challenge
for
us
scientists
to
reach
out
to
people
and
politicians,
and
to
convince
them
that
decisions
that
affect
our
lives
and
the
future
of
the
world
must
be
based
on
facts
and
not
on
wishful
thinking.”
Has
this
changed
at
all?**

(Laughs).
I don’t
know.
Clearly
nowadays
we would
like
politicians
to base
their
decisions
more on
facts.
We can
take
climate
change
as an
example.
We know
from
science
that the
reason
for
climate
change
is us
and our
way of
living,
and we
have to
change
that.

Politicians
should
listen
to
scientists
and take
necessary
actions.
They
don’t
because
the
action
is not
so nice
and
people
will not
like the
sacrifices
they
will
have to
make. So
that is
clearly
a
problem
now.
Whether
that has
changed,
who
knows,
it’s
probably
still
the
same.

**As
someone
as
distinguished
as
yourself
who
has
decades-long
experience
in
science
and
research,
how
would
you
define
‘progress’
in a
society?
As a
scientist,
what
according
to
you
is
progress?**

Good
question.
Progress
in
science
and
progress
in
society
are two
different
things.
I can
assure
you that
we are
making
progress
in
science,
although
it might
be slow
and
maybe
slower
than one
would
hope.
But
there is
progress.
When it
comes to
society
it is
much
more
tricky
because
we see a
backlash
in many
countries.

When I
was
young, I
felt
that
every
year
things
improved
in the
world up
until
November
9, 2016,
when
[Donald]
Trump
was
elected
as the
President
of the
United
States.
It was a
game
changer
because
all of a
sudden,
it
became
possible
to
disregard
truth
and
claim
awkward
things.
It was
possible
to
disregard
science
and
behave
obnoxiously.
Many
other
leaders
from
other
parts of
the
world
saw what
Trump
was
doing
and
thought,
“Oh,
this is
possible.
Let me
also do
the
same.”
We have
a real
lack of
political
leadership
in many
important
countries
in the
world.
So
society
hasn’t
really
continued
to
develop
in the
way I
had
hoped.

**Would
you
include
India
among
the
countries
you
mentioned?**

India is
the
world’s
largest
democracy
and that
is
excellent.
So far,
India
hasn’t
really
suffered
the way
other
countries
I
mentioned
have.

**Dr
Heldin,
you
will
be
turning
71
this
year.
You
have
published
over
440
research
papers
and
you
have
been
cited
some
70,000
times.
Looking
back
at
your
largely
prolific
life,
is
there
a
sense
of
contentment?**

Not
really.
First of
all, I
don’t
think I
should
be too
concerned
about
figures
and
numbers
in this
context.
I am
very
satisfied
that I
chose to
become a
scientist
and I
enjoy
every
day. So
in that
sense,
yes, I’m
content…
achievements
are for
others
to
judge. I
have
made
some
contribution
to
science
and
others
have
contributed
a lot
more. I
enjoy
being
part of
it.

### Leave a Reply [Cancel reply](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/voice-of-experience/index.html#respond)

Your email address
will not be
published.
Required fields are
marked
\*

Comment
\*

Name
\*

Email
\*

Website

Save my name,
email, and website
in this browser for
the next time I
comment.

## Related News

## [The pursuit of happiness](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/the-pursuit-of-happiness/)

[Srivatsan](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/author/magazine/)[2 years
ago2 years
ago](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/the-pursuit-of-happiness/)
[0](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/the-pursuit-of-happiness/#comments)

## [As good as a catalyst](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/as-good-as-a-catalyst/)

[Srivatsan](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/author/magazine/)[2 years
ago2 years
ago](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/as-good-as-a-catalyst/)
[0](https://ge.iitm.ac.in/rendezvous/as-good-as-a-catalyst/#comments)