Search

Victor McKusick's contributions to the field of medical genetics are legendary and include his contributions as a mentor, as creator of Mendelian Inheritance in Man (now Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man [OMIM®]), and as a leader in the field of medical genetics. McKusick's full bibliography includes 772 publications. Here we review the 453 papers authored by McKusick and indexed in PubMed, from his earliest paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1949 to his last paper published in American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A in 2008. This review of his bibliography chronicles McKusick's evolution from an internist and cardiologist with an interest in genetics to an esteemed leader in the growing field of medical genetics. Review of his bibliography also provides a historical perspective of the development of the discipline of medical genetics. This field came into its own during his lifetime, transitioning from the study of interesting cases and families used to codify basic medical genetics principles to an accredited medical specialty that is expected to transform healthcare. Along the way, he helped to unite the fields of medical and human genetics to focus on mapping the human genome, culminating in completion of the Human Genome Project. This review confirms the critical role played by Victor McKusick as the founding father of medical genetics., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Between 1988 and 2007, during the courses of the European School of Genetic Medicine, many of us had the opportunity to appreciate the tolerant and open-minded personality of Victor McKusick. He was gifted with a unique foresight for the innovations introduced into medicine through the development of the Human Genome Project. The aim of our separate contributions in this article is to document how his insights had an important impact on the European medical training system., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Dr. Victor McKusick was a founding member of the joint NIH-DOE working group that designed the federal effort to address the ethical, legal, and social implications of the US Human Genome Project in 1989. A key feature of this effort was its commitment to anticipating genomics-driven questions before they became urgent practical dilemmas, by complementing the scientific effort to map and sequence the human genome with projects by a wide range of social scientists, humanities scholars, legal experts, and public educators designed to equip society with the foresight required to optimize the public welfare benefits of new genomic information. This article describes the origins of that experiment and the model of anticipatory science policy that it produced, as one piece of Dr. McKusick's extraordinary intellectual legacy., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Victor Almon McKusick (VAM) is widely recognized as the father of the field of medical genetics. He established one of the first medical genetics clinics in the United States at Johns Hopkins in 1957 and developed a robust training program with the tripartite mission of education, research, and clinical care. Thousands of clinicians and scientists were educated over the years through the Short Course in Medical and Molecular Genetics, which VAM founded with Dr. Thomas Roderick in 1960. His Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM), a catalog of human genes and genetic disorders, serves as the authoritative reference for geneticists around the globe. Throughout his career he was an advocate for mapping the human genome. He collaborated with Dr. Frank Ruddle in founding the International Human Gene Mapping Workshops in the early 70's and was an avid proponent of the Human Genome Project. He was the founding President of the Human Genome Organization and a founding editor of the journal Genomics. His prodigious contributions to the field of medical genetics were recognized by multiple honors, culminating with the Japan Prize in 2008., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The Human Genome Organization (HUGO) was initially established in 1988 to help integrate international scientific genomic activity and to accelerate the diffusion of knowledge from the efforts of the human genome project. Its founding President was Victor McKusick. During the late 1980s and 1990s, HUGO organized lively gene mapping meetings to accurately place genes on the genome as chromosomes were being sequenced. With the completion of the Human Genome Project, HUGO went through some transitions and self-reflection. In 2020, HUGO (which hosts a large annual scientific meeting and comprises the renowned HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee [HGNC], responsible for naming genes, and an outstanding Ethics Committee) was merged with the Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS; which defines the correct nomenclature for variation description) and the Human Variome Project (HVP; championed by the late Richard Cotton) into a single organization that is committed to assembling human genomic variation from all over the world. This consolidated effort, under a new Executive Board and seven focused committees, will facilitate efficient and effective communication and action to bring the benefits of increasing knowledge of genome diversity and biology to people all over the world., (© 2021 The Authors. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

John Sulston changed the way we do science, not once, but three times - initially with the complete cell lineage of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans , next with completion of the genome sequences of the worm and human genomes and finally with his strong and active advocacy for open data sharing. His contributions were widely recognized and in 2002 he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine.

The Human Genome Project (HGP) is one of the most important international achievements in life sciences, to which Japanese scientists made remarkable contributions. In the early 1980s, Akiyoshi Wada pioneered the first project for the automation of DNA sequencing technology. Ken-ichi Matsubara exhibited exceptional leadership to launch the comprehensive human genome program in Japan. Hideki Kambara made a major contribution by developing a key device for high-speed DNA sequencers, which enabled scientists to construct human genome draft sequences. The RIKEN team led by Yoshiyuki Sakaki (the author) played remarkable roles in the draft sequencing and completion of chromosomes 21, 18, and 11. Additionally, the Keio University team led by Nobuyoshi Shimizu made noteworthy contributions to the completion of chromosomes 22, 21, and 8. In April 2003, the Japanese team joined the international consortium in declaring the completion of the human genome sequence. Consistent with the HGP mandate, Japan has successfully developed a wide range of ambitious genomic sciences.

LeRoy Walters was at the center of public debate about emerging biological technologies, even as "biotechnology" began to take root. He chaired advisory panels on human gene therapy, the human genome project, and patenting DNA for the congressional Office of Technology Assessment. He chaired the subcommittee on Human Gene Therapy for NIH's Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee. He was also a regular advisor to Congress, the executive branch, and academics concerned about policy governing emerging biotechnologies. In large part due to Prof. Walters, the Kennedy Institute of Ethics was one of the primary sources of talent in bioethics, including staff who populated policy and science agencies dealing with reproductive and genetic technologies, such as NIH and OTA. His legacy lies not only in his writings, but in those people, documents, and discussions that guided biotechnology policy in the United States for three decades.

The genomics community has frequently compared advances in sequencing to advances in microelectronics. Lately there have been many claims, including by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), that genomics is outpacing developments in computing as measured by Moore's law - the notion that computers double in processing capability per dollar spent every 18-24 months. Celebrations of the "$1000 genome" and other speed-related sequencing milestones might be dismissed as a distraction from genomics' slowness in delivering clinical breakthroughs, but the fact that such celebrations have been persistently encouraged by the NHGRI reveals a great deal about the priorities and expectations of the American general public, the intended audience of the genomics-computing comparison. By delving into the history of speculative thinking about sequencing and computing, this article demonstrates just how much more receptive to high-risk/high-payoff ventures the NIH and the general public have become. The article also provides access to some of the roots and consequences of the association of "innovation talk" with genomics, and the means to look past that association to the less glamorous (but arguably much more important) contributions of the NHGRI to building the field of genomics.

In this article we examine the history of the production of microarray technologies and their role in constructing and operationalizing views of human genetic difference in contemporary genomics. Rather than the "turn to difference" emerging as a post-Human Genome Project (HGP) phenomenon, interest in individual and group differences was a central, motivating concept in human genetics throughout the twentieth century. This interest was entwined with efforts to develop polymorphic "genetic markers" for studying human traits and diseases. We trace the technological, methodological and conceptual strategies in the late twentieth century that established single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) as key focal points for locating difference in the genome. By embedding SNPs in microarrays, researchers created a technology that they used to catalog and assess human genetic variation. In the process of making genetic markers and array-based technologies to track variation, scientists also made commitments to ways of describing, cataloging and "knowing" human genetic differences that refracted difference through a continental geographic lens. We show how difference came to matter in both senses of the term: difference was made salient to, and inscribed on, genetic matter(s), as a result of the decisions, assessments and choices of collaborative and hybrid research collectives in medical genomics research.

A common account sees the human genome sequencing project of the 1990s as a "natural outgrowth" of the deciphering of the double helical structure of DNA in the 1950s. The essay aims to complicate this neat narrative by putting the spotlight on the field of human chromosome research that flourished at the same time as molecular biology. It suggests that we need to consider both endeavors - the human cytogeneticists who collected samples and looked down the microscope and the molecular biologists who probed the molecular mechanisms of gene function - to understand the rise of the human genome sequencing project and the current genomic practices. In particular, it proposes that what has often been described as the "molecularization" of cytogenetics could equally well be viewed as the turn of molecular biologists to human and medical genetics - a field long occupied by cytogeneticists. These considerations also have implications for the archives that are constructed for future historians and policy makers.

The Bermuda Principles for DNA sequence data sharing are an enduring legacy of the Human Genome Project (HGP). They were adopted by the HGP at a strategy meeting in Bermuda in February of 1996 and implemented in formal policies by early 1998, mandating daily release of HGP-funded DNA sequences into the public domain. The idea of daily sharing, we argue, emanated directly from strategies for large, goal-directed molecular biology projects first tested within the "community" of C. elegans researchers, and were introduced and defended for the HGP by the nematode biologists John Sulston and Robert Waterston. In the C. elegans community, and subsequently in the HGP, daily sharing served the pragmatic goals of quality control and project coordination. Yet in the HGP human genome, we also argue, the Bermuda Principles addressed concerns about gene patents impeding scientific advancement, and were aspirational and flexible in implementation and justification. They endured as an archetype for how rapid data sharing could be realized and rationalized, and permitted adaptation to the needs of various scientific communities. Yet in addition to the support of Sulston and Waterston, their adoption also depended on the clout of administrators at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the UK nonprofit charity the Wellcome Trust, which together funded 90% of the HGP human sequencing effort. The other nations wishing to remain in the HGP consortium had to accommodate to the Bermuda Principles, requiring exceptions from incompatible existing or pending data access policies for publicly funded research in Germany, Japan, and France. We begin this story in 1963, with the biologist Sydney Brenner's proposal for a nematode research program at the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) at the University of Cambridge. We continue through 2003, with the completion of the HGP human reference genome, and conclude with observations about policy and the historiography of molecular biology.

The practical realization of genomics has meant a growing realization that variant interpretation is a major barrier to practical use of DNA sequence data. The late Professor Dick Cotton devoted his life to innovation in molecular genetics and was a prime mover in the international response to the need to understand the "variome." His leadership resulted in the launch first of the Human Genetic Variation Society and then, in 2006, an international agreement to launch the Human Variome Project (HVP), aimed at data integration enabled by standards and infrastructure of the databases of variants being identified in families with a range of inherited disorders. The project attracted a network of affiliates across 81 countries and earned formal recognition by UNESCO, which now hosts its biennial meetings. It has also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the World Health Organization. Future progress will depend on longer term secure funding and integration with the efforts of the genomics community where the rapid advances in sequencing technology have enabled variant capture on a previously unimaginable scale. Efforts are underway to integrate the efforts of HVP with those of the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health to provide a lasting legacy of Dick Cotton's vision., (© 2016 WILEY PERIODICALS, INC.)

In this paper, I propose a strategy for navigating newly available archives in the study of late-twentieth century genomics. I demonstrate that the alleged 'explosion of data' characteristic of genomics-and of contemporary science in general-is not a new problem and that historians of earlier periods have dealt with information overload by relying on the 'perspective of time': the filtering effect the passage of time naturally exerts on both sources and memories. I argue that this reliance on the selective capacity of time results in inheriting archives curated by others and, consequently, poses the risk of reifying ahistorical scientific discourses. Through a preliminary examination of archives documenting early attempts at mapping and sequencing the human genome, I propose an alternative approach, in which historians proactively problematize and improve available sources. This approach provides historians with a voice in the socio-political management of scientific heritage and advances methodological innovations in the use of oral histories. It also provides a narrative framework in which to address big science initiatives by following second order administrators, rather than individual scientists. The new genomic archives thus represent an opportunity for historians to take an active role in current debates concerning 'big data' and critically embed the humanities in pressing global problems., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The Human Genome Archive Project (HGAP) aimed to preserve the documentary heritage of the UK's contribution to the Human Genome Project (HGP) by using archival theory to develop a suitable methodology for capturing the results of modern, collaborative science. After assessing past projects and different archival theories, the HGAP used an approach based on the theory of documentation strategy to try to capture the records of a scientific project that had an influence beyond the purely scientific sphere. The HGAP was an archival survey that ran for two years. It led to ninety scientists being contacted and has, so far, led to six collections being deposited in the Wellcome Library, with additional collections being deposited in other UK repositories. In applying documentation strategy the HGAP was attempting to move away from traditional archival approaches to science, which have generally focused on retired Nobel Prize winners. It has been partially successful in this aim, having managed to secure collections from people who are not 'big names', but who made an important contribution to the HGP. However, the attempt to redress the gender imbalance in scientific collections and to improve record-keeping in scientific organisations has continued to be difficult to achieve., (Copyright © 2015 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Let's face it. There is no way of writing about the last half century of genetics without getting a little bit excitable. All of the terms in the title of this piece have been used by otherwise level-headed geneticists to describe the pace of change in genetics over the past few years. The thing is--they are right. Genetics is moving faster and faster. Five years ago, few people would have predicted that we would be where we are today. Five years from now, presumably, it will seem like 2015 was some kind of Dark Age when nothing much was happening. So it would be easy to lose perspective on the achievements of the past, or to assume that nothing much was happening in genetics until recently. However, everything that is happening in genetics now rests on the foundations built up over the past century, and particularly the past half century. And through that time, this journal has been a part of that story., (© 2015 The Author. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health © 2015 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians).)

This article recounts some of the early days of the Human Genome Project, covering the important and sometimes controversial role that complementary DNA-based approaches played in the discovery and mapping of the majority of human genes. It also describes my involvement in this effort and my lab's development of methods for rapid sequence identification and mapping of human genes., (Copyright © 2014 by the Genetics Society of America.)

In this paper, I will reread the history of molecular genetics from a psychoanalytical angle, analysing it as a case history. Building on the developmental theories of Freud and his followers, I will distinguish four stages, namely: (1) oedipal childhood, notably the epoch of model building (1943-1953); (2) the latency period, with a focus on the development of basic skills (1953-1989); (3) adolescence, exemplified by the Human Genome Project, with its fierce conflicts, great expectations and grandiose claims (1989-2003) and (4) adulthood (2003-present) during which revolutionary research areas such as molecular biology and genomics have achieved a certain level of normalcy--have evolved into a normal science. I will indicate how a psychoanalytical assessment conducted in this manner may help us to interpret and address some of the key normative issues that have been raised with regard to molecular genetics over the years, such as 'relevance', 'responsible innovation' and 'promise management'.

The history of science shows a shift from single-investigator 'little science' to increasingly large, expensive, multinational, interdisciplinary and interdependent 'big science'. In physics and allied fields this shift has been well documented, but the rise of collaboration in the life sciences and its effect on scientific work and knowledge has received little attention. Research in biology exhibits different historical trajectories and organisation of collaboration in field and laboratory - differences still visible in contemporary collaborations such as the Census of Marine Life and the Human Genome Project. We employ these case studies as strategic exemplars, supplemented with existing research on collaboration in biology, to expose the different motives, organisational forms and social dynamics underpinning contemporary large-scale collaborations in biology and their relations to historical patterns of collaboration in the life sciences. We find the interaction between research subject, research approach as well as research organisation influencing collaboration patterns and the work of scientists., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The sequence of the human genome has dramatically accelerated biomedical research. Here I explore its impact, in the decade since its publication, on our understanding of the biological functions encoded in the genome, on the biological basis of inherited diseases and cancer, and on the evolution and history of the human species. I also discuss the road ahead in fulfilling the promise of genomics for medicine.

Having mapped the human genome, the Human Genome Project maintains that certain genes can be linked to specific diseases and certain forms of human behavior. This breakthrough, it is hoped, will lead to the effective treatment, even the elimination of serious, debilitating illnesses for all groups of people. However, because the project conjures up memories of eugenics, the project raises concerns about its potential for identifying and linking diseases and social conditions (e.g., criminal behavior) to certain groups. This article places the Human Genome Project in historical context in terms of its resemblance to the eugenics movement in America and a period in social work history when the profession embraced eugenics and was guided by the movement's premises in its response to poor people.