Bench Strength
California-style collaboration, entrepreneurship,
and a “do-it-yourself” attitude
A mother walks with her child–who wears a protective mask–along a street in Hong Kong during the SARS outbreak in 2003
Right now, all over the world, PhD scientists are at work answering some of the most complex questions in human health. And chances are, when and where a breakthrough comes, you’ll find a Stanford mind in the mix. Nobelists, MacArthur “genius” fellows, Howard Hughes Investigators– on the “must-recruit” list for every top academic institution in the world–Stanford PhDs are in high demand. We talked with just four to find out if–wherever they are, whatever they’re doing–there’s Stanford DNA in their work.
Karl Deisseroth, PhD ’98, MD ’00, hasn’t strayed from the Farm. He runs a lab in the Clark Center, researching the “native language of the brain.” Just north of Stanford at UCSF, Joe DeRisi, PhD ’99, helped identify the SARS virus and is now working on new approaches to parasitology, virology, and immunology that integrate technologies and chemistries. Across the country at Yale, Susan Kaech, PhD ’99, also works on vaccines–exploring how memory T-cells emerge during infection and vaccination. Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, Peter Kim, PhD ’85, has left his own research on viral membrane fusion, which had significant impact in deconstructing HIV infection, to become president of Merck Research Laboratories.
All four gifted researchers–at the top of whatever game they choose to play–will tell you: The little bit of Stanford they carry keeps them optimistic.
Susan Kaech first fell in love with research in Charles Laird’s human genetics lab at the University of Washington. That love affair was strengthened considerably by the collaborative and supportive nature of Stanford’s developmental biology department, home to her thesis work in Dr. Stuart Kim’s lab. “When I arrived at Stanford for student interviews and saw Palm Drive, I was first awed by the openness and beauty of the campus,” she says. “During the interview, I was even more impressed with the excellence in research and the up-beat and outgoing graduate students.”
“In lessons learned from Stanford, my first advice to students today,” says Kaech, “is to drop the undergrad mentality of intense competition and studying for tests. Research is more about thinking out of the box and applying your knowledge to solve problems. It is also built on collaboration, where you work together and share information and reagents to foster each others’ pursuits.”
Adds Peter Kim, “Biochemistry at Stanford was an outstanding research environment. Arthur Kornberg, the patriarch of the department, had built a highly collaborative place. Back then, we actually pooled research dollars. Everyone shared labs. The PI, the grad students, and fellows for many teams were in one room, so there was much sharing.”
The real breakthroughs can happen when researchers pursue their work, no matter where it takes them. Macarthur Fellow Joe DeRisi, PhD ’99, leads his colleagues at UCSF in exactly that spirit.
Kim absorbed a life lesson at Stanford. “Very quickly, I learned humility,” he says. “The quality of the scientists, the grad students, and post-docs was so high. It was humbling but inspiring. What I found unique was a real spirit of objective inquiry. Everyone would dig in and attack a scientific argument, to see if they could take it further. But the attack was on the problem, not on each other.”
Deisseroth–a multidisciplinary collaborator even when he’s all alone–calls himself an “odd mix of psychiatrist and bioengineer.” He describes his work on the brain in terms Magellan might have used: “It’s like exploring a new continent, trying to understand and speak the language of the brain. It’s very interdisciplinary. You need good optics, good electrophysiology, good surgery, good behavioral measures, imaging, and computational ability. Stanford is an ideal place for these studies because it is strong in so many disciplines. And the hallmark is openness and a collaborative culture. Being here in the Clark Center, at the interface of medicine and engineering, is ideal. The diversity of talent at the university is replicated in microcosm in my lab. Plus, these are talented people who are also friendly, social, and interactive.”
An entrepreneurial, do-it-yourself attitude was also the order of the day at Stanford. Remembers DeRisi, “My advisor, Patrick Brown, taught me many lessons about how to pursue science and run a lab. He created a do-it-yourself culture. If you didn’t have the instrument or technology you needed, he believed you should go off and build it. So many scientists now get their reagents and instruments right off the shelf, and that limits them to what is available.”
In true frontier spirit, Brown also encouraged DeRisi to take risks. “Pat emphasized that it was very important to try bold, risky innovations even if they might fail,” he says. “He stressed that it was okay to pursue things with a low probability of success. I do the same in my own lab, trying to inspire students to be ambitious, educated risk-takers, unafraid of failure.”
The underlying questions are big: What is energy? What is awareness? What is hope?
The thrill of discovery
Peter Kim, PhD ’85, leads Merck Research Laboratories to think big about its impact on human health.
The right kind of risk-taking leads to success, and all four PhDs have relished that experience. For DeRisi, solving the SARS mystery was the moment to date. “It was thrilling and intense because it was a global emergency,” he says, “and we had this unique technology we thought could help.” Deisseroth’s most exciting breakthrough happened when he and his colleagues first used light to activate the brain circuit in a mammal, thereby controlling behavior. “It was a transcendent moment,” he says. “It opened the possibility that we could someday use the native language of the brain. It isn’t necessarily easy or plausible, but now it is possible.”
Kaech continues her work on T-cells, “…trying to figure out why we never get the same infection twice and how we can make vaccines better. Part of our long-term immunity to infection depends on a small number of long-lived T-cells preserved after the first infection to fight off reinfection. My lab is trying to understand the genetic pathways that create this special population of ‘memory’ T-cells. And, if we can get the memory T-cells to turn against tumors, selectively seeing some cells as pathogens, we’ll be able to improve on what chemotherapy does now,” she says. “And if we can turn those memory T-cells down a notch, there would be some relief from auto-immune diseases. Once we understand more about these cells, there will be some wonderful applications.”
Kim has his eye on different challenges now that he’s leading an enterprise rather than a lab. “In our labs, we can bring tremendous resources–16,000 people and $8 billion per year on R&D–to bear on serious problems in human health,” he says. “Our big questions are: How do we use those resources to have the most impact? Where do we aim? The overarching goal is straightforward–making the most difference with drugs and vaccines.” He cites the example of Gardasil, the new cervical cancer vaccine. “That was a breakthrough 20 years in the making,” he says. “Now we’re working with the Gates Foundation and other nonprofits to figure out how to get the vaccine out into the world, where it can have even more impact.”
Money, money, money–and opportunity
Susan Kaech, PhD ’99, benefited from mentoring at Stanford as a graduate student, and now embodies what she experienced–giving students in her lab the experience of an open, collaborative, willing-to-share environment.
In research, brains are critical. But as the cynical emcee observes in Cabaret, “Money makes the world go around.” Kaech puts a tough spin on that point: “Last year, I spent half my time writing grants–time my brain could have spent on research. The stimulus money was short-term aid. In fact, the entire annual medical research budget in the United States is only around $30 billion. Do you know how much progress and creativity we could generate if we didn’t have to fight so hard for research dollars?”
DeRisi couldn’t agree more: “Many researchers don’t have the support they need, and we have a backlog of post-docs lingering around, unable to get a job. I really think the major barrier to young researchers today is getting a job and getting funding.”
Funding aside, all four PhDs are enthusiastic about what’s next in research. Says Kim, “Having the genome sequenced is paying off in tangible ways. It is changing how we discover drugs. There are huge advances in DNA technology and stem cells. Yet the economy is suffering, and it’s harder for young scientists to get off to an independent start because there is a tendency to fund ‘sure things’ rather than highrisk/ high-reward research. Biology is going to have a lot to do with solving the world’s issues–food supply, preserving the environment, clean energy, understanding individualized health and personalized medicine. There are major opportunities, but we need to invest to make them real.”
In an investment-challenged era, how do these four stay hopeful? Perhaps Deisseroth can tell us as he continues his work on the brain: “If we more deeply understand the nature, physiology, and biology of the brain, the impact will be profound. The underlying questions are big: What is energy? What is awareness? What is hope?” While he’s decoding those mysteries, these Stanford-trained researchers are living the answers.
Bench Stars At a Glance
Karl Deisseroth, PhD ’98, MD ’00
- Associate Professor of Bioengineering and Psychiatry, Stanford University
- PhD in neuroscience, Stanford University ’98
- MD, Stanford University ’00
- BA in biochemical sciences, Harvard College ’92
Research Concentration:
Developing optical neuroengineering technologies for noninvasive imaging and control of brain circuits, as they operate within living intact tissue, in real time
Selected Honors:
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute Early Career Scientist
- Schuetze Prize in Neurobiology, Columbia University
- Lawrence C. Katz Prize in Neurobiology
- Brilliant 10 Award, Popular Science
- William M. Keck Foundation Medical Research Award
- MIT Technology Review: Top 10 Technologies (TR10) of 2007 Award
- McKnight Foundation Scholar Award
Joseph DeRisi, PhD ’99
- Professor and Vice Chairman of the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, UCSF
- Joint appointment at the California Institute for Quantitative Biomedical Research (QB3)
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator
- PhD in biochemistry, Stanford University ’99
- BA in biochemistry and molecular biology, UC Santa Cruz ’92
Research Concentration:
Genomic approaches to the study of infectious disease
Selected Honors:
- Heinz Award for Technology, the Economy and Employment
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator
- MacArthur Fellow
Susan Kaech, PhD ’99
- Associate Professor, Department of Immunobiology, Yale University
- PhD in developmental biology, Stanford University, ’99
- BS, University of Washington, Seattle ’93
Research Concentration:
Mechanisms of memory T-cell development
Selected Honors:
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute Early Career Scientist
- Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers
- American Asthma Foundation Award
- Cancer Research Investigator Award
- Edward Mallinckrodt Jr. Foundation Award
Peter Kim, PhD ’85
- President, Merck Research Laboratories
- PhD in biochemistry, Stanford University ’85
- BS in chemistry, Cornell University ’79
Research Concentration:
Leads Merck’s drug and vaccine research and development activities. His own research work at the Whitehead Institute (MIT) as a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator focused on discovering how proteins cause membranes to fuse.
Selected Honors:
- Member, National Academy of Sciences
- Member, Institute of Medicine
- Fellow, American Academy of Arts and Sciences
- National Academy of Sciences Award in Molecular Biology
- Eli Lilly Award in Biological Chemistry
- Hans Neurath Award of the Protein Society
- Samsung Foundation Ho-Am Prize in Basic Science