Nobel Prizes Keep Ignoring Women and Black Scientists – And It’s Getting Old
By Alexandra Thompson
Another year, another round of Nobel Prizes in science. And once again, the winners’ list looks disappointingly familiar: all men, all from wealthy countries, and not a single Black researcher among them.
This isn’t just bad luck. It’s a pattern—one that keeps sidelining brilliant minds who don’t fit the Nobel committee’s usual mold.
The Rosalind Problem
Take this year’s winners in medicine, Gary Ruvkun and Victor Ambros. Their groundbreaking work on microRNAs—which could lead to new cancer treatments—was built on years of research, much of it co-authored by Rosalind Lee, Ambros’ own wife. The Nobel committee gave her a shoutout on social media but stopped short of actually giving her the prize. Apparently, one medal per couple was enough.
Sound familiar? It should. Back in 1962, James Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins won for discovering DNA’s double helix. But their breakthrough relied on Rosalind Franklin’s crucial X-ray images—work they used without her permission. Franklin died before the prize was awarded, and the Nobel’s no-posthumous-honors rule meant she was erased from the story.
The Numbers Don’t Lie
Since 1901, only 64 women have won Nobel Prizes out of 972 total laureates. In physics? Just five women have ever won. This year’s physics prize went to two men (again) for their work on machine learning.
For Black scientists, the record is even worse. Not one Black researcher has ever won a Nobel in science. Think about that. Pioneers like Charles Drew (who figured out how to store blood plasma) and Percy Julian (who synthesized life-saving drugs from plants) were snubbed. Meanwhile, the peace and literature prizes have only gone to 17 Black winners in total.
Location, Location, Location
Where you live also seems to matter. More than half of all Nobels have gone to North Americans. Winners from poorer countries? Almost all had moved to the U.S. or Europe by the time they won.
Some argue this just reflects who’s in science. But when committees highlight a scientist’s work (like Lee’s) as essential to a discovery—then leave them off the winner’s list—it’s not just an oversight. It’s a choice.
Why Should We Care?
Because Nobels shape how the world sees science. For most people, these awards are the only time scientists make headlines. When the same kinds of people keep winning, it sends a message: This is who does important science.
The Nobel committees say they’re trying. Since 2019, they’ve asked nominators to consider gender, race, and geography. But since then? Only six more women have won in science—and still zero Black laureates.
Time for Real Change
The Nobel Prizes are stuck in the past. Alfred Nobel’s 19th-century rules—like limiting winners to three living people—don’t fit today’s collaborative research. But tradition isn’t an excuse to keep ignoring talent.
If the Nobels want to stay relevant, they need to do better. Not just for fairness, but because science is bigger than one old man’s vision. The next generation of researchers is watching—and they deserve to see themselves in the winners.