Securing the Greatest Scholars of the World is the Quickest Way for a University to Develop Here we meet one of the greatest scholars of the world along with 20 year-old freshmen from all over the world who will take on the future. They are Dr. Kurt Wuthrich and the students of the Underwood International College. Dr. Kurt Wuthrich is noted for being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2002 for developing a method of examining 3-dimensional protein structures with a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy at the solution state. He has elucidated the structure of the prion protein, the cause of mad cow disease, and also contributed to developing new medicines such as gleevec, a drug for leukemia. Dr Yu Sam Kim, the dean of the graduate school met with Dr. Kurt Wuthrich who is teaching at the UIC this year as a Shinhan distinguished professor. You are a Shinhan distinguished professor of the Underwood International College(UIC). What are your impressions of teaching at Yonsei? What do you think about the UIC? - I think the UIC is well-organized. The students speak excellent English and they seem to be very enthusiastic academically. I have noticed that they are so determined, not even one student has been absent. I had a class of 9, and they all showed outstanding abilities apart from one or two. Also, the staff at the UIC is very capable and devoted, and I get a lot of support from them. Everything has been going smoothly. What do you think of the future of the UIC? - The UIC is a new program with only freshmen at present. I believe it is not the UIC's goal to achieve in the short term but in the long term. I don't think one could forecast an outcome that will occur in 10 years time right now. Who knows how successful these students will be in the future? I think we shouldn't predict about the UIC's future immediately but watch the progress in a long term perspective. I hope the UIC develops into a system that educates first-class talents. You received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2002 for developing a method of examining 3-dimensional protein structures with Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. Could you tell us about the course of winning the Nobel Prize? Tell us about an episode during the research process. - I majored in physical education originally. Then I studied physics, chemistry, and mathematics, and eventually received my doctorate in inorganic chemistry. At first I used ESR (electronic spin resonance) and NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance). These are very basic physical methods. I also used metals. Honestly I don't know why, but people felt that I accomplished something very special, so the Bell Telephone Laboratories gave me a great position and I was offered a lot of equipment. This is where I found out people were doing research using proteins. I studied physics and inorganic chemistry, and because I used metal ions, I immediately realized that using ESR and NMR could be a big contribution towards the study of proteins. And through these methods I could discover errors from the past research and correct them. I was pretty famous since I started my research about protein structures using NMR. I became the top scholar in this area. My research was considered something special because nobody else had done it before. I was starting research in a completely new area. With this momentum, I was offered a position in Switzerland as a professor and started a full-scale research. You might need a lot of money to get the instruments for your research. How did you convince the administrative authorities? - I got a degree in chemistry and not in physics while studying for my PhD in Basel. The head of the physics department said it was inappropriate for a student who studied physical education to use expensive instrument, so I switched my major to chemistry. But the funny thing was that I used materials and instrument in the physics department although I was majoring in chemistry. And by chance a professor who had EPR (electron paramagnetic resonance) instrument was out of the country and nobody was using it, and somebody taught me how to use it. This was how I started my research in the area, and I followed my post-doctoral training at UC Berkeley after I received a degree there. I met Professor Robert E. Connick at Berkeley and we worked together with an adequate research budget. Afterwards, I went to the Bell Telephone Laboratories in 1967. They provided me with all the support they could afford to get the best results in the best condition. Then in 1969, I went back to Switzerland. The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) examined how much the Bell Telephone Laboratories gave me and offered the same equipment and more financial support. In fact, I was well-known after a year at the Bell Telephone Laboratories and I didn't think I had to go back to Switzerland because there was everything I needed at the Bell Lab. However, Switzerland provided the same treatment I got from the Bell Telephone Laboratories and the best research environment. It might sound unreal, but I don't think my requests had ever been rejected. As a pioneering scientist, what do you think about the future of life science? - There are many research results on the structure and interaction of molecules in structural biology at present. I think we could find out a method to discover the inside structure of a cell in the near future. There are ways already to find out the structure of proteins or nucleic acids. These studies are being done currently and are going to be developing in the future as well. For example, nobody was interested in RNAi (RNA interfere) merely 10 years ago, but now it is a big area for research. Thus, there should be many areas we haven't started studying and we will be able to shed light on those areas. There will be many more events and we will be able to know more about many things. You have carried your research in Switzerland and also in the United States. Which environment and research method do you prefer? What would be different if you compared the research in Switzerland, in the U.S., and in Korea? - The system in Korea is different from that of Switzerland and Europe in several ways. In Europe, the university provides assigned staff such as a secretary or assistant. I have heard it is not like that in Korea. And in the case of the US, some famous universities support start-up funds at the beginning of a research. An assistant professor would get about 500 thousand to a million dollars. Of course it depends on whether you need equipment or not. Scholars don't accept unless the university supports the research sufficiently. And the universities compete with each other to get great scholars, offering better conditions. This is very different from Korean universities. To compare the American system with the European system, the European system guarantees a wider area of study for a longer period. In the U.S. you are expected to do everything fast and to present the results as soon as possible. I think in this sense the system in the States is similar to the situation in Korea. However, recently the U.S. has been adopting a lot of European ways. The Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) selects scientists in discretion and gives them about 10 years of time, helping them experiment and study. But I think whether it is in the United States, in Europe, or in Korea, the most important thing is to choose an outstanding scholars. What do you think about the research standards in the field of life science in Korea and at Yonsei? And what is the most important factor in improving the level of research? - The most important factor is the ability of the scholars. It would mean nothing if there were just mediocre scientists no matter how much research funding is put in. The next important thing is to gather smart students. We should open up the doors for people who want to be scientists. There should be more opportunity to go abroad and study without any conditions or restrictions. For example, in Spain or Poland, students could receive a post-doctoral fellowship if they wanted to study abroad. But as far as I know, Korean students are unable to get help from the government. I think these policies are too harsh for future scholars. Do you have anything to say to the students of Yonsei U? - I think Yonsei University is already a great university. And I also judge highly of the positive effort to advance further. The reason why world famous universities like Harvard or Yale rank at number 1 or 2 is because they try hard to improve themselves. That is why the university rank does not change largely. But one thing I want to point out is that basic sciences such as physics, chemistry, and biology should be given more weight at Yonsei. The college of science is different from other departments. The lawyers in Korea cannot be compared to American lawyers, and Korean history cannot be compared to American history. But basic sciences should be compared and competed, not within Korea, not with Switzerland, but on a global level. Of course, I understand that this might be considered unfair to people in other areas, but I think the college of science should be given much more support. I anticipate that Yonsei University will improve its international competitive power through the development of the basic sciences.