hi KimWipes and everyone
I like this thread :-) I really enjoy reading what everyone is saying :-)
Would anyone else like to win the Nobel prize?

love satchi

Your definition of bias looks a bit loose. Bias could be procedural/systemic rather than introduced through actual discrimination on the part of the committee. So, American scientific output could be more internationally noticeable/prevalent and so is rewarded more often. Equally, the lower level of female/ethnic minority awards could be a reflection of the lower levels of women/ethnic minorities in the academy in the period that Nobels have been awarded (major incremental change in structures would generally have a long-term impact - it would be the shading of probabilities over time). Finally, looking at previous awards (particularly over a period which has experienced major social changes across the world) is not necessarily a good way of informing predictions about future awards.

Ghandi was nominated for the peace prize 5 times and never won! So there we have it, if Ghandi can slip through the net how thorough is the voting process? I'll never win as I'm not in the categories, unless I do something amazing for world peace, lol and evn then peace prizes seem to go a lot to heads of state/high up gov officials or leaders and I'm not on of those either. :-/ I' not sure about how the science prizes work but I pretty much guess the voting does have bias.

I agree with most of what is said on this thread. Like you KimWipes, I have always dreamt of winning a Nobel Prize in Medicine. Althought I am now 23, I was told like you since school days that I possess the potential to win it if I dedicate my life for science. However, after studying at university and meeting Mrs Right, I seldom think about the Nobel Prize. Instead, I think my (and your) efforts are better focused in SERVING HUMANITY. I came to realize that the yearning for an international scientific recognition is in my view dangerous, as it diverts your focus from scientific interest to recognition interest. Before long, you will feel disconnected from science, your whole career becomes a struggle and your days of youth lost in pursuing something that is unlikely to be a reality. What matters is what you think of yourself and not what people think of you, and I think you should be tremendously proud of your achievements in receiving those many educational awards.

Hi again Kim. Although you got some interesting replies I think most people totally missed your point. But on a brighter note, women in the future won't be so left out of science, because of the fantastic efforts that have created schemes like Athena Swan and Project Juno which will correct the problem of women being left out of science and technology careers. I think we will see many more women rightfully getting Nobel prizes in the future, but we still have a long way to go.

Hi metabanalysis, thanks for the information on Athena Swan and Project Juno and I hope these projects correct the problem. All I was trying to say was to show that based on the past data for the winners demographics, there is a considerable bias in selection of Nobel prize winners and certain demographical. cultural or religious characteristics are more likely to win than the others. If this is true, it means that the Nobel-worth discoveries may not be as important as they get media attention and there are several important discoveries that do not get the credit and reputation they deserve.