User:Incennative23/Selman Waksman

Lead
These results were later confirmed by Elizabeth Bugie Gregory, whose name was also published on "Streptomycin, a Substance Exhibiting Antibiotic Activity Against Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria" with the Schatz and Waksman. However, Bugie’s name was not on the second key paper in 1944, which was regarding the efficacy of streptomycin against tuberculosis in test tubes, as Schatz claims Bugie was not involved with the experiment. Bugie was also not given credit for her work on streptomycin, nor was she listed on the patent proposal, as she signed an affidavit stating that she did not have any contribution in discovering streptomycin. This was submitted under an attorney of the Rutgers Research and Endowment Foundation.

The details and credit for the discovery of streptomycin and its usefulness as an antibiotic were strongly contested by Schatz, eventually leading to litigation. However, it was possible that Waksman did not see Schatz’s contribution as significantly as Schatz did. Waksman noted that Schatz was away at the military in 1943, adding that he was only in the lab for three months and only played a small role in discovering streptomycin. Waksman and Rutgers settled out of court with Schatz, resulting in financial remuneration and entitlement to "legal and scientific credit as co-discoverer of streptomycin."

Schatz protested being left out of the award, even sending a letter to the King of Sweden, King Gustav the Sixth, but the State did not have any influence over the Nobel Prize Committee’s decision and they ruled that he was a mere lab assistant working under an eminent scientist.