To most of us, the question for CRISPR is “when” not “will” it get a Nobel Prize. However, there are still questions over “when”, “who” will get the credit, and which Nobel Prize it will even be. The prize for Physiology and Medicine was given Monday for “discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm”, then the prize for Physics  for detection of gravitational waves, and now the Chemistry award “for developing cryo-electron microscopy for the high-resolution structure determination of biomolecules in solution”.

Another year and another year of wondering for CRISPR and a potential Nobel prize (let’s assume it doesn’t win for literature or peace later this week). Last year we were already getting stories about how it was missing out – “CRISPR loses Nobel to tiny machines” – and stories about this year’s award still mentioned CRISPR as a “an oft-cited contender during the Nobel award season”.

…

The fact that this question can be asked makes a strong case for how impactful CRISPR is perceived. A small twitter poll from Hank Greely (@HankGreelyLSJU) had odds about even for medicine and chemistry but with neither as the main prediction. I’ll go ahead and predict that while “neither” was correct for 2017 it won’t be correct forever.