many bio researchers lack enough trainings on math and logic, this reflects a lot on experiment design and explanation, none more obvious than stats application.

stats analysis is used so often, yet few researchers really understand it. science news former editor-in-chief gottfried had quite some insights into it. i think biostats should be a mandatory course in biomed study.

go back to your topic, though life science seemed less prestigious than physics and chemistry, the fact is the latter 2 areas reach bottleneck stages, bieng already so advanced that new breakthroughs seem more and more difficult. physics almost solely focuses on those boring microscopic particles; chemistry is more bizarre, most recent laureates are biochemists!

only biomed winners truly made exciting discoveries, amy i sat this?

btw, where did you find this claim
" many only count phys and chem for nobel science laureates"