THE SCIENTIST
(CONTENTS PAGE & FULL ISSUE FOLLOW THIS SHORT MESSAGE)
******************************************************
Dear Reader:
Many of you have been accessing THE SCIENTIST, free of
charge, on the Internet for over a year. We thank you for
your interest.
Would you please take a moment to let us have your views,
suggestions, and comments about THE SCIENTIST to enable us
to better meet your needs?
We would particularly like to know:
1. If you are working in an academic, commercial, or
government organization?
2. After you ftp each issue of THE SCIENTIST, how many
others do you share it with?
3. Do you usually ftp the file or prefer searching it via
Gopher or WAIS?
4. If it can be arranged, would you prefer receiving each
issue, automatically, in your electronic mail box?
5. Finally, do you have any suggestions for ways of
improving our file or format?
Thanks and best wishes,
Eugene Garfield
Publisher
THE SCIENTIST, 3600 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104,U.S.A.
Phone :(215)243-2205 // Fax: (215)387-1266
E-mail:garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
=================
THE SCIENTIST
VOLUME 8, No:13 JUNE 27, 1994
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
===============================================================
Articles published in THE SCIENTIST reflect the views of their
authors and not the official views of the publication,
its editorial staff, or its ownership.
===============================================================
*** THE NEXT ISSUE OF THE SCIENTIST WILL APPEAR ON ***
*** JULY 11, 1994 ***
*** ***
*******************************************************
Subscription rates for the printed edition are:
In the United States: one year $58, two years $ 94
Canada : one year $82, two years $142
All other foreign : one year/air cargo $ 79
one year/ airmail $133
THE SCIENTIST
(Page numbers correspond to printed edition of
THE SCIENTIST)
FOR SEARCHING PURPOSES:
AU = author
TI = title of article
TY = type
PG = page
NEXT = next article
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : CONTENTS
PG : 3
============================================================
NEWS
BRIDGING THE GAP: The second part of a two-part series on
science in the courtroom looks at several ongoing efforts
aimed at establishing better communication between the
scientific and legal professions. Among the projects under
way is the development of a reference manual to help judges
evaluate scientific evidence and an examination by a
committee of scientists and lawyers of mechanisms to
identify potential court-appointed scientific experts
PG : 1
POMP AND CIRCUMSPECTION: Distinguished members of the
scientific community have received honorary degrees from
academic institutions over the past two months. Topics the
honorees have touched on at commencement ceremonies include
the need for social responsibility, evolving issues in
health care, and new career challenges
PG : 1
RISKY TIME FRAME: The members of the Risk Assessment and
Management Commission convened their first meeting last
month with their work cut out for them. Already delayed more
than two years in its formation, the commission has until
November to complete its congressional mandate. Complicating
their task, according to some members, is the need to define
the parameters of their charge
PG : 1
LACK OF UNDERSTANDING: A recent survey by the American
Museum of Natural History confirms similar studies that
indicate that, despite their professed interest in science,
Americans' understanding of the natural and physical world
is disturbingly low. Researchers say it is imperative that
this situation be reversed
PG : 3
OPINION
AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE: Social and ethical responsibilities
of research, the public's skepticism about science, equality
for women and minorities, and the increasing difficulty of
building a stable career in research were some of the issues
raised by leading science figures in their commencement
addresses to graduates this year. Several of the speeches
are excerpted here
PG : 12
COMMENTARY: The serendipitous collaboration of Rutgers
University and Merck & Co. Inc. that 50 years ago produced
streptomycin, the first effective treatment for
tuberculosis, serves as a paradigm for academia-industry
cooperation leading to biomedical discovery, says molecular
biologist Joachim Messing, director of the Waksman Institute
at Rutgers. Today's restrictive government regulations
concerning funding and procedures are stifling such
productive joint ventures, Messing declares
PG : 13
RESEARCH
COMPUTING BRAIN FUNCTIONS: Neuroscience research initiatives
have increased dramatically over the past several years,
and, ironically, computers--originally invented to duplicate
brain functions--are playing a leading role in investigating
neural mechanisms
PG : 15
HOT PAPERS: Microbiologist Kazuo Sugamura discusses his
paper on a breakthrough brought about by characterization of
a gene; astrophysicist Brian P. Schmidt reports on an
attempt to determine the value of the Hubble Constant; and
biochemist Douglas C. Rees relates his investigation of the
FeMo cofactor
PG : 16
TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
BIBLIOGRAPHY BREAKTHROUGHS: Increasingly, bibliographic-
database software is becoming an essential tool for
researchers producing papers, and improvements facilitating
direct importation of references from electronic sources are
becoming equally popular
PG : 18
PROFESSION
DUAL-PURPOSE GRANTS: In an effort to promote teaching and
research as equally important endeavors, the Research
Corporation initiated the Cottrell Scholars awards, grants
to third-year faculty to help them conduct research that
will involve their undergraduate students
PG : 21
NOBELIST DEREK H.R. BARTON, a Distinguished Professor of
Chemistry at Texas A&M University, has been named the
recipient of the 1995 Priestley Medal from the American
Chemical Society
PG : 22
SHORT TAKES
NOTEBOOK PG : 4
CARTOON PG : 4
LETTERS PG : 13
BIBLIOGRAPHIC-DATABASE SOFTWARE DIRECTORY PG : 19
NEW PRODUCTS PG : 20
OBITUARIES PG : 22
PEOPLE BRIEFS PG : 22
CROSSWORD PG : 22
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Science Luminaries In Limelight At 1994 Commencement
Exercises
AU : NEERAJA SANKARAN
TY : NEWS
PG : 1
Dozens of distinguished science figures have been among the
luminaries receiving honorary degrees and offering their
words of wisdom to graduating students throughout North
America over the past two months. Scientists so honored
include Francis S. Collins, director of the National Center
for Human Genome Research; Frank Press, former president of
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS); and Walter Massey,
past director of the National Science Foundation--as well as
Nobel laureates Kary Mullis and Michael Smith.
Unlike the students, who donned their caps and gowns to
receive formal acknowledgment of their academic
accomplishments, these individuals were feted for
achievement in their chosen professional fields. Although a
somewhat controversial issue (B. Spector, The Scientist,
June 24, 1991, page 1), the practice of granting honorary
degrees is a time-honored tradition in many schools, and the
awardees have been effusive in expressing their gratitude.
"It is a unique kind of honor that an institution with which
I have had no connection thinks my achievements are worth
recognizing," says Herman Goldstine, executive director of
the Philadelphia-based American Philosophical Society and a
recipient of an honorary doctor of science degree from
Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J. At various points
in his career, Goldstine, a mathematician who was educated
at the University of Chicago, has worked at the
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, the University of
Pennsylvania in Phil- adelphia, and Princeton University in
New Jersey, but never at Rutgers.
"It's very flattering," adds Goldstine, who was in charge of
building ENIAC (Electronic Numerical Integrator and
Computer), the world's first electronic computer, and
directed the development of the prototype for the first
modern computer, the IBM 700 series.
Upon accepting his honorary degree from Thomas Jefferson
University in Philadelphia, Jerome Kassirer, editor-in-chief
of the New England Journal of Medicine, said he felt like
the comedian Jack Benny, who once said, when given an honor,
"I don't deserve this award, but I have arthritis and I
don't deserve that, either."
Kassirer, a medical doctor and former teacher of some of the
faculty at Jefferson, gave a brief address at the graduation
ceremony, in which he exhorted the medical students to guard
the trust between doctor and patient. "Take the time to
listen to them.... Give a lot of yourself," he advised.
Pediatrician T. Berry Brazelton, in his speech to the
graduating medical students of Tufts University at its
Waltham, Mass., campus, gave similar advice, urging them "to
get off your pedestal and get your hands dirty," and to be
activists for justice and tolerance. Brazelton, who was
recognized for his role in addressing critical issues facing
children and parents, is a professor of psychiatry and human
development at Brown University in Providence, R.I.
The topics of health and medicine appeared very much on the
minds of other speakers, as well. Although not an honorary
degree recipient, former National Institutes of Health
director Bernadine Healy was the featured speaker at Vassar
College commencement ceremonies. Addressing graduates of the
Poughkeepsie, N.Y., school, Healy emphasized the importance
of those subjects, saying, "The lesson s from medicine
are really lessons for life.
"The transformation of our lives by advances in medicine
over the next few decades will...challenge all of us to
participate in decisions about what gifts have worth--
whether or not you are in medicine."
Henry Friesen, president of the Medical Research Council of
Canada, also touched on the subject in his address to
graduates at Canada's University of Western Ontario in
London, where he and former NAS president Press were
presented with honorary doctorates in science.
"Faced with the startling advances in treatment and
prevention of disease and disability, and with concepts of
health that may at times verge on the utopian, we do well to
keep in mind that there will always be 10 leading causes of
death, premature or otherwise," cautioned Friesen.
Keeping with the spirit of anticipation that pervades the
atmosphere at graduation ceremonies, several speakers
offered the students some practical tips on facing the
future.
"A career is like a vacation," said Thomas Weil, general
manager for research and development at Chicago-based Amoco
Chemical Co., addressing the graduates of the State
University of New York, Oswego, after receiving an honorary
doctorate.
Weil, a SUNY-Oswego alumnus, expanded on this theme, saying
that both endeavors require planning. "Be sure to have fun
and select a career that is exciting and stimulating," he
said. "Learn to manage the stresses and frustrations. Take
away and keep good memories, experiences, and stories."
Among other honorary degree recipients who were returning
either to their alma maters or hometowns was Jon Lien, head
of the Whale Research Group at Canada's Memorial University
of Newfoundland in St. John's. Lien revisited St. Olaf
College in Northfield, Minn., having graduated from there in
1962.
Kary Mullis, who shared the Nobel in chemistry last year for
his invention of the polymerase chain reaction and is now a
biotechnology consultant, was honored by the University of
South Carolina, located in his hometown of Columbia.
Urging graduates to be flexible in their career paths, and
unafraid in the face of mistakes, Mullis said, "Admit it
quickly and get into something else if you don't like where
you are."
1994'S HONOR ROLL
Unless otherwise mentioned, the following list includes
recipients of honorary doctorates in science, awarded to
those who have made significant contributions to science,
irrespective of their profession.
Brown University, Providence, R.I.
* Masaru Ibuka, cofounder and honorary chairman, Sony Corp.,
Japan.
* Robert MacPherson, chairman, department of pure
mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; for
achievements in the field of topology and work with Russian
mathematicians since the 1970s.
* Matthew D. Scharff, director, Albert Einstein Medical
College, Bronx, N.Y.; for research in immunology that has
led to antibody engineering and given insights into immune-
system cancers.
Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H.
* Jonas E. Salk, founding director, Salk Institute for
Biological Studies in La Jolla, Calif., and developer of the
first vaccine against polio.
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
* Maxine Singer, president, Carnegie Institution of
Washington, D.C.; for contributions in biochemistry and
human genetics.
Hobart and William Smith Colleges, Geneva, N.Y.
* Wangari Maathai, coordinator, Green Belt Movement and
former associate professor of anatomy, University of
Nairobi, Kenya; for her contributions to global
environmental movements.
* Priscilla A. Schaffer, chief, division of molecular
genetics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and a professor of
microbiology and molecular genetics at Harvard Medical
School.
Hood College, Frederick, Md.
* Shirley M. Malcom, head of the directorate for education
and human resources programs, American Association for the
Advancement of Science; for efforts to improve the education
of women and minorities.
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
* D.A. Henderson, Department of Health and Human Services
deputy assistant secretary for health, science, and the
environment; former deputy director, White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy; former dean, Johns Hopkins
School of Public Health.
* Richard S. Ross, emeritus dean, Johns Hopkins School of
Medicine.
Lafayette College, Easton, Pa.
* Jay M. Weiss, professor of psychiatry and behavioral
sciences, Emory University School of Medicine; for
achievements in experimental neurochemistry.
New York University
* Daniel Nathans, professor of microbiology and genetics,
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine; Howard Hughes Medical
Institute senior investigator; recipient of 1978 Nobel Prize
in physiology or medicine; for work in the area of genetic
mapping.
Philadelphia College of Pharmacy and Science
* Philip Needleman, senior vice president for research and
development, Monsanto Co., St. Louis; for achievements in
biomedical and biotechnology research.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N.Y.
* Jewel Plummer Cobb, principal investigator, ACCESS Center
and Network for Minorities in Science and Engineering,
California State University, Los Angeles; president,
emerita, California State University, Fullerton; for
work in cell physiology and advocacy for women in
science.
* Mary Lowe Good, Department of Commerce undersecretary for
technology.
Ripon College, Ripon, Wis.
* Sylvia A. Earle, deep-sea explorer and ocean environmental
researcher; adviser to National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration; for contri- butions to oceanic and
environmental research.
* Edward O. Wilson, Frank B. Baird, Jr. Professor of Science
at Harvard; for work on behalf of biodiversity and
endangered species.
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick
* Herman Heine Goldstine, executive director, American
Philosophical Society; for contributions to computer
sciences, mathematics, and the history of the computer and
mathematics.
* June E. Osborn, professor of epidemiology, University of
Michigan School of Public Health; professor of pediatrics
and communicable diseases, University of Michigan
Medical School; for contributions as chairwoman of the
United States National Commission on AIDS.
St. Lawrence University, Canton, N.Y.
* David G. Leach, director, Madison, Ohio, satellite
research station of Cleveland's Holden Arboretum; for
contributions to horticulture and plant genetics.
St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minn.
* Jon Lien, professor of ocean studies and psychology and
head, Whale Research Group, Memorial University of
Newfoundland, St. John's.
Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
* Michael Smith, professor of biochemistry, University of
British Columbia; recipient of 1993 Nobel Prize in
chemistry (honorary doctorate of laws).
Smith College, Northampton, Mass.
* Mary-Claire King, geneticist, University of California,
Berkeley.
* Rosalyn Sussman Yalow, senior medical investigator,
emerita, Veterans Administration Hospital, Bronx, N.Y.;
recipient of 1977 Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine.
State University of New York, Binghamton
* John Cairns, Jr., University Distinguished Professor,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; for
work on environmental management.
State University of New York, Oswego
* Thomas A. Weil, general manager for research and
development, Amoco Chemical Co., Chicago; for
environmental computing research.
State University of New York, Stony Brook
* Akito Arima, president, Institute of Physical and Chemical
Research, Tokyo; for research on nuclear structure.
* Joycelyn Elders, Surgeon General of the United States; for
contributions to medicine and public welfare (honorary
doctorate of humane letters).
Syracuse University, N.Y.
* Carl R. Woese, professor of microbiology, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; for work in microbial
genetics, evolution, and taxonomy.
Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia
* Jerome P. Kassirer, editor-in-chief, New England Journal
of Medicine.
* Takashi Sugimura, adviser to Japan's Ministry of Health
and Welfare; president, emeritus, National Cancer Center
of Japan.
Tufts University, Medford, Mass.
* T. Berry Brazelton, professor of psychiatry and human
development, Brown University; clinical professor of
pediatrics, emeritus, Harvard Medical School; for work
addressing critical issues facing children and parents in
society.
University of Cincinnati
* Barry C. Bishop, chairman, Committee for Research and
Exploration, National Geographic Society; for research on
extreme terrestrial environments.
University of Connecticut, Storrs
* Sylvia A. Earle (see Ripon College entry).
* Edith W. Martin, vice president and chief information
officer, International Telecommunications Satellite
Organization (INTELSAT); national adviser to Secretary of
Energy.
* Chang-Lin Tien, A. Martin Berlin Chair in Mechanical
Engineering and chancellor, University of California,
Berkeley; for research in heat-transfer technology.
University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington
* Anthony S. Fauci, director, National Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases; for clinical immunology research.
University of Illinois, Chicago
* Dudley Herschbach, professor of chemistry, Harvard;
recipient of 1986 Nobel Prize in chemistry; for
investigations leading to the science of molecular-
reaction dynamics.
* Leon Hirsch, founder, chairman, and chief executive
officer, U.S. Surgical Corp., Norwalk, Conn.; for
contributions to surgery.
University of Massachusetts, Worcester
* G. Timothy Johnson, medical editor, ABC television
network.
* Paul C. Zamecnik, principal scientist, Worcester
Foundation for Experimental Biology.
University of Michigan, Dearborn
* Don Herbert, creator of the television science program
"Watch Mr. Wizard"; for contributions to science education
in the form of the program as well as books, kits, videos,
and films.
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
* Francis S. Collins, director, National Center for Human
Genome Research, National Institutes of Health; for
discoveries in human genetics.
* Jane Richardson, James B. Duke Professor of Biochemistry,
Duke University; for research in the area of structural
biology.
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
* Samuel O. Thier, president, Massachusetts General
Hospital, Boston; for achievements in the field of
medicine.
* Phillip Tobias, professor, emeritus, of anatomy and human
biology, and director, Paleoanthropology Research Unit,
University of Witwatersrand, South Africa; for research on
the early evolution of man.
University of South Carolina, Columbia
* Kary Mullis, recipient of the 1993 Nobel Prize in
chemistry, private consultant in molecular biology and
biotechnology in San Diego; for development of PCR
technology.
University of Western Ontario, London
* Henry G. Friesen, president, Medical Research Council of
Canada; for contributions to medical resarch.
* Frank Press, senior research fellow, Department of
Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution of Washington;
former president, National Academy of Sciences; for
contributions to geophysics, oceanography, science, and
science policy.
Washington University, St. Louis
* Richard E. Leakey, paleoanthropologist and
conservationist; former director, Kenya Wildlife Service;
for efforts in saving elephants and other African wildlife
from extinction.
* Ernst L. Wynder, adjunct member, Sloan-Kettering Institute
for Cancer Research, and clinical professor of community
and preventive medicine, New York Medical College; for
pioneering work in cancer prevention as the first
researcher to show a link between smoking and lung cancer.
Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn.
* Satoshi Omura, president, Kitasato Institute, Tokyo; for
research in microbial chemistry and work toward a cure for
river blindness.
Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
* Robert E. Cooke, professor, emeritus, of pediatrics, State
University of New York, Buffalo; for contributions in the
fields of health care and child development (honorary
doctorate of medical sciences).
* Maxine Singer (see Harvard University entry).
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Scientists And Lawyers: Projects Aim To Bridge Gap
Between The Traditionally Contentious Professions
Cooperative efforts seek to develop bases for agreement and
a vocabulary to be shared by two influential cultures
AU : FRANKLIN HOKE
TY : NEWS
PG : 1
****
Editor's Note: This second part of a two-part series looks
at several ongoing efforts aimed at establishing better
communication between the scientific and legal professions.
With court cases increasingly relying on sophisticated
scientific evidence, the importance of such cooperative
efforts is growing. The first part of this series, which
appeared in the June 13 issue, explored some of the
questions concerning the admissibility of scientific
evidence raised in a landmark liability case heard by the
Supreme Court last year.
****
The cultures of science and law both seek their own versions
of truth. But their purposes differ in important ways, as do
their methods. Partly as a result, interactions between the
two historically have been fraught with misunderstandings
and, at times, mutual suspicion.
Today, however, a number of projects are under way to
bring the scientific and legal professions into greater
alignment. These projects seek to increase the insight
members of both groups have into the processes of the other
and to develop something like a shared vocabulary of ideas.
For example, a reference manual to help judges manage
scientific evidence is being developed at the Federal
Judicial Center in Washington, D.C., a research, education,
and planning arm of the federal judiciary, with help from
the Carnegie Corporation. Also, the National Conference of
Lawyers and Scientists, a group sponsored by the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the
American Bar Association (ABA), is working to identify
mechanisms whereby the scientific community can identify
potential candidates to serve as court-appointed scientific
experts or so-called special masters, individuals designated
by a judge to help assess the validity of scientific
evidence.
The tasks are complex ones that attempt to bring closer the
differing goals of these two groups, both of which are
socially powerful.
"Although both scientists and the courts say they are
looking for truth, what they mean by that is very, very
different," says Dan L. Burk, a molecular biologist and a
visiting assistant professor of law at George Mason
University in Arlington, Va. "When a scientist says that
she's looking for the truth or she's looking for an
understanding of how the universe works, she's working
inside a very definite kind of empirical and social
framework. When the law says they're after truth, they're
after something completely different, which is that they're
trying to help people live together in society. They're
trying to resolve conflicts.
"That may mean that the courts come to a decision that
completely flies in the face of the scientific evidence,"
Burk adds. "The scientists have one particular worldview,
and the lawyers really have a very different one. And each
one is well adapted to what that community is trying to
accomplish. But when you get on the interface between them,
you're going to get some conflict of priorities."
That conflict was clearly drawn in the landmark Supreme
Court ruling in Daubert et al. v. Merrell Dow
Pharmaceuticals, a product-liability case originally decided
in Merrell Dow's favor in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California in 1989. In the Daubert
case, two children, Jason Daubert and Eric Schuller, and
their parents contended that Bendectin, a drug marketed by
Merrell Dow (now Marion Merrell Dow Inc., Kansas City, Mo.)
and taken by the mothers while pregnant to avert morning
sickness, had caused the children's birth defects.
The twin questions of what should qualify as minimally
admissible scientific evidence and who should make that
decision were at the heart of the case, scientists and
lawyers say. In 1991, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit in San Francisco upheld the summary judgment
in the case that the more stringent standards of the
scientific community--in this case, reliance on peer-
reviewed research--should outweigh other considerations in
evaluating the admissibility of such evidence.
But in the Supreme Court's June 28, 1993, decision, written
by Justice Harry A. Blackmun, the Court allowed for more
judicial latitude and called on judges to take a more
active, "gatekeeping role" in screening scientific evidence.
In determining the admissibility of such evidence, the Court
said, judges should use only relevance and reliability as
their guides, rather than rely on the peer-reviewed status
of the work, for example, as some scientists had advised.
The decision has led judges to a greater appreciation of the
methods of science, scientists and legal scholars say, and,
perhaps ironically, findings in cases since Daubert appear
to conform at least as closely with scientific consensus
views as before.
"The courts are very conscious of their role now," says
Richard A. Meserve, a lawyer with the Washington, D.C.-based
firm of Covington and Burling. Meserve, who holds a Ph.D. in
applied physics and once served as clerk to Justice
Blackmun, is also cochairman of the National Conference of
Lawyers and Scientists. "The Supreme Court has told judges
that their obligation is to police scientific evidence.
They're supposed to look at these matters closely, and
they're doing it."
"The Daubert opinion is saying to judges, `Don't let in
junk science,'" says David Kaye, a professor at the
Center for the Study of Law, Science, and Technology at
Arizona State University, Tempe, and editor of Jurimetrics
Journal, a science-and-law publication affiliated with ABA.
"Be vigorous."
Scientific Advice To Judges
The purpose of the reference manual under development at the
Federal Judicial Center is to help judges more effectively
assess scientific evidence and to do so as early in the
legal process as possible, according to project director
Joseph A. Cecil.
"It is intended to advise on the management of expert
testimony and the use of extraordinary procedures--like use
of court-appointed experts and special masters--in cases
that pose difficult science problems," Cecil says.
The manual, scheduled to be published in November 1995, will
contain a series of "reference guides," or overview papers,
in areas of science that have proved troublesome to the
courts, according to Cecil. Information provided about such
areas as epidemiology and toxicology will enable a judge to
engage in a meaningful conversation with the attorneys and
experts for each side about the basis of the expert
opinions. Other areas to be covered in the manual are
forensic analysis of DNA, survey research, inferential
statistics, and multiple-regression analyses.
"The guides are written not to tell judges what evidence is
admissible," Cecil says, "but to explain to judges how
[scientists in] these disciplines go about determining their
findings. For example, in the epidemiology paper, there's an
explanation of case-control research designs and cohort
research designs, so that when judges hear these terms,
they'll understand exactly what kind of research design was
used. In the toxicology paper, there's a discussion about in
vitro and in vivo studies, and the issues that arise among
toxicologists when discussing extrapolation of findings of
animal research to humans."
Advice on what role peer review should play in deciding the
admissibility of scientific evidence will be part of the
handbook, too, according to Steven G. Gallagher, a senior
staff associate of the task force on science and technology
in judicial and regulatory decision making of the Carnegie
Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, which
produced the March 1993 report Science and Technology in
Judicial Decision Making. The importance of peer review is
not simply a matter of asking whether or not a study has
been peer reviewed, he says. A more subtle approach to the
question is needed.
"For example, how long has it been between the study or the
other background work and its presentation to the court?"
Gallagher says. "If the study was just done last year, there
may not have been time for peer review. If the study was
done 20 years ago and there's no peer review, then you might
need to ask more questions."
Also, scientific journals differ in their level of scholarly
credibility, Gallagher says.
"There are allegations that some people have set up journals
just to publish and validate their studies," Gallagher says.
According to Burk, publications in the area of clinical
ecology might fit this description.
"Most members of the scientific community view clinical
ecologists with a great deal of suspicion," Burk says.
"These are people saying the immune system [can be]
irreparably damaged by almost undetectable amounts of
formaldehyde coming off the carpets and drapes."
The manual will strongly urge judges to make their
assessments of scientific evidence at the pretrial stages of
a case, according to Gallagher, a goal also emphasized by
the Supreme Court in Daubert.
"Why go through three or four years of discovery, empanel a
jury, start the expert testimony, and then have the
testimony ruled inadmissible?" Gallagher asks. "If the
testimony is going to be inadmissible, why not find that out
earlier and save everybody heartache? If it is inadmissible,
that then gives the plaintiff the opportunity to go back and
try to find better evidence."
"The science community has long been critical of the kind of
testimony that is presented in court," says Cecil. "And one
of the consequences of the Daubert case is that federal
judges, at least, are instructed to look into the scientific
validity of the information. So, this manual will, to an
extent, address what has been a long-standing complaint
among scientists about the way information that they have
developed is being used in a public-policy arena."
Finding Neutral Experts
Margaret A. Berger, associate dean and a professor at the
Brooklyn School of Law in New York, is playing a central
role in preparing materials for the Federal Judicial Center
manual. Berger was also the primary author of the Carnegie
Commission report.
Berger says that judges are reluctant to use court-appointed
nonpartisan experts, despite existing powers that allow them
to do so, even in cases with complex scientific or technical
issues. Among the concerns of judges, Berger says, are
ensuring neutrality of the expert and maintaining judicial
independence, especially in areas in which their own
expertise is likely to be limited. The judicial reference
manual, she says, should encourage judges and give them
guidance in how to use such court-appointed experts for help
in understanding the methodology used by a given scientific
expert, whether proffered by the plaintiff or the defendant,
rather than for findings of fact.
"A court might be more willing to use an expert," Berger
says, "if the expert were called upon to advise the court
more on [questions such as]: How do you set up an
epidemiological study correctly? Were the number of subjects
adequate to reach the conclusions that were reached? Were
confounding factors taken into account?"
Finding ways for judges to make better use of nonpartisan
experts is also one of the aims of the National Conference
of Lawyers and Scientists. The conference organized a
November 1993 meeting of judges, attorneys, scientists, and
others in Washington, D.C., to discuss establishing a
demonstration project in which the professional scientific
and engineering societies would create mechanisms to
identify appropriate experts that judges could call on for
help.
"The attitude of the judges was that this was something that
they would only apply rarely," says Meserve. "It would be an
extraordinary case in which they would be prepared to
consider calling their own experts, chiefly because judges
are accustomed to the adversarial system and want to have
each party have the responsibility to present its case. But,
then, they were prepared to believe that, in extraordinary
cases, it might well be useful and were very interested in
seeing how their ability to identify experts could be
improved."
"Several of the judges said they would like their courts to
be included in the demonstration project," says Deborah
Runkle, associate staff officer for the conference and a
senior program associate at AAAS. "We're going to try to
have coordinating mechanisms that the federal judges can use
when they would like to use a court-appointed expert in any
of a number of capacities. We will work with, probably, the
scientific and technical societies, but will not be limited
to that. We might work with universities, for example, to
help get experts in a timely fashion."
Some attendees at the conference say that judges' concerns
over the impartiality of court-appointed experts are only
one set of difficulties to be overcome.
"The judges were more interested than the attorneys [in
introducing such experts]," says one meeting participant,
speaking on condition of anonymity. "Attorneys who actually
try cases are a little bit more wary, particularly--but not
exclusively--the plaintiffs' [attorneys]. They don't see
this working to their advantage."
One reason for this is that it is often the plaintiff's side
that introduces novel scientific ideas of injury or disease
causation by, for example, pesticides or electromagnetic
fields.
"It is more often seen as being in the [defense's] interests
to go with consensus or established science," this source
says. "Also, who is neutral? Where do these scientists get
their money? Who pays them? Where do they get their grants?
Often the scientists who know the most about a particular
thing work for industry. Who knows more about pesticides
than the people who make them?"
If the process of selecting nonpartisan experts can be done
in such a way that the concerns of judges and the attorneys
who try cases can be answered, some observers see expanding
roles for scientists in the courtroom.
"There may be more call on the scientific community, not to
render ultimate opinions in the case about the issue that's
being disputed, but rather to serve as experts who would
advise the court about whether the opinions were reached in
accordance with the scientific method," Berger says. "So,
there might really be more of a role for scientists."
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : INDEPENDENT SCIENCE COURTS
AU : FRANKLIN HOKE
TY : NEWS
PG : 5
The debate over the role of science in the courts, although
lately active, is not entirely new. Beginning in the 1960s,
different groups have suggested the formation of court-like
institutions to settle disputes that revolve around
scientific evidence. Sometimes these are suggested as
adjunct to the court system but with scientists as both
advocates and adjudicators; sometimes the recommendation is
that they be part of the scientific community with an
advisory role to the courts. These ideas have been discussed
seriously at times, but have never emerged as likely
alternatives either to peer review within science or to the
judicial process.
"There have been proposals for special science courts from
time to time," says Richard A. Meserve, a lawyer with the
Washington, D.C.-based firm of Covington and Burling. "But
that's never gone very far, nor is it likely to."
"The problem," says Dan L. Burk, a molecular biologist and a
visiting assistant professor of law at George Mason
University in Arlington, Va., "is that it's extremely
difficult to untangle the fact-finding function from the
legal questions. You end up having scientists making legal
determinations, which I don't think the scientists want to
be doing. And there are also potential legal and even
constitutional problems with having that happen."
"You seldom would see a scientific issue in isolation from
everything else in a case," Meserve says. "To try to isolate
some component of a case [for decision] does not reflect the
way decisions are made."
Some observers have suggested that a group like the National
Research Council could attempt to clarify the relevant
science in contentious areas such as forensic DNA analysis.
"That would be like an informal science court," says Burk.
"It wouldn't actually be an arm of the courts; it would just
be a scientific society or scientific body offering helpful
suggestions in a report of some kind. The problem with that
is that you get a snapshot of science at that time. Things
change even within six months, especially in these very
frontier-science kinds of questions."
--F.H.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Risk Assessment Commission Identifies Daunting
Challenges
AU : KAREN YOUNG KREEGER
TY : NEWS
PG : 1
The members of the Risk Assessment and Management Commission
(RAMC), which held its first meeting last month in
Washington, D.C., apparently have their work cut out for
them. Hampered by a two-year delay in its formation, the
commission faces a November deadline to fulfill its
congressional mandate to evaluate current standards and
methods of assessing environmental hazards and to recommend
how that information should be used.
Complicating that task and one of the first priorities for
the 10-member panel, according to some of the commission
members and other observers, is the need to define more
specifically the parameters and goals of RAMC's charge.
At stake in the commission's deliberations is more than just
a blueprint for Congress and public policymakers to follow
in determining and regulating such environmental hazards as
air pollution and toxic wastes, says RAMC chairman Gilbert
Omenn, elected by the commission members as one of the first
orders of business at the meeting. Omenn, dean of the School
of Public Health and Community Medicine at the University of
Washington, says that risk assessment and management affect
broad areas of the scientific community.
"Risk assessment, at its heart, depends on advances in basic
sciences, in the understanding of mechanisms, and in the
documentation of exposures at sites of action, such as
organs and tissues," he says. "Modern molecular technology
has raised expectations among public-health officials and
environmental regulators that biomarkers of effect, of
exposure, and of individual variation in susceptibility will
be usefully applied to studies of humans."
Omenn adds, "Social scientists have a large role to play,
also, since conceptual approaches and practical techniques
for communicating with many kinds of stakeholders are
essential for effective risk reduction and protection of
health and the environment."
Given RAMC's far-reaching mission, the November deadline set
by Congress for the commission to report its analyses and
recommendations is a challenge, Omenn acknowledges. Although
he has not said whether this date would be moved, Omenn does
say that the commission "would need to develop a full scope
of work that is realistic."
"There's no deadline change right now," says Carl Mazza,
liaison to RAMC from the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) office of air and radiation, and not a commission
member, "until [the commission] figures out what they need
in terms of time and until they communicate that message to
[the Clinton administration] and to Congress. It's up to the
commission members how they want to handle this."
"I'm encouraged that we're finally meeting," says John
Doull, a commission member and a professor of toxicology and
pharmacology at the University of Kansas Medical School in
Kansas City, referring to the fact that the commission was
originally supposed to convene in 1992 but was delayed until
last month. According to government officials, several
factors, including the transition between the Bush and
Clinton administrations, caused delay in appointing members.
The commission was created by 1990 amendments to the Clean
Air Act of 1972. Composed of eminent scientists in
toxicology and epidemiology and other leaders in academia,
business, and government, RAMC was formed through three
presidential, one National Academy of Sciences, and six
congressional appointments (K.Y. Kreeger, The Scientist, May
2, 1994, page 3).
Defining Its Role
Ostensibly, RAMC's all-encompassing charge is to address the
appropriateness and feasibility of--as well as uncertainties
and policy issues surrounding--the development of a
consistent methodology or standard for risk assessment.
"Ours is not a strictly scientific task. It also includes
social values and public-policy issues," says Omenn.
According to the Clean Air Act amendments, RAMC is supposed
to include in its evaluation risk assessment and management
activities "in regulatory programs under various Federal
laws to prevent cancer and other chronic human health
effects which may result from exposure to hazardous
substances."
But some of the meeting participants and others express
concern that the issues the panel is looking into, as well
as RAMC's role, need to be better defined for the commission
to be successful.
Ellen Silbergeld, a senior toxicologist with the
Environmental Defense Fund--a Washington, D.C.-based
advocacy group--and a professor of epidemiology at the
University of Maryland Medical School, gave a presentation
at the meeting. Silbergeld, who is not a commission member,
says that RAMC "has a somewhat confused sense of purpose in
that it's not completely clear what it's about, in terms of
[being] yet another commission to look at risk assessment or
[trying to] bridge the gap between assessment and
management."
Although she says the commission "has a potential to make a
contribution," Silbergeld still is skeptical about the
overall impact RAMC may have. "A concern I have about all
these creations like the RAMC is that to some extent they
reflect [either] the nave hope or a sly technique to look
toward some sort of science panel to solve the problems of
environmental policy-making, which in my opinion is largely
political."
"The mandate is pretty broad, and eventually we'll have to
pick out specific areas and concentrate our recommendations
to make a bigger impact. We don't want this to be just
another report," says commission member Peter Chiu, a
physician with the Kaiser Permanente Medical Group in
Milpitas, Calif., and an assistant clinical professor at
Stanford University's School of Medicine.
Doull says his impression of what the commission is supposed
to do is "not to reinvent the wheel," but rather to "develop
a new approach to risk assessment."
Because most of the attention in risk assessment has been
on cancer-causing toxins in the environment, Silbergeld
says, "I tried to suggest some areas that have not been
dealt with adequately. One is the continuing neglect of how
we're going to assess the risks of non-carcinogens," such as
lead and solvent chemicals, that can have neurotoxic effects
and can cause reproductive damage. Doull says that he and
the committee agreed in principle with Silbergeld that non-
cancer risks should be addressed more prominently.
Another non-commission member, Elizabeth M. Whelan,
president of the American Council on Science and Health, a
New York-based consumer-education organization, has a
cautious view of what issues RAMC will really address. "I've
seen mandates like this at various agencies, for example at
the EPA, but then you find out in print that it really only
applies to things that are within their control," she says,
referring to her doubt that RAMC will consider causes of
risk to human health that are not normally considered
environmental hazards, such as tobacco smoke.
However, according to Omenn, "There is a clear sense
throughout the agencies and the commission that our mandate
calls for looking quite broadly at risk assessment and
management decisions. This is not at all an EPA-bounded
problem."
The next RAMC hearing, which is open to the public, is
scheduled for June 30 at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in
Washington. Upcoming meetings are tentatively slated for
July 29, September 9, and October 21, Mazza says. Meeting
dates will be announced in the Federal Register.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Researchers Alarmed By Reports Of Public's Lack Of
Scientific Knowledge
AU : KAREN YOUNG KREEGER
TY : NEWS
PG : 3
A recent survey by the American Museum of Natural History
(AMNH) in New York confirms what scientists across the
United States have been fearing for some time: Despite their
professed interest and confidence in science, Americans'
understanding of the natural and physical world remains
disturbingly low.
Researchers say that it is imperative to the future of the
nation that this situation be reversed. "However you cut it,
you become alarmed." says Bonnie Kalberer, director of the
National Institutes of Health's office of science education.
"Every day, people are having to deal more and more with
scientific, technical, and mathematical issues. And, if
they're not prepared for that, one could say your whole
democratic system is in jeopardy."
To counter what they perceive as a dangerous level of
ignorance, scientists interviewed for this article say, they
must mobilize themselves to make people smarter about
science, especially young people, who will be responsible
for shaping society in the next century. One of these
scientists, Paul Saltman, a professor of biology at the
University of California, San Diego, who is involved in
training San Diego-area teachers in science, says: "My
position is one of fighting. I can't sit still for this."
"The whole notion," says Saltman, "becomes: `How do we start
to create an environment for it to be cool and for it to be
fun to know science?' We have to take into account this
knowledge [about scientific ignorance] and do something
about it."
The AMNH study--entitled "Science and Nature Survey" and
released in late April--consisted of telephone interviews
with 1,255 adults from across the United States. Respondents
were asked a series of multiple-choice and true-false
questions to gauge how they feel about science and to
measure the level of their understanding in disciplines,
such as evolution, that coincide with the museum's mission.
According to museum officials, figures for age, sex, race,
education, and number of adults per household were weighted
where necessary--using data from the latest U.S. Census--to
bring them into line with their actual proportions in the
overall population. The study points out, among other
things, the following statistics, which the survey designers
find particularly dismaying:
* 46 percent of respondents do not believe that humans
evolved from earlier species of animals;
* 65 percent don't know how many planets there are in the
solar system;
* 87 percent cannot identify the cause of the hole in the
ozone layer.
Other recent surveys concur with these findings.
Science & Engineering Indicators (National Science
Board, Science & Engineering Indicators--1993,
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1993
[NSB 93-1]) revealed, for example, that:
* 41 percent of respondents do not believe that "Human
beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier
species of animals";
* 41 percent do not know that DNA regulates inherited
characteristics for all plants and animals;
* 92 percent cannot correctly identify the causes of acid
rain. Although no observer contacted denies that such
revelations are distressing, Mary Woolley, president of
Alexandria, Va.-based Research!America--a nonprofit
medical-research advocacy organ- ization--says
capitalizing on the public's high opinion of science
should be paramount. "The attitudes are positive, the
interest is there," says Woolley, "but we're not
exploiting it in a manner that will really pay off for
us.
"Scientists tend to be invisible in their neighborhoods
as scientists. We need to get out there. Scientists
have the opportunity to describe to the public how it
is that their dollar goes to something that we already
know they value."
Paradoxical Findings
In a statement, Ellen V. Futter museum president, said the
results of the recent museum survey show that the public has
"an acute recognition of the importance of science and a
healthy respect for the potential negative consequences and
abuse of scientific research."
However, the science literacy portion of the AMNH study
found that the public has an almost "paradoxical"--as Futter
put it--view of some subjects, demonstrating misconceptions
about some things and a relatively clear understanding of
others.
"We were surprised with some of the contrasts, such as how
so many people knew that continents gradually move over
millions of years. But more than one-third believed that
humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time," says David
Grimaldi, curator of entomology at AMNH and codeveloper of
its survey. Specifically, 35 percent said that the earliest
humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs and 78
percent said they believed that the statement that
continents gradually change their positions was true.
Findings from the AMNH study are expected to be used
primarily for designing museum programs, but researchers and
educators anticipate they will also be helpful to people
outside AMNH. Futter said the survey results will be used
for a range of activities, "from conceiving and designing
new exhibits to developing innovative educational programs
for application within and without our walls, to informing
the public about the results of the often cutting-edge
research of our scientific staff."
Grimaldi adds: "We don't see the survey as setting an agenda
for our research, but it reveals what the populace expects
or is concerned about in science." For example, he says,
there was stronger support for and interest in environmental
issues than expected (22 percent; see chart on page 1), so
he anticipates more rigorous informal science education
programs on such subjects as biodiversity as a result.
Research!America's Woolley adds that information from the
AMNH survey will be useful in fashioning her organization's
fledgling educational outreach program--to be conducted in
partnership with AMNH--in New York City.
Linda Pifer, associate director of the International Center
for the Advancement of Scientific Literacy, says that the
AMNH survey results will eventually be archived at her
organization to make them available to scholars and
professional societies, such as the American Association for
the Advancement of Science.
Comparisons And Contrasts
The AMNH study, like most public-and-science surveys,
established that the public's interest level is high. For
example, more than two-thirds of the respondents said they
were very or somewhat interested in such subjects as "plants
and trees," "peoples of the world," and "the history of
life."
Similarly, in NSF's 1993 Science & Engineering Indicators,
66 percent of those surveyed said they were very interested
in new medical discoveries and 59 percent were very
interested in environmental pollution.
A 1992 study conducted by Research! America (Medical
Research and Health Care Concerns: A Survey of the American
Public, Research! America, Alexandria, Va., 1993)--which
concentrated on assessing attitudes about medical research--
found that 66 percent ranked medical research as the most
valuable type of scientific inquiry and 18 percent ranked
environmental research as the most important.
Although interest is high, people still feel distanced from
science, say literacy experts. According to the Science
Indicators, only one out of every 10 adults considered
himself or herself well-informed about new scientific
discoveries or the use of new inventions and technologies.
The AMNH study found similar attitudes among its
interviewees: 51 percent agreed with the statement "I
understand less and less of what scientists are doing
today." At the same time, however, 68 percent agreed with
the statement "Science will solve many of the world's
problems" (see chart at left).
"The point of all of this is that science is perceived as
remote from and inaccessible to nonscientists. Science is
not for experts only," said Futter.
A survey sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
North Carolina State University, and Colorado State
University (T.J. Hoban, P.A. Kendall, Consumer Attitudes
About Food Biotechnology, Project Report [#91-EXCA-3-0155],
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1993) found another
dichotomy: 86 percent of the respondents agreed with the
statement "Most problems can be solved by applying more and
better technology," whereas 58 percent agreed with the
statement "Science and technology have made the world a
riskier place to live."
Thomas J. Hoban, an associate professor of sociology and
anthropology at North Carolina State University in Raleigh
and coauthor of the USDA study, characterizes this seemingly
conflicting result as the public's "love-hate" relationship
with science. "The public recognizes many of the benefits
that science and technology have given us, but at the same
time they are very fearful of environmental and health
impacts of new technologies and related ethical issues," he
says.
Some researchers, however, say that in contrast to the
relatively large body of work on people's attitudes and
understanding, too little effort has been spent on
ascertaining what people know about the scientific method.
Bruce Fuchs, an assistant professor of pharmacology at the
Medical College of Virginia, Richmond, who is on a two-year
appointment with NIH's office of science education policy,
says, "One thing that does concern me--and I don't see this
survey getting at this--is that I think people really need
to understand the process of science rather than some of
these facts." He adds that this kind of knowledge is
important so people can put what they read about scientific
controversies "into some perspective."
Success Stories
Although statistics from these surveys paint a grim picture,
say some observers, many programs are taking action to make
science more accessible. One successful example--based on
similar programs across the U.S.--is NIH's Mini-Med School,
a series of talks geared toward the general public that
cover the basic subjects of medical school. Kalberer, one of
the developers of the "school," says the Mini-Med scheme has
received "an overwhelmingly positive response." In fact,
interest was so keen that organizers had to turn away more
than 500 people who attempted to sign up for the 250 slots.
Mini-Med "students," she says, have commented favorably on
the program's informativeness, level of scientific detail,
and relevance to health-care issues. NIH plans to build on
the achievements of its first year by promoting it as a
model for other organizations planning their own lecture
series.
Although success stories like Mini-Med are becoming more and
more prevalent, science literacy experts agree that
attention still needs to be paid to what they consider the
root cause of science illiteracy. They say inadequate
exposure to science in high school is the primary reason for
the lack of understanding of some scientific concepts among
adults. UC-San Diego's Saltman characterizes this as the
"benign neglect" of science in the American educational
system.
"You're left with a population of 11- or 12-year-olds that
is turned off to the curiosity about the nature of the
universe in which they live," he says.
Don Herbert--also known as Mr. Wizard--who for more than 40
years has hosted hands-on science television shows for
children and who was recently awarded an honorary doctor of
science degree from the University of Michigan, Dearborn
(see story on page 1), says, "I don't think it's a
reflection of the kids at all. I think it's been the method
of presenting science. In the past, there was an emphasis on
rote learning. They haven't been teaching the way science is
done at all."
Hoban concludes: "Because scientists can influence people's
impressions, they really need to take responsibility for
getting out there and trying to help demystify science."
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
NOTEBOOK
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Zoning In
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Forrest M. Mims III, a science writer who last year won a
50,000-Swiss-franc (about $32,500) Rolex Award for inventing
a hand-held ozone-monitoring device called a total ozone
portable spectroradiometer, or TOPS (Notebook, The
Scientist, June 28, 1993, page 4), detected record-low ozone
levels last month in South Central Texas using an instrument
built with the Rolex funds, a MicroTOPS (microprocessor-
controlled TOPS) ozonometer. Mims found that ozone fell
about 20 percent below the mean level for the area, as
measured by NASA's former ozone satellite, Nimbus-7, in
1978-82. In 1992, Mims, using TOPS, detected an error in the
calibration of Nimbus-7, proving NASA's measurements wrong.
His study was conducted through his Sun Photometer
Atmospheric Network, or SPAN, which measures ozone, water
vapor, and ultraviolet-B radiation in three states, with six
more locations to be added soon. The SPAN Data Center is
based at Colorado Christian University in Lakewood. "I
didn't go purposely to look for a Christian school" to house
the center, says Mims, who in 1990 was removed from an
assignment to write "The Amateur Scientist" column in
Scientific American because of his belief in creation (F.M.
Mims III, The Scientist, Feb. 18, 1991, page 11). "They're
the only school that offered to take over my network," he
says. "Just as I don't like being discriminated against
because I'm a Christian, I don't discriminate against
schools because they're not. I'll work with anybody--I just
want to get good data."
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Overcoming Bigotry--And Then Some
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
During a ceremony earlier this month at which the first
Weizmann Women and Science Award was presented to biochemist
Joan A. Steitz of Yale University School of Medicine (B.
Spector, The Scientist, June 13, 1994, page 3), speakers
referred repeatedly to the lack of recognition given women
scientists and decried the chauvinistic assumption that
research is incompatible with femininity. But the winner of
the award told the attendees that "an overt act of prejudice
against women in science turned out to be the best thing
that ever happened to me." When she was a graduate student
at Harvard University in the 1960s, Steitz said, she
approached the professor who was her first choice for a
thesis adviser and was told, "You're a woman, you're going
to get married and have kids--what future do you think you
have in science?" In the face of this rejection, she went to
her second choice--the legendary James D. Watson,
codiscoverer of the DNA double helix--and became the first
woman graduate student he ever sponsored. As a postdoc,
Steitz said, she followed her husband to Cambridge, England,
where Watson encouraged his colleague Francis Crick to make
room for her in his crowded lab. "That's how I came to work
with the two giants in biology in the 20th century," Steitz
told the audience.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Women In Math Award
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Jing-Rebecca Li, a junior at the University of Michigan, has
won the Alice T. Schafer Mathematics Prize, awarded to an
undergraduate woman for excellence in mathematics. Sponsored
by the College Park, Md.-based Association for Women in
Mathematics (AWM), the honor comes with a cash prize of
$1,000. Li, a mechanical engineering student with a
published paper on the deformation of bicrystals, switched
to math only last fall and is in the math honors program at
Michigan. Since then, according to AWM, "she has excelled in
demanding undergraduate and graduate courses, performing on
the level of the best graduate students." For information on
the prize, contact Joanna Wood Schot, AWM executive
director, at 4114 Computer and Space Sciences Building,
University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742-2461; (301)
405-7892. E-mail: awm@math.umd.edu.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Oncology On The Internet
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
As the result of frustration at not being able to find
current, cancer-related information for themselves and their
patients, two researchers from the University of
Pennsylvania Medical Center's Department of Radiation
Oncology--E. Loren Buhle and Joel W. Goldwein--have started
Oncolink. It is an Internet-based multimedia resource that
can be accessed through World-Wide Web and gopher software.
"There is no end to the types of information we can post on
Oncolink: clinical trials; case-of-the-month studies,
complete with moving, audible images; resident handbooks;
and new research," said Goldwein in a statement. Since its
inception in early March, Oncolink has averaged 2,000
responses per day. For information, contact Buhle at (215)
662-3084 or via E-mail at buhle@xrt.upenn.edu; or Goldwein
at (215) 662-7147 or via E-mail at goldwein@xrt.upenn.edu.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Atlanta Team Captures Science Bowl
TY : (NEWS) NOTEBOOK
PG : 4
A team from Atlanta's Westminster Schools beat out a squad
from Langham Creek High School in Houston in the finals of
the 1994 National Science Bowl, held over two days in late
April in Washington, D.C. The two teams were all that
remained from 52 regional competition winners, who vied with
each other in a question-and-answer format at the national
championships, sponsored by the Department of Energy and
Cray Research Foundation. Renee Landrum, Susan Born, Peter
Chan, Si Hwang Chin, Shireen Haque--the winning Westminster
team--along with their coach, Penney Sconzo, will spend July
9-16 in Geneva at the Fifth International Wild Animal
Research Week. The team was sponsored by DOE's Atlanta
Support Office. The runners-up from Houston, sponsored by
DOE's Dallas office, will attend the 36th London
International Youth Science Forum. Overall, more than 7,000
students and 1,400 high schools took part in this year's
Science Bowl.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Inventive Minds
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Five scientists from Dow Chemical Co. in Freeport, Texas,
have been presented with the 21st annual National Inventor
of the Year Award from Intellectual Property Owners (IPO), a
Washington, D.C.-based association that represents companies
and inventors who own patented inventions. Researchers Pak-
Wing S. Chum, George W. Knight, Shih-Yaw Lai, James C.
Stevens, and John R. Wilson were honored with the award for
their creation of a new family of plastics that
"significantly expands plastic processing and performance
options," according to IPO. In addition, the organization
recognized Harvey M. Severson, an 82-year-old independent
inventor from Minneapolis, with its Spirit of American
Ingenuity award for inventing a machine in his home shop
that converts waste wood into biodegradable packing
material. Last year's Inventor of the Year honors went to a
research team from Merck and Co. Inc. in Rahway, N.J., who
developed Proscar, the first drug for treating benign
prostate enlargement.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
OPINION
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Celebrated Scientists Share Their Thoughts With 1994's New
Graduates
TY : OPINION
PG : 12
****
Editor's Note: Social and ethical responsibilities of
researchers, the public's skepticism about science, the threat of
tighter economic constraints on biomedical investigation,
equality for women and minorities, the increasing difficulties in
building a stable career in research--these were among the themes
addressed by this year's commencement speakers at academic
institutions throughout the United States and Canada. Following
are excerpts from speeches made by several noted scientists; the
selections are drawn from transcripts supplied by the
institutions.
****
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, May 15
FRANCIS COLLINS
Director, National Center for Human Genome Research
Now I stand at the helm of the Human Genome Project, an audacious
effort to determine the sequence of the entire human blueprint
and the hundred thousand genes that make us what we are. We
expect to have this done by year 2005. This is the most important
scientific effort that humankind has ever undertaken.
And yet there are times--and you will experience this, too--when
I'm restless, when there seems that there must be something else
that I'm called to do. And twice over the last four years, I've
taken three or four weeks and gone off to Nigeria to work in a
small jungle hospital.
Now I went full of enthusiasm. Then I began to wonder, "What am I
doing here?" I knew that although I might be able to help a
particular patient, get them better over some terrible disease,
they would go out again into an environment where some other
scourge would quickly strike them down.
As I struggled with that, realizing how insignificant my
contribution was, a patient who I was taking care of, a young
farmer from Nigeria who had come in with fluid around his heart,
was close to death, and whom we were able to save by drawing that
fluid off, said to me, "You know, I sense that something's
troubling you and you're wondering why you're here. I have a
message for you. You are here for one thing--for me. To save me.
And that's enough."
That was a profound moment for me. To touch one human being. To
change one other human being's existence for the better. That's
enough. Have your goals, have them be grand, but remember what
really counts are those single human beings that you come in
contact with.
Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn., May 23
FRANCES CONLEY
Professor of surgery, Stanford University
School of Medicine
In the long run, I don't care how many policies are promulgated,
how many diversity watch-dogs are appointed, how many
interminable committees are formed to examine issues of race,
racism, gender, or sexism--nothing will change in the world of
medicine for women and minorities until there is a culture shift,
and I have become absolutely convinced that the only true change
of culture will come through the leaders we select. A racist
and/or sexist tone at the top translates into validation of
racism and sexism and perpetuates bigoted ideas for yet another
generation.
The process by which leaders are chosen needs revamping; power
cannot continue to be defined simply as "power over others."
Along with the traditional evaluation of technical talent and
academic acumen, leaders need to be assessed for their degree of
behavioral decency. Deans, department chairs, program directors
must be reprogrammed to view every student accepted, every
resident selected for postgraduate training, every faculty
appointed, as having the requisite intellectual promise and
personal values to qualify as a potential physician for his or
her own medical care. Only with leaders in place who are
passionately committed to developing the careers of others based
on their ability and resolve, rather than simply on the basis of
gender or race, will the medical profession enter the 21st
century maximally prepared for the challenges presented by such
aspects as managed health-care systems, cost containment,
rationing of medical resources, and ever-increasing technology.
St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minn., April 18
JON LIEN
Professor of ocean studies and psychology; head, Whale Research
Group; Memorial University
of Newfoundland, Canada
Is technology up to the challenge that environmental problems
present? What answers can it provide? What can't it do? Do we
need to do more than recycle pop cans and magazines? Will
environmental impact studies, environmental cost/benefit
analyses, mitigation programs be sufficient to guide change?
Will the environment be safe? Will it be justly and fairly
managed? Are present visions of the partnership between humankind
and nature adequate to restore a balanced, sustainable
partnership? There is lots of room for pessimism. What is needed
is a fundamental reexamination of our species and humankind's
relationship with nature.
First, it is certainly true that my technical training has given
me some tools useful for problems of ecological management and
human ecology. But this technical side ignores vast areas of
human experience: values, intuition, common sense. It has in fact
given me only a little with which to understand and to help.
Decisions about fish and their environment are not made divorced
from people and their cultures.
If graduates slide into the seductive security of American
materialism, worry only about an environment that is safe for the
American way of life, accumulate only personal satisfactions and
pleasures, and do not use the wealth of the educational gifts
they have been given to solve environmental problems--then,
simply, there is no hope.
You have acquired responsibilities. You are the solution to the
environmental problems which will continue to face humankind for
your entire working lives. My hope is that students will reflect
on their gifts and consider their responsibilities for
discovering and inventing new ways and means for restoring the
necessary partnership between nature and humankind. You will be
the ones that make a difference.
University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, May 26
ANTHONY FAUCI
Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Historically, the way society views the role of science has
oscillated. Ever since Plato first placed his faith in objective
truth, the anti-science tide against rational thought has come in
and out, more or less at its own natural frequency. During the
1950s, '60s, and '70s the biomedical research element of science
flourished in such areas as biotechnology and there were major
advances in health care. However, in the 1980s came a perception
that such endeavors actually added to the cost of health care;
next came a heightened public awareness of fraud in science. As a
result, in some sectors, an attenuation of the public faith in
biomedical research now parallels a disillusionment by some with
science in general. There is a growing feeling by some that there
is little evidence that objective scientific knowledge leads to
subjective benefits for humanity.
In this regard, there lies a final, important, and rather unique
challenge to you. Although history at times has tended to
separate the two, it is essential that we preserve this marriage
of science and humanitarianism that forms the very foundation
upon which our profession is built. The solution must be anchored
in principles that have guided generations of physicians, health-
care professionals, and basic biomedical researchers. You must be
guided by integrity, unselfishness, perseverance,
inquisitiveness, and a compelling thirst for scientific knowledge
with the patient as the focus and beneficiary of all that you do
professionally. If you are a basic scientist, your integrity,
your scholarship, and your commitment should match the importance
of your task, the advancement of knowledge for the good of
mankind.
Ripon College, Wisconsin, May 15
E.O. WILSON
Frank B. Baird, Jr. Professor of Science, Harvard University
There have been five great extinction spasms in the past 450
million years of geological history, causing major losses of
biodiversity. The latest was 65 million years ago, caused by a
giant meteorite strike near present-day Mexico. Each spasm
required 10 million years or more for evolution to restore.
Humanity has now begun the sixth great spasm. If we allow it to
go on, and our descendants realize that they must wait millions
of years to recover what we carelessly threw away in two or three
generations, they are going to be peeved.
We are entering, I believe, the Century of the Environment. The
opportunities before you, in citizenship and new employment, of
finding a good life in a stable, healthy environment, will be
intimately tied to the environment. This will be the idealism of
the new generation.
And for biodiversity, it isn't too late to make a big difference.
We are going to lose a lot of species all over the world, but we
can slow and eventually stop the hemorrhaging. Our goal should be
to carry as much of the rest of life as we can through the
bottleneck of the next 50 years, when at last population
stabilizes and, we most fervently hope, the quality of life
improves, to hold on to every species and race we possibly can.
Along with culture itself, that inheritance will be the most
precious gift we can give to future generations.
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N.Y., May 29
BERNADINE HEALY
Former director, National Institutes of Health
We are on the brink of discovery more adventurous and promising
than any explorer ever dreamed. We have already discovered the
genes for cystic fibrosis and colon cancer. Next it'll be the
gene or genes for breast and prostate cancer, osteoporosis, and
Alzheimer's disease; maybe for addictive behavior and
schizophrenia. The revolution in the life sciences will also go
way beyond medicine into agriculture, chemical production,
environmental sciences, microelectronics. Biotechnology will be
creating jobs that we don't even have names for yet.
But for science to flourish and all the dreams of tomorrow
realized, we must acknowledge that ethics and public interest are
to become companions wherever science goes. This explosion of
knowledge in biology and medicine is changing not only the nature
of healing, but also the society in which we live. We are seeing
large shifts in demography, with an aging population living
longer and longer. The meaning of life and death is being
reexamined. Extending life will be easier than deciding when not
to. New diseases will emerge as people survive the old ones. We
will confront new problems from new perspectives. We will come
face to face with a whole new realm of ethical and legal issues.
Today we are confronting the economic challenge--the dollar cost-
-of the extraordinary success of the wonders of biology and
medicine. But tomorrow we will confront ethical, social, and
moral challenges that will make the problems of economics we are
facing now seem very easy. What this brave new world of tomorrow
will demand is a generation of informed leadership who have the
courage and the wisdom to get it right.
University of South Carolina, Columbia, May 13
KARY MULLIS
Biotechnology consultant, 1993 chemistry Nobelist
Think back to where it was that we started, say about 20 or 30
million years ago. We were in the middle of a continent that was
really heavily forested, and we were the cute little animals up
in the top of the trees, eating the leaves. And we didn't go down
to the ground, we were up on the top, protected from the cats by
the fact that we could climb fast and jump. Change trees if
necessary.
So don't forget how to jump from one tree to another. You might
have picked the wrong field, for instance. Maybe you are getting
a degree in something that you are thinking, "Boy, this is a bad
place to work." Don't be afraid to jump--you know, change trees.
It takes probably, in science, about two years to learn the
vocabulary in a new field and another year to learn the important
people that you need to know; and then you can move from being,
like, a chemist, to a biochemist, to physicist. You might have
made a mistake and might admit it quickly and get into something
else if you don't like where you are.
Be ready to do that. Don't plod, don't try to be uncomfortable.
Don't say, "Well, I chose this horrible life for myself. And I am
just going to do it."
University of Western Ontario, London, June 10
FRANK PRESS
Former president, National Academy of Sciences
Now we're witness to the information revolution--the joining of
computers and communications, to create wholly new industries, to
organize services electronically, to transform how we communicate
and use information. Some political scientists credit the changes
in Eastern Europe and the growth of democracy to the transistor
and the information revolution it spawned.
And we are at the edges of the biological revolution--the
exploitation of our understanding of how cells are built, work,
and copy themselves. That revolution already has created new
industries, new ways to detect and treat terrible diseases, and
to make old products in new and often better ways.
What's happening, of course, holds great meaning for you. Wayne
Gretzky, perhaps the greatest hockey player ever, was once asked
why he was so good. He answered that he "skates to where the puck
is going to be, not where it's been." The point is universal. You
have spent years immersed in your studies. I'd argue that what
you've been taught has less to do with getting ready for a
specific career, and more with "skating to where you want to be."
Why would I praise the fact that your education probably had
little to do with getting ready for a specific career? Because,
as Gertrude Stein once put it, there may be no there there. Any
job you tried to train for may be gone by the time you get there.
The economic change is happening so fast that what matters is
knowledge and the will and ability to use it and to continually
acquire it.
Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, Calif., May 15
WALTER MASSEY
Provost and senior vice president for academic affairs,
University of California; former director,
National Science Foundation
Along with [our] skills and attitudes, we also need to develop
certain values. We have to know what we stand for, the limits and
boundaries of our actions, the ethical and moral principles that
will guide us as we try to navigate our way in a world in which
signposts are not always clear and the directional signals are
not always stable. Honesty--especially honesty to oneself--and
integrity are among those values. We also need to develop a
personal center of gravity that can keep us firmly guided on the
paths that we have set for ourselves, even as the events and
people around us change.
It might seem presumptuous for me to say this, but as a
scientist, I believe these skills, attitudes, and values are the
kinds of things that one learns in pursing an education in the
sciences. Analytic ability is an obvious requirement, as are
curiosity and confidence. I would also argue, very strongly, that
the values of honesty and integrity are not only consistent with
scientific values, but are what have made the scientific
enterprise so successful. I say this in spite of some very
notable cases of scientific fraud and misconduct.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
COMMENTARY
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Is Government Policy Stifling Breakthrough Research?
AU : Joachim Messing
TY : OPINION (COMMENTARY)
PG : 13
It's been 50 years since microbiologists Selman Waksman and
Albert Schatz discovered streptomycin, the first effective
treatment for tuberculosis, in their laboratory at Rutgers
University. While prestigious research groups at the Bayer
Co. in Germany and Sahlgren's Hospital in Sweden had labored
for years to find a cure for the deadly disease, it was the
comparatively humble Rutgers team who succeeded.
At first glance it seems almost miraculous that an ill-
funded academic laboratory at a university without a medical
school, led by a man without a medical degree, would succeed
where better-funded and better-credentialed groups had
failed. But the story of streptomycin's discovery is the
story of university-industry cooperation at its best. It's a
paradigm that federal officials and health-care reformers
would do well to consider seriously in approaching such
present-day scourges as AIDS.
One obvious lesson from Waksman and Schatz's achievement is
the potentially enormous value of basic research that moves
in unconventional directions. Waksman's laboratory was in an
agricultural school, and his students were concerned with
soil microbiology, a subject that few legislators,
journalists, or even other scientists would readily connect
to a cure for tuberculosis. But the dean of Rutgers' College
of Agriculture encouraged his work, and support for it came
from a grant provided by Merck & Co. Inc. in nearby Rahway,
N.J.
Had Waksman faced today's peer review-process, which
determines the distribution of precious federal funding, it
is unlikely he would have received a penny, since government
backing of individual-investigator projects currently tends
to provide the vast bulk of its support to only a relatively
few, most obviously promising projects. This approach is
unwise, however, since--especially during the discovery
stage--modest funding of a large variety of original
projects is most likely to pay off in the long run.
Moreover, drug companies must be free--as Merck was--to
pursue risky projects, knowing that a single success can pay
for a multitude of failures. Today, much federal funding
seems to assume that an individual researcher will both make
the discovery and lead the way to its application.
But scale-up is rightly the role of industry, which has the
know-how and infrastructure to move ideas and products into
the marketplace. In the case of streptomycin, Merck,
recognizing that its funding of Waksman's laboratory might
never yield a marketable result, asked only for the first
right to explore commercialization if a potential product
did emerge. As it turned out, the investment paid off
handsomely.
We must remember that the cumulative costs of research
tests, clinical trials, and production of new drugs are
enormous--about $360 million today for a single drug. The
United States pharmaceutical industry spends some $13
billion each year on research, a figure that exceeds the
entire National Institutes of Health budget. And without the
hope of sufficient profits, there's little reason for drug
firms to take such risks. Health-care reformers should
realize that by setting price limits, they may stifle an
important component in the search for new cures.
In the 50 years since the discovery of streptomycin--for
which Waksman was awarded the 1952 Nobel Prize in physiology
or medicine--the nature of scientific discovery has changed
little. What has changed dramatically is the role of the
federal government in setting priorities and dispensing
funds. Indeed, it sometimes seems that government actions
are designed to hinder, not encourage, medical
breakthroughs. Especially distressing is the shift in
government focus from individual researchers working with
their hand-picked teams to large-scale, billion-dollar proj-
ects such as the Human Genome Project.
While such projects are important, they shouldn't be
confused with or replace scientific discovery, which must
come first. Before Congress allocates billions of dollars in
scale-up moneys for the fight against AIDS, cancer, or the
recurrence of resistant strains of tuberculosis, it needs to
fund numerous original and even risky laboratory projects in
the basic sciences. By focusing on discovery, the government
will make a much wiser investment of our tax dollars.
The streptomycin story reminds us that cooperation between a
brilliant university research team and a pharmaceutical
company not stifled by threats of price controls is likely
to be the shortest route to medical miracles.
Joachim Messing, a molecular biologist, is the director of
the Waksman Institute at Rutgers, the State University of
New Jersey, New Brunswick.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
LETTERS
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Educational Bioluminescence
AU : J.D. ANDRADE
TY : OPINION (LETTERS)
PG : 13
I enjoyed the extensive feature on bioluminescence in the
Tools and Technology section of the March 7, 1994, issue of
The Scientist [R. Lewis, page 17]. In addition to its
growing and important applications in environmental and
clinical diagnostics, bioluminescence is being increasingly
used for science-education purposes. We use bioluminescent
marine phytoplankton as a means to introduce elementary and
junior high teachers to the scientific process and the
development of critical-thinking skills, as well as
experiment design and execution. A symposium on
bioluminescence for science education will be held at the
International Symposium on Bio and Chemiluminescence in
Cambridge, U.K., Sept. 5-8, 1994. Readers may contact Philip
Stanley (Fax: 44-223-461777) for further information.
J.D. ANDRADE
Professor and Director
Center for Integrated Science Education
University of Utah
2480 Merrill Engineering Building
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Alternative Medicine
AU : GRAEME FRICKE
TY : OPINION (LETTERS)
PG : 13
I am writing to comment on Franklin Hoke's article
"Alternative Medicine Ideas Widen Horizons in Biomedical
Research" in the March 21 issue of The Scientist [page 1].
I am extremely skeptical of the current attempts to merge
"alternative medicine" with the mainstream. It seems to me
that these techniques are generally unsupported by hard
evidence and in some cases, such as homeopathy, are
exercises in fantasy. Hearing so-called medical
professionals claiming that it is unfeasible to test the
effectiveness of a Chinese herbal remedy because the
diagnostic method is different from the methods used in the
West is absurd; either it works well, works to a limited
degree, or doesn't work at all.
If these "treatments" actually work as claimed, then they
will surely stand up to serious research. Before such
flights of fancy are included with medicine that has
demonstrated benefits, their claims must be verified like
any other course of treatment. Anecdotal evidence is a good
place to start, but it is inadequate proof for something
that could be fatal if misapplied. I agree with those who
insist that extraordinary claims require extraordinary
proof; this proof has not materialized, so attempts to
create courses based on "alternative medicine" are horribly
premature.
I agree that these "alternative treatments" should be
analyzed and subjected to rigorous inspection, but until
this is accomplished they should not be permitted to
interfere with real medicine. We must always remember that a
treatment that doesn't work can end in pain and suffering,
and this is too high a price to pay to keep the purveyors of
"alternative medicine" happy.
GRAEME FRICKE
47 Runnymede Court
London, Ontario Canada N6G 1Z7
E-Mail: gfricke@julian.uwo.ca
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : `Lucrative' Science
AU : JAMES T. KELLIS, JR.
TY : OPINION (LETTERS)
PG : 13
Fantasy: your article about "lucrative science contests
spread[ing] through the United States to reward the
achievements of young researchers" [L. Katterman, The
Scientist, May 2, 1994, page 1]. Reality: the "career"
opportunities (my quotes) advertised in the same issue
offering jobs for Ph.D. scientists at salaries like $23,550
per year!
The article says that "none of the people contacted for this
story ... believes that the [contest prize] money is the
primary motivation for the students." I wonder how they will
feel at the age of 30, when they are earning less than
clerical workers.
JAMES T. KELLIS, JR.
864 Bluebird Canyon Dr.
Laguna Beach, Calif. 92651
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
WHERE TO WRITE:
Letters to the Editor
The Scientist
3501 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Fax:(215)387-7542
E-mail:
Bitnet: garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
=====================================
RESEARCH
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : A Meeting Of Minds: Using Computers To Study The Brain
AU : NEERAJA SANKARAN
TY : RESEARCH
PG : 15
Given that computers were first invented with the intention
of duplicating certain functions of the brain--notably
memory and calculation--researchers say it is perhaps
appropriate that today, science has evolved to the point at
which the machines are being used to study that organ,
employing the selfsame properties they emulate.
"Except for [a computer's] great memory and speed, the brain
is much more powerful," says Stephen Koslow, director of the
Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Science at the
National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Md. "A
computer is a more rigid system, but it is sort of
interesting how things have come to a full circle."
Scientific interest in studying the brain and nervous system
has boomed in the past few decades--as evidenced, for
example, by the dramatic increase in the membership of the
Washington, D.C.-based Society for Neuroscience, from 500 in
1969 to 23,000 in 1994.
The public's interest in neuroscience has also grown because
of the rising awareness of disabling diseases like
Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, stroke, and depression, which
is especially reflected in the large number of private
organizations--such as the Alzheimer's Association in
Chicago; the Arlington, Va.-based National Alliance for the
Mentally Ill; and the Tourette Syndrome Association in
Bayside, N.Y.--that support research in specific areas of
neuroscience.
Expounding on the applications of research to treating brain
disorders, in 1988 the late Rep. Silvio Conte (R-Mass.)
introduced a bill in the House of Representatives to promote
neuroscience. This resulted in an official proclamation,
signed by President George Bush in July 1989, declaring the
1990s as the "Decade of the Brain." It calls upon all public
officials and people to observe the decade with programs and
activities appropriate to the theme.
One of the initiatives to arise from the Decade of the Brain
has been the Human Brain Project, a broad-based federal
effort, supported by several agencies (see accompanying
story), to use computers in mapping the human brain.
"What we are attempting to do is take advantage of the
advances in computer and communications technologies to
develop tools to study [the brain and nervous system] at
different levels and to allow various researchers to share
information with each other," says Koslow.
"Neuroscience is such a vast field," says Frank Eeckman, a
neuroscientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
(LLNL) in Livermore, Calif. "There are several groups
working in different aspects of neuroscience research--
genes, neural circuits, gross anatomy, and psychology--and
there is such an enormous scale of difference in their work
that they can't talk to each other."
Databasing The Brain
While the Human Brain Project was formalized only last year,
various neuroscientists are already using computers to
facilitate their research. "A vast array of computer-based
tools is needed to complement the diverse varieties of data
obtained about the brain," says Peter Fox, director of the
Research Imaging Center at the University of Texas Health
Science Center in San Antonio.
"There are categories of software depending on what you want
to do," he says. "There are devices and sensors which
monitor brain activity by various criteria--blood flow,
volume, or oxygen levels--and we need different types of
software to get the different types of data. These
[programs] are acquisition software which tell the machines
how to acquire the data. Once we have the data we need
additional, post-processing software to use the information
for statistical and other analyses."
Using these various tools, Fox and his colleagues developed
one of the first functional online databases--called Brain
Map--to correlate structure and function of the brain. Set
up in an interactive, multimedia format, BrainMap contains
numerical and statistical data from peer-reviewed journal
articles, as well as pictorial information digitized from
the Atlas of Stereotaxic Anatomy of the Telencephalon (J.
Talairach et al., Paris, Masson & Cie, 1967).
"We've incorporated fairly elaborate indices for accessing
the information," says Fox. "Search categories include
anatomy, behavior [function], citations, and methodologies
used."
"If a scientist were interested in a particular aspect of
vision research, he or she could search the database under
that term," explains Jack Lancaster, a physicist at San
Antonio who worked with Fox in setting up BrainMap. "The
computer would then come back with the number of entries--
articles, experiments, and locations--in the database
corresponding to the search criteria. The researcher would
thus know the nature of the experiments, who did them, and
what the findings were."
The embedded atlas provides a pictorial guide whereby the
researcher can call up images and look up where the research
findings are located within these images, explains
Lancaster. "When a user calls up an image, the computer
screen provides three images--a large diagram representing a
slice of the brain in one plane, and two smaller transparent
views of the brain in the two perpendicular directions to
help pinpoint the locations of various points in the main
diagram," he adds.
"The database would have an entry capability, as well, to
enable scientists to enter new data and use previous
publications to interpret their new observations," says Fox.
Currently BrainMap's software is in beta test-phase, which
means that a limited number of users are evaluating its
capabilities and limitations. Fox and his team hope to have
it widely accessible sometime next year.
Brain Warps
Because no two brains are alike, a key element for the
success of the database, say BrainMap's creators, is
ensuring that structural data from different sources be set
to a standard scale and that each point in the brain be made
identifiable by a coordinate system.
"When comparing two images, we have to make sure the two
brains are in register and that the corresponding parts are
in the same place," LLNL's Eeckman says. "For example, an
MRI [magnetic resonance imaging] and PET [positron emission
tomography] scan from the same brain need to be in register
to correlate the information from the two experiments,
otherwise the comparisons are meaningless."
David Van Essen, a neurobiologist at the Washington
University School of Medicine in St. Louis, has developed
tools such as warping algorithms to "fit" one brain to
another so as to enable meaningful comparisons. These
algorithms endow researchers with powerful tools:
Physicians, for example, could compare the brain of an ill
patient to that of a normal person, say researchers.
Tools like the warping algorithms also have applications in
brain modeling, says Van Essen, who has done extensive work
on mapping the visual cortex of the macaque brain.
Researchers can thus apply the insights gleaned from the
brain in one system to model the working of the brain in
another system. At the Scripps Research Institute in La
Jolla, Calif., Floyd Bloom's team has already digitized
atlases of the brains from other animals such as cats, rats,
mice, and monkeys.
While the existing databases are prototypes, Koslow
anticipates that the final product of the Human Brain
Project will be a much larger and a far more powerful
system.
"Calling it a map or even a database is a misnomer--the
terms are too limiting," says Eeckman. "A data-management
system would be a more appropriate description."
"At this point we haven't determined the final
configuration, and it will probably be half-a-dozen years
before we have some inkling of what it will become," says
Koslow, taking into account the ongoing developments in
computer science (for example, three-dimensional virtual
reality technology) that would influence the project.
"Once [the database] is up, scientists should be able to
access it from their terminals, either to retrieve or feed
information, and use it for modeling work. We anticipate it
will have multiple uses--not only in research but in
education, therapy, and intervention, as well."
-----
NETWORKING FOR NEUROSCIENTISTS
For more information on neuroscience and brain research,
contact:
Society for Neuroscience
11 Dupont Circle, Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202) 462-6688
* Nancy Beang,
executive director
* Larry Squire, president
* 23,000 members
American Academy of Neurology
2221 University Ave., S.E.
Suite 335
Minneapolis, Minn. 55414
Phone: (612) 623-8115
Fax: (612) 623-3504
* Jan Kolehmainen, executive director
* Jack Whisnant, president
* 12,800 members
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : THE BRAIN: BYTE BY BYTE
AU : NEERAJA SANKARAN
TY : RESEARCH
PG : 15
The Human Brain Project is a multi-institutional federal
effort to facilitate neuroscience research and coordination
of data and information among various researchers. It was
conceived as part of the Decade of the Brain, a
congressionally mandated initiative to promote neuroscience
and brain research in the 1990s. The 12 federal agencies
that are contributing varying amounts of money or resources
to the project are:
* National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
* National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
(NHLBI)
* National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
* National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
(NICHD)
* National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR)
* National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
* National Institute on Aging (NIA)
* National Institute on Deafness and Other
Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
* National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
* National Library of Medicine (NLM)
* National Science Foundation
* Office of Naval Research (ONR)
The program came into being formally with the April 1993
release of a report--titled "The Human Brain Project: Phase
I Feasibility Studies"--on the practicality of the
undertaking. This was prepared by the 10 original funding
bodies (NHLBI, NIAAA, and NIDR joined in the project after
the report was released, and the National Center for
Research Resources withdrew).
The first eight research grants, totaling about $4.5
million, were awarded last September. Currently, a second
round of research proposals is being reviewed for relevance
to the objectives of the project. Rather than set aside
money for the Human Brain Project per se, individual
agencies fund projects that simultaneously address their own
interests and are applicable to the project. The eight
projects are:
Neuronal Vulnerability and Informatics in Human Disease
* Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, Calif.
* Floyd Bloom, principal investigator
* Funded by NIMH, NIDA, and NASA
* Proposes to develop software to acquire and analyze
quantitative microscopic data and construct a database of
digitized (computerized) atlases of brains from several
species of animals.
Extended Thin-Plate Splines for Brain Variation in Three Dimensions
* University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
* Fred Bookstein, principal investigator
* Funded by NIDA, NIMH, and NIA
* Proposes to develop mathematical and statistical tools to
standardize gross brain shape from image data.
A Simulator-Based Neuronal Database
* California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
* James Bower, principal investigator
* Funded by NIMH and NIDA
* Proposes to apply new tools such as virtual reality to
augment an existing brain modeling/simulation software tool.
Structural Information Framework for Brain Mapping
* University of Washington, Seattle
* James Brinkley, principal investigator
* Funded by NIDCD and NLM
* Proposes to develop a three-dimensional multimedia
database and modeling system focusing on the organization
of language in the brain.
Goal-Directed Magnetic Resonance Brain Micro-Imaging
* California Institute of Technology
* Russell Jacobs, principal investigator
* Funded by NIDA and NIMH
* Proposes to link data collection by computers with image
processing for application in developmental neurosciences.
A Probabilistic Reference for the Human Brain
* University of California, Los Angeles
* John Mazziotta, principal investigator
* Funded by NIMH and NIDA
* Proposes to develop a three-dimensional model relating
structure and function of the brain, based on
probabilistic data from population studies that facilitate
sophisticated statistical analysis of new incoming data.
Imaging Software and Methods for Mapping Brain Development
* Kennedy Krieger Research Institute Inc., Baltimore
* Allan Reiss, principal investigator
* Funded by NICHD
* Plans to develop software relating to image processing and
analysis.
Integration of Multidisciplinary Sensory Data
* Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
* Gordon Shepherd, principal investigator
* Funded by NASA and NIMH
* Proposes to develop software to integrate different types
of data and operations specifically to model the olfactory
system.
For information on the Human Brain Project, contact Stephen
Koslow or Michael Huerta, E-mail: hmi@cu.nih.gov.
--N.S.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
HOT PAPERS
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : BIOCHEMISTRY
TY : RESEARCH (HOT PAPERS)
PG : 16
T. Takeshita, H. Asao, K. Ohtani, N. Ishii, S. Kumaki, N.
Tanaka, H. Munakata, M. Nakamura, K. Sugamura, "Cloning of
the g chain of the human IL-2 receptor," Science, 257:379-
82, 1992.
Kazuo Sugamura (Department of Microbiology, Tohoku
University School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan): "Prior to
this study, we had established monoclonal antibodies
specific for the b chain of the receptor for interleukin 2
(IL-2), also known as a T cell growth factor. A series of
experiments with these monoclonal antibodies provided
evidence that the functional IL-2 receptor includes a third
novel component, the g chain, in addition to the a and a
chains. In this study, a complete cDNA clone of the g chain
gene was isolated and characterized as a new member of the
cytokine receptor family. The g chain, like the a chain, was
shown to be an indispensable subunit for the functional IL-2
receptor. Interestingly, the g chain gene was mapped to a
locus on the X chromosome (Xq13) where the putative gene for
X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (XSCID) is
located. Furthermore, mutations of the g chain gene were
demonstrated in patients with XSCID (M. Noguchi et al.,
Cell, 73:147-57, 1993). XSCID is characterized by markedly
reduced levels or complete absence of T cells that play
pivotal roles in the immune system. Therefore, it is evident
that abnormality of the g chain causes an impairment of
early T cell development, resulting in XSCID.
"The g chain was originally identified as an essential
component of the receptor complex for IL-2. However, since
patients and mice lacking IL-2 production generate mature T
cells, it could be speculated that the g chain may be a
component of receptors for other cytokines. In this context,
we have already demonstrated that the g chain participates
in the formation of functional receptors for IL-4 and IL-7,
as well as IL-2 (M. Kondo et al., Science, 262:1874-77, 1993
and 263:1453-4, 1994). The study of such cytokines
interacting with the common g chain accentuates the urgent
need to resolve the mechanism of early T cell development.
"Currently, only bone marrow transplantation has lent
dividends in curing patients with XSCID. Since XSCID is
caused by mutation of a single gene, the g chain gene,
introduction of the normal g chain gene into bone marrow
cells of patients with XSCID could probably lead to gene
therapy of patients with XSCID--as in the case of adenosine
deaminase deficiency, which has been successfully corrected
by gene therapy.
"Thus, the discovery and molecular characterization of the g
chain gene has brought us a breakthrough in studying the
rather intricate patterns involved in T cell development,
and has provided a practical tool for gene therapy for
XSCID."
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : ASTROPHYSICS
TY : RESEARCH (HOT PAPERS)
PG : 16
B.P. Schmidt, R.P. Kirshner, "Expanding photospheres of Type
II supernovae and the extragalactic distance scale,"
Astrophysical Journal, 395:366-86, 1992.
Brian P. Schmidt (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics, Cambridge, Mass.): "Deter- mining the value of
the Hubble Constant, Ho, has been an area of considerable
interest since Edwin Hubble first realized that the universe
was expanding in the late 1920s. Ho is the constant of
proportionality between the recession velocities of galaxies
and their distances. It gives the current rate of expansion
of the universe, and is inversely proportional to the age of
the universe. Measuring Ho is difficult because there are no
direct geometric measures of distance that can be applied to
objects beyond our own galaxy. Because the universe does not
expand smoothly on scales corresponding to the distances to
the nearest galaxies, it is necessary to measure accurate
distances to galaxies far beyond the local group to
ascertain the true value of Ho. Starting with parallax
distances to the nearest stars, astronomers have erected
cosmic distance ladders to galaxies by bootstrapping several
different methods. Unfortunately, the results are
inconclusive--several methods give Ho = 80 km s-1 Mpc-1
(kilometers per second per mega parsec), while others give
Ho = 50 km s-1 Mpc-1, with the difference well outside the
quoted errors.
"Our work refined the Expanding Photosphere Method, a
technique for measuring distances to Type II supernovae (the
life-ending explosions of massive stars) based on our
physical understanding of their expanding atmospheres. The
method requires no external calibration, and can be applied
to nearby supernovae as well as extremely distant objects in
a consistent manner. In this work we applied our method to
10 supernovae, and found Ho = 60x10 km s-1 Mpc-1. In the
past two years we have added further refinements to our
understanding of Type II supernova atmospheres, and have
gathered data for eight more Type II supernovae. Our latest
value of Ho has nudged up to 73x9 km s-1 Mpc-1 (B.P. Schmidt
et al., Astrophys. J., in press).
"Progress has been made with the more traditional methods,
as well. The absolute brightness of Type Ia supernovae has
been calibrated using the Hubble Space Telescope (A. Sandage
et al., Astrophys. J., 413:L23, 1994), and a comparison of
the distances derived using Type Ia supernovae, the
luminosity line-width relation for galaxies, planetary
nebula luminosity functions, and surface brightness
fluctuations has shown that the relative distances derived
by these methods are consistent with each other (G. Jacoby
et al., Publications of the Astronomical Society of the
Pacific, 104:599, 1992). However, the absolute calibration
of the Type Ia supernovae distance ladder disagrees with
these three other methods, giving Ho = 55 km s-1 Mpc-1, as
opposed to Ho = 80 km s-1 Mpc -1. More controversy is in
store as a Hubble Constant larger than Ho = 65 km s-1 Mpc-1
gives an age for a marginally bound universe (one that will
stop expanding eventually) of less than 10 billion years, a
time shorter than the ages of the oldest stars."
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : BIOINORGANIC CHEMISTRY
TY : RESEARCH (HOT PAPERS)
PG : 16
J. Kim, D.C. Rees, "Structural models for the metal centers
in the nitrogenase molybdenum-iron protein," Science,
257:1677-82, 1992.
Douglas C. Rees (Division of Chemistry and Chemical
Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena):
"The isolation by V.K. Shah and W. Brill (Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 74:3248, 1977) of a low-
molecular-weight iron- and molybdenum-containing component
from nitrogen- ase, the FeMo cofactor, catalyzed extensive
efforts to structurally characterize the active center of
the enzyme responsible for biological nitrogen fixation.
Interest in the nitrogenase mechanism was already heightened
by the contrast between the mild conditions associated with
biological conversion of dinitrogen to ammonia and the high
temperature and pressure conditions required for the
industrial Haber- Basch process; the report by Shah and
Brill provided a convenient approach to directly study the
enzyme's active center. Spectroscopic, synthetic, and
analytical studies defined many pieces of the structural
jigsaw puzzle of the FeMo cofactor, but final assembly of
these pieces into the completed structure proved elusive.
"Our involvement in this puzzle resulted from two fortunate
events. While I was a graduate student with W.N. Lipscomb at
Harvard University, J.B. Howard spent a sabbatical in the
group, thus triggering my interest in nitrogenase and
initiating a continuing collaboration, and more recently, a
remarkable graduate student, Jongsun Kim, joined my group at
Caltech. For his thesis work, Jongsun used X-ray
crystallography to solve the structure of the entire
nitrogenase protein that contains the FeMo cofactor, and was
consequently able to define the structure of this component.
The cofactor structure incorporated many of the previously
defined features, but included a few unexpected twists,
especially for the coordination environment of many of the
iron atoms.
"Interest in this paper may reflect the solution of a long-
standing and well-formulated problem in bioinorganic
chemistry. This work also illustrates the fundamental
importance of structural information in understanding
chemical and biological systems. Although the structure is
now available, the nitrogenase story is far from complete."
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Making The Online Connection With Bibliographic-
Database Software
AU : FRANKLIN HOKE
TY : TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
PG : 18
Researchers increasingly are discovering the virtues of
personal bibliographic-database software pack- ages--
programs that can help them cut long, tedious hours from the
process of preparing the often-extensive bibliographies
accompanying their scientific manuscripts.
Introduced in the early 1980s, these programs allow an
investigator to maintain a sophisticated reference database
specific to his or her studies. Once assembled, such a
database can be turned to many different research purposes.
Among the most useful of these, scientists say, is
automatically generating properly formatted manuscript
bibliographies.
The task of building a thorough bibliographic database in
the first place, however, can be quite time-consuming in
itself, especially if each reference must initially be keyed
in.
The answer to this problem, for a growing number of
scientists, is improved bibliographic-database software
designed to import references from electronic sources--
including online databases, CD-ROM data-bases, and
subscriptions to reference research services--directly into
their personal databases.
"That's how lots of people are using [this] software--and
those that aren't, should be," says library automation
consultant Pamela R. Cibbarelli, who heads her own firm,
Cibbarelli's, in Huntington Beach, Calif. She is also editor
of the Directory of Library Automation Software, Systems,
and Services (Medford, N.J., Learned Information Inc.,
1994).
Ideally, importing references should be as automatic a
process as printing out a bibliography. Historically,
however, attempts to import references from electronic
databases have met with varied levels of success and
frustration, because the databases use widely differing
entry formats that can cause the computerized process to
stumble. Producers of bibliographic-database software have
worked hard on the problem, and today the process of
electronic reference importation--although still not
infallible--is much smoother.
The new ease with which references can be brought into
personal databases dovetails well with the continuing growth
in use of the Internet among scientists and the increasing
presence of CD-ROM and electronic databases in libraries and
on campus networks, information professionals say.
"There's an enormous amount of interest in importing
references, especially with the advent of free and low-cost
searching," says Sue Stigleman, a former librarian at the
Health Sciences Library of the University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill, and author of a recent review of bibliography-
formatting software (Database, 16:24-38, February 1993). "As
people can do more and more of that right from their own
personal computers--just capture references and dump them
into their database--importing is going to become even more
important than it is now."
Once bibliographic references are imported and integrated
into the database, the leading programs then allow a
scientist to search individual database fields, such as
author, title, and user-selected key words. Some programs
include the ability to create or import fully searchable
abstracts. Such a personal database can serve as an
extremely valuable research tool, pulling together, in a
moment, a sharply focused group of references relevant to
whatever question the researcher may be currently at work
on.
Perhaps the most sought-after feature of these programs,
however, is their ability to help a prospective author
automatically generate bibliographies of virtually any
length, in the required formats of leading scientific
publications. And if the paper is rejected by one journal, a
few keystrokes at the computer will generate a new version
of the paper with the bibliography properly formatted for
the next journal.
Among such programs are: Bookends Pro from Westing Software,
Tiburon, Calif.; EndNote from Niles and Associates Inc.,
Berkeley, Calif.; Library Master from Balboa Software,
Willowdale, Ontario, Canada; Papyrus from Research Software
Design, Portland, Ore.; Pro-Cite from Personal Bibliographic
Software Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich.; and Reference Manager, from
Research Information Systems Inc., Carlsbad, Calif. Citation
from Oberon Resources, Columbus, Ohio, is another, similar
program that runs exclusively as a utility program within
WordPerfect for Windows, a popular word-processing program
from WordPerfect Corp., Orem, Utah. Prices range from $99
for the total Papyrus package to $590 for the Pro-Cite
system, including importation software.
Translation Tactics
Producers of personal bibliographic-database programs take
two main approaches to the task of importing references. The
most common is to provide users with specific file-
conversion modules, or filters, designed to translate
references from a given set of widely used databases into
the format used by the personal-database program. The other
is to allow the user to design or customize file-conversion
routines to import from whatever database he or she is
using. The second approach, although more complex and
demanding of the user, is growing in popularity. Some
programs offer a combination of these approaches.
"The general trend is toward more customizability by the
user," says Stigleman. "The major programs are taking a much
broader view and recognizing that people go out and get
information from all sorts of places and want to bring it in
[to their databases] without having to retype it."
Stigleman adds, however, that users should think twice
before abandoning the set of file conversions provided by
the software producer. Customizing a conversion "is picky,
tedious work for the user," she says.
Some of the programs using the pre-formatted conversions
require the user to buy the filters bundled separately from
the main bibliographic-database program. For example,
EndNote offers EndLink, Pro-Cite has Biblio-Link II, and
Reference Manager markets Capture. Papyrus, on the other
hand, includes its conversion software in its main program,
as does Bookends Pro.
Among the commercial vendors of databases from which
references can be imported using these conversion packages
are: BIOSIS, based in Philadelphia; BRS Information
Technologies of McLean, Va.; CD-Plus Inc. of New York;
Chemical Abstracts Service/STN International in Columbus;
Dialog Information Services Inc., located in Palo Alto,
Calif.; the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in
Philadelphia; and SilverPlatter Information Inc. of Norwood,
Mass.
Several databases of particular importance to biomedical
researchers--Medline, most prominently--are produced by the
National Library of Medicine (NLM) in Bethesda, Md., and are
available directly from NLM via the Internet or CD-ROM. But
they are also offered by many major commercial database
suppliers, and each supplier's version requires its own
file-conversion routine.
"We support 31 different Med-line versions," says Alison
Cevolani, a product marketing representative for Reference
Manager. "The data is all the same. It's just how it looks
that's different."
The list of Medline versions supported by Reference Manager
even includes the one available on the University of
Southern California campus network, Cevolani says. Counting
the Medline versions, Reference Manager supports more than
100 database sources.
A new version of EndNote's EndLink module, scheduled for
release for the Macintosh in the fall, provides an extensive
selection of filters for major databases but also allows
users to customize file filters when necessary, says Emanuel
Rosen, Niles and Associates' vice president for marketing.
Other programs that allow their users to customize
importation routines, according to Stigleman, include
Library Master and Pro-Cite.
Papyrus has long allowed users to customize their
importation routines. Papyrus also provides a large library
of database filters--more than 100 at last count.
"When there is a change by an online service, some of our
more savvy users can just change the format on their own,"
says Dave Goldman, president of Research Software Design and
the author of Papyrus. "Others will just call us and we give
them instructions as to what to type in Papyrus to update
their format."
A nearly foolproof way to import electronic references, for
those who can afford the expense, is to subscribe to one of
the diskette reference services specifically coordinated
with a database program. These services search the
literature relevant to a researcher's discipline and provide
sets of new bibliographic references on diskettes weekly.
One of these services, Current Contents on Diskette from
ISI, for example, permits records to be directly imported
into EndNote, Pro-Cite, and Reference Manager data-bases.
Reference Up- date, from Research Information Systems, is a
similar service, and its records can be painlessly
integrated into Reference Manager. In addition, Reference
Update is now available via the Internet, so that
subscribers can receive new references in their fields in an
even more timely way.
Plain text, or ASCII, files also can be transferred from
electronic sources to a personal database, although
difficulties with Greek and other special characters may
emerge.
Eric A. Jaffe, a professor of medicine at Cornell University
Medical College in New York, says his Reference Update
subscription, which includes abstracts, costs about $500 per
year. To help defray the costs, he and several other faculty
members with related interests share a subscription. Jaffe
researches endothelial cells, and colleagues work with
platelets, adhesion factors, and lipid biochemistry, he
says.
However one chooses to build his or her bibliographic-
reference database, its value, once compiled, is great,
Jaffe says. To be freed of laboriously producing the
bibliographies to accompany manuscripts and other papers
makes it worth the trouble, even if one has to enter the
records individually, he says.
"To write a paper with 10 citations is not a big deal,"
Jaffe says. "To write a paper with 20 citations is no longer
so easy. To write a paper with 30 citations--let's say, you
want to reverse the order of the citations in the
introduction, or add a three-line paragraph in the methods
section with a citation--suddenly, you've got to renumber
all your citations. Who wants to do that? Why should anybody
waste their time? And imagine if you do a thesis, where
there are 80, 150, or 200 references. It becomes totally out
of hand.
"Nobody should do that kind of work without one of these
products. I happen to like Reference Manager, but if
somebody said to me, `Should I do it by hand or should I use
the competition?' I would say `Use something, but, God,
don't do it by hand.'"
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : SUPPLIERS OF BIBLIOGRAPHIC-REFERENCE DATABASES AND
SOFTWARE
TY : TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
PG : 19
The following companies produce online and CD-ROM bibliographic-
reference databases or software products to create and manage
personal bibliographic databases of references obtained from such
sources. Please contact the companies directly for more
information concerning specific products.
Balboa Software
61 Lorraine Dr.
Willowdale, Ontario,
M2N 2E3 Canada
(416) 730-8980
Fax: (416) 730-9715
Circle No. 226 on Reader Service Card
BIOSIS
2100 Arch St.
Philadelphia, Pa. 19103
(215) 587-4800
Fax: (215) 587-2041
Circle No. 228 on Reader Service Card
Biosoft
P.O. Box 10938
Ferguson, Mo. 63135
(314) 524-8029
Fax: (314) 524-8129
Circle No. 229 on Reader Service Card
CD-Plus Inc.
333 Seventh Ave.
Fourth Floor
New York, N.Y. 10001
(800) 950-2035
Fax: (212) 563-3784
Circle No. 230 on Reader Service Card
Chemical Abstracts Service
STN International
2540 Olentangy River Rd.
Columbus, Ohio 43210
(614) 447-3600
Fax: (614) 447-3713
Circle No. 001 on Reader Service Card
Compact Cambridge
Division of Cambridge
Scientific Abstracts
7200 Wisconsin Ave.
Bethesda, Md. 20814
(800) 843-7751
Fax: (301) 961-6720
Circle No. 002 on Reader Service Card
DataChip Corp.
11736 Raleigh Dr.
Omaha, Neb. 68164
(402) 496-9662
Fax: (402) 496-9662
Circle No. 003 on Reader Service Card
Dialog Information Services Inc.
3460 Hillview Ave.
Palo Alto, Calif. 94304
(415) 858-2700
Fax: (415) 858-7069
Circle No. 004 on Reader Service Card
Institute for Scientific Information
3501 Market St.
Philadelphia, Pa. 19104
(800) 523-1850
Fax: (215) 386-6362
Circle No. 227 on Reader Service Card
Niles & Associates Inc.
800 Jones St.
Berkeley, Calif. 94710
(510) 559-8592
Fax: (510) 559-8683
Circle No. 005 on Reader Service Card
Oberon Resources
147 E. Oakland Ave.
Columbus, Ohio 43201
(614) 294-7762
Fax: (614) 294-7980
Circle No. 006 on Reader Service Card
Personal Bibliographic Software Inc.
525 Avis Dr., Suite 10
Ann Arbor, Mich. 48108
(313) 996-1580
Fax: (313) 996-4672
Circle No. 007 on Reader Service Card
Pro Tem Software Inc.
3790 El Camino Real
Suite 389
Palo Alto, Calif. 94306
(800) 533-6922
Fax: (415) 323-0611
Circle No. 008 on Reader Service Card
REFMENU
940 Contra Costa Dr.
El Cerrito, Calif. 94530
(510) 642-2286
Fax: (510) 643-6264
Circle No. 009 on Reader Service Card
Research Information Systems Inc.
Camino Corporate Center
2355 Camino Vida Roble
Carlsbad, Calif. 92009-1572
(619) 438-5526
Fax: (619) 438-5573
Circle No. 010 on Reader Service Card
Research Software Design
2718 S.W. Kelly St.
Suite 181
Portland, Ore. 97201
(503) 796-1368
Fax: (503) 241-4260
Circle No. 011 on Reader Service Card
Sidereal Technologies Inc.
P.O. Box 30
263 Center Ave.
Westwood, N.J. 07675
(201) 666-6262
Fax: (201) 666-8119
Circle No. 012 on Reader Service Card
SilverPlatter Information Inc.
100 River Ridge Dr.
Norwood, Mass.
02062-5043
(800) 343-0064
Fax: (617) 769-8763
Circle No. 013 on Reader Service Card
Trinity Software
P.O. Box 960
Main Street
Campton, N.H. 03223
(603) 726-4641
Fax: (603) 726-3781
Circle No. 014 on Reader Service Card
Westing Software
2960 Paradise Dr.
Tiburon, Calif. 94920
(415) 435-9343
Fax: (415) 435-6286
Circle No. 015 on Reader Service Card
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
NEW PRODUCTS
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Dialog Information Services Issues Nuclear Science
Abstracts On CD-ROM
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
Dialog Information Services Inc. of Palo Alto, Calif., has
released DIALOG OnDisc Nuclear Science Abstracts (NSA), a
CD-ROM database containing nearly 1 million records from the
1948-76 volumes of Nuclear Science Abstracts. The database
provides bibliographic references for books, journal
articles, conference proceedings, technical reports,
patents, dissertations, engineering drawings, and other
documents of interest to professionals in nuclear research,
development, and production. Abstracts are included for
approximately 25 percent of the references. NSA provides
background data for current research in nuclear science
areas: reactor technology; particle accelerators; nuclear
materials and waste management; radiation effects; isotope
and radiation source technology; metals, ceramics, and other
materials; and fusion energy. The NSA database precedes
Dialog's OnDisc DOE (Department of Energy) Energy Science
and Technology, which covers 1974 to the present.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Geno Technology Launches GeneCAPSULE For DNA Extraction
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
Geno Technology Inc. of St. Louis announces the release of
GeneCAPSULE, a new, single-use device for rapid DNA
extraction from gels. Using electroelution and requiring no
additional equipment, the new product takes as little as 90
seconds to recover DNA in amounts ranging from 10 to 30 ml,
and less than 60 seconds to recover 1,000 bp, according to
the company. The recovered DNA is ready for ligation,
restriction-enzyme digestion, sequencing, amplification,
random priming, nick translation, and other enzymatic
reactions. GeneCAPSULE is supplied as a 54-unit kit.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Biotecx Laboratories Introduces IMMULAN Purification Kits
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
Houston-based Biotecx Laboratories Inc. has introduced
IMMULAN immune column separation kits for T cells and T-cell
subpopulations. The kits facilitate affinity chromatography
separation and selection of rat, mouse, human, cat, dog, and
monkey T cells derived from peripheral blood, lymph nodes,
spleen, thymus, and other tissues. Through selective
chemical elimination, users can separate CD4+ and CD8+ T
cells in high yield. The purity of isolated T cells is said
to range from 90 percent to 99 percent; that of
subpopulations is said to be from 93 percent to 98 percent,
with virtually all of the B-cell population and macrophages
removed. The kits allow for 30 T-cell purifications and 20
T-cell subpopulation separations. They use immunoselective
microparticles coated with polyclonal IgG (H and L chains)
and include plastic, adjustment-free columns accommodating
standard 50 ml centrifuge tubes as well as pretested, ready-
to-use reagents.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Phycoerythrin-Cy5 Conjugated Antibodies For Flow
Cytometry From AMAC
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
AMAC Inc., headquartered in Westbrook, Maine, has added PE-
Cy5 conjugated antibodies to its line of products for flow
cytometry: CD3, CD4, CD19, CD34, and CD45, as well as IgG1
phycoerythrin-Cy5, all available in liquid form, in vials
that will last for 100 tests. This fluoro-chrome allows for
multiparameter analysis of lymphocyte populations with other
fluorochromes and a single-laser flow cytometer. AMAC's
fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC), phycoerythrin, and
phycoerythrin-Cy5 are all excited at 488 nm, with FITC
emitting at 525 nm, phycoerythrin at 575 nm, and
phycoerythrin-Cy5 at 670 nm. The majority of photons emitted
by phycoerythrin in the tandem fluorochrome PE-Cy5 (greater
than 95 percent) are captured by Cy5, which avoids light
contamination in the phycoerythrin detector by the PE-Cy5
dye spectrum. The phycoerythrin-Cy5 molecule is designed to
yield a very high level of fluorescence intensity.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Elkay Products Inc. Releases New Autotubes
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
Elkay Products Inc. of Shrewsbury, Mass., offers autotubes
for use in HTLV-III testing, polymerase chain reaction cell-
harvesting procedures, cell-uptake studies, receptor-binding
assays, radioimmunoassays, and enzyme immunoassays. They can
also be used for freezer storage of blood bank samples, as
well as laboratory transport and storage of specimens and
reagents. The autotubes provide convenient, extra-volume
capacity for sample predilution prior to transfer into a
microplate for analysis. They are packaged in a 96-position,
stackable 8 o 12 rack. Standard 9 mm on-center spacing of
tubes is used for the Autotube 1.2 ml rack, making it
compatible with leading multichannel pipettors and
autosampling devices. Each rack of tubes contains a
removable, 96-place identification card for recording tube
locations for each sample. The tubes, rack, and cover are
made from 100 percent virgin polypropylene, are fully
autoclavable, and can be stored to -85oC. Sterile or
nonsterile polyethylene plug caps are supplied on strips
(eight caps per strip), which are not autoclavable; the caps
help prevent sample contamination during mixing and storage.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Labsystems Unveils Microplate Luminometers
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
Labsystems, located in Needham Heights, Mass., has announced
the release of three new micro-plate luminometers, all
robot-compatible and computer- controllable. The Luminoskan
EL is designed for use with enhanced luminescence, or
"glow," reagents.
The basic system--without injectors, temperature control, or
a mixer--offers a choice of eight measurement modes and
computer controls. The Luminoskan RT has two injectors and
an orbital mixer as standard features. It is suited for
applications requiring reagent addition without the need for
temperature control.
The Luminoskan RS includes bilevel temperature control
ranging from 20o to 43oC, orbital mixing, and two injectors;
two other injectors may be added as an option.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Nalge Announces A PES Membrane For Tissue-Culture
Applications
TY : RESEARCH (NEW PRODUCTS)
PG : 20
Nalge Co. of Rochester, N.Y., has introduced a line of
filtration products featuring a new polyethersulfone (PES)
membrane for a variety of tissue-culture applications. PES,
an inherently hydrophilic membrane, offers faster flow rates
and fluid throughputs than other sterilizing-grade
filtration membranes, according to the company. This is said
to reduce the number of filter changes, thereby cutting
filtration time and costs. In addition, the company says
that PES results in lower extractables and protein binding
and better chemical resistance than occur with acetates,
nitrate, or nylon membranes.
The PES membrane is available on NALGENE 50 mm and 90 mm
filter units, bottle cap filters, and syringe filters, which
are radiation sterilized and certified sterile,
noncytotoxic, and nonpyrogenic.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : New Grants Promote Research, Teaching As Equally
Important Duties
AU : EDWARD R. SILVERMAN
TY : PROFESSION
PG : 21
Seeking to promote teaching and research as equally
important endeavors among university science faculty, the
Research Corporation, a Tucson, Ariz.-based nonprofit
foundation, recently named the recipients of its first-ever
Cottrell Scholars awards.
A total of 17 young academics in chemistry, physics, and
astronomy (see accompanying list) were each granted $50,000,
which they are expected to use to fund a research project
while also involving their undergraduate students in
scientific investigation.
The awards program is designed to help third-year faculty at
Ph.D.-granting institutions carry out their commitments to
both teaching and research and bridge the gap that often
exists between the two responsibilities. The grant
recipients are not required to prepare budgets and have a
great deal of flexibility in how they use their awards.
"In the last half-dozen years, we've grown increasingly
concerned that universities have underemphasized teaching,"
says Brian Andreen, vice president of the Research
Corporation. "And there weren't many sources of support for
broad scholarship. But there's a need for people who do both
research and teaching. This is an attempt to identify people
like that and give them the capital to preserve their work.
"One of the problems has been that indirect support is so
attractive to universities that research overwhelms
everything else," Andreen says. "This seemed to be a program
where we could get more leverage for our dollars.
"We feel that it's important for undergraduates, our future
scientists, to be exposed to the best and brightest people
and not be relegated to wait until they get into graduate
school for this kind of benefit."
The awards are named for Frederick Gardner Cottrell, who
founded the Research Corporation in 1912, chartered "to make
inventions more available and effective in the useful arts
and manufactures" and "to provide means for scholarly
research and experimentation." Recipients were chosen from
among 123 applicants, who were judged by a panel of six
outside academics and Research Corporation president John
Schaefer. The recipients included 10 chemists, six
physicists, and one astronomer from 16 different
universities in 14 states; the program is limited to faculty
in these three disciplines.
Charting New Ground
Of overriding importance to the review panel was not only an
applicant's mix of teaching and research ideas, but also a
desire to explore new ground in such a way that their work
influences students.
"There are several [criteria]: creativity, evidence that
their ideas can be implemented, impact, and the scope of
innovation," says Arthur Ellis, a chemistry professor at the
University of Wisconsin, Madison, and a member of the
committee that chose the Cottrell Scholars.
Adds another committee member, Robert Hallock, a physics
professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst: "What
we look for are people who present proposals for high-
quality research and a high quality of teaching. One of the
things you look for is an innovative approach to a
scientific problem. But the bottom line is this: Will these
people make a difference to their field and their students?
They're judged as researchers and teachers."
Hallock says: "I think these awards will help outsiders to
recognize that high-quality teaching does take place.
Certainly, the monetary award is large enough that people
will take notice. Most scientists have one or two years of
start-up money, but little by the third year. The Research
Corporation is putting its money where its mouth is."
Herbert Fertig couldn't agree more. The 32-year-old
assistant professor in the physics and astronomy department
at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, was among the
first round of recipients of the Cottrell grants.
"In my field, the teaching aspect has been missing--[the]
emphasis is on research, and other awards place it there,
too," he says. "It's part of the culture. Historically,
teaching hasn't been emphasized all that much."
With the award, he hopes to use computer simulation to
examine electron systems. He expects his students to benefit
from the new, sophisticated computer gear he plans to
purchase. "And now, I'll be in a position to support a
student," he adds. "It's a necessary thing."
For those interested in next year's Cottrell Scholars
awards, information and application forms are now available;
the deadline for applying is September 1. Applicants must be
qualified faculty members in chemistry, physics, and
astronomy who accepted tenure-track positions in 1992.
According to the Research Corporation, there is no fixed
limit on the number of Cottrell Scholars awards. For more
information, contact the Research Corporation, 101 N. Wilmot
Rd., Suite 250, Tucson, Ariz. 85711-3332; (602) 571-1111.
Fax: (602) 571-1119. E-mail: research@ccit.ariz.edu.
Edward R. Silverman is a freelance writer based in Millburn, N.J.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : 1994 COTTRELL SCHOLARS
TY : PROFESSION
PG : 21
* Warren Findlay Beck, assistant professor, chemistry
department, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn.
* David Scott Bohle, assistant professor, chemistry
department, University of Wyoming, Laramie
* Robert M. Bowman, assistant professor, chemistry
department, University of Kansas, Lawrence
* David Mark Collard, assistant professor, chemistry and
biochemistry department, Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta
* Peter K. Dorhout, assistant professor, chemistry
department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins
* Herbert A. Fertig, assistant professor, physics and
astronomy department, University of Kentucky, Lexington
* L. Michael Hayden, assistant professor, physics
department, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
* Heinrich Martin Jaeger, assistant professor, physics
department, James Franck Institute, University of Chicago
* Nancy Makri, assistant professor, School of Chemical
Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana
* Ann McDermott, assistant professor, chemistry department,
Columbia University, New York City
* Sanjib Ratan Mishra, associate professor, physics
department, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
* Lyman Alexander Page, Jr., assistant professor, physics
department, Princeton University, New Jersey
* Lynmarie Agnes Posey, assistant professor, chemistry
department, Van-derbilt University, Nashville
* Roger W. Romani, assistant professor, physics department,
Stanford University, California
* Bradley Dennis Smith, assistant professor, chemistry
department, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, Ind.
* Lynmarie Kim Thompson, assistant professor, chemistry
department, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
* Reinrus (Rene) A.M. Walterbos, assistant professor,
astronomy department, New Mexico State University, Las
Cruces
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
PEOPLE
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Balanced Reactions: Organic Chemist Named Winner Of
Priestley Medal ...
AU : NEERAJA SANKARAN
TY : PROFESSION (PEOPLE)
PG : 22
Derek H.R. Barton, a winner of the 1969 Nobel Prize in
chemistry and a Distinguished Professor of Chemistry at
Texas A&M University, College Station, has been selected to
receive the 1995 Priestley Medal, the American Chemical
Society's (ACS) highest honor. Designed to commemorate the
work of Joseph Priestley, an 18th-century chemist from Great
Britain, the gold medal will be presented to Barton at ACS's
national meeting scheduled for next April in Anaheim, Calif.
Barton's special interest has been in the area of
conformational analysis: forming theories on the three-
dimensional shapes of molecules, and inventing new chemical
reactions. "You think about them in your head and then try
them out in the laboratory," says the 75-year-old organic
chemist, who in 1959 devised reactions that made functional
the unactivated methyl groups in steroids. This reaction
enabled other scientists to synthesize aldosterone--an
essential hormone controlling electrolyte balance in the
body. Nowadays, Barton is working on the selective
functionalization of saturated hydrocarbons, which he says
has applications in the production of adipic acid, a major
component in the production of nylons.
In 1942, Barton received his Ph.D. in organic chemistry from
the Imperial College of Science and Technology, a part of
the University of London in the United Kingdom. He
subsequently spent several years in the U.K. and France,
moving to Texas A&M in 1986. Three years after his receipt
of the Nobel Prize, along with Norwegian chemist Odd Hassel,
he was knighted by Great Britain's Queen Elizabeth II.
--Neeraja Sankaran
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : ...And Two Inorganic Investigators Get The 1994 Welch
Award In Chemistry
AU : NEERAJA SANKARAN
TY : PROFESSION (PEOPLE)
PG : 22
F. Albert Cotton, Doherty-Welch Distinguished Service
Professor of Chemistry at Texas A&M University, College
Station, and Jack Halpern, Louis Block Distinguished Service
Professor at the University of Chicago, have been named
winners of the 1994 Robert A. Welch Award in Chemistry.
The two researchers will be honored at a formal ceremony
scheduled for October 24, at which they will each receive a
certificate and gold medallion and share a $300,000 cash
prize. Presented annually by the Houston-based Welch
Foundation, the prize seeks to recognize chemists whose
basic research has had a positive influence on humankind.
Although Cotton, 64, and Halpern, 69, have never
collaborated, they share this award owing to the
complementary nature of their work in the field of inorganic
chemistry. Halpern has spent most of his career studying how
chemical reactions work and why.
"It is always challenging to find out about the short-lived
intermediary compounds--they lead to all sorts of
interesting revelations," says Halpern, whose recent work on
the mechanisms of Vitamin B12 in biological reactions
resulted in the first demonstration of a free-radical
carrier role for the vitamin. The Polish-born chemist
received his Ph.D. in 1949 from McGill University in
Montreal; he came to the University of Chicago in 1962.
Cotton's research has focused on the structure and bonding
of molecules, with particular emphasis on metal atoms. He
originated the concept of cluster chemistry and is also
known for his X-ray crystallographic blueprint of a
bacterial enzyme. A native of Philadelphia, he received his
Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1955 and came to Texas A&M
in 1972.
--Neeraja Sankaran
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:
garfield@aurora.cis.upenn.edu
71764.2561@compuserve.com
The Scientist,
3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104
U.S.A.
--------
NEXT:
OBITUARIES
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : ROY J. PLUNKETT
TY : PROFESSION (OBITUARY)
PG : 22
Roy J. Plunkett, the Du Pont Co. chemist who discovered
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin--better known by its
trade name, Teflon--died May 12 in Corpus Christi, Texas,
after a brief illness. He was 83 years old.
Plunkett's discovery in 1938, at E.I. du Pont de Nemours and
Co.'s Jackson Laboratory in Deep Water, N.J., came about by
accident, according to Du Pont. In the course of
investigating the results of a failed experiment on a
potential refrigerant, he tested the substance he had
produced and found it was inert to almost all chemicals, and
proved to be the most slippery material known.
Besides his work with Teflon, Plunkett, who retired in 1975,
is the inventor or coinventor named on a dozen U.S. patents.
He received the National Medal of Technology in 1990.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : JAMES A. SHANNON
TY : PROFESSION (OBITUARY)
PG : 22
James A. Shannon, former director of the National Institutes
of Health, died in Baltimore on May 20. He was 89 years old.
Shannon, whose research focused on pharmacology,
chemotherapy, and kidney physiology and clinical nephrology,
headed NIH from 1955 until he retired in 1968. After leaving
NIH, Shannon became a professor of biomedical sciences at
Rockefeller University in 1970 and an emeritus professor in
1980.
Shannon was awarded a Presidential Medal of Merit for his
leadership in developing antimalarial drugs during World War
II.
(The Scientist, Vol:8, #13, pg.1, June 27, 1994)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
----------
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.