THE SCIENTIST VOLUME 7, No:24 December 13, 1993 (Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.) Articles
THE SCIENTIST
VOLUME 7, No:24 December 13, 1993
(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 ***
*** DECEMBER 27, 1993 ***
*** ***
*******************************************************
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,
countries 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
SCIENCE 1993: During the year now coming to a close, bench
scientists throughout the United States have pressed forward
at the frontiers of their disciplines, many of them with
well-publicized success. Even so, sources agree, the most
important events in the world of research this year had to
do with activity not in the laboratory, but in the halls of
Congress and the corridors of scientific power--at the
National Science Foundation and National Institutes of
Health, for example
PG : 1
CELL BIOLOGY'S BOOM-BUST CYCLE: Dramatic advances in cell
biology are grabbing headlines, and the field is
increasingly attractive to young researchers. But there is a
clear downside to all of this: Uncertainty over the economy
and the fate of President's Clinton's health care plan is
causing the job market in this field to stagnate or decline
PG : 1
TEAM EFFORT: A coalition of scientists and clergy is putting
aside their traditional differences about the specific
origins and workings of the Earth to work toward saving the
present environment through a public information campaign
that crosses both scientific and religious boundaries
PG : 1
DANA HONORS: This year, seven scientists and educators won
or shared the four prizes making up the Charles A. Dana
Awards for Pioneering Achievement in Health and Education;
among them were three neuroscientists who applied their
brain research to clinical disorders and two physics
professors who created a new approach to teaching their
discipline
PG : 3
OPINION
MONTAGNIER ON GALLO: A new book by science writer Thomas A.
Bass presents interviews with 11 internationally known
research scientists. One of Bass's interviews is excerpted
here: French biochemist Luc Montagnier shares with the
author his views on the discovery of the AIDS virus, the
varying investigative roles played by him and the American
cancer researcher Robert Gallo, and the highly publicized
controversy centering on the conflicting claims made by
these two eminent investigators
PG : 11
COMMENTARY: The expansion of interest in the history of
science is heartening for several reasons, says publisher
Eugene Garfield. An understanding of what has gone before
informs and invigorates the efforts of the present-day
science community; it also reinforces a scientist's sense of
belonging in the grand scheme of things
PG : 12
RESEARCH
LANDSAT UPSHOT: Many researchers are trying to adjust to the
launch failure of Landsat 6. Originally intended to support
studies in geology and other physical sciences disciplines,
the satellite's remote-sensing-generated data have become
increasingly valuable to environmental specialists and other
life sciences investigators
PG : 14
HOT PAPERS: A medical researcher discusses his investigation
of the use of bronchodilators for chronic asthma and
bronchitis
PG : 16
TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
CELL DISRUPTION: The challenge for cell biologists whose
work requires them to open a cell and retrieve its contents-
-without destroying most of it in the process--is being met
through a growing selection of versatile cell-disruption
devices and systems
PG : 18
PROFESSION
NEVER TOO OLD TO TEACH: A Washington, D.C.-based program is
bringing retired researchers' skills and experience into the
classroom as part of a collaborative science education
effort with several schools; armed with an NSF grant, the
initiative is poised to go national
PG : 20
CARLO M. CROCE AND RICHARD E. SMALLEY, director of the
Thomas Jefferson University Cancer Institute and Cancer
Center and Gene and Norman Hackerman Professor of Chemistry
at Rice University, respectively, have received the 1993
John Scott Awards
PG : 22
SHORT TAKES
NOTEBOOK PG : 4
CARTOON PG : 4
LETTERS PG : 12
CROSSWORD PG : 13
OBITUARIES PG : 22
SCIENTIFIC SOFTWARE DIRECTORY PG : 30
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Cell Biology Leads Way As Biological Sciences
Progress, But Experts Are Wondering Where All The Jobs
Have Gone
As more researchers flock to the popular field, observers
fear a widening gap between supply and demand
AU : SUSAN L-J DICKINSON
TY : NEWS
PG : 1
When scientists convene in New Orleans next week for the
33rd annual meeting of the American Society for Cell Biology
(ASCB), nine symposia, 20 minisymposia, and countless
informal gatherings are sure to focus on the recent
achievements and continuing progress in this exciting and
rapidly expanding scientific field.
There is likely to be little excitement in the air, however,
concerning the current job market for the researchers
committed to working in cell biology.
Steve Hanes, whose recent job search consumed two years
before he landed a position as a research scientist at the
New York State Department of Health's Wadsworth Center in
Albany, puts it simply: "There is a tremendous supply of
first-rate people looking for a few positions."
For Hanes, an accomplished cell biologist, the job hunt was
"an exhausting process."
Dottie Doyle, placement coordinator for ASCB, concurs with
Hanes's observation concerning supply and demand, although
she does expect more candidates and more employers to
register with the meeting's placement service this year than
did at last year's meeting in Denver. She warns that
registration figures do not accurately reflect the true
demand for cell biologists. She's skeptical as well about
other numbers that might misleadingly indicate that the cell
biology job market is healthier than it actually is.
"Based on previous years' statistics," says Doyle, "the job
market has appeared stable. But anecdotally, I know that
people are feeling the pinch."
Indeed, when asked to describe their recent experiences
trying to find a job or get funding, cell biologists plumb
the depths of their vocabularies. "Demeaning," "depressing,"
"discouraging," "exhausting," "bruising," and "demoralizing"
are some of the adjectives that recur. Their
characterizations apply to both the oversupply of and the
underde-mand for experts in their field.
The evolution of cell biology itself and its merging with
other subdisciplines within the biological sciences has
beclouded the issue of just who is and who isn't a cell
biologist these days (see accompanying story); it is
abundantly clear, however, that the factors contributing to
the tight job market over the past few years have not abated
in 1993, nor are they expected to in 1994, say observers of
the field. Academic budgets continue to be squeezed,
industrial research divisions suffer at the hands of a poor
economy and fears of President Clinton's health plan, and
Ph.D.'s in the biological sciences continue to be awarded in
increasing numbers each year.
According to the National Research Council, the number of
United States scientists earning their doctorates in cell
biology has increased over the past 10 years, from 118 in
1983 to 188 in 1992. During this same period, the number of
Ph.D.'s awarded in all biological sciences--the larger
candidate pool from which cell biology positions are being
filled--has also risen sharply, from 3,741 to 4,794.
Furthermore, the number of U.S. scientists who consider
themselves to be cell biologists--as measured by membership
in ASCB--has grown more than 60 percent over the past
decade, from 3,973 in 1983 to 6,322 at this year's meeting.
ASCB president Susan Gerbi points out that "even if you kept
turning out the same number of graduates year after year,"
as her department at Brown University is doing, "unless the
demand increases, you are going to start overloading the
market." And indeed, it is the sharp decrease in the number
of new academic and industrial positions that is hurting
cell biologists' employment prospects the most, experts say.
Academic scientists point out that state university budgets
have been drastically cut during the past few years, and
even large, private research universities are searching for
ways to cut costs. "Universities are being very tightly
squeezed now," says Peter von Hippel, a professor of
chemistry who administers a National Institutes of Health
training grant at the Institute of Molecular Biology at the
University of Oregon in Eugene. "Every university is trying
to hire as few faculty as it can to save money; many posted
positions are being eliminated even before they are filled."
Additionally, von Hippel notes, the practice of hiring part-
time faculty to circumvent the creation of expensive,
tenure-track positions is increasing in popularity.
Compounding this budget crunch, both Gerbi and von Hippel
say, is the fact that older faculty--who are due to be
released, by federal law, in January from mandatory
retirement at age 70--are staying in their senior faculty
positions longer than anticipated. This not only decreases
the need for new faculty, but also ties up a significant
portion of university staff budgets in fewer, more expensive
positions.
In industry, a poor economy and the specter of Clinton's
health plan and its predicted impact on the pharmaceutical
industry are the major forces resulting in a dismal
employment outlook, industry observers say. The list of
large companies that have announced downsizing efforts reads
like a who's who in the pharmaceutical industry, and
includes Merck & Co. Inc. (Rahway, N.J.), Bristol-Myers
Squibb Co. (Princeton, N.J.), SmithKline Beecham
(Philadelphia), Syntex Corp. (Palo Alto, Calif.), the Upjohn
Co. (Kalamazoo, Mich.), and Warner-Lambert Co. (Morris
Plains, N.J.). And though all of these companies claim to be
preserving R&D to the greatest extent possible, hiring
freezes prevent anyone from predicting an expanded
industrial job market for scientists in 1994.
Fiscal belts are being tightened at the smaller R&D firms,
as well. In addition to general economic concerns, two
highly publicized clinical trial setbacks, for Centocor
Inc.'s Centoxin and Synergen Inc.'s Antril, were dealt
earlier this year. The result, industry watchers say, has
been a dampening of venture capital's interest in
biotechnology, and a grim retrenchment among the industry's
management.
The most immediate result of this dearth of positions for an
expanding pool of applicants, scientists say, is an increase
in the amount of time new Ph.D.'s spend at the postdoctoral
level. Bert Shapiro, deputy director of the cellular and
molecular basis of disease program at the National Institute
of General Medical Sciences, recalls that when he graduated
from Harvard with a Ph.D. in biology 25 years ago, he
received two offers for faculty positions immediately,
without ever doing a postdoctoral fellowship. By contrast,
Mary Jane Osborn, chairman of the department of microbiology
at the University of Connecticut Health Center in
Farmington, says that in1985, strong job candidates had an
average of three years' postdoc experience. In 1993 this
number, many postdocs and employers say, has increased to
five years.
"It's a very long haul," says Shapiro, who estimates that a
scientist can be 30 or 35 years old by the time he or she
gets a Ph.D. and completes the one or two postdocs requisite
to be considered for a tenure-track position.
"These people should be doing their own science by then,"
says von Hippel, who is one of the many scientists worried
by this trend. He points out that expanding postdoctoral
years is bad for the scientist psychologically, and puts a
strain on the budgets of research grants required to support
these trainee positions. "These scientists are ready to
teach and be productive on their own," he says. "It would be
better for them and better for the science."
An Arduous Search
"Your ego takes a bruising," acknowledges Robert Glaser, a
colleague of Hanes's at the Wadsworth Center whose job
search also required two years. He had earned his Ph.D. in
biochemistry and molecular and cell biology from Cornell
University in 1989 and was two years into his three-year
postdoc at the Carnegie Institution in Washington, D.C.,
when he started his search for job in the fall of 1991.
During the first year, he sent some 60 applications, all for
academic positions, and garnered a few interviews for
teaching posts. But, because he really wanted a full-time
research position, Glaser says he decided to hold out for
another year.
In 1992, aware that he no longer had a funded fallback
position for the following year, he broadened his job search
significantly, to include both industry and what he calls
"peripheral science positions"--a grant review position at
NIH, for example. Glaser says he sent out nearly 100
applications, and was dismayed to learn that during the
intervening year the market had gotten even tighter. "I
talked with people hiring both years, and was told that the
number of competing applicants went up substantially," he
recalls
So Glaser mounted an all-out offensive. "Most job
descriptions are very, very general," he notes. "You need to
talk to people, and find out not just about the science, but
also the political nuances of each position--what does the
chair of the search committee want vs. what other faculty
members want, for instance.
"I was much more aggressive up front" during the second
search, he says. "I made lots of phone calls, did constant
networking, and whenever possible got the department chair
on the phone to say: `This is who I am; what do you really
want?'"
Armed with this knowledge, Glaser not only customized the
cover letter for each application, but also reworked his
c.v. to best fit his perception of what each search
committee was looking for. It took a tremendous amount of
time and organization, he says, but it worked. Glaser got
four interviews and four job offers, one of which is the
project assistantship at the Wadsworth Center that he
started this fall.
"I knew it was going to be difficult," Glaser says. "But I
was surprised that with my background, from first-rate and
respected institutions, I didn't at least get more
interviews."
He also acknowledges that he probably wouldn't have applied
to the Wadsworth Center during the first year of his search.
"It's part of the New York State health department, so I
would have assumed that it wasn't true academia," a
prejudice he now feels is totally unfounded.
If there is any silver lining to be found in the cloud that
is the current job squeeze, cell biologists find it in the
science itself, and the assumption that, in time, the
situation will improve.
"Right now is the best time to be alive for a biological
scientist," says Shapiro. "The intellectual ferment is
extremely exciting, and the promise [for advances] is the
greatest it's ever been. Medical and biological science is
hopping, and cell biology is in the middle of it."
"In a few years," adds von Hippel, "maybe the people who
didn't retire at 65 will retire at 70. And maybe there will
be less fiscal pressure."
Susan L-J Dickinson is a freelance writer based in
Philadelphia.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : WHO IS A CELL BIOLOGIST?
AU : SUSAN L-J. DICKINSON
TY : NEWS
PG : 5
The challenge of presenting a comprehensive assessment of
career prospects for cell biologists is great, since there
is some question, even among experts, as to which scientists
currently constitute the field.
A list of American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) members
who have registered with the placement service for this
year's meeting reveals no fewer than 18 different types of
Ph.D.'s, including those in anatomy, biochemistry,
immunology, endocrinology, biophysics, and zoology. Darien
Wilson, a public relations representative for Hoffmann-La
Roche Inc. of Nutley, N.J., can't reveal how many cell
biologists her company has hired over the past year, not
because of concern for industrial competition, but because
it is practically impossible. "Cell biologists are used in
pretty much every department," she says.
"Cell biology is such a fundamental discipline," concurs
Donald Luecke, deputy director of research grants at the
National Institutes of Health. "Virtually all of the
institutes make awards that could be classified as cell
biology; it would be too difficult to dissect out," to
determine what portion of NIH monies are awarded for cell
biology or how application and success rates compare with
other areas of life sciences.
At issue, observers agree, is the evolution of science
itself: As more knowledge is gained, distinctions between
disciplines are becoming obsolete. "All of the subfields of
biomedical science are coming together," says Bert Shapiro,
a deputy director at the National Institute of General
Medical Sciences.
"For instance, molecular biology is now a common tool in
cell biology, genetics, and immunology," says Steve Hanes, a
research scientist at the New York State Department of
Health's Wadsworth Center in Albany. "So you can no longer
make such strong distinctions."
Even university departments are beginning to reflect this.
Wadsworth Center researcher Robert Glaser, for example,
received his Ph.D. from Cornell University's department of
biochemistry and molecular and cell biology. And Susan
Gerbi, president of ASCB, is currently the chairwoman
nominee for the new department at Brown University that will
merge molecular biology, cell biology, and developmental
biology into one.
What pragmatic effect does this have on the job market for
someone with a degree in cell biology? Certainly, it
broadens the categories of positions for which such
researchers can feel qualified to apply. But, as the
increasing ASCB membership indicates, this trend also works
to broaden the pool of applicants for each available
position.
--S.L-J D.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Researchers' Assessment Of 1993: Science Gained,
Politics Reigned
Despite impressive lab achievements, the big news this year
has sprung from the corridors of power in Washington
AU : FRANKLIN HOKE
TY : NEWS
PG : 1
Scientists, policy experts, administrators, and observers of
the research community appear satisfied that 1993 has been a
strong year in terms of research advances. They cite, for
example, bold steps taken this year in gene therapies and a
continuing frenzy of research on the 60-atom molecules of
carbon known as buckminsterfullerenes, or buckyballs.
Overall, they feel, researchers pressed their disciplines
forward on many fronts, advancing fundamental knowledge and
clinical capabilities dramatically.
However, those interviewed during recent weeks by The
Scientist also tend to share the opinion that the most
important developments for science took place not in
academic and industry labs throughout the United States, but
in the nation's capital, in the halls of Congress and the
agencies in whose hands lie the fate of America's research
future.
Many sources agree, for example, that the most arresting
single event this year--and hardly a scientific step
forward--was the cancellation by Congress of the
superconducting supercollider (SSC). Also cited as highly
significant, if less dramatic, are the well-received science
appointments that followed President Bill Clinton's
inauguration in January, specifically those of Harold Varmus
to head the National Institutes of Health and Neal Lane to
be director of the National Science Foundation. In addition,
a major shift in the rationale for public funding of
science, toward more economic justifications, in both
Congress and the new administration, is seen as worrisome by
many scientists.
A settlement in favor of the accused in several high-profile
scientific misconduct cases on appeal, new rules for
assessing indirect costs in research, and Hillary Rodham
Clinton's health care reform proposals are also expected to
influence the environment for future research.
Certainly, researchers and clinicians continued to move
boldly in their respective fields, according to observers.
"This year brought very clearly home that we've entered the
era of cell therapeutics, from which we're never going to
retreat," says Donald S. Fredrickson, director of NIH from
1975 to 1981 under President Jimmy Carter.
Fredrickson believes that the replacement of genes, the
development of humanized murine antibodies, and the creation
of designer drugs to receptors are major steps toward fully
realized molecular medicine.
"It will be three or four years before this will become so
commonplace that we'll turn to the vial instead of the pill
box," he says.
Fredrickson says, too, that the emerging molecular therapies
may serve to reunify investigators whose biomedical goals
have evolved in disparate directions over the past decade
and more.
"We've probably bottomed out in the creation of this
tremendous gradient between clinical researchers and
molecular biologists," Fredrickson says. "The whole field of
molecular biology and molecular genetics is now becoming not
a discipline at all, but a set of tools. More and more, very
gifted people in molecular biology are working on more
clinically related problems."
But political changes take precedence over laboratory
advances as others look back at the year in science.
"The most important [event] is the new science and
technology policy of the administration," says Erich Bloch,
NSF director from 1984 to 1990 under President Ronald Reagan
and now a fellow with the Council on Competitiveness in
Washington.
"I put that one ahead of all of them, because it's the basis
for all the others in one form or another," Bloch says. "And
there's a material change occurring with this administration
with the acknowledgment that technology is the driver for
economic growth. I think we're seeing a sea change."
The change is going to mean researchers will have to justify
their work to granting agencies in new terms, Bloch says.
"Unless you can responsibly say what you are doing is
helping the country," he says, "you will have a more
difficult time getting support in the future than you had in
the past."
The appointments of University of California, San Francisco,
geneticist and Nobel Prize winner Varmus at NIH and Rice
University provost and physicist Lane at NSF, along with
other top science appointments, are emphasized by some
scientists.
"My concern has been that the Clinton administration would
be so technology-oriented that basic research would be put
into a second tier," says Arthur Kornberg, a professor of
biochemistry at Stanford University Medical Center and a
Nobelist himself. "At least based on these appointments,
that doesn't seem to be the case," Kornberg says. "That's
the big story--it matches the others easily."
The Loss Of The SSC
For many scientists, the cancellation of the SSC by Congress
after a protracted appropriations struggle is the most
important single story in science this year. They fear the
demise of the huge particle physics project may have a
lingering and detrimental effect on other large-scale
science efforts, especially in related areas, such as fusion
research.
"The death of the SSC is the biggest [science] event this
year," says Harvey Brooks, a professor, emeritus, of
technology and public policy and applied physics at Harvard
University. "People in the field are beginning to see what
they can do in Europe now, because the U.S. is out of the
game, essentially," says Brooks, a former chairman of the
National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Science,
Engineering, and Public Policy (COSE-PUP).
Scientists say that Congress' refusal to continue to bear
the expense of the SSC begins to redefine what kinds of
science will--and will not--be possible in the future.
The loss of the SSC "certainly shows that the country has
lost its will to push ahead with big adventures," says J.
David Litster, a professor of physics and vice president and
dean for research at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. "I'm afraid that same loss of will is going to
apply to other projects in other areas. In spite of how
tough the times are [economically], we should have one or
two heroic projects like the SSC."
Arthur Reis, associate provost for research at Brandeis
University in Waltham, Mass., says the SSC's fall suggests a
change in the way Congress and society perceive national
goals. In the past, he says, some programs without obvious
benefit to society were, nonetheless, seen as important to
the country.
"Sometimes you don't get a lot of national good from
something that's declared a national priority, but everyone
seems to be behind it," says Reis. "Somehow, the SSC was
never perceived as an important project by a large majority
of the population. We never said that this was a national
priority, like the space program was a national priority in
the 1960s."
The cancellation of the SSC was not completely unexpected,
given its difficulties in getting congressional backing the
year before, according to Graham Glass, a professor of
chemistry and dean of graduate studies at Rice University.
He also accepts that the straitened economic circumstances
the country now finds itself in will mean funding reductions
in many areas, not only in science.
"Most of us recognize that, with a major budget deficit,
science will have a much harder time," Glass says.
"Funding from the federal government will become more
difficult to obtain in the future," he predicts. "The SSC is
just one example--we're going to be pared down across the
board."
Glass adds: "Programs that have infinitely larger amounts of
human appeal are being cut. It's unlikely that science can
possibly escape the effects."
New Science Leaders
In contrast to the gloomy feelings surrounding the SSC's
fate, several Washington appointments have buoyed scientists
concerned over the continuing strength of federal support
for basic science. For example, the selection of Varmus, a
strong proponent of fundamental research, to head NIH
reassured basic investigators that their interests would be
represented in an administration whose rhetoric seems aimed
at technology transfer and strategic research. Also, some
scientists say the research prowess of NIH itself, somewhat
diminished in recent years, may rebound under Varmus.
"The capacity for that institution to regain its focus on
supporting both meritorious clinical and basic research
should be improved with Varmus's coming on board," says
David Kipnis, Distinguished University Professor of Medicine
at Washington University, St. Louis. Kipnis, a diabetes
researcher, also chairs the committee overseeing the
university's joint biomedical research program with Monsanto
Co., St. Louis.
While Kipnis generally praises former director Bernadine
Healy's efforts, he hopes Varmus will have more successful
relations with Congress. Healy's encounters with the
legislative branch were sometimes confrontational. Kipnis
would like to see lawmakers content to describe the goals
they see as important and then to let scientists decide the
best way to achieve those goals.
"My concern is that appropriate and effective communication
be developed with Congress," Kipnis says, "so that they
exercise less and less effort to micromanipulate. Using the
NIH as a social instrument is very dangerous."
Like Varmus's appointment, the choice of Neal Lane as
director of NSF also has bolstered researchers' confidence
that Clinton's administration will be sufficiently
supportive of science. Lane is a research physicist by
training; his statements express a desire to continue to
maintain a balance in the NSF research portfolio between
basic and applied work.
"I see a greater responsiveness to the universities in a
number of these appointments," says Glass. He also says his
interactions with some government departments have improved
with the change of administrations in Washington.
Glass is, however, concerned about recent revisions to
circular A-21, the publication from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) that specifies allowable indirect costs on
government research grants. The Clinton administration
reviewed but let stand most of the changes proposed by the
previous administration, including a 26 percent cap on
administrative indirect costs, which is less than most
universities charged previously, Glass says.
"We are looking at significant shortfalls," Glass says.
"We're going to have to come up with millions of dollars to
cover these costs, and there is no other source except the
university's income to do it with. This is going to be a
major hit that most universities experience."
The health care reforms proposed by Hillary Rodham Clinton
this year are also likely to have repercussions for science,
some researchers note. For example, pharmaceutical companies
have raised concerns that the new laws may seek to control
aspects of their activities, perhaps hampering their drug
research and development capabilities. For now, however, the
implications for biomedical research of health care reform
remain unclear.
"Regardless of what the details are, the die seems to be
cast that something is going to be done in the way of
universal health care," says Edwin G. Krebs, a professor of
pharmacology and biochemistry at the University of
Washington, Seattle, and a Nobel Prize winner. "I have
enough faith in the planners [to believe] that medical
research is going to continue to be accommodated. The
Clinton administration is very well aware of America's
position in research, and it's going to be maintained."
Redefining Science Fraud
A number of researchers who had been found guilty of
misconduct by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) of the
Public Health Service (PHS) successfully appealed their
cases or saw charges against them dropped this year.
For example, the appeals panel of the Department of Health
and Human Services, which oversees PHS, overturned ORI's
case against Mikulas Popovic, an assistant to also-accused
AIDS researcher Robert C. Gallo. The panel, composed mainly
of lawyers, cited a lack of hard evidence in its decision.
Then, just a few weeks later, noting what it viewed as a
changed and more difficult-to-prove definition of
misconduct, ORI dropped its charges that Gallo had
appropriated the work of French researchers, ending a four-
year-long battle.
Many researchers--but not all--welcome the apparent shift to
a more demanding definition of what constitutes scientific
misconduct. They hope that, overall, the issue will receive
less attention in the future as a result.
"It's distressing that it's gone as far as it has," says
Stanford's Kornberg, "because it's politicized science and
exaggerated the importance of fraud. Fraud has always
existed, as long as human nature has been around, but the
significance of it is trivial."
"There have always been some problems," agrees Harvard's
Brooks, "but they represent a very small fraction of the
total. I think an objective examination would show that the
scientific system is probably much less corrupt than any
other system that depends on government support in our
society."
Some scientists see a degree of irony in the fact that a
panel of lawyers may have had the effect of returning
responsibility for issues of scientific misconduct to
scientists, where, they say, it belongs.
"When people attempt to provide judicial solutions toward
questions of scientific research, they're obviously [using]
instruments not very well made for each other," Fredrickson
says. "Issues of fraud, abuse of funds, and so forth need to
be punished legally, but judgments of science's notebooks
simply are not amenable to this kind of treatment."
Other observers, however, point to a recently published
study that suggests that researchers encounter what they
believe to be fraud much more often than has been previously
thought (J.P. Swazey, M.S. Anderson, K.S. Louis, American
Scientist, 81[6]:542-53, 1993). These individuals see
scientific misconduct as a serious problem that the
community of researchers must confront, if not through the
agency of ORI, then in some other way.
C.K. Gunsalus, associate vice chancellor for research at the
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, for example,
praises the scientific misconduct research performed by
Walter Stewart and Ned Feder of the National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) at NIH.
Stewart and Feder, after years of controversial
investigation, were forcibly reassigned in early summer in
an attempt to end their misconduct inquiries.
Gunsalus notes that the two men have often angered
scientists, but says that their contributions are
undeniable.
"These guys are infuriating, they're outrageous, they're
exasperating, and they haven't got the sense that God gave
geese--but they're often right," says Gunsalus, who is also
chairwoman of the Committee on Scientific Freedom and
Responsibility of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science in Washington.
"The infuriating things about them are mostly stylistic, and
they do have substance," she adds. "As a community, we ought
to care more about substance than style."
Gunsalus says, for instance, that she has used a computer
system developed by the Stewart and Feder to compare texts
for matching character strings to both substantiate and
refute allegations of plagiarism at her campus.
"They ought to have a platform from which to speak,"
Gunsalus says. "Should that be NIDDK? Probably not. Should
it be someplace in the government? Probably so."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Scientists Join Forces With Clergy In Addressing
Environmental Issues
AU : EDWARD R. SILVERMAN
TY : NEWS
PG : 1
In an unusual alliance, a group of prominent scientists has
teamed up with several major religious denominations to
address what they see as urgent environmental problems.
The group aims to educate Americans about such global
concerns as deteriorating marine life, loss of important
species, and food shortages. It is being led by Henry
Kendall, a physics professor at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology and chairman of the Union of Concerned
Scientists, both in Cambridge, Mass.
Called the National Religious Partnership for the
Environment, the recently formed nonprofit organization
hopes to tap into the American consciousness by building
grass-roots support at the spiritual level.
"The global environment situation is harsher than most
people realize," says Kendall. "The severe troubles are
coming down the pike. There's a lot riding on this outreach.
"And none of us in the scientific community have anything
approaching this kind of access," he says, referring to the
widespread following of major Christian and Jewish
denominations.
Setting Aside Differences
Reasonable minds may disagree about the Earth's beginnings,
says Paul Gorman, executive director of the New York-based
partnership, but the organization wants to set aside
creation debates and remind everyone that improving the
environment requires a mix of ecological vigilance and
faith.
"The science and religious communities are two groups that
have long been distant or estranged," says Gorman, who
previously worked as a vice president of advocacy at the
Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City.
"They may not agree about creation. But look at it this way.
God said, `Let there be water.' Well, what's the state of
our water now? " he says. "And God created animals. But half
of those species may be extinct within 50 years. The bottom
line is that we don't have to agree on how or when the Earth
was made in order to agree on how to preserve it."
"These are human problems, and require a new ethic of
dealing with ecosystems," says Kendall. "But the solutions
can't rest with the scientific community."
To get its message out, the partnership plans to distribute
informational booklets to 53,000 congregations--Catholic,
Baptist, Greek Orthodox, and Reform and Conservative Jewish,
among many others--representing as many as 100 million
Americans, on Earth Day, next April 22. The specific content
of the booklets has yet to be determined.
Simple Goals
As Gorman describes it, the goals of the organization are
simple: to broaden the base of support for environmental
action in mainstream communities, deepen the level of
commitment to collective action, and underscore the moral
imperative of leaving a healthier planet for future
generations.
To make that happen, the partnership will try to help
religious leaders integrate environmental issues in their
preaching, teaching, and worship. Emphasis will also be
placed on helping them build bridges to community
organizations in order to participate in public policy.
"When the religious community gets together, they can make a
lot of things happen," says Gorman, noting, for example,
that the effort will reach every Catholic parish in the
United States. "There hasn't been a partnership of this
breadth on a single issue before," Gorman says.
"We bring the authority of the scientific community, which
understands threats to the environment, the nature of damage
being done, and how to assess it," says Kendall.
Scientists Took Initiative
The partnership got its start in January 1990, when 34
prominent scientists--including Kendall; Hans Bethe, John
Wendell Anderson Professor of Physics at Cornell University;
Freeman Dyson, a professor of physics at the Institute for
Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J.; Jerome Wiesner,
president, emeritus, and Institute Professor, emeritus, at
MIT; Stephen Jay Gould, a professor of zoology at Harvard
University; and Carl Sagan, David Duncan Professor of
Astronomy and Space Sciences and director of planetary
studies at Cornell--sent a letter to the heads of several
major religious denominations, urging their involvement in
solving environmental problems.
That letter got the ball rolling. Subsequent conversations
led to meetings, including one breakfast with several
congressional leaders, which resulted in the formation of
working groups. These groups, in turn, hammered out the fine
points needed to make scientific notions palatable to
religious leaders and their followers.
"Each group has to embrace the issues within their own
religious framework," Gorman acknowledges. "They needed this
relationship with the scientific community so there could be
an informed response."
The partnership coalesced in May of last year, backed by the
U.S. Catholic Conference, the National Council of Churches
in Christ, the Consultation on the Environment and Jewish
Life, and the Evangelical Environmental Network.
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a nonprofit
organization devoted to influencing public policy, will
supply a staff member and make its nationwide network of
scientific contacts available to religious congregations. A
three-year commitment to be involved in the project has been
made by UCS, the religious groups, and the scientist
volunteers; pledges for $4.5 million in funding from various
external sources have been received.
"If this program is a success, it should have an important
effect on what it means to be religious," says Gorman. "In
fact, environmental stewardship should become a significant
aspect of what it means to be religious."
For information, contact the National Religious Partnership
for the Environment, 1047 Amersterdam Ave., New York, N.Y.
10025; (212) 316-7441.
Edward R. Silverman is a freelance writer based in Millburn,
N.J.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
-----------------------------------------------------------
TI : Dana Awards Honor Scientific Innovators
AU : NEERAJA SANKARAN
TY : NEWS
PG : 3
The Charles A. Dana Foundation presented its annual Charles
A. Dana Awards for Pioneering Achievements in Health and
Education at a dinner ceremony last month at the Plaza Hotel
in New York City. This year, the New York-based foun-
dation's health awards honored seven scientists and
educators who won or shared four awards--two in health and
two in education.
Three neuroscientists who made significant breakthroughs in
brain research and applied their findings to clinical
disorders won health awards. Among the four education award
recipients were two professors who created a new approach to
teaching introductory physics.
The foundation established these annual prizes in 1986 to
honor people who have made significant contributions toward
improvements in health and education worldwide. David
Mahoney, chairman and CEO of the foundation, presented the
four $50,000 awards at the dinner. In the afternoon
preceding the ceremony, the recipients met for a symposium
at New York's Museum of Modern Art to share their ideas and
research accomplishments.
Brain Cell Transplants
Anders Bjorklund, a professor of histology at the University
of Lund in Sweden, and Fred H. Gage, a professor of
neuroscience at the University of California, San Diego,
shared one of the health awards for pioneering cell-
transplantation techniques to treat brain damage in
neurodegenerative diseases once thought to be irreversible.
The two scientists have worked, both in collaboration and
independently, to develop brain cell-replacement techniques
and gene therapies to treat Parkinson's disease, which is
characterized by the gradual impairment of patients' motor
functions.
Says Gage, "The patients still have the ability to move--the
damage is such that they are slow to respond to the brain's
commands. So, once a patient begins something, it is
difficult to stop." For instance, he explains, a person with
Par-kinson's will walk into a wall because he or she is
unable to either stop or turn away in time to avoid it.
"The brain cells that are damaged are like the clutch of a
car," Bjorklund said at the symposium. "The engine is okay,
but the patient has difficulty in switching the gears." The
"clutch" consists of neurons that produce dopamine, a
neurotransmitter that allows communication between different
parts of the brain in order to coordinate movements.
Bjorklund's research has concentrated on grafting neurons
into the brain to replace dead and dying dopamine-producing
brain cells. Until he showed that this was possible,
neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's
were considered completely irreversible. In a parallel line
of research, Gage has been working on genetically
engineering the donor cells to endow them with specific
properties. He has developed a method to alter easily
obtainable cells from the patient's own skin, and introduce
these into the brain.
Currently, Bjorklund is heading clinical trials in Sweden,
testing the brain cell-transplantation techniques in
patients with Parkinson's disease. In describing the trials
at the conference, he said that the early results have been
very promising.
Bjorklund received his M.D. in 1969 from the University of
Lund, and has been with the neurobiology section of the
department of cell biology there since 1966. He has been a
member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences since 1989.
Gage, a professor of neuroscience at the University of
California, San Diego, received his Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins
University in 1976. Before his appointment there in 1985, he
served on the faculty of Texas Christian University in Fort
Worth and the University of Lund.
Memory Research
The second health award went to Larry R. Squire, also of UC-
San Diego, for his research on the brain and human memory.
The members of the nominating committee for the health
awards cited his investigations as laying the groundwork for
understanding how memory is affected by factors such as
aging, trauma, and disease. He was among the first
researchers to show that memory was not a single faculty of
the brain, and in fact comprises several systems that
involve different parts of the organ.
"Memory is not just in the hippocampus any more," he said at
the symposium, with reference to previous attempts to
correlate brain functions with specific areas of the brain.
Through his research with amnesiacs, Squire has classified
the very process of memory into two types of functions--
declarative and nondeclarative--and related these to
different parts of the brain. While the hippocampus and
associated parts are responsible for learning and
remembering facts and events (declarative memory),
nondeclarative memory functions such as the acquisition of
skills and habits were shown to be independent of this area.
Using newly developed brain-imaging techniques on patients
with amnesia, Squire and his colleagues were the first to
observe damage in the hippocampus. That these patients still
possessed normal capabilities for skills and habits
validated Squire's belief that the two types of memory were
independent.
Squire came to UC-San Diego in 1970 as a professor of
psychiatry and neuroscience and is currently also a staff
research scientist at the San Diego Veterans Affairs Medical
Center. He obtained his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology in 1968 and did postdoctoral studies
at Yeshiva University's Albert Einstein College of Medicine
in Bronx, N.Y. He is the president-elect of the Society for
Neuroscience, which he served as secretary in 1988-90.
Precollegiate Education
The education awards this year honored people whose work has
influenced precollege education. Priscilla W. Laws, a
professor of physics at Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa.,
and Ronald K. Thornton, a professor of research in physics
and education at Tufts University, Medford, Mass., jointly
received an award for developing a program--Workshop
Physics--to teach the fundamentals of physics in the
classroom, which has, according to the award citation,
boosted achievement rates in the subject. Instead of using
the traditional lecture and laboratory-based approach, the
program involves sophisticated computer tools and
interactive workshops to induce students to grasp, through
experience, fundamental concepts and gain the skills
necessary for learning physics.
Marie M. Clay, a professor, emerita, of developmental
psychology at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and
Gay Su Pinnell, an associate professor in the Ohio State
University College of Education, received an award for the
development and dissemination of an early-intervention
program called "Reading Recovery" to improve learning skills
in young children.
Awardees are nominated by a committee of leading researchers
in the respective fields. The final selections are made by
an independent panel of jurors, who are also prominent
researchers in the given areas of interest. Recently the
foundation made a $25 million commitment to neuroscience.
Keeping with this focus, it has, since last year, channeled
the health award to researchers who have made significant
contributions in applying basic research in neuroscience to
the problems of human health and disease.
Neeraja Sankaran is a science writer at the Cancer Research
Institute in New York City.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
NOTEBOOK
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : A `Best-Kept' Secret
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Several attendees at--and one recipient of--the 1993 John
Scott Awards, presented annually by the Board of City Trusts
of the city of Philadelphia (see People, page 22), voiced
concern over the lack of publicity for the award. At one
point during his acceptance speech, honoree Richard E.
Smalley, Gene and Norman Hackerman Professor of Chemistry at
Rice University, remarked, "This is the only time I've
received an award, or heard of one, when all efforts made to
get a list of previous awardees have failed." Lewis Padulo,
president and CEO of Philadelphia's University City Science
Center, shared Smalley's sentiment, calling the Scott Award
"one of the best-kept secrets in Philadelphia, maybe in
American science." Padulo also urged his colleagues in the
Philadelphia science community to "put our thinking caps on"
and "see if there's some way we can't get more attention and
recognition for this outstanding advisory committee that
gives the Scott Award and works so hard to pick these good
people."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Broadening Experience
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
The Princeton, N.J.-based Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
offers post-resident physicians an opportunity for two years
of graduate-level study and research in non-biological
sciences important to medical-care systems through its
Clinical Scholars Program. The program covers such
disciplines as biostatistics, medical information sciences,
anthropology, the social sciences, law, ethics, and the
humanities. Applications, including on-site interviews with
participating institutions, must be completed between
January 1 and April 1. For information, contact program
assistant Sheila Libassi, Clinical Scholars Program, Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation, P.O. Box 2316, Princeton, N.J.
08543; (609) 243-5919.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Women's Work
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Just in time for the holidays (or the spring semester), the
National Women's History Project has come out with another
in its series of educational materials, this time for
children in grades four through eight. Science is
Women's Work: Photos and Biographies of American Women in
the Sciences is a 56-page booklet profiling the lives and
work of 26 prominent women scientists of the past and
present, representing 18 fields of science or mathematics,
each of whom had to overcome social biases to rise in their
profession. Among the scientists featured are 19th- century
astronomer Maria Mitchell (1818-1889), nuclear physicist and
National Medal of Science winner Chien-Shiung Wu (born
1912), and Nobel Prize-winning pharmacologist Gertrude B.
Elion (born 1918). For information, contact the National
Women's History Project, 7738 Bell Rd., Dept. P, Windsor,
Calif. 95492; (707) 838-6000.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Robotiquette
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Some day, University of Rochester graduate student Ray Rimey
hopes his robot will impress scientists with its ability to
scan a scene and independently zero in on the most important
information--a difficult problem in artificial intelligence.
But for now, Rimey's robot should at least give a thrill to
etiquette aficionados. The device can survey a table and, by
way of visual clues like the nature of the place settings,
analyze and draw conclusions such as whether the table is
set for breakfast, lunch, or dinner; whether a dinner is
formal or informal; how many guests are coming; and even
whether the table is messy or the guests have begun eating.
Rimey programmed his robot--whose research and development
earned him his Ph.D. in computer science--using decision
theory and mathematical constructs known as Bayes Nets. A
key advantage to his robot is that it doesn't bother itself
with needless details, selectively taking note of the most
pertinent information before it. Although this process might
make sticklers like Miss Manners balk, Rochester computer
science professor Christopher Brown applauds it as one that
surmounts a problem for artificial intelligence scientists.
"Most computer vision work develops methods of image
processing, but when it comes to which methods the computer
should do in what order--well, that's usually programmed
into the application," says Brown, Rimey's adviser. "Rimey
has built a general framework for using prior knowledge and
information discovered along the way to choose the best
method to apply next."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : What's In A Name?
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
Given the multitude of scientific and political challenges
that the space station Freedom project has had to overcome
to remain viable, a newly encountered dilemma--NASA's plan
to rename the station--seems rather minor, but not to a
grass-roots organization having to deal with it. The Space
Station Freedom Fighters, a Houston-based volunteer lobbying
organization, will probably have to change its name when the
project's new moniker is announced at the end of the year;
and that has a few members worried. "We'll have to wait and
see what the new name will be," says volunteer Cynthia
Griffin. "The station is being temporarily called the `Alpha
Station,' but we don't want to be called the `Alpha Bits.' "
The organization is soliciting name suggestions to pass
along to NASA. To suggest a name or for information, contact
the Space Station Freedom Fighters, 16582 Space Center
Blvd., Houston, Texas 77058; (718) 488-4075. Fax: (713) 488-
7903.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : For Returning Scholars
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
The Association for Women Geoscientists Foundation has
announced that it will award at least two Chrysalis
Scholarships to women geoscience master's or Ph.D.
candidates to cover expenses associated with finishing their
theses. The $750 scholarships are for candidates who have
returned two school after an interruption of their education
of at least one year, and may be used for anything necessary
to assist in finishing the thesis. Applications and related
materials are due by March 1. For information, contact the
Chrysalis Scholarship, Association for Women Geophysicists
Foundation, Macalester College Geology Department, 1600
Grand Ave., St. Paul, Minn. 55105-1899; (612) 696-6448. Fax:
(612) 696-6183.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Bigger, Better Shrimp
TY : NEWS (NOTEBOOK)
PG : 4
A biologist at the University of Connecticut has put some
more jumbo into jumbo shrimp by developing a method of
introducing a reproductive hormone into the feed of shrimp,
to produce a larger, tastier variety in commercial
hatcheries. The process has earned Hans Laufer, a professor
of molecular and cell biology, and the university a U.S.
patent and, they hope, some commercial success down the
road. Laufer and colleagues discovered methyl farnesoate, a
hormone that stimulates reproduction and growth in
crustaceans, in 1987, and later synthesized the hormone
through biotechnology and added it to shrimp feed. Laufer's
patent is for his work with Penaeus vannamei, a Pacific
white shrimp.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
OPINION
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Luc Montagnier On Gallo And The AIDS Virus: `We Both
Contributed'
TY : OPINION
PG : 11
Editor's Note: "Science is the dominant metaphor of the
twentieth century," says author Thomas A. Bass in the
introduction to his new book, Reinventing the Future:
Conversations with the World's Leading Scientists (New York,
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1994). "Science is the
knowledge in which we place our faith, the solution to our
problems, the way out, the way up."
Bass's admittedly worshipful respect for science, along with
his quest to understand it more fully, has prompted him over
the past several years to conduct personal interviews with
men and women who, given their research achievements, have
played major roles in shaping the international science
community of today. His book presents 11 of these
interviews, touching on subjects as diverse as molecular
biology, genetics, chaos theory, and drug research. Among
Bass's interviewees are behavioral biologist Sarah Hrdy,
neuroscientist Bert Sakmann, archaeologist Farouk El-Baz,
and RU 486 developer Etienne-Emile Baulieu.
Of all Bass's subjects, none, perhaps, has achieved more
renown than Luc Montagnier, the French biochemist who laid
claim in 1983 to discovering the AIDS virus at his Institut
Pasteur laboratory in Paris--a claim that was also
subsequently made by United States researcher Robert Gallo,
head of the National Cancer Institute's laboratory of tumor
cell biology in Bethesda, Md. Acrominious debate over who
discovered the virus and who, as a result, deserves to
receive royalties on the AIDS blood test has raged for the
better part of the past decade.
According to Bass, the American press has branded Montagnier
as "patrician and aloof." What he discovered in his
interview with the biochemist, however, was a candid,
friendly researcher, willing to give his supposed rival
Gallo abundant praise as a scientist, while at the same time
determined to retain for himself the distinction of having
isolated the AIDS virus.
Following is an excerpt from Bass's interview with
Montagnier.
Q The American press describes you as proud and ambitious
to the point of arrogance. Are you?
A It depends on the day. When you're climbing a mountain,
the last thing you want to do is look behind you and say,
"Oh my, it's too high, what am I doing up here?" Even if
I keep my eyes fixed on the summit, I realize I'm a long
way from the top--in fact, there is no summit! In science
there are always new problems. If it weren't AIDS, it
would be something else. I'm a gambler out for the big
killing. Like a roulette player at the table, I'm
addicted to getting results out of my laboratory.
Q You've said many times, "I have lots of enemies."
A I do! In France we're very egalitarian, so if you get out
ahead of the pack, they shoot at you. I'm a target. This
comes not only from my scientific success, but also from
my success in the media, which is something new for a
scientist in France. From the start, AIDS has been a
show-business disease. The press and media have been
fascinated by it. People are making major discoveries in
other domains, but they receive none of the attention
accorded to AIDS, while I'm being barraged with
invitations to appear on TV around the world.
Q To set the record straight, did you discover the AIDS virus?
A There's no debate about this point. The argument with
Robert Gallo had to do with proving causality. Did the
virus I discovered cause the disease? I don't think Gallo
disputes that we were the first to isolate the virus and
publish our findings in May 1983. All he has ever claimed
is that he isolated the virus at roughly the same time.
He wasn't able, however, to characterize it.
Q What was your reaction when Gallo announced that he had
discovered the virus?
A I remember quite well the day he came to my office in
April 1984. He . . . told us he had discovered the virus
that causes AIDS, which he was calling HTLV-3. It was
obvious his virus was close, if not identical, to ours.
My reaction was altogether positive. He was confirming
our work.
Q Even though he was claiming all the credit for himself?
A We both contributed to the discovery of the virus. The
difference between science and religion is that in
science everyone has to agree. For a fact to be a fact,
it has to be reproducible. Miracles, by definition, are
not reproducible. So if we were capable of isolating the
virus that causes AIDS, it's not surprising that others
could do it, as well.
Q What was Gallo's contribution?
A He found a way to grow the virus in continuous cell
cultures. We developed a similar technique at the same
time, but our cell lines were less productive than his.
Later we found one equally as good, but in the beginning
his line was better. This was important for developing
the AIDS blood test. We also owe to him the idea that
AIDS was caused by a retrovirus.
Q Some people say that Gallo owes his discovery to samples
of virus you sent him in July and September of 1983.
A I don't want to stir up the past. All the details are
given in the chronology we published together in Nature
[R.C. Gallo, L. Montagnier, 326:435-6, 1987]. It says I
sent him the virus. These shipments must have been useful
to Gallo, and I don't think he denies it.
Q Is it possible that Gallo's cell lines might have became
contaminated with your virus, which would explain why he
reproduced it so faithfully?
A These accusations were made by the Institut Pasteur. And
Gallo himself did not exclude this possibility.
Q Because of his ability to mass-produce the virus, Robert
Gallo has been called the Henry Ford of AIDS research.
A Gallo is not someone who has merely perfected other
people's discoveries. Many important findings have come
from his laboratory, things like interleukin-2, the
growth factor that allowed us to isolate the AIDS virus.
He generates a lot of creativity. He's not merely a Henry
Ford, a biological mechanic. Gallo and I have worked
together in the past, and we'll probably do so again. The
unhappy period that he and I lived through was distorted
way out of proportion by the press and by the politics of
the disease.
Q What was your reaction to the political pressures
surrounding AIDS research in the United States?
A I was particularly furious that our patent for the blood
test was ignored until Gallo's was accepted. That's what
pushed me into starting legal proceedings.
A Scientists in the United States are forced to produce
results, which sometimes warps their sense of ethics.
Q Were you surprised by the nature of American science?
A No, I really don't object to the aggressivity of the
Americans. I object to the passivity of the French, who
met my work with incomprehension and indifference. Thanks
to this research, France could be making breakthroughs in
biotechnology, but it's letting the opportunity slip
through its fingers.
Q Were you pleased with the legal agreement you and Gallo
signed in 1987?
A Yes, I thought from the start there had to be a
compromise. No one should be made to look as if he were
losing face. The only solution was to split the royalty
money 50-50 and establish a foundation for spending it. I
was probably happier about the settlement than Gallo,
because it was my idea.
The affair caused a lot of ill will, and AIDS is too
important for the problem to have remained unsolved. It
was giving certain scientists--and science itself--a bad
name. Not to have fought would have created a bad
precedent. It would have signaled that one can get away
with anything in science, which isn't true.
Q Are you under a gag order that prevents you from talking
about the details of the accord?
A It's not exactly a gag order, although it's stated in the
agreement that no one will reopen the scientific
argument. There were actually two agreements: a legal
accord between the American government and the Institut
Pasteur, and a scientific accord between Gallo and me,
which was published in Nature.
Now Gallo and I are getting along quite well. We
respect each other .... I bear no grudge against him.
My rancor is reserved for the people who are still trying
to get in the way of my research. I have a reputation for
being an imperialist, an expansionist, because I ask for
a lot of money. But this is what it takes to do research
on AIDS. AIDS is not an affair that's going to last 50
years. It's going to be settled in 10 years, and if you
want to put the package together, you can't drag your
feet.
Q Do you deserve a Nobel Prize for discovering the AIDS
virus?
A It's not for me to say. The Nobel committee might want to
give the prize to the discoverer of the vaccine, although
it was the discovery of the virus itself that allowed for
its detection in blood and the development of public
health measures that can limit the epidemic, even without
a vaccine. The contribution of the American team is also
important, so I doubt the prize will go to only one of
the virus' co-discoverers. If someone develops a miracle
drug against AIDS, that, too, would merit a Nobel
Prize....
AIDS is a terrible malady, and I don't want to suggest
that scientists are reaping their honors at other
people's expense. I haven't changed because of my
notoriety, but there's tremendous pressure from the media
and the public, who think of us as a cross between
magicians and movie stars.
Reprinted from Reinventing the Future: Conversations with
the World's Leading Scientists, by Thomas A. Bass. Copyright
c1993 by Thomas A. Bass. Used by permission of Addison-
Wesley Publishing Co.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
COMMENTARY
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : How An Understanding Of Science History Is Useful,
Enriching, And Rewarding
AU : EUGENE GARFIELD
TY : OPINION (COMMENTARY)
PG : 12
It was gratifying to publish Franklin Hoke's article titled
"History Of Science Societies Sprout Up Nationwide, With
More Researchers Studying Lessons Of The Past" (The
Scientist, Nov. 15, 1993, page 1). The dramatic
proliferation of these societies is a very healthy trend.
Throughout my career--in fact, since my early adolescence--I
have been fascinated by the history and sociology of
science. Indeed, it's quite likely that a book my uncle gave
to me at the end of my freshman year in high school--John D.
Bernal's The Social Function of Science--was the spark that
ignited my incipient interest in research and influenced my
eventual decision to make a career for myself in the science
community.
As a Columbia University undergraduate, I wrote a paper on
biblical treatments of medical problems; later, as a young
chemist at Johns Hopkins University--where my investigations
of information retrieval were launched--I worked under
Sanford V. Larkey, a physician-librarian with an abiding
interest in Elizabethan medicine; and at the Institute for
the History of Medicine, I met scholars like Richard H.
Shryock, the "dean" of American medical history.
Chauncey D. Leake--pharmacologist, dean, medical historian,
and one of the leading mentors in my life--introduced me not
only to the subtleties of review writing, from which my
ideas on citation indexing sprung, but also to Egyptian
medical papyri, Leonardo da Vinci, and a host of other
science history subjects. Later, I became closely associated
with Derek J. de Solla Price--the creative pioneer of
scientometrics--and Robert K. Merton, the quintessential
sociologist/historian of science.
In 1958, at the International Conference on Scientific
Information in Washington, I met John Desmond Bernal
himself, the man whose work had stimulated me first as a
teenager and later at the Welch Indexing Project at Johns
Hopkins. (After his death about a decade ago, I was happy to
sponsor the J.D. Bernal Annual Award of the Society for the
Social Study of Science.)
Why has the study of the history of science remained so
compelling for me? What prompted some of the people I've
mentioned previously, and countless others, to devote the
bulk of their professional lives to learning, teaching, and
writing about it? What is its practical value to the
researcher of today? And why do I so warmly greet the news
that interest in the subject appears to be spreading
rapidly?
There are many ways to address these questions. I think it
is safe to say, for instance, that each of us, no matter
what our role may be, gains from the understanding that the
daily tasks we perform, petty and routine as they often may
be, contribute to the composition over time of a larger
pattern and more elevated purpose than is immediately
perceptible to us. The study of history not only provides a
glimpse of the ennobling grand scheme, but also reinforces
our sense of community with our colleagues, with those who
have preceded us in time, and with those who are to follow.
Hoke's article quoted a longtime associate of mine, Gerald
Holton, a Harvard University professor of physics and the
history of science and past president of the 4,000-member
History of Science Society. "For understanding the 20th
century," Holton contends, "it is a requirement to be able
to understand what science is about, how it works, and what
influence it has had." This is especially applicable today,
he says, in light of the fact that "something like half the
bills in Congress have scientific or technological
implications."
Perhaps the most strikingly poetic justification was
provided by the Belgian-born George Sarton, author of the
mammoth Introduction to the History of Science and often
referred to as "the father" of the field. In the mid-1920s,
Sarton--founder and editor of Isis--organized the History of
Science Society. At the first George Sarton Medal ceremony
in 1955--the year before his death--he said:
"The past cannot be separated from the present without
grievous loss. The present without the past is insipid and
meaningless; the past without the present is obscure. The
life of science, like the life of art, is eternal, and we
must view it from the point of view of eternity."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
LETTERS
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Animal Welfare
AU : SUSAN E. PARIS
TY : OPINION (LETTERS)
PG : 12
I am sure many of your readers join me in disagreeing with
the accusations made by Marjorie Anchel in her Sept. 20,
1993, letter to The Scientist [page 12].
To say that "laboratories are exempt from the anti-cruelty
laws" is to ignore the fact that the biomedical research
industry is one of the most highly regulated industries in
the United States.
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) sets standards for the humane
treatment of laboratory animals. This act has specific
requirements for housing, feeding, sanitation, and
ventilation. Many amendments were added to this 1966 bill
that also govern the amount of living space, proper
exercise, and psychological well-being of the animal. In
fact, with all these regulations, some animal research
laboratories cost more to build than hospitals.
Additionally, many institutions voluntarily adhere to even
stricter laboratory guidelines, such as those of the
American Association for Accreditation of Laboratory Animal
Care (AAALAC).
Medical scientists strive to avoid excessive regulation,
which does nothing for animal welfare but costs researchers
time and money. These costs translate into paying more for
health care and waiting longer for new treatments.
Furthermore, Quakers, who, according to Anchel's letter,
"found themselves involved with animal protection as
naturally as temperance and antislavery" were also meat
eaters and used these same animals to work their fields, a
lifestyle vehemently opposed by the "animal rights"
movement.
I believe Anchel is confusing animal welfare, which all
responsible scientists support, with animal rights. Animal
rights is an indefensible stance that equates the life of a
rat or any research animal with the life of a human being.
If we had followed the animal rights philosophy 50 years
ago, our children would still be suffering from diphtheria,
whooping cough, and measles. And we'd still be dying from
polio and rabies.
SUSAN E. PARIS
President Americans for Medical Progress
1735 Jefferson Davis Highway
Suite 907
Arlington, Va. 22202-3401
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Fetal Tissue Research
AU : ALFRED E. HARPER
TY : OPINION (LETTERS)
PG : 12
The article on resumption of National Institutes of Health
support for investigations involving the use of fetal tissue
(M.E. Watanabe, The Scientist, Oct. 4, 1993, page 1) was
heartening. It would have been more heartening if, in their
comments, the researchers interviewed about the effects of
the ban had emphasized less their deprivation of funds and
delayed progress and more the restriction imposed on their
freedom.
It was encouraging, in any event, that three scientists made
reference, even though obliquely, to the ban's being based
on moral or political, not on scientific, grounds. It would
have been more encouraging if they had stated flatly that
imposition of the ban was neither a moral nor a political
issue, but a religious issue. It is a serious threat to
freedom when, in a country whose constitution requires
separation of church and state, funding for a valuable
component of medical research can be banned because some
aspects of it are considered not to conform with precepts
certain religious organizations assert are ordained by
divine revelation.
The conflict between religion and science is not dead, or of
only historical significance, as many would have us believe.
It is as real as it was when Galileo was forced to recant.
The conflict is less physically threatening now than it was
in Galileo's time because the power of religious hierarchies
has waned. Violence, nonetheless, is still countenanced by
organizations that try to force the entire population to
conform with their religious beliefs about reproduction and
creation.
Although the current political leadership is disposed more
strongly toward protecting freedom than abridging it, to
ensure continuity of the policy will require scientists to
stand firmly against actions that subordinate the autonomy
of reason to the doctrines of a church.
ALFRED E. HARPER
381 N.W. 112th St.
Seattle, Wash. 98177-4840
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
RESEARCH
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Failure Of Landsat 6 Leaves Many Researchers In Limbo
AU : MYRNA E. WATANABE
TY : RESEARCH
PG : 14
On its launch this past October 5, the Landsat 6 remote-
sensing satellite crashed into the Indian Ocean--a sourly
disappointing turn of events for researchers in several
scientific fields. These scientists have grown increasingly
dependent on the space device, which scans specific
electromagnetic wavelengths from Earth, to supply them with
unique data on the ever-changing planet.
For these researchers, this latest setback is representative
of the roller-coaster history of the two-decade-old Landsat
satellite program, and their experience with it. It is a
history marked, on one hand, by the spectacular research
applicability of the satellite, far exceeding its initial
expectations, and, on the other, by administrative and
political decisions that eventually priced the data it
collected out of the reach of most researchers, forcing them
to abandon it as a viable tool.
A recently passed federal law revived the hopes of many of
these scientists that they might again use the satellite in
their studies, but the October crash and federal budgetary
problems have left those hopes, at the very least, in limbo.
The first Landsat satellite, launched in 1972, was expected
to be used primarily to aid geologists in their monitoring
of the Earth's surface from space on a repetitive basis with
sophisticated sensors.
It wasn't long, however, before scientists in many other
fields--geographers, ecologists, biologists, environmental
scientists, and others --realized that remote sensing of the
Earth's surface could provide them with invaluable
information. Use of the medium blossomed; suddenly, Landsat
imagery was conveying startling data--in the form of
striking and informative color and black-and-white images--
about crop yields, irrigation, ecological recovery from
brush fires and volcanoes, siltation and diversion of
rivers, and other phenomena.
And the price was right. A data tape produced from the
satellite could be obtained for $250, a black-and-white
print for $10.
But 12 years later, in 1984, the Reagan administration moved
the Landsat program from governmental auspices to the
private sector. Run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) under the Department of Commerce in
the early 1980s, the satellite's operation and development
were put under the aegis of a private company, Lanham, Md.-
based Earth Observation Satellite Co. (EOSAT), a joint
venture of Camden, N.J.-based RCA Corp. and Hughes Aircraft
Co., Los Angeles. Almost immediately, prices for the
satellite-generated imagery skyrocketed: The computer-
compatible tape now cost $4,400; the price of the $10 black-
and-white print soared to $2,700.
Some investigators made do with pre-EOSAT imagery to
continue their studies, while others reduced their research,
exploited expensive and non-comparable imagery from European
satellites, or began making the best of imagery obtained
from conventional aircraft.
Understandably, they had reason to be hopeful when, in
October 1992--after much congressional lobbying by them and
sympathetic politicians--a law was passed that will
eventually see the return of Landsat to governmental
supervision and affordability. The Land Remote Sensing
Policy Act of 1992, signed by President George Bush,
requires that Landsat be turned over to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of
Defense from EOSAT. The law sets up a procedure that will
make data available at cost to specific researchers. The
process of buying back Landsat has begun, but NASA does not
yet have the budget to buy its share; however, it has bought
some Landsat data from EOSAT and has made them available to
researchers.
But then came the Landsat 6 debacle, a loss of valuable
resources that many were quick to blame on the ineptitude of
NOAA, which handled the launch, and EOSAT, which had built
the satellite. Once again, the scientists whose work
depended on this remarkable device are concerned about the
prospects of continuing their studies. The next generation
of Landsat satellite, Landsat 7, is scheduled to be launched
in 1998, although plans to speed up the process in the wake
of the Landsat 6 crash have been discussed. In the meantime,
scientists must wait or find alternatives.
Many Applications
There is no way of monitoring large-scale environmental
degradation and global change except through remote sensing.
For example, the University of New Hampshire's David Skole
and his colleague Compton Tucker of NASA's Goddard Space
Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., used the data to determine
rain forest loss in Brazilian Amazonia. Their results
(Science, 260:1905-10, 1993) showed much less of a loss than
environmentalists expected.
They based their assessment on a massive amount of Landsat-
generated information obtained from the Brazilian space
agency, which has a monitoring station to receive data
directly from satellites. These stations, in countries
throughout the world, pay EOSAT for access--the privilege of
turning on the satellite and collecting and processing the
data themselves. Skole and Tucker used approximately 250
Brazilian scenes at $250 per scene, Skole says. He
calculates that the same scenes, if available from EOSAT,
would have cost $1.1 million.
Victor Klemas, a professor of marine studies and director of
the Center for Remote Sensing at the University of Delaware
in Newark, uses remote sensing imagery to assess erosion and
pollution. This is important not only to assess water
quality, but also to prepare for possible oil spills in the
region, according to Klemas. Klemas has purchased data from
EOSAT from grant money for some of his projects. "All in
all, the research has suffered because of the high price
structure," he says.
He sees himself in a bind as a result of the loss of Landsat
6. "We all counted on Landsat 6 data for continuity," he
says, referring to the need for repetitive coverages and
images in similar formats to those taken by Landsat before.
Another use of Landsat remote sensing data is for monitoring
resources. According to Janine Stenback, a remote sensing
specialist with the State of California's Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection in Sacramento, her state
specifically is looking at the conversion of wild lands to
urban lands, monitoring threatened and endangered habitats,
and mapping and monitoring wetlands.
California, however, cannot afford EOSAT's prices and was
looking forward to receiving relief under the new Landsat 6
pricing structure. According to Stenback, California has
been relying on aircraft-acquired data--which are in similar
wavelengths as the data from Landsat--from NASA's Ames
Research Center in Mountain Home, Calif., for emergency
response situations, such as quickly locating and assessing
the scope of brush fires.
This coverage is both frequent and rapid, and, in emergency
situations, the data were provided free of charge. But these
data are limited in use, Stenback says. It is hard, for
example, to put the images together to form a continuous
mosaic; and images may differ, depending upon the altitude
of the aircraft.
Donald Rundquist, a geographer who is a professor of
conservation at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, says
that he relies on Landsat remote sensing imagery for many
studies, most of which are related to the agricultural
emphasis of his school. These include irrigation monitoring;
crop classification, identification, and mapping; and water-
quality assessment. His group had to cut back on the imagery
after EOSAT raised the prices. Now, he is considering
alternatives.
Alta Walker, a geologist with the United States Geological
Survey in Reston, Va., used contemporary Landsat imagery in
the early 1980s to determine the extent of remaining natural
habitat for the endangered Chinese alligator. This required
imagery from several different years and seasons, and would
be prohibitively expensive now. Walker now limits her
research to geology and geological history, which do not
require time-sensitive images, trading old Landsat tapes
with other researchers and the government.
Meanwhile, Fred Koontz, curator of mammals at the Bronx
Zoo/Wildlife Conservation Park in New York, has used
satellite tracking systems to follow movements of radio-
collared elephants in Africa. He had hoped to use Landsat
remote sensing imagery for on-site field research and
wildlife conservation programs, but under EOSAT, such
imagery has been out of financial reach. And now he foresees
a "data gap" until Landsat 7's proposed 1998 launch.
Bridging The Gap
Since EOSAT took over the Landsat program, consumption of
Landsat data by academics dropped precipitously. In 1976,
researchers purchased 34,000 scenes, an all-time high; in
1990, only 450 scenes were purchased, says Koontz. Even the
scientific literature suffered. Geophysicist Paul Lowman of
the Goddard Space Flight Center says that very little has
been published on use of remote sensing imagery in the last
several years.
The new pricing structure that will be worked out as a
result of the 1992 law was expected to lead to immediate
increased demand for Landsat 6 data. Given the crash and
ongoing negotiations to repurchase the program, this will
not happen.
How can the many researchers hope to continue their work?
Right now, there are only two barely functioning Landsat
satellites: Landsat 4, which has been shut down because of
communication difficulties, and Landsat 5. Both of these are
long overdue for replacement, and both of them can fail at
any moment.
Although some existing Landsat data will be provided at cost
to certain researchers and organizations under the new law,
current data will be available only as long as the two
satellites last.
Archival data, now maintained on tapes in storage centers by
NOAA, have the disadvantage of being dated; moreover, they
tend to not be in the best of shape. According to Skole,
much previously obtained material is located in coun- tries
outside the U.S. that have their own tracking stations. In
fact, Skole points out, no one knows exactly what data are
available worldwide.
Alternatives
Those who can afford to are considering alternatives, but
nothing seems to be ideal. California is looking into using
data from the French-European Systme Probatoire pour
l'Observation de la Terre (SPOT) satellite. But SPOT data
are not cheap, and, California's Stenback says, the
differences in resolution and format may make it difficult
to compare Landsat and SPOT imagery of the same area.
Rundquist is considering using imagery from the Japanese
JERS-1 satellite for work on changes in the aquifer in four
western lakes in Nebraska. These data also are expensive--
about $1,000 for a computer-compatible tape--but
significantly cheaper than EOSAT's data. New Hampshire's
Skole questions the use of Japanese imagery. "It's of
dubious quality," he says.
The best solution seems to be to move up the launch of
Landsat 7. Landsat 7 is not a panacea; its technology,
according to Nebraska's Rundquist, is dated. But it still
will provide affordable data to U.S. researchers.
Researchers such as Koontz are concerned that national
budgetary problems may further hinder the project. Koontz
adds, however, that President Clinton and Vice President
Gore support the Landsat program. "The government is going
to have to step in and follow through on some of these
ideas, or the U.S. will lose its leadership position,"
Koontz states.
Myrna E. Watanabe is a biotechnology consultant based in
Yonkers, N.Y.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : LANDSAT EVOLUTION
TY : RESEARCH
PG : 14
The first of the Landsat series of satellites was launched
by the U.S. Department of the Interior in 1972. The program
was a direct outgrowth of the use of hand-held Hasselblad
cameras by the astronauts in the Mercury and Gemini space
programs to photograph the Earth from space, according to
Paul Lowman, a geophysicist with the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration's Goddard Space Flight Center in
Greenbelt, Md. These space photos enthralled geologists.
The Landsat program was a concerted effort to monitor the
Earth from space on a regular and repetitive basis with
sensors that detect radiation in select wavelengths,
providing information that geologists could use to study
landforms, land movement, and the Earth's geological
history. These satellites repeat coverage of the same area
approximately once every 16 days. The digital data obtained
can be analyzed by computer and can be used to make black-
and-white or multicolored images of the Earth.
Landsat 2 was launched in 1975, Landsat 3 in 1978, Landsat 4
in 1982, and Landsat 5 in 1984. Landsat 4 and 5 have
improved sensors and produce images with increased
resolution, but the resolution is inferior to that of the
French-European Systme Probatoire pour l'Observation de la
Terre (SPOT) satellite, an alternative available to
researchers. The average lifespan of Landsat 1 through 3 was
six years. Landsat 4 and 5 are still aloft, but Landsat 4
has been shut down because of communication difficulties and
Landsat 5's transmissions are weak.
Scientists expect that Landsat 7, to be launched in 1998,
will carry sensors with greater resolution equivalent to
SPOT, but Tony Janetos of NASA in Washington, D.C., explains
that if the launch is moved up, this improvement may have to
be scrapped.
--M.E.W.
SUGGESTED READING:
P.D. Lowman, Jr., Geologists and Ideas: A History of North
American Geology, E. T. Drake and W. M. Jordan eds.,
Geological Society of America Centennial Special, Vol. 1,
pages 481-519, 1985.
T. Nishidai, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 14:18-
25, 1993.
D.C. Rundquist, et al., Photogrammetric Engineering and
Remote Sensing, 55:587-90, 1989.
D.C. Rundquist and S.A. Samson, in, Introduction to Remote
Sensing of the Environment, ed. B.F. Richason, Jr., 2nd ed.,
Kendall-Hunt Publishers, pages 317-37, 1983.
N. M. Short and R. W. Blair, Jr., eds., Geomorphology from
Space. (Washington, D.C., NASA, 1986).
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
HOT PAPERS
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : MEDICINE
TY : RESEARCH (HOT PAPERS)
PG : 16
C.P. van Schayck, E. Dompeling, C.L.A. van Herwaarden, H.
Folgering, A.L.M. Verbeek, H.J.M. van der Hoogen, C. van
Weel, "Bronchodilator treatment in moderate asthma or
chronic bronchitis: continuous or on demand? A randomised
controlled study," British Medical Journal, 303:1426-31,
1991.
Constant P. van Schayck (Department of General Practice,
Nijmegen University, the Netherlands): "We investigated the
effects of chronic, continuous use of bronchodilators in
asthma and chronic bronchitis. The possibly adverse effects
of bronchodilators on the prognosis of asthma and chronic
bronchitis is a topical subject nowadays. Long-term studies
on this subject are scarce. These studies have begun to
appear in the last few years, and they do not seem to
justify the fear (or even panic) among patients and doctors
of using these bronchodilators.
"It is true that several publications have pointed to the
possibly adverse effects of these drugs. However, none of
these publications have real-ly proved that bronchodilators
are dangerous in the long run. In several epidemiological
studies an association was found between the prescription of
b2-adrenergic drugs and asthma mortality (J. Crane, et al.,
Lancet, 1:917-22, 1989; W.O. Spitzer, et al., New England
Journal of Medicine, 326:501-6, 1992). These epidemiological
studies cannot provide evidence for a causal relationship--
that is, that the bronchodilators themselves were the cause
of an increase in asthma mortality. It is more probable that
overdependence on the b2-adrenergic drugs delays the use of
necessary anti-inflammatory agents and might therefore be a
cause of asthma mortality.
"The only way to prove the deleterious effects of the
bronchodilator itself is to perform clinical trials in which
the treatment regimen is randomized. In this paper, we
published the changes caused by continuous bronchodilator
treatment compared with treatment on demand. The decline in
lung function was 72 ml per year during continuous use and
20 ml per year during treatment on demand (p 0.05). Another
prospective study showed an increased bronchial
hyperresponsiveness during continuous use of a
bronchodilator (M.R. Sears, et al., Lancet, 226:1391-6,
1990). On the basis of these studies it has been recommended
that if asthmatic patients need to inhale a bronchodilator
more than once daily, it is advisable to add anti-
inflammatory medication.
"A follow-up study by our group investigated whether a rapid
progression in lung function of patients with asthma or
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease could be reversed or
slowed by additional anti-inflammatory treatment (E.
Dompeling, et al., Annals of Internal Medicine, 118:770-8,
1993). It was shown that the initial annual decline in FEV1
of 160 ml per year was decelerated to 100 ml per year during
the use of the inhaled steroid. On the basis of these
observations it is recommended to avoid overreliance on
bronchodilators. The use of anti-inflammatory treatment
(inhaled steroids or cromoglycate) should be given serious
consideration when a bronchodilator is used daily."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : GENETICS
TY : RESEARCH (HOT PAPERS)
PG : 16
S.H. Devoto, M. Mudryj, J. Pines, T. Hunter, J.R. Nevins, "A
cyclin A-protein kinase complex possesses sequence-specific
DNA binding activity: p33.MDSU/cdk2 is a component of the
E2F-cyclin A complex," Cell, 68:167-76, 1992.
Joseph R. Nevins (Section of Genetics, Duke University
Medical Center, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Durham,
N.C.): "A series of experiments performed in 1991 led to the
realization that the cellular transcription factor E2F,
previously studied as a component of transcription of an
early adenovirus gene, was a target for the action of the
retinoblastoma gene product. This finding coalesced studies
directed at understanding the action of E1A as a
transcriptional regula- tory protein, through the activation
of E2F, together with studies directed at E1A's oncogenic
role, by binding to proteins such as Rb. In short, it
appeared that the binding of E1A to Rb was a consequence of
the action of E1A to disrupt the E2F complex and activate
E2F.
"At the same time that the E2F-Rb connection was made, it
became clear that there was an additional E2F complex that
contained the cell cycle regulatory protein cyclin A,
another protein previously shown to be bound by adenovirus
E1A. The E2F-cyclin A interaction was shown to accumulate in
S phase of the cell cycle, coincident with the accumulation
of the cyclin A protein. Although these findings were quite
unexpected and striking, they were also perplexing to those
in the cell cycle field, since previous studies had detailed
the role of cyclin A as a cofactor for the cdc2 family of
protein kinases.
"It was difficult to imagine a scenario in which cyclin A
would interact with a kinase on the one hand and a
transcription factor on the other. In this regard, the work
of Steve Devoto, which demonstrated that the E2F-cyclin A
complex also contained the cdk2 kinase as well as the Rb-
related p107 protein--a result also described by Ed Harlow
and colleagues at the same time (L.M. Cao, B. Faha, M.
Dembski, et al., Nature, 355:176-9, 1992)--was important in
placing the interaction in a more comfortable perspective.
In short, this paper returned the cyclin A protein to its
proper place--an association with the cdk2 kinase--but, in
so doing, added an interesting twist: As a consequence of
the presence of E2F, this kinase complex possessed sequence-
specific DNA binding activity. I suspect that this aspect is
responsible in part for the extensive citations.
"Although the ultimate significance of the association of a
cyclin-dependent kinase with a transcription factor is still
to be determined, these findings raise the interesting
possibility that E2F might serve as a chaperone for the
kinase complex, targeting the kinase to a site on DNA that
may contain a substrate for the kinase. Whether this is
significant for transcription or, alternatively, DNA
replication, or even some other DNA-associated event, must
await future studies."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : CELL BIOLOGY
TY : RESEARCH (HOT PAPERS)
PG : 16
S. Shirodkar, M. Ewen, J.A. DeCaprio, J. Morgan, D.M.
Livingston, T. Chittenden, "The transcription factor E2F
interacts with the retinoblastoma product and a p107-cyclin
A complex in a cell cycle-regulated manner," Cell, 68:157-
66, 1992.
Thomas Chittenden (Immunogen Inc., Cambridge, Mass.): "This
work was done in the lab of David M. Livingston at the Dana-
Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. The retinoblastoma
protein (Rb) belongs to a class of growth regulatory
proteins, termed tumor suppressors, which function to
prevent tumorigenesis. Livingston's laboratory has been
interested in understanding, at a molecular level, how Rb
negatively regulates cell growth. In 1991 several groups,
including our own, demonstrated that Rb forms a complex with
the cellular transcription factor E2F. E2F contributes to
the cell cycle-dependent transcription of a multitude of
genes involved in DNA synthesis and cell proliferation.
"This work is an effort to understand how the activity of
E2F is coordinated with the cell cycle. We show that
regulation of E2F involves an interaction with Rb in G1,
whereas in S phase, E2F forms a complex with an Rb-related
protein, p107, and cyclin A. Similar findings were reported
simultaneously by several other laboratories.
"The interest in this paper most likely reflects a
convergence of several areas of intensive research: Rb
(tumor suppressors), E2F (transcription factors), and
cyclins (components of the cell cycle machinery). These
findings provide evidence that different members of the Rb
protein family (Rb and p107) have distinct functions in the
cell cycle. The presence of cyclin A, a known regulator of S
phase, in a DNA-binding transcription factor complex is
provocative to many investigators.
"Subsequent studies by a number of groups have pointed to
additional complexity in virtually every component of E2F
regulation. The recent isolation of cDNA clones for E2F has
revealed that E2F is actually a family of proteins. At least
one other cyclin, cyclin E, interacts with E2F, but with
kinetics that are distinct from cyclin A. There is also
evidence that yet additional members of the Rb protein
family interact with E2F. Despite the incredibly rapid pace
of research in this area, the central challenge remains to
determine how all of these components are integrated to
provide appropriate cell cycle-dependent transcription of
E2F-responsive genes."
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : New Disrupters Help Cell Biologists Retrieve Products
AU : RICKI LEWIS
TY : TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
PG : 18
Many experiments in cell biology require researchers to
break open cells and then retrieve their contents. For
example, the production of recombinant proteins in
biotechnology relies on cell and tissue cultures--and cell
disruption is essential to retrieving sought-after cell
products. The technology used must be powerful enough to
disrupt cell membranes and, possibly, cell walls, yet gentle
enough so that the organelles and macromolecules inside the
cells are not smashed, shattered, or boiled away.
Today, researchers have quite a selection of cell-disruption
tools to choose from, including relatively familiar
sonicators, rotor-stator systems, blenders, and bead mills,
as well as several innovative newcomers.
"The method selected will depend on its capability to
process samples of a certain size or to be able to process
multiple samples in a reasonable period of time," says
Timothy R. Hopkins, a biochemist and president of BioSpec
Products Inc. in Bartlesville, Okla. "Other considerations
are the availability, cost, and general utility of the
disruption equipment.
"In a research environment, purchase of an expensive cell
disrupter which processes a wide variety of cell types may
be easier to justify than a specialized disrupter," he adds.
"And if the long-term goal is to scale up, the choice of
disruption methods narrows considerably."
Some techniques that can easily process a few milliliters of
cell sample in a researcher's lab are of no use when the
sample is scaled up to several liters. Another key
consideration in selecting a cell disrupter is cell type.
"Some cells are more difficult to rupture than others," says
Carol Ostrom, marketing manager at Microfluidics Corp. in
Newton, Mass. "For example, mammalian cells, in many
methods, are easier. Yeast are really hard to penetrate."
In her company's Cell Disruption Microfluidizer, cells
caught at the point where two high-speed and highly
pressurized streams of proprietary liquids meet are
ruptured. Mammalian cells, relatively delicate because they
lack cell walls, rupture with one pass at a pressure of
2,000 psi, while insect blood cells require three passes at
5,000 psi or one pass at 15,000 psi.
The notoriously tough yeast cells can require two passes at
20,000 psi, Ostrom says. The advantage of the device,
according to Ostrom, is that "the whole product is treated
in a uniform manner, making it easy to scale up from
research and development to production."
While Microfluidics emphasizes the ability of its device to
rupture the toughest cells, a Cell Disruption Bomb from Parr
Instruments Co. in Moline, Ill., targets delicate mammalian
cells and works on the principle of nitro- gen
decompression. This is the same phenomenon feared by deep-
sea divers and known as "the bends," in which nitrogen in
the blood bubbles out of solution as the divers ascend from
great depths.
With the Cell Disruption Bomb, nitrogen is dissolved in
cells in a high-pressure vessel. A sudden release of the
pressure sends the nitrogen into bubbles, and the cells
burst. The technique is fast and uniform, and handles large
samples without generating heat.
"It is physically and chemically quite gentle and can be
used to recover delicate biochemicals with high metabolic
activities," says Sherman Hamel, vice president of sales and
marketing at Parr. "The disruptive action can also be
closely controlled to release intact nuclei and functional
mitochondria from most mammalian cells."
Traditional Disrupters
Bead milling is another effective way to disrupt the tough-
to-crack yeast cells, other fungi, cyanobacteria,
microalgae, and spores. In a shaking-type bead mill,
electromechanical forces agitate glass beads in a container
of cell-rich fluid. Speed, duration, and bead size are
chosen to suit the particular cell type and the type of
material the researcher wants to collect. It takes one to
five minutes to disrupt bacterial cells, for example, says
Hopkins. After movement stops, the beads settle immediately
to the bottom of the container and the broken cells can be
removed from the material on top. The shaking type bead mill
can handle samples up to 3 ml. A rotor-type bead mill, in
which a moving rotor provides the shearing force, can
process samples up to 250 ml.
Another common cell-disrupting tool, the rotor-stator
homogenizer, tears cells by applying turbulence and shearing
generated by forces between a stationary component, the
stator, and a moving component, the rotor.
"The stator is a hollow tube, and the rotor is a blade
inside it that turns swiftly," says Alison Lippincott,
marketing coordinator at Omni International Inc. in
Gainesville, Va. "The stator has slots," Lippincott says.
"When the rotor spins, it sucks the sample up and cuts it
while it is rotating. When the sample is pushed out of the
windows [slots], it is cut further. Outside [of the slots],
the sample meets a pressure differential, which shears it
even further."
Ultrasound is the basis for another widely used cell-
disruption technology. Devices based on ultrasound are
called sonicators and work on the principle of cavitation.
An electrical current is converted to mechanical vibrations,
which traverse a device called a horn, which intensifies the
vibrations. This establishes pressure waves.
When the horn contacts a liquid, millions of microscopic
bubbles, or cavities, form in the presence of the resulting
positive and negative forces generated by the pressure
waves.
As the bubbles expand under negative pressure and implode,
or collapse, under positive pressure, they send a powerful
shock wave through a probe tip, which shears cells it
contacts. The cavitation actually occurs just in front of
the probe's tip. Vendors supply ultrasound devices and a
variety of horns, probe tips, cooling jackets, and sound-
proofing modifications.
"Every unit does the exact same thing," says Anthony
Borrelli, assistant marketing manager at Sonics and
Materials Inc., Danbury, Conn. "With higher wattages, you
can go with a higher volume. A couple of models have more
whistles and bells."
While ultrasound manufacturers highlight the efficiency and
speed of sonicators, many life scientists are wary of the
devices.
"Ultrasound generates a tremendous amount of heat, which is
a great disadvantage in biology," says Stefan Surzycki, a
professor in the Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology at
Indiana University, Bloomington. Heat, he explains, can
destroy organelles and unravel biological molecules.
Birth Of BioNeb
Surzycki's dissatisfaction with cell disrupters on the
market led him to invent a new entrant into this rather
classical field.
"Ultrasound leads to heat, which is uncontrollable," he
says. "Systems that use a blade shatter everything. With
many methods, you just smash everything and hope you don't
smash what you want."
Surzycki, along with fellow Indiana biology professor Robert
Togasaki and associate Masahiko Kitayama, embarked on
building a better cell disrupter. The technique they settled
on takes advantage of a natural phenomenon called
nebulization--basically, the formation of droplets. The
aspect of nebulization that is important to the process is
similar to what happens in a capillary tube, Surzycki
explains.
"If you have a very small capillary tube, flow is in
layers," Surzycki says. "The center flows faster and layers
towards the side of the tube are much slower. If you put a
cell in the area of differential speed, it is broken because
one end of the cell is flowing faster than the other. The
cell stretches and breaks."
Engineering a capillary tube small enough to hold a cell and
facilitate this process proved a daunting challenge. Enter
nebulization.
Nebulization "occurs when you blow a gas over a surface of a
liquid, following the same principles as a perfume sprayer
or air-painting device," Surzycki says. The gas flow causes
droplets to form--but not instantaneously, he explains. "For
a moment they are connected to the liquid, with the neck
size about half the diameter of the droplet," he adds. For a
millisecond, that "neck" between liquid surface and emerging
droplet resembles a tiny capillary tube. In Surzycki's
device, called BioNeb, cells are sheared within that neck
because of the differential flow.
BioNeb works well on a variety of cell types and sources,
including cyanobacteria, E. coli, yeast, algae, and plant
and mammalian cells, its manufacturer says. One convert to
BioNeb from sonicators and a high-pressure device called a
French press is David W. Krogmann, a professor of
biochemistry at Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind. "We have
used the BioNeb to break open cells of the cyanobacterium
Synechocystis, an especially difficult cyanobacterium to
break," he says. He adds that the two methods he had been
using broke only 40 percent of the cells in his samples over
repeated cycles, compared with 60 percent or more in a
single pass with BioNeb.
And Wendy Boss, a professor of botany at North Carolina
State University in Raleigh, uses BioNeb to open carrot
cells gently enough so that she can ease out and collect
their nuclei.
Surzycki points out another major advantage of this gentle
approach--it is time-independent. If a user runs it a bit
too long, the sample isn't ruined. With other systems, the
longer you operate, the more you destroy. The device is also
cool and very fast, handling a liter of cells in two to
three minutes.
"It uses low pressure, so hazards are much less," says
Raymond Rickert, president of Glas-Col Apparatus Co. in
Terre Haute, Ind., which is entering the biotechnology
market with the BioNeb Cell Disruption System. "You can turn
it over to an assistant without worrying about blowing up
the lab."
Ricki Lewis is a freelance science writer based in Scotia, N.Y.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : SELECTED CELL-DISRUPTION PRODUCTS
TY : TOOLS & TECHNOLOGY
PG : 19
The following companies are among those providing research-
scale cell-disruption technologies.
BioSpec Products Inc.
P.O. Box 722
Bartlesville, Okla. 74005
Phone/Fax: (918) 336-3363
Products: Mini Beadbeater, $988; Biohomogenizer (rotor-stator), $485
Cole-Parmer Instrument Co.
7425 North Oak Park Ave.
Chicago, Ill. 60648
(708) 647-7600
Fax: (708) 647-9660
Products: 50-watt ultrasonic processor, $1,495; shaking bead
mill, $485-530; rotor-stator generators, $500-$690
Glas-Col Apparatus Co.
711 Hulman St.
Terre Haute, Ind. 47802
(812) 235-6167
Fax: (812) 234-6975
Product: BioNeb Cell Disruption System, $3,965-$4,065,
depending on capacity
Microfluidics
30 Ossipee Rd.
P.O. Box 9101
Newton, Mass. 02164-9101
(800) 370-5452
Fax: (617) 965-1213
Product: Cell Disruption Microfluidizer, $21,690
Omni International Inc.
6530 Commerce Court
Suite 200 E
Gainesville, Va. 22065
(800) 776-4431
Fax: (703) 347-5352
Products: Mixer Homogenizer, $2,400, Micro Homogenizer,
$1,100
Parr Instrument Co.
211 53rd St.
Moline, Ill. 61265-9984
(309) 762-7716
Fax: (309) 762-9453
Product: Cell Disruption Bomb, $1,120-$7,700, depending on
capacity
Sonics and Materials Inc.
Kenosia Avenue
Danbury, Conn. 06810
(203) 744-4400
Fax: (203) 798-8350
Product: VibraCell VCX 600 Ultrasonic Liquid Processor,
approx. $3,000
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
================================
NEXT:
PROFESSION
------------------------------------------------------------
TI : Retired Researchers Go Back To School
AU : STEVEN BENOWITZ
TY : PROFESSION
PG : 20
Microbiologist Stanley Barban introduces fifth-graders to
the "invisible world of microorganisms" by swabbing a
child's hand before and after washing, then growing the
removed bacteria under glass for later study. He and the
class also visit a laboratory at the National Institutes of
Health.
Meanwhile, electrical engineer Harold Sharlin uses wires,
sockets, and light bulbs to demonstrate principles of
electricity to fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-graders. Then he
takes the eager pupils on tours of the Chalk Point
Generating Station in southern Prince George's County, Md.
"A key to getting kids interested in science is to get them
at a young age," says the 68-year-old Sharlin. "Studies have
shown that interest in science takes a nosedive after the
sixth grade. They have to be shown science in the context of
their everyday lives."
Sharlin should know; for the last five years, he has been
project director for the Emeritus Scientists,
Mathematicians, and Engineers (ESME) program, which links
retired Washington, D.C.-area scientists, mathematicians,
and engineers with local public schools. The program aims to
spark the interest of inner-city youth in science and
engineering careers.
The ESME program originated about five years ago. Sharlin,
after 25 years in academia teaching electrical engineering
and the history of science--18 of them at Iowa State
University--was consulting for various government agencies.
He also volunteered at a local senior center, and was
appalled by the notion that many regarded all elderly as
frail and unable to continue to contribute to society. A
friend suggested Sharlin meet Larry Mirel, a retired
attorney who is founder and president of the Emeritus
Foundation, a nonprofit organization of volunteer retired
professionals--attorneys, accountants, social workers, and
teachers--who perform community service and provide
professional advice in the Washington area.
Sharlin and Mirel met over lunch and discussed Sharlin's
idea of organizing a group of retired scientists and
engineers to help in local schools. "We knew there must be
thousands of retired scientists and engineers in the
metropolitan Washington, D.C., area, and hundreds more like
Harold--still young and vigorous and looking for something
to do," Mirel recalls.
Several studies had previously reported United States
students' poor showings in math and science, particularly
when compared with their counterparts in other
industrialized countries. Locally, a recent Washington Post
article had reported that the city's elementary pupils
scored above average in math and science on national
standardized tests, then fell to the lower third by 11th
grade. Says Mirel: "That showed it wasn't a lack of ability;
rather, something turns them off."
Mirel and Sharlin began approaching schools with the idea of
volunteer retired scientists and engineers working with
teachers, providing hands-on demonstrations in the classroom
to encourage young people's interest in science and
technology. "When we polled the kids," Sharlin says,
"everyone seemed to know about lawyers and basketball
players. Hardly anyone knew what scientists did."
The Emeritus Foundation supplied start-up funds for
equipment, buses for field trips, and other materials.
Sharlin and Mirel set about recruiting through professional
organization newsletters and meetings. In September 1989,
the ESME program officially got off the ground when six
scientists and engineers went to work in fourth- through
eighth-grade classes in two Northeast Washington, D.C.,
schools, Bunker Hill Elementary and Taft Junior High.
"It's intergenerational," Sharlin says about the ESME
program. "Retired scientists and engineers are underutilized
resources. At the same time, we're addressing the poor
showing of these kids in math and science. These kids see
older people who have had interesting careers; it broadens
their horizons."
The program has been wildly popular with teachers and
students alike. It has grown from two schools to seven, and
from six emeriti to 29. In August 1992, it won a three-year
National Science Foundation grant for more than $398,000.
Mirel attributes much of the program's success to its
"unique design." Teachers and emeritus scientists jointly
plan the classroom lessons, ensuring that they are topical
and understandable. Each scientist signs on for a unit of
six hour-long classes with a concluding field trip, often to
a museum, laboratory, or plant. The scientists and engineers
don't teach; rather, they supplement the programs already in
place with hands-on demonstrations and explanations.
"We foster an ongoing relationship with the students and the
teachers," Sharlin says. "It's not just one hour and out.
This kind of contact makes an impression; we develop a
rapport."
Mirel says he has been pleasantly surprised at how the
teachers have embraced the emeriti. "We knew the kids would
love it," he says, "but we were a little worried about the
interplay with the teachers--we didn't want anyone stepping
on toes." Mirel tells the teachers and principals to treat
the emeritus scientists as "high-priced consultants." They
also use them as mentors.
"Most of these teachers don't have much formal training in
science, and it's not really fair to expect them to have
much," Mirel says. "Teachers are often afraid of science
themselves. They're afraid of an experiment failing, and of
not understanding the material. This gives them an
opportunity to learn and develop their science teaching
skills, as well."
Classroom Challenge
Julie Simon, a fifth-grade teacher at John Eaton Elementary
School in the city's Northwest section, says it's a relief
to have someone in class to answer the pupils' questions,
rather than "always having to look it up." Retired
microbiologist Barban, who spent more than three decades at
the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in
Bethesda, Md., speaks to Simon's class about the "invisible
world of microorganisms," covering a range of topics
including viruses and immunology as well as pasteurization.
"The kids love it, and they ask lots of questions," says
Simon. Barban, who had never taught before, now acknowledges
that when he first stepped into a classroom some three years
ago, "the experience was frightening."
Many of the scientists are like Barban--they wonder what
they'll tell a 10-year-old about science. "Translating the
way scientists think in their science to something
acceptable and useful to the young child can be a
challenge," says William J. Condell, Jr., retired director
of physics at the Office of Naval Research, who also
lectured at George Washington University. He claims to spend
more time preparing for lectures to sixth-graders than he
did for college students.
Condell, 66, says he "jumped at the chance" to work in J.F.
Cook Elementary School in Washington's Northwest section
because he felt that "many of these kids needed a little
extra attention."
He stresses principles with his sixth-graders, and attempts
to "relate physics to their everyday life.
"You have to understand where these kids are coming from,"
he says, "so you can relate the material better to them."
For some classes, he'll show up with balls of various shapes
and sizes--bowling balls, basketballs, and golf balls, for
example--which allows the students to learn about weight,
size, diameter, circumference, and friction. His classes
explore Newtonian mechanics and optics, electricity, and
magnetism. "I introduce them to serious mathematics and
physics," he says. "It's fun, but it's also serious work."
More important than what they learn, Condell says, is
developing "the ability to think and question."
Retired Bunker Hill principal Carolyn R. Preston credits the
ESME program with helping to establish the school as a
demonstration school for science, meaning, she says, that
"its teachers have been determined to be highly skilled in
teaching science, and that students from other area schools
are brought in for science programs."
When Bunker Hill, an academically rigorous public school in
the city's Northeast section, decided several years ago to
begin to emphasize the sciences, a regional superintendent
introduced Preston to Sharlin. They found that they had
several common goals, particularly showing pupils how
science impacts on everyday life. "We started out making
sure that the middle grades--fourth, fifth, and sixth--were
exposed to areas that they could begin to think about as
career choices." Preston recalls. "The emeritus teachers
brought in so many materials and conducted such fun and
fascinating workshops, the kids were awed. Some expressed
interest in careers in these areas, such as engineering and
geology."
According to Preston, the General Electric Foundation of
Fairfield, Conn., has stepped in and lent support to the
ESME program, which in turn has helped fund and "round out
the science program" at Bunker Hill, supplying equipment and
other necessary materials. When the district saw that the
school was committed to teaching science, it kicked in
funding for a pair of science laboratories, which allowed
the school to hire its first full-time science teacher.
Impact And Growth
The ESME program, entering its fifth year, continues to
grow. It has reached into nearby Montgomery County, Md., and
its organizers hope it will spread to major cities
throughout the U.S. In fact, the NSF grant requires the ESME
program to help establish six similar programs in other
locales. One has already taken root in New York: The Long
Island Forum for Technology began a pilot program in April.
But will the ESME program ultimately make much of a
difference in a young person's decision to pursue a career
in science, engineering, or medicine? No one can say for
sure. The program simply hasn't been in existence long
enough.
"It's hard to assess the program at this point," says
Condell, adding that "many schools want emeritus scientists,
but volunteers are hard to come by.
"The program has received high marks from everyone--
principals, teachers, parents, and students--but it's like
any other educational program: How do you know if it's
better than what it replaced?"
For the participating scientists and engineers,
gratification is more immediate. "Every once in a while a
student suddenly raises his hand--he won't look confused or
bored--and blurts out: `I understand it,' " Condell says.
"That's very rewarding."
For more information about the Emeritus Scientists,
Mathematicians, and Engineers program, contact project
director Harold Sharlin at (202) 966-2122, or Emeritus
Foundation president Lawrence Mirel at (202) 232-0863. The
Emeritus Foundation may also be contacted by mail at 1614
20th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009.
Steven Benowitz is a science and medical writer for Penn
State University's Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in
Hershey, Pa.
(The Scientist, Vol:7, #24, December 13, 1993)
(Copyright, The Scientist, Inc.)
============= |