The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 266 No 7152 p798
June 16, 2001

Enriching science
Tricky ethics
Ancient seeds
Troublemakers

Enriching science

Much has been written in recent years concerning the need for scientists to acquire the knack of communicating clearly and unambiguously with non-scientists. It is not only a problem of writing logical English, or whatever is the author’s mother tongue, but one of producing a sequence which the reader can follow and at once retain a sympathy with the theme pursued: that is to say, a progression similar to that of a literary work which someone will read because the theme arouses interest and encourages the reader to continue.

In a commentary in Nature for May 17, Robert Simmons of King’s College London asks whether the straitjacket of scientific writing can be relaxed by studying how ideas are presented in imaginative literature. He points out that Peter Medawar exposed the essential fraudulence of the scientific paper which proceeds via introduction, methods, results and discussion, each section being derived from its predecessor by a process of induction. Instead of this sequence, Medawar suggested, a paper should open with discussion, followed by scientific facts and scientific acts. Scientific hypotheses would then appear in the light of adventures of the mind, which indeed they are. This approach would enrich the language of science.

As Simmons explains, Karl Popper regarded human language as divided into three worlds — physical objectivity, mental experiences and products of the human mind. Theories, propositions and statements come into the third category. The critical aspect is necessary for objective knowledge, which is the point of science. Novelty enlivens the arts and the sciences, the difference between them being that science can only discover and reveal what already exists, whereas art can create something which had no previous existence.

It seems to me, on the basis of such arguments, that although science writing can indeed be enriched, it can never attain the creativity that is the essence of the arts practised by humans.

Back to Top

Tricky ethics

The efforts of governments all over the world to crack down on crime often involve dubiously ethical procedures.

Attention has recently been drawn to the fact that police in Britain have for some years been collecting and storing saliva swabs drawn from anyone taken into custody and have in the process amassed a huge DNA reference library — or should it be called a museum? The samples may be referred to in any new attempt to link a suspect with a crime. The store is claimed to be increasing by 3,000 samples every day, and the total of samples exceeds 80,000. The professed intention is to increase this number to 3.5 million.

An editorial in New Scientist for May 5 takes a highly critical attitude towards the craze for DNA evidence and hints that it denotes a kind of creeping totalitarian attitude worthy of George Orwell’s Big Brother. Of course, once you adopt as a shibboleth the notion that crime must be stamped out of society, however distasteful or even anti-human rights the means you adopt to achieve your end, there are no limits to the power you will hand over to the police and other surveillance services, whether or not they are deemed to be unethical or dubious. We already see a section of public opinion firmly against the extension of closed circuit television systems in public places.

It may be fair enough to secure a sample of DNA and seek a match between a suspect and material objects brought forward as evidence, but this does not justify indefinitely retaining that sample after the legal establishment of innocence in case it later implicates the giver in another crime. The only positive argument for such action is a need to establish political control, which is suspect in a democracy, however favoured in a totalitarian regime. It has been noted that in other countries there is a rule that DNA samples must be destroyed when a suspect has been cleared by the law of the land.

As we all know, in interpreting the results of any test, human error is a factor to be considered. Laboratory methods and handling procedures for biological samples are not, and can never be, perfect. The mindset prompting retention of biochemical evidence after innocence has been established reflects the assumption of many politicians and law enforcers that “there is no smoke without fire”, something that a scientist can demonstrate as false with little effort.

Sir William Blackstone, a man revered by lawyers, remarked in his “Commentaries on the laws of England”, first published in 1765: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer.” I suspect that most civilised and educated people would agree.

Back to Top

Ancient seeds

In Science for March 9, Kathryn Brown recalls some experiments carried out by William Beal of Michigan, more than a century ago, to discover the survival rate of seeds from various plants. He placed 50 seeds from 20 different species in clear glass bottles with damp sand, inverted the bottles and buried them in a secluded spot. Every fifth year he disinterred a bottle, emptied the contents and planted them in a greenhouse with light and water, to find which seeds sprouted.

The viability of subterranean seeds may last months or decades, depending on soil and weather conditions and the plant species concerned. The oldest viable seed reliably recorded was of the sacred lotus, retrieved from a dried-up lake bed in China. Studied by radiocarbon dating, this had an estimated age of 1,450 years.

Such extraordinary longevity was attributed to an extremely hard seed coat, impervious to air and water. Moreover, it is known that the lotus seed contains repair enzymes such as L-isoaspartyl methyltransferase which enable it to resist fungal attack and extremes of temperature.

A recent examination of some of William Beal’s original seed samples has shown that after a week’s exposure to bright light seedlings could be raised of moth mullein (Verbascum blattaria) and other Verbascum species. Exposure to cold conditions initiated germination also of a mallow species, which was probably Malva neglecta.

It is believed that seed germination is closely linked to changing seasons, but it is not possible to predict which plants are able to survive for season after season over long periods. As a rule they are those whose seeds can withstand extreme conditions of heat and moisture. Such plants offer the possibility of restoring some ancient landscapes that have been devastated by farming activities or other works, but where pockets of seeds may be buried and awaiting favourable conditions to germinate and sprout.

Back to Top

Troublemakers

Humanism postulates a world that is totally redesigned and controlled by human beings; however, there will always be some people who are destructive or insane while occupying positions of power. The more interlinked and organised the world becomes, the more vulnerable it will be to such disturbed persons, the more power they will have.
— David Ehrenfeld: ‘The arrogance of humanism’ (1978).