In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

To the Editor

DID I "snidely question" Nature's description of Wainwright as "an independent medical scientist?" No, they described him as an "independent medical historian,"1 and it was the objectivity of his history, not his scientific record, that concerned me.

Did I "conveniently ignore" the award of the Rutgers Medal to Schatz in 1994? No, it is dealt with on page 454.

Did I write that his book "was published a year before Lawrence's article, when in fact it was published some twelve years before?" No, I wrote (p. 442) that it was published a year before Wainwright's own article, which is correct.

Had I actually read his article? Of course—I cite it four times (pp. 442, 456, 458).

Footnotes

1. William Kingston, "Streptomycin, Schatz versus Waksman, and the Balance of Credit for Discovery." J. Hist. Med. All. Sci., 2004, 59, 442.

...

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
1468-4373
Print ISSN
0022-5045
Pages
p. 221
Launched on MUSE
2005-03-14
Open Access
N
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.