In this era of mounting deficits, we struggle to find extravagances whose elimination is practicable and effective. Among the many proposals to salvage the economy is imposition of a drastic reduction of the government support of basic research. Proponents of these austerities view research activity as frivolous-its practitioners in the laboratories as misty-eyed, impractical dreamers who are wholly out of touch with reality and the serious needs of our society. The administration favors diver

First, they reported, investigators fail to credit National Institutes of Health sponsorship of their work. Second, they noted, researchers do not clearly communicate the significance and utility of their basic findings to the advancement of medicine, the environment, or the economy. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), for example, views basic science efforts as "curiosity-driven activities," which she equates with pork. Members of Cong

First, they reported, investigators fail to credit National Institutes of Health sponsorship of their work. Second, they noted, researchers do not clearly communicate the significance and utility of their basic findings to the advancement of medicine, the environment, or the economy. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), for example, views basic science efforts as "curiosity-driven activities," which she equates with pork. Members of Cong

In my recent commentary (The Scientist, May 25, 1992, page 12), I stressed the importance of having the textbook one chooses support one's teaching objectives, but I made no mention of how this should be done. Therefore, as a postscript to my essay, let me discuss the benefits a textbook can offer if its chapters are supplemented by (and teachers make use of) questions and problems, with answers. From my experience, these problems compel students to think about and learn to use the information

I was troubled by Ricki Lewis's recent article on textbook selection (The Scientist, March 30, 1992, page 20), in which she describes the somewhat arbitrary and even whimsical approach that scientist-instructors often take in choosing textbooks for the courses they teach. I was troubled not because I take issue with what Lewis wrote--but because the practices she described are all too familiar. Indeed, as a professor and, for eight years, chairman of a medical school biochemistry department,

Alan Nixon's essay struck in me a sympathetic chord. The issue with which he dealt, the propriety of using data obtained by the Nazis under inhuman conditions, is certainly a provocative one which invites the weighing of moral issues (whether we condone the mode of experimentation) vs. scientific and more important human welfare considerations. I share with Nixon the belief that we cannot undo these dreadful acts of carnage but that we can make amends for them by deriving information of use in