Chemists Must Explain Their Work Better

Advertisers long ago learned that they could increase the sales of many products simply by adding the word "natural" to the packaging. But what is natural? To many people, the natural world is a chemical-free world. In his new book Chemicals & Society: A Guide to the New Chemical Age (Cambridge University Press, 1986), Hugh D. Crone of the Materials Research Laboratories in Melbourne, Australia, bemoans the "plethora of chemical fact and fancy with which the public is bombarded," including the twin fancies that the natural world holds no chemicals and that the chemical world is completely toxic. In this adaptation from the book, Crone discusses the role chemists can play in explaining chemicals to the public and in working for effective laws to control chemical pollution. I think we are seeing a departure from rationalism in a number of aspects of the Chemical Age. In 1945, we saw the hope that science was being put to rational use to improve the world. Now that hope is faded or, more exactly, it has been reversed into a fear that science will bring catastrophe of a chemical, nuclear or other type. In our discussion of drugs, foods, herbicides and many other issues, this tendency to go from cience to the obscure has been evident. Somehow science is not enough for people or, at least, has not been perceived as being sufficient. To a large degree this situation must have arisen from a failure to communicate between the scientist and the public. If we do not all go out rapidly in a chemical war, we have to counter the possibility of our all being slowly poisoned by an accumulation of chemical junk in the environment. I do not believe there is much risk of this, provided we put effort and finance into developing the technical means to control pollution. Because of public concern and agitation about pollution, we are much more alert than 10 years ago, and it is unlikely that the gross abuses of the past will be allowed to recur. My main fear is that we may put great effort into finding solutions for specific small parts of the problem and, by so doing, neglect to consider the full range of the pollution question. In other words, devoting all effort to PCBs and dioxins may clean up relatively minor nuisances, but what we need is a broad strategy that takes account of the bulk of slightly toxic chemical products. The Chemist's Role There will be no control of chemicals unless we legislate for it, and then enforce the consequent regulations. To put such legislation on a rational footing requires much technical knowledge, and it is clear that at present much of this is lacking. Regulation also brings the chemist into contact with that strange and capricious beast, the law. At least, that is how chemists view it, and I suspect lawyers see chemists in a similar light. In other words, we have to educate the lawyers in the basic concepts of chemically related topics, principally toxicity and analysis. We must ensure that all legislation concerning chemicals is based on sound chemistry, unambiguous to the courts and not in need of interpretation. What, then, have chemists done? The learned societies and professional bodies have to an extent endeavored to explain chemically related matters to the public, but they are largely inward-looking: chemist talking to chemist rather than to the public. Chemists should strive much more vigorously to present their professional image to the public and to offer their services as sources of chemical information. I cannot think of any chemical, biochemical or toxicological society that issues news releases on topics of current interest. If they do, the press must totally ignore them. Contrast this situation with that of lawyers or medical practitioners. Lawyers have advanced the ambit of their operations well beyond the strict practice of law so that it embraces many aspects of public life. If there are technical matters of national impact to be investigated, set up a Royal Commission with another pair of legal teams to settle the matter. It is of no concern to anyone that the legal system of argument between professional antagonists in court is not a good way to decide scientific matters. Nor, apparently, is it of any concern that the lawyers very frequently do not understand what they are arguing about. Doctors are frequently regarded as oracles on matters other than the cure of disease; a doctor's pronouncement will gain more credence than that of a scientist. However, doctors are not trained in rational deduction or analytical thinking, they are trained to respond quickly to a situation in order to save life or mitigate suffering. Their decisions have to be made rapidly on limited evidence. This is perfectly proper training, for the patient is unlikely to be grateful if he dies this week while waiting for an accurate diagnosis available next week. I am not belittling the medical profession. I am merely pointing out that its members are not theorists and are not infallible connectors of effect with cause. There is a need for professional chemical groups to assume a proper public role, if necessary elbowing the lawyers back to law and standing up to the medical profession on matters of chemical science. If this action is taken, the public awareness of chemically related matters should improve greatly. What of the future? There will be more Bhopals, thalidomides and Times Beaches, though we may hope that some lessons have been learned. Such incidents are minor when considered over the whole range of human activity. I think, therefore, that the main problem is the question of chemical disposal, the broad problem of the mass of material of low toxicity which nevertheless can slowly gum up our environment. We have the technical knowledge to solve many problems and, if this is coupled to a social will, these problems will disappear. Crone's address is Personnel Protection Group, Materials Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia. Copyright 1986 Hugh D. Crone. Reprinted by permission of the publisher, Cambridge University Press.

Chemists Must Explain Their Work Better

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of