Hillman Vindicated?

The Scientist is enjoyable reading not only because of the range of stories you cover, but mainly because you are willing to address controversial subjects. I was especially interested in the July 25 article about Professor Hillman and his concern over images generated by electron microscopy. While Dr. Hillman may have alienated himself from some of the scientific community, I feel he has valid concerns over the creation of artifacts in conventional electron microscopy. Of note here is the work

Richard Wilkinson
Sep 18, 1988
The Scientist is enjoyable reading not only because of the range of stories you cover, but mainly because you are willing to address controversial subjects. I was especially interested in the July 25 article about Professor Hillman and his concern over images generated by electron microscopy. While Dr. Hillman may have alienated himself from some of the scientific community, I feel he has valid concerns over the creation of artifacts in conventional electron microscopy.

Of note here is the work of Linner, et al (J. Histochemical Cytochemistry, volume 34, page 1123,1986) who used ultra-high vacuum systems to process tissue. Tissue water is first vitrified, after which a vacuum is used to remove the "immobilized" water (at lower temperatures than freeze-drying); no fixative or chemical dehydrant contacts the tissue. The result is that their electron microscopic images are quite different from conventional electron micrographs. It seems intuitively clear that orthodox...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?