ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Support For Stewart, Feder

Please forgive my urge to share a few thoughts concerning the Stewart-Feder execution by the establishment. In my view, scientists are divided into two groups, one of which, perhaps best represented by John Edsall, practices science for its own sake and another group that is represented by those who cheer the ignominious action taken against Stewart and Feder. One group has nothing to fear from monitors of misconduct; the other group stands to lose prominence, careers, committee membership,

Christian Schwabe
Please forgive my urge to share a few thoughts concerning the Stewart-Feder execution by the establishment. In my view, scientists are divided into two groups, one of which, perhaps best represented by John Edsall, practices science for its own sake and another group that is represented by those who cheer the ignominious action taken against Stewart and Feder.

One group has nothing to fear from monitors of misconduct; the other group stands to lose prominence, careers, committee membership, "honors," and, worst of all, the incredible chunk of research money that their method allows them to extract from NIH. Scientists like Stewart and Feder are the only effective counterforce that pure science has to defend itself against overgrowth by "careerists." Federal anti-fraud agencies are mere window dressing, as Bernadine Healy has demonstrated beyond doubt.

David Baltimore's audacious comments (Franklin Hoke, page 1) make it clear that the group he de facto...

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?
ADVERTISEMENT