Eugene Garfield: 1925–2017ILLUSTRATION BY ERICA P. JOHNSON

Everything he did, he was ahead of everybody in so many ways. He was a genius of a very special type. Not only because he had this incredible imagination and brain, but he had incredible tenacity and courage.

—Vitek Tracz, publisher of Faculty of 1000 and former co-owner of The Scientist, on the passing of Eugene Garfield, the scientometrics pioneer who launched The Scientist in 1986 (February 27)


I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do, and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.

Newly confirmed US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, on the CNBC program Squawk Box (March 9)


It is...

Former Vice President Joe Biden, in a speech delivered at this year’s South by Southwest festival in Austin, Texas, about the federal government’s role in cancer research (March 12)


To succeed, the Trump administration needs to assume the leadership Biden was given previously as vice president to foster cooperation and collaboration among the various federal agencies and institutions with relevant resources, and to guide [the] moonshot in a direction that maximizes its value to public health.

—Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan G. Komen breast cancer charity, and journalist Eric Rosenthal, writing in The Hill about how Donald Trump should pursue Barack Obama’s cancer “moonshot” (February 15)


His treatment was much easier than what some people have to endure, but I’ve found that physicians who have a cancer experience understand the human side of things and how treatment impacts individuals and families.

—Shelley Fuld Nasso, CEO of the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship, talking about Donald Trump’s appointment of  Scott Gottlieb— a physician, drug industry financier, and cancer survivor—to lead the US Food and Drug Administration (March 10)


It would allow employers to ask employees invasive questions about . . . genetic tests they and their families have undergone . . . [and] to impose stiff financial penalties on employees who choose to keep such information private, thus empowering employers to coerce their employees.

—Nancy Cox, president of the American Society of Human Genetics, in a letter delivered to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce a day before it approved HR 1313, a bill that would allow companies to require their workers to undergo genetic testing or pay fines (March 10)

Interested in reading more?

Magaizne Cover

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?