Abstract
I've subscribed to the New Yorker since my sophomore year in college, when I first noticed that all those gray words surrounding the cartoons make for interesting reading. Over the years I've been in turns amused, informed, provoked, and moved to tears. But I have never reacted as strongly to a New Yorker article as I did to a May 27 piece by Daniel J. Kevles entitled Assault on David Baltimore. Kevles is a respected historian of science who heads California Institute of Technology's Program in Science, Ethics & Public Policy. The article is his take on the 10-year-old controversy surrounding a paper by Nobel Laureate Baltimore, Tufts University immunologist Thereza Imanishi-Kari, and four others on the workings of the immune system in transgenic mice [Cell , 45, 247 (1986)]. Imanishi-Kari's former postdoc Margot O'Toole challenged the paper's validity after data she discovered in the lab and her own experiments didn't jibe with what Imanishi-Kari had reported. ...
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
