Letter: Vitamin see
I have to plead guilty to thinking that natural vitamins are better
for you than artificial ones after reading ‘Curing chemophobia’ (Forum,
6 October).
My ignorance is absolute, but my reasoning goes like this. I expect
my body to extract from the food I offer it all that it needs. My part of
the bargain is to give it suitable substances from which to take its requirements.
I do not understand its mechanics, but it has these means and one should
not allow them to atrophy by feeding on pills of concentrated vitamins.
I do make one or two exceptions. When I have cramp or chilblains, I take
calcium and if I feel under par, I sometimes take raw yeast, but otherwise
I only resort to pills in the case of true illness.
I understand that laboratory vitamins are the same as natural ones,
but the method of delivery does not seem to be the right one.
Natalie Hodgson Bridgnorth Shropshire
Letter: Lotus position
It would be wonderful to ride in a car, especially a Lotus, devoid of
outside noise (Patents, 27 October). The idea of producing sound in reverse
phase to unwanted noise, thereby producing a no-noise effect, is not a new
idea. Arthur C Clarke had such an idea in a story called Silence Please,
in Tales from the White Heart. His advice was called the Fenton Silencer,
where ‘any sound picked up by the mike, is amplified and inverted so that
it is exactly out of phase with the original noise’.
The prediction is alright as far as it goes, but the fictional silencer
had the unfortunate property of absorbing sound energy. Clarke’s propostion
was that you cannot destroy energy and so it had to go somehwere. In this
case, the energy built up until it exploded when finally overloaded by the
sound of approaching footsteps. Although the theory here may be a bit shaky,
I shall be giving any Lotus I see on the road a very wide berth from now
on.
Graham Lappin Warrington
Letter: Wild about animals
Colin Tudge displays a lack of understanding of Green Party policies.
Consequently, like virtually all the limited coverage of the Green Party
in the media, he distorts and misrepresents them (Talking Point, 13 October).
He states that we would abolish all zoos and release animals to the
wild, or put them in sanctuaries, and then goes on to invent the ludicrous
scenario of an oryx wandering up the M4.
The motion in question actually stated that zoos and private animal
collections would be abolished except where they are for the benefit of
the animals, and that licences would be granted to breeders of endangered
species and santuaries for animals unable, through injury or other cause,
to be returned to the wild.
He is also mistaken in believing that the Green Party is against technology.
On the contrary, Greens recognise the essential role that technology must
play to safeguard the future, particularly with regard to renewable energy,
waste reduction, recycling and so on.
P A Barnett Green Party, London
Letter: Rabies control
I cannot think of many people who know as much about rabies and foxes
as Stephen Harris (‘If rabies comes to Britain’, 20 October). But his own
work has pointed out than an insufficient culling programme can actually
increase the spread of rabies by a kind of vacuum effect (removing resident
foxes can lead other, possibly infested, foxes to move into an area of untapped
food source).
Seasonal factors are an influence here too, but it is clear that a culling
programme depends on making sure enough foxes are killed. The article suggests
a poisoning campaign. A reason for doing this, we are told, is the difficulty
of getting foxes to take the vaccinated baits. Why will it be any easier
to get them to take poisoned baits? I am not at all sure that leaving poisoned
baits around Britain’s towns is a good idea anyway. This leaves the intriguing
option of marauding bands of armed government employees picking off foxes
late at night with rifles.
The article also argues that a vaccination programme is unsatisfactory
because it does not provide a steady source of dead animals to test for
the spread of disease. Yet surely, killing the odd fox for sample testing
is not precluded by a vaccination programme.
The article hardly did justice to a very complicated issue. I suspect
that the fault lies with your repeated attempts to cover the rabies’ problem
in two pages. Why not give it a bit more space?
Vic Allen Greeneye London
Letter: Your article has implications
Your article has implications for devotees of ‘field sports’. It will
surely be necessary to ban fox-hunting to eliminate one avenue of transmission
into the canine population.
V C MacRae Blackpool Lancashire
Letter: White-coated worker
John Wilson’s article on scientist’s white coats explores a familiar
subject (‘The white badge of science’, Forum, 15 September). The correlation
between scientists and white coats was recognised in a survey published
in new 杏吧原创 in August 1975, where Hills and Shallis reported that an
‘extraordinary’ number of respondents described a scientist as a ‘white-coated
man in spectacles’.
It is only comparatively recently that the white coat has become a key
point for identification of a scientist (other points include eccentricity,
masculinity, spectacles and the utilisation of glassware). A drawing from
1869 shows the pioneering women chemistry students at MIT wearing long aprons
over their fashionable dresses, while some of the men appear to have overalls
similar to present day dentists. In an earlier sketch of Liebig’s laboratory
in 1842, the research chemists are wearing quite elegant frocks like Victorian
surgeons. They also have hats which, according to the caption, keep the
ashes from charcoal burners out of their hair.
The white-coated image is repeatedly used in comic strips and also in
children’s books. One example in children’s fiction occurs in a Womble book
by Elizabeth Beresford. When Wellington Womble, the shy researcher, was
asked why he wore a white coat, he replied: ‘I’m being a scientist. I don’t
know why they have to wear white coats but they do in all the pictures I’ve
seen.’
Childhood exposure to a stereotype established it for life – and the
adult expects the white coat even if he or she becomes a scientist and knows
perfectly well what clothing is worn. To overcome such simplistic stereotyping,
could not scientists be depicted in books for all ages as they really are,
not uniformly ‘white-coated’? Perhaps more fiction should be written by
practising scientists.
Janice McAdam Sydney Australia
Letter: Statistical saver
I was delighted to read your report, ‘How to fine tune a superconductor’
(Science, 20 October). The technique Edwards and Liu seem to be using is
known among applied statisticians as ‘response surface exploration’. It
is encouraging that Edwards and Liu are using something like a formal approach.
However, your report indicates a problem that may prolong their research:
‘They believe that a system of seven or eight metals might well have a Himalayan
landscape with a Mount Everest reaching up to the magic 293 K’
Now supposing that they were simply gathering data to fit a quadratic
surface in eight dimensions of components (the height of the response surface
being in the ninth dimension) and they believed, fairly reasonably, that
each of these variables should be studied at each of three levels (needed
to estimate quadratic terms), they would be faced with an experiment of
3 8 observations: 6561. This would take a long time and cost
a lot of money. Furthermore, they are likely to be interested in the effects
of the temperature and pressure applied to the composite material while
it is baked and to the time of baking. So they would have 11 control variables
and an experiment of 3 11 observations: 177 147.
One of several advantages of using experimental design techniques based
on statistical theory is that it leads to a relatively very small set of
observations, but sufficient to provide the desired information, and so
to great economies of time and cost.
Tony Greenfield Whitwell Hertfordshire
Letter: Gas escapes
How sad that British Gas resorts to mud-slinging rather than rise to
the challenge to provide data on the claim of ‘significant environmental
advantages’ for natural gas as a fuel (Letters, 1 September).
Methane is known to be so potent as a greenhouse gas that leakage and
venting of natural gas to the atmosphere contributes significantly to the
total greenhouse effect. There are technical differences between my own
and British Gas’s calculations. But the company’s claim depends mainly and
critically on assumed rates of emissions of gas. The Earth Resources Research
report calculates that leakage from the aged distribution mains is probably
higher than I have estimated (This Week, 22 September). British gas has
the measurements that can validate our figures, but keeps them secret, as
the ERR researchers record.
Similarly, no measurements of methane release from British gas wells
and well-head equipment are available. True, the government does report
a total from oil and gas field exploitation, but the source states these
are ‘at best, guesses’. To me, that is code to warn that they are invalidated
numbers, probably under-reported by industry with its eye on public relations.
Can British Gas justify a claim that leakage from its own Morecambe
Bay wells is only one quarter of rates recorded elsewhere, when it has no
authentic measurements? The Department of Energy said that gas is vented
as ‘an operational and economic choice’ during maintenance and from operation
of gas-fired power generators. The high pressure pumps and pressure release
valves inevitably involve leakage. Reciprocating engine pumps in the US
leak 4-5 per cent of the methane they use as fuel, so how does British Gas
claim to be ‘virtually leak-free’?
If the World Climate Convention’s agreement this autumn is to work,
open accounting and independent checks will be needed on greenhouse gas
emissions.
Max Wallis University of Wales Cardiff
Letter: Consuming passion
When Gerard Quinn writes, ‘In any society, people must be motivated
to act in that society’s interests and the desire for wealth has proved
a more effective motivation than most’, he seems to miss Colin Tudge’s point
(Letters, 27 October). Tudge is arguing that creating wealth is not necessarily
in society’s interest.
Part of the ‘green economics’ that Tudge calls for will involve new
ideas about the creation of wealth. A car is more useful than its raw materials
were, so making a car does in a sense reduce entropy and when we make one,
we could be said to have created something, at least temporarily. But in
the long run the car will decay and we end up having consumed wealth (raw
materials), rather than having created anything. Creating wealth, in other
words, also involves consuming resources.
It is self-evident that we cannot base a sustainable society on the
desire to consume as much as possible. Our present view that consumption
(we call it production) is good because it creates jobs, keeps money circulating,
gives us all something meaningful to do and so on, is one of the first beliefs
we should abandon. There is a limit to the material resources we each need;
many of us are above that limit already. Gerard Quinn might call this communism,
but a more important question is, is it right?
Peter Holway Yarmouth Isle of Wight