1953 07 31 Science - Vol 118 No 3057 - Davidson

Magazine Overview

Title: Science
Issue: Vol. 118
Date: November 21, 1952
Publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science
Country: USA
Language: English
Price: 25 cents
Cover Headline: Comments and Communications

This issue of *Science* magazine, dated November 21, 1952, features a collection of communications and research notes. The cover prominently displays "Comments and Communications," with specific sections dedicated to "Comment on Flying Saucers" and "A Single Tube Method for Anaerobic Incubation of Bacterial Cultures." The visual element on the cover is a photograph illustrating laboratory setups.

Comment on Flying Saucers

Leon Davidson, writing from Arlington, Virginia, and submitting his comment on May 24, 1953, addresses the entoptical theory proposed by E. F. Mauer. Davidson argues that this theory, which posits flying saucers as merely spots before the eyes, is untenable. He bases his argument on the geographical distribution of reported sightings, citing a declassified Air Force Report. According to Davidson, if the entoptical theory were correct, one would expect a uniform distribution of sightings across the population. However, the report indicates that sightings are not uniformly distributed but show distinct maxima in certain regions of the country. This non-uniformity, Davidson asserts, is incompatible with an entoptical interpretation.

A Single Tube Method for Anaerobic Incubation of Bacterial Cultures

William R. Lockhart, from the Department of Biological Sciences at Purdue University, presents a novel method for achieving anaerobiosis in bacterial culture tubes. Submitted on November 21, 1952, this technique aims to simplify the process, avoiding the need for inverted tubes or specialized accessory equipment previously described. The method utilizes a standard 5x6 inch culture tube containing up to 10 ml of medium, sealed with a cotton plug around a small vial (Fig. 1A). For anaerobic conditions, the cotton plug is pushed down, and 2 ml of 40% KOH and 2 ml of 20% pyrogallol are added to the vial. Immediately after, the tube's mouth is flamed, and a rubber stopper coated with paraffin is inserted, creating a seal as it cools (Fig. 1B). Lockhart notes that this method allows for complete and rapid anaerobiosis, enabling the observation of facultative organisms' growth patterns. He provides an example with *Aerobacter aerogenes*, which grows aerobically but not anaerobically on a synthetic medium with lactate. The reduction of a methylene blue indicator solution within two hours visually confirms the anaerobic state. Lockhart also suggests an improvement: folding a strip of filter paper into the vial to increase surface area for oxygen adsorption, thereby speeding up the attainment of anaerobic conditions.

Pain Controlled and Uncontrolled

This section critically examines the disagreements presented in previous communications concerning pain, specifically referencing work by Henry K. Beecher and by Hardy, Wolff, and Goodall. The author suggests that the discord arises from errors on both sides. The group led by Dr. Hardy is described as focusing on measuring pain under controlled experimental conditions, exposing normal healthy tissues to noxious stimuli. However, they allegedly fail to acknowledge that the pain measured in such experiments differs fundamentally from pain originating within tissues experiencing deranged metabolism due to damage or disease, which serves as a sign of existing injury.

Conversely, Dr. Beecher's approach is characterized as clinical but is criticized for confusing the issue by insisting on an artificial distinction. The author implies that both perspectives are flawed in their understanding or presentation of the complex nature of pain, particularly when differentiating between experimentally induced pain and pain associated with pathology.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around scientific methodology and the interpretation of phenomena. The "Comments and Communications" section highlights the journal's role as a platform for scientific discourse, allowing researchers to debate theories (flying saucers) and share practical advancements (anaerobic incubation). The discussion on pain underscores the journal's interest in fundamental biological and medical research, emphasizing the importance of precise definitions and accurate distinctions in scientific inquiry. The editorial stance appears to favor rigorous empirical evidence and clear theoretical frameworks, as demonstrated by Davidson's critique of the entoptical theory and the analysis of methodological differences in pain research.