NATURE

Magazine Overview

This issue of NATURE, dated March 8, 1969, features a review of the University of Colorado's "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects" (UFOs), directed by Dr. Edward Condon. The magazine also includes an article discussing the Task Force on Prescription Drugs in the United States and its recommendations for Medicare coverage.

A Sledgehammer for Nuts

The lead article critically reviews the "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects," often referred to as the Condon Report. The study, conducted by the University of Colorado over 18 months with a budget exceeding $300,000, aimed to determine the reality of flying saucers and gather scientific knowledge from UFO reports. The review notes that a significant portion of the American population believes they have seen UFOs, citing a 1966 Gallup poll.

The article highlights numerous cases investigated by the Colorado team, often revealing mundane explanations. Examples include a horse death attributed to UFOs with no unusual findings in the carcass, 'beeping' sounds identified as owl calls, and a predicted UFO landing that did not occur. One case involved an illuminated object identified as a schoolboy's hot air balloon. Another case, where a witness claimed her car was interfered with by a UFO, was debunked by magnetic field strength analysis. A large number of sightings over a small town yielded no evidence of manned saucers or unusual traces.

However, the review acknowledges that not all cases were easily solved. Case 46, from 1950, is described as one of the few reports where all investigated factors were consistent with an "extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disc shaped, tens of metres in diameter, and evidently artificial." Photographs of this object revealed a saucer shape with a mast.

The article praises the report's "almost obsessional attention to detail" and its rigorous scientific methodology, which subjected even speculative hypotheses to testing. It mentions the proponents' deduction of a planet named Clarion, whose existence was tested by calculating its gravitational effect on Venus's orbit, finding no observed perturbations.

The review questions the overall necessity and impact of the project, suggesting that it might be "a sledgehammer to crack a nut." It posits that few UFO enthusiasts would alter their beliefs, and questions whether the project could yield significant scientific value or if it was driven by a belief in UFOs by its sponsors, including the United States Air Force.

Dr. Condon's preface is quoted, stating that the physical aspects of the UFO phenomenon were prioritized over behavioral aspects, and that most people who sight UFOs are not of psychiatric interest. The reviewer laments the lack of exploration into the "considerable sociological interest of the phenomenon," noting the shift in UFO interpretations from omens of disaster to signals from extragalactic intelligences.

The article concludes that the Colorado project, while a "monumental achievement," may have been a case of "means justifying the end." It suggests that the project's sponsors might have benefited more from a historical perspective, and that the study's conclusion – that "further extensive studies of UFOs probably cannot be justified in the expectation that science will be advanced thereby" – might have been reached with less effort.

Drugs on Prescription

This section discusses the Task Force on Prescription Drugs, established in the United States under John Gardner, then Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. The task force was formed to study the inclusion of out-of-hospital prescription drug costs under Medicare, particularly for the elderly.

The article notes that Medicare already covers most in-patient hospital expenses and a significant portion of other medical services for the elderly. However, drug expenses represent the largest single personal health expenditure for older people, with aid from private insurance, public programs, and tax relief being insufficient. In 1967, prescription drugs accounted for 20% of the health expenditure of older people, with an average cost of $3.91 per prescription, compared to $3.43 for the general population.

The task force has published reports with recommendations to ease the drug cost burden for the elderly and lower costs for federal and state governments. It has also examined the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's pharmaceutical activities to determine necessary reorganizations.

Regarding Medicare benefit implementation, the task force suggests starting with a less-than-comprehensive basis. Full coverage was estimated to cost $1,600 million annually, excluding administrative costs. A less-than-comprehensive approach would reduce costs and administrative complexity. Coverage would likely fall under Medicare's Part A (hospital insurance) program, making it automatically eligible for those aged 65 or over.

To limit the scope, the task force proposes covering drugs important for treating serious chronic illnesses in the elderly. For 1971, this would mean benefit payments of $720 million, covering about 125 million prescriptions. With a $1 co-payment, the cost would be 0.19% of taxable payroll. An alternative, a "high-cost-sharing factor" where benefits are paid only after drug expenses exceed a high threshold, would cost $405 million in the first year, covering about 100 million claims, at a payroll cost of 0.14%.

Limiting benefits to those over a certain age (e.g., 70 or 72) was considered unsuitable. The task force recommends that the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare be responsible for the drug benefit, with primary delegation to the Social Security Administration.

At a lower administrative level, the task force suggests that pharmacies (community, mail-order, or hospital out-patient) should initiate claims and be reimbursed by the program, rather than the beneficiary. This would allow the Social Security Administration to leverage advances in electronic data processing for direct transmittal of claims information from drugstores.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue's editorial stance appears to be one of critical analysis and skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims, particularly in the realm of UFOs. The review of the Condon Report, while acknowledging the rigor of the scientific methodology, questions the value and necessity of the study, framing it as an over-application of resources to ols to a problem that may not yield scientific advancement. The article suggests that the study's conclusion was perhaps predetermined. The discussion on prescription drugs, conversely, adopts a pragmatic and policy-oriented approach, detailing the complexities and potential solutions for a significant healthcare issue affecting the elderly. The overall tone suggests a preference for evidence-based reasoning and practical policy solutions over speculative or unverified phenomena.