Benjamin Lewin - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by Benjamin Lewin
Nature, 1971
poison at periods of known chemical activity in its life. The last group of papers is entitled "L... more poison at periods of known chemical activity in its life. The last group of papers is entitled "Lethal synthesis", a term coined by Peters to cover the biosynthesis of the toxic fiuorocitrate from fluoroacetate. Accounts are given of lethal syntheses involving 6-aminonicotinamide and its synthesis into abnormal pyridine nucIeotides, and hypoglycin, the hypoglycaemic agent in unripe ackee, a fruit eaten in Jamaica, and its synthesis into abnormal CoA derivatives. The roles of the liver and of the gut flora in the production of toxic molecules from relatively inert precursors are also discussed in two papers in this section. All the papers in this symposium are of considerable interest not only because they illustrate mechanisms of toxicity at the molecular level but also because the hypotheses proposed and the questions raised give useful leads for future research which could provide rational explanations of the responses of man and animals to the toxic effects of drugs and other chemicals. R. T. WILLIAMS
Cell, 1999
Bet-1 could have remained a significant issue for a de-Heroes and Villains cade all but defies cr... more Bet-1 could have remained a significant issue for a de-Heroes and Villains cade all but defies credibility. In any case, in the course of exploring this issue, The Baltimore Case: A Trial of Politics, O'Toole discovered data in a notebook of a former mem-Science, and Character ber of the lab that she considered were inconsistent By Daniel. J. Kevles with the results published in the paper. Her complaints New York: Norton (1998). 509 pp. $29.95 led to enquiries at both MIT and at Tufts, to which Imanishi-Kari was moving her laboratory. At this stage the sole allegation was that the published paper did not In December 1985 a paper was submitted to Cell reaccurately represent the data. After the committees and porting that expression of a rearranged Mu immunoindividuals involved in the investigations at MIT and globulin heavy chain gene caused alterations of the Tufts failed to find serious fault with the paper, O'Toole, repertoire of expressed endogenous immunoglobulin together with Charles Maplethorpe, another disgruntled genes. An intriguing relationship between the transgene former member of the laboratory, become involved with and the expressed endogenous genes (their products Ned Feder and Walter Stewart at the NIH, who had shared idiotypic determinants) suggested the possibility become interested in scientific fraud. Kevles traces the of some sort of network control of immunoglobulin gene chain of events through an NIH investigation (which expression that recognized protein determinants on the again exonerated the authors) to the Dingell Congresexpressed antibodies. The paper seemed an approsional Committee. The Dingell committee held its own priate candidate for publication and was sent to reviewhearings and forced another enquiry through the Office ers in the usual way. The reviewers reported in January of Research Integrity (ORI) at NIH. Closure was reached with various comments, the authors responded in Februonly in 1996, when the Appeals Board finally exonerated ary with revisions that seemed to satisfy the reviewers' the authors of all the charges raised by the ORI. concerns, and we published the paper in April 1986. We The historical account of events unfolds with all the had no idea of the storm that was to descend, quesawful inevitability of a Greek tragedy. As the affair moves through its various stages, Kevles considers the roles tioning the veracity of the paper, jeopardizing individual of the institutions and various individuals who were inreputations, polarizing opinions, and indeed bringing volved, discusses the reactions of the press and the into question the conduct of American science. The turscientific community, and analyzes the broader implicamoil lasted for years, with the apparent heroes and viltions for the conduct of science. He is punctilious in lains exchanging their roles more than once. This cause describing the transition from an allegation that data in celè bre has now been exhaustively reviewed in Kevles's 17 pages of a notebook did not support the published book, which provides a dispassionate analysis of the information to the subsequent allegations of fraud and conduct of the various parties involved, and provides cover-up. He is unsparing in his analysis of the particimuch food for thought on the proper conduct of science. pants, especially the self-proclaimed whistle-blowers, The paper itself was, of course, the product of a colalthough he lets the comments of others speak rather laboration between the laboratories of David Baltimore than passing judgement himself. The picture becomes and Thereza Imanishi-Kari, both then at MIT. The data a somewhat black and white portrayal of the heroes and that were questioned were produced in Imanishi-Kari's villains, but perhaps it is inevitable that a decade of laboratory, but it was Baltimore who became the spokesargument could be produced only by people with determan for the authors, and in due course the lightning rod mined, not to say, extreme views. On the one side, Baltifor their critics. The affair started soon after publication more is shown to have-how shall we put this?-a cerof the paper when Margot O'Toole, a postdoctoral fellow tain impatience with criticism. On the other side were in Thereza Iminishi-Kari's laboratory at MIT, had difficulpeople committed to the downfall of Imanishi-Kari and/ ties with the antibody Bet-1 that was used to distinguish or Baltimore. between Mu a and Mu b chains. Other scientific issues Certainly it is reasonable to doubt the efficiency of arose subsequently, but the specificity of Bet-1 reinstitutions in self-policing allegations against their facmained a recurring theme. Questions about the specificulty. My own experience has been mixed. In one case ity of reagents (and perhaps especially of immunological where we were virtually certain that a paper submitted reagents) are scarcely novel: I could not even begin to to Cell was fraudulent, and where we thought we had count the number of discussions I have had with authors found the smoking gun, an internal institutional investion this topic, sometimes ending in agreement, somegation cleared the investigator. I found this hard to actimes in disagreement, but in no case amounting to more cept, but decided finally that the nature of any system than a legitimate difference of opinion. Speculation is for investigating complaints must be that, at the end of reported in the book as to whether Cell would have the day, the complainant accepts the verdict, agree with published a correction on Bet-1's specificity had the it or not. In the Baltimore case, what emerges from authors wished to make a statement about it. I don't Kevles's account is that the institutions took their rerecall being asked the question, but I would probably sponsibilities seriously, that they responded to comhave agreed with the authors' position that the apparent plaints by asking qualified faculty to investigate, and variation in its specificity was not significant enough to that the internal investigations were reasonable and adequately documented. The deficiency in the process warrant a separate correction. That the specificity of
Tienda online donde Comprar Lewin's Essential Genes al precio 56,97 € de Benjamin Lewin | Kre... more Tienda online donde Comprar Lewin's Essential Genes al precio 56,97 € de Benjamin Lewin | Krebs, J. | S. Kilpatrick | E. Goldstein, tienda de Libros de Medicina, Libros de Biologia - Genetica
The new edition of Lewin's Essential GENES is the most accessible, student-friendly text of i... more The new edition of Lewin's Essential GENES is the most accessible, student-friendly text of its kind! Completely revised and rewritten, the Second Edition continues to provide students with the latest findings in the field of molecular biology and molecular genetics. An exceptional new pedagogy enhances student learning and helps readers understand and retain key material like never before. New Concept and Reasoning Checks at the end of each chapter section, End of Chapter Questions and Further Readings for each chapter, and several categories of special topics boxes within each chapter expand and reinforce important concepts. The reorganization of topics in this edition allows students to focus more sharply on the key material at hand and improves the natural flow of course material. New end-of-chapter questions reviews major points in the chapter and allow students to test themselves on important course material.
Nature, 1971
poison at periods of known chemical activity in its life. The last group of papers is entitled "L... more poison at periods of known chemical activity in its life. The last group of papers is entitled "Lethal synthesis", a term coined by Peters to cover the biosynthesis of the toxic fiuorocitrate from fluoroacetate. Accounts are given of lethal syntheses involving 6-aminonicotinamide and its synthesis into abnormal pyridine nucIeotides, and hypoglycin, the hypoglycaemic agent in unripe ackee, a fruit eaten in Jamaica, and its synthesis into abnormal CoA derivatives. The roles of the liver and of the gut flora in the production of toxic molecules from relatively inert precursors are also discussed in two papers in this section. All the papers in this symposium are of considerable interest not only because they illustrate mechanisms of toxicity at the molecular level but also because the hypotheses proposed and the questions raised give useful leads for future research which could provide rational explanations of the responses of man and animals to the toxic effects of drugs and other chemicals. R. T. WILLIAMS
Cell, 1999
Bet-1 could have remained a significant issue for a de-Heroes and Villains cade all but defies cr... more Bet-1 could have remained a significant issue for a de-Heroes and Villains cade all but defies credibility. In any case, in the course of exploring this issue, The Baltimore Case: A Trial of Politics, O'Toole discovered data in a notebook of a former mem-Science, and Character ber of the lab that she considered were inconsistent By Daniel. J. Kevles with the results published in the paper. Her complaints New York: Norton (1998). 509 pp. $29.95 led to enquiries at both MIT and at Tufts, to which Imanishi-Kari was moving her laboratory. At this stage the sole allegation was that the published paper did not In December 1985 a paper was submitted to Cell reaccurately represent the data. After the committees and porting that expression of a rearranged Mu immunoindividuals involved in the investigations at MIT and globulin heavy chain gene caused alterations of the Tufts failed to find serious fault with the paper, O'Toole, repertoire of expressed endogenous immunoglobulin together with Charles Maplethorpe, another disgruntled genes. An intriguing relationship between the transgene former member of the laboratory, become involved with and the expressed endogenous genes (their products Ned Feder and Walter Stewart at the NIH, who had shared idiotypic determinants) suggested the possibility become interested in scientific fraud. Kevles traces the of some sort of network control of immunoglobulin gene chain of events through an NIH investigation (which expression that recognized protein determinants on the again exonerated the authors) to the Dingell Congresexpressed antibodies. The paper seemed an approsional Committee. The Dingell committee held its own priate candidate for publication and was sent to reviewhearings and forced another enquiry through the Office ers in the usual way. The reviewers reported in January of Research Integrity (ORI) at NIH. Closure was reached with various comments, the authors responded in Februonly in 1996, when the Appeals Board finally exonerated ary with revisions that seemed to satisfy the reviewers' the authors of all the charges raised by the ORI. concerns, and we published the paper in April 1986. We The historical account of events unfolds with all the had no idea of the storm that was to descend, quesawful inevitability of a Greek tragedy. As the affair moves through its various stages, Kevles considers the roles tioning the veracity of the paper, jeopardizing individual of the institutions and various individuals who were inreputations, polarizing opinions, and indeed bringing volved, discusses the reactions of the press and the into question the conduct of American science. The turscientific community, and analyzes the broader implicamoil lasted for years, with the apparent heroes and viltions for the conduct of science. He is punctilious in lains exchanging their roles more than once. This cause describing the transition from an allegation that data in celè bre has now been exhaustively reviewed in Kevles's 17 pages of a notebook did not support the published book, which provides a dispassionate analysis of the information to the subsequent allegations of fraud and conduct of the various parties involved, and provides cover-up. He is unsparing in his analysis of the particimuch food for thought on the proper conduct of science. pants, especially the self-proclaimed whistle-blowers, The paper itself was, of course, the product of a colalthough he lets the comments of others speak rather laboration between the laboratories of David Baltimore than passing judgement himself. The picture becomes and Thereza Imanishi-Kari, both then at MIT. The data a somewhat black and white portrayal of the heroes and that were questioned were produced in Imanishi-Kari's villains, but perhaps it is inevitable that a decade of laboratory, but it was Baltimore who became the spokesargument could be produced only by people with determan for the authors, and in due course the lightning rod mined, not to say, extreme views. On the one side, Baltifor their critics. The affair started soon after publication more is shown to have-how shall we put this?-a cerof the paper when Margot O'Toole, a postdoctoral fellow tain impatience with criticism. On the other side were in Thereza Iminishi-Kari's laboratory at MIT, had difficulpeople committed to the downfall of Imanishi-Kari and/ ties with the antibody Bet-1 that was used to distinguish or Baltimore. between Mu a and Mu b chains. Other scientific issues Certainly it is reasonable to doubt the efficiency of arose subsequently, but the specificity of Bet-1 reinstitutions in self-policing allegations against their facmained a recurring theme. Questions about the specificulty. My own experience has been mixed. In one case ity of reagents (and perhaps especially of immunological where we were virtually certain that a paper submitted reagents) are scarcely novel: I could not even begin to to Cell was fraudulent, and where we thought we had count the number of discussions I have had with authors found the smoking gun, an internal institutional investion this topic, sometimes ending in agreement, somegation cleared the investigator. I found this hard to actimes in disagreement, but in no case amounting to more cept, but decided finally that the nature of any system than a legitimate difference of opinion. Speculation is for investigating complaints must be that, at the end of reported in the book as to whether Cell would have the day, the complainant accepts the verdict, agree with published a correction on Bet-1's specificity had the it or not. In the Baltimore case, what emerges from authors wished to make a statement about it. I don't Kevles's account is that the institutions took their rerecall being asked the question, but I would probably sponsibilities seriously, that they responded to comhave agreed with the authors' position that the apparent plaints by asking qualified faculty to investigate, and variation in its specificity was not significant enough to that the internal investigations were reasonable and adequately documented. The deficiency in the process warrant a separate correction. That the specificity of
Tienda online donde Comprar Lewin's Essential Genes al precio 56,97 € de Benjamin Lewin | Kre... more Tienda online donde Comprar Lewin's Essential Genes al precio 56,97 € de Benjamin Lewin | Krebs, J. | S. Kilpatrick | E. Goldstein, tienda de Libros de Medicina, Libros de Biologia - Genetica
The new edition of Lewin's Essential GENES is the most accessible, student-friendly text of i... more The new edition of Lewin's Essential GENES is the most accessible, student-friendly text of its kind! Completely revised and rewritten, the Second Edition continues to provide students with the latest findings in the field of molecular biology and molecular genetics. An exceptional new pedagogy enhances student learning and helps readers understand and retain key material like never before. New Concept and Reasoning Checks at the end of each chapter section, End of Chapter Questions and Further Readings for each chapter, and several categories of special topics boxes within each chapter expand and reinforce important concepts. The reorganization of topics in this edition allows students to focus more sharply on the key material at hand and improves the natural flow of course material. New end-of-chapter questions reviews major points in the chapter and allow students to test themselves on important course material.