ApologyAuthor(s): Eds.Source: The Scientific Monthly, Vol. 58, No. 4 (Apr., 1944), p. 331Published by: American Association for the Advancement of ScienceStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/18045 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 07:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Association for the Advancement of Science is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve andextend access to The Scientific Monthly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 07:36:56 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

COMMENTS AND CRITICISMS Apology

We shall not wait for a reader to ask us who wrote the article on the work of Dr. Frank Schlesinger, which was published under the title, "Explorer of Celestial Spaces" in the March issue of The Scientific Monthly, pp. 240-242. This article was an abridged version of an address by Dr. Henry Norris Russell, which he delivered at the exercises in memory of Dr. Schlesinger in Stratheona Hall, Yale University, November 19, 1943. We regret the inadvertent omission of Dr. Russell's name at the end of his article and of- fer our apologies to him and to our readers.-Eds.

War Effort I have unfortunately misplaced the letter you sent

me and, by golly, I can 't remember your name. I think it is Carpenter, but I am not sure. At all events, the reproof in your letter was merited in part. I haven 't been asleep at the switch, but I found that I wasn't as good a listening post as I thought. In addition to this, much of the work be- ing done by anthropologists today is in connection with the war effort and there is a certain amount of hush-hush about it. At all events I have writ- ten an item for "Science on the March" which now has to go through the red tape of army clear- ance. If you will sit tight for all of this rigamarole, you should have something from me one of these days. I saw Dr. Moulton last Sunday and explained to him that I have darn near bitten off more than I can chew. However, I will keep plugging and will do my best.--Wilton M. Krogman.

Our contributiing editors are doing their best to supply timely and illuminating articles for "Science on the March." While their articles are germinating or being cleared, "Carpenter" has been sawing woo(d to fill space. He regrets the necessity of giviilg our readers an overdose of insecticides and hopes that his specialty will not obtrude again. This note is written to invite con- tributions for "Science on the March" from our readers.-Eds.

Diethylstilbestrol The objective of your new section "Science on the

March " is very much worthwhile. Scientific progress is rapid on so many fronts that it is extremely diffi- cult for one to keep his head above water even in his special field.

However, such a section, to achieve its purpose, must be edited with extreme care. In the January issue under the heading "synthetic sex hormones" I find a confusion between " stilbestrol " and diethyl-

stilbestrol (to use the American spelling). This con- fusion is probably a reflection of the fact that in the U.S.A. " stilbestrol has often been used where " diethylstilbestrol" was meant. The Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry of the American Medical Association has not always agreed with the Food and Drug Administration in this regard.

In his original publication, Dodds reported the preparation and testing of several derivatives of stilbene (diphenylethylene). Amon-g these were 4,4'- stilbenediol and a,3-diethyl-4,4'-stilbenediol. The latter compound has achieved considerable clinical use both under the name "diethylstilbestrol" and "stilbestrol." The former name was first assigned as the "common name" by the Food and Drug Ad- ministration. The Council sanctioned the latter.- E. Leon Foreman.

At the bottom of the first coluinn on page 80 of the January, 1944, issue of The Scientific Monthly the editor innocently published: "A derivative of stilboestrol, known as diethylstilboestrol... Dr. Foreman points out above that these two com- mon names are synonymous, both referring to the chemical compound a, 13-diethyl-4,4'-stilbene- diol. The Food and Drug Administration now requires the commercial product to be labeled under the name diethylstilbestrol, which may be regarded as the name generally accepted in the United States for this synt;hetic sex hormone. -Eds.

Interpretation I am wondering whether the exclamation " oh "

on page 164 of the February issue of The Scientific Monthly was occasioned by the second sentence of the item which contains two well-defined grammatical errors.-Curvin H. Gingrich.

An Astronomer's View Dr. G. A. Lundberg's statement concerning post-

war efforts ("Scientists in Watr Time," The Scien- tific Monthly, February 1944, p. 89) that, "No matter who wins, appeasement and compromise will occur because there is, practically speaking, no alternative," is surprising. If he means that in connection with the peace settlement, appeasement and compromise will not be wholly absent, few will disagree. But apparently he thinks that the peace terms must con- sist wholly or essentially of appeasement and com- promise, for the next sentence r eads, "The only subjects for profitable discussion are the details of the appeasement and compromise. "

The context supplies one or two arguments for this disheartening conclusion. One is that after

331

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 07:36:56 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions