- Email: [email protected]
Curiosity and curare
Perspectives
view that the embryo’s status is different from that of the newborn baby, he does not regard the embryo as disposable matter for the utilitarian demands of researchers. There is one problem in the argument Jones uses, of the need to protect the weak. If we used the Lockeian definition of personhood—the capacity for rational thought—about embryos, how then would we protect the mentally incompetent or the semiconscious? But he fails to acknowledge the difference—the embryo is unborn, and will not be a person in that sense if disposed of, whilst the weak or mentally incompetent may have been truly rational beings at some stage, and have had a “life”. The destruction of human embryos should be taken seriously, but the difference between them and other weak “people” is considerable. Indeed, I
find attractive and compelling the traditional Jewish argument that there is no legal status to the fetus until it appears from the mother’s womb. That does not mean it is right to abort, or to use embryos. It does, however, mean that there is an important difference between the born and the not-born. But Jones does not try to finish the arguments, nor does he restrict himself only to Christian sources. Our ideas about life, ensoulment, birth, personhood, and the value of the prehuman being are shaped by various religious and philosophical influences. Within faith communities, as between Protestants and Catholics, there are differences. What matters is that scientists cannot solve the moral questions, and theologians and philosophers cannot argue without the latest scientific knowledge. Although those who work
in bioethics used largely to be people of faith, these days they hold a mixture of faith-based and humanistic views. Their goal should be to stop any single view prevailing. There is no absolute truth here. If views have changed for 2500 years, they will continue to change. A calm watching brief is what is needed, not a shrill condemnation by one interest group of another. So it is time for less certainty from scientists that their research will bring forth human benefit, and a groping, uncertain crossdisciplinary study of philosophy, theology, and science together. That might lead us to some conclusions about what can be allowed in our time, not in the future.
research driven by a need to show that his own activities were normal? Can the mix of groups and individuals surveyed yield data adjustable statistically to reflect a whole nation? Of course, a mainstream film has to appeal to audiences who may know little about Kinsey, but others may come away tantalised. For detailed discussion of methodological and other issues, a cinema visit should be supplemented with reading Jones and Gathorne-Hardy.
tetanus and spasmodic disorders, then as a paralytic agent, before eventually transforming anaesthesia in the 20th century and providing the substrate for pivotal investigations into how neurotransmitters worked. The book is part history and part a memoir of a career in research and this is, perhaps, its one failing. Like a scientist unsure of overreaching with his conclusions, Feldman often dampens the force of his statements. Where this book delights, it is in the first-hand accounts of his experiences of curare derivatives, their effects in patients, and how his quizzical nature prompted further investigations. Books like Poison Arrows, which shed light on scientific method, the work of researchers, and the illumination of the world through curiosity, insight, and serendipity are important—discovery needs a human face.
Julia Neuberger [email protected]
Twentieth Century Fox
In brief Film and Book Kinsey’s life
Kinsey Written and directed by Bill Condon. Fox Searchlight. UK release March 4, 2005. Kinsey: a Biography Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy. Pimlico Film Edition, 2005. Pp 544. £8·99. ISBN 1-844-13836-4.
Poison Arrows: the Amazing Story of How Prozac and Anaesthetics were Developed from Deadly Jungle Poison Darts Stanley Feldman. Metro Publishing Ltd, 2005. Pp 272. £14·99. ISBN 184358-137X.
838
The American sexologist Alfred C Kinsey has recently appeared in a novel, a new edition of a biography, and a film. And that is just the latest material on a man whose reputation has had its ups and downs. Bill Condon, writer and director of Kinsey the film, takes as a main source Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy’s biography. Kinsey had been criticised before but Gathorne-Hardy felt that James H Jones’ 1997 biography brought matters to head, and he sought to redress an imbalance. However, a film that draws on a redress could risk underplaying criticism. Liam Neeson has immersed himself in the central role, and the rest of the cast are excellent. Condon recognises the “intimate connection between [Kinsey’s] personal life and his scientific project”, but we are not given enough to be able to judge the effect of that link. Kinsey was a caring sex counsellor, but was his
David Sharp [email protected]
Book Curiosity and curare In this charming history of curare, Stanley Feldman traces the development of neuromuscular blockers from the 15th century to the present day. Feldman, whose textbook is a classic among anaesthesiologists, details the cycles of excitement and frustration as the South American arrow poison was unsuccessfully advanced as a cure for
Noah Raizman [email protected]
www.thelancet.com Vol 365 March 5, 2005
view that the embryo’s status is different from that of the newborn baby, he does not regard the embryo as disposable matter for the utilitarian demands of researchers. There is one problem in the argument Jones uses, of the need to protect the weak. If we used the Lockeian definition of personhood—the capacity for rational thought—about embryos, how then would we protect the mentally incompetent or the semiconscious? But he fails to acknowledge the difference—the embryo is unborn, and will not be a person in that sense if disposed of, whilst the weak or mentally incompetent may have been truly rational beings at some stage, and have had a “life”. The destruction of human embryos should be taken seriously, but the difference between them and other weak “people” is considerable. Indeed, I
find attractive and compelling the traditional Jewish argument that there is no legal status to the fetus until it appears from the mother’s womb. That does not mean it is right to abort, or to use embryos. It does, however, mean that there is an important difference between the born and the not-born. But Jones does not try to finish the arguments, nor does he restrict himself only to Christian sources. Our ideas about life, ensoulment, birth, personhood, and the value of the prehuman being are shaped by various religious and philosophical influences. Within faith communities, as between Protestants and Catholics, there are differences. What matters is that scientists cannot solve the moral questions, and theologians and philosophers cannot argue without the latest scientific knowledge. Although those who work
in bioethics used largely to be people of faith, these days they hold a mixture of faith-based and humanistic views. Their goal should be to stop any single view prevailing. There is no absolute truth here. If views have changed for 2500 years, they will continue to change. A calm watching brief is what is needed, not a shrill condemnation by one interest group of another. So it is time for less certainty from scientists that their research will bring forth human benefit, and a groping, uncertain crossdisciplinary study of philosophy, theology, and science together. That might lead us to some conclusions about what can be allowed in our time, not in the future.
research driven by a need to show that his own activities were normal? Can the mix of groups and individuals surveyed yield data adjustable statistically to reflect a whole nation? Of course, a mainstream film has to appeal to audiences who may know little about Kinsey, but others may come away tantalised. For detailed discussion of methodological and other issues, a cinema visit should be supplemented with reading Jones and Gathorne-Hardy.
tetanus and spasmodic disorders, then as a paralytic agent, before eventually transforming anaesthesia in the 20th century and providing the substrate for pivotal investigations into how neurotransmitters worked. The book is part history and part a memoir of a career in research and this is, perhaps, its one failing. Like a scientist unsure of overreaching with his conclusions, Feldman often dampens the force of his statements. Where this book delights, it is in the first-hand accounts of his experiences of curare derivatives, their effects in patients, and how his quizzical nature prompted further investigations. Books like Poison Arrows, which shed light on scientific method, the work of researchers, and the illumination of the world through curiosity, insight, and serendipity are important—discovery needs a human face.
Julia Neuberger [email protected]
Twentieth Century Fox
In brief Film and Book Kinsey’s life
Kinsey Written and directed by Bill Condon. Fox Searchlight. UK release March 4, 2005. Kinsey: a Biography Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy. Pimlico Film Edition, 2005. Pp 544. £8·99. ISBN 1-844-13836-4.
Poison Arrows: the Amazing Story of How Prozac and Anaesthetics were Developed from Deadly Jungle Poison Darts Stanley Feldman. Metro Publishing Ltd, 2005. Pp 272. £14·99. ISBN 184358-137X.
838
The American sexologist Alfred C Kinsey has recently appeared in a novel, a new edition of a biography, and a film. And that is just the latest material on a man whose reputation has had its ups and downs. Bill Condon, writer and director of Kinsey the film, takes as a main source Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy’s biography. Kinsey had been criticised before but Gathorne-Hardy felt that James H Jones’ 1997 biography brought matters to head, and he sought to redress an imbalance. However, a film that draws on a redress could risk underplaying criticism. Liam Neeson has immersed himself in the central role, and the rest of the cast are excellent. Condon recognises the “intimate connection between [Kinsey’s] personal life and his scientific project”, but we are not given enough to be able to judge the effect of that link. Kinsey was a caring sex counsellor, but was his
David Sharp [email protected]
Book Curiosity and curare In this charming history of curare, Stanley Feldman traces the development of neuromuscular blockers from the 15th century to the present day. Feldman, whose textbook is a classic among anaesthesiologists, details the cycles of excitement and frustration as the South American arrow poison was unsuccessfully advanced as a cure for
Noah Raizman [email protected]
www.thelancet.com Vol 365 March 5, 2005