Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Two large companies, IBM in the United States and ICI in Britain, suddenly look vulnerable. Is the explanation their sheer size or, more probably, their ingrained habits?
Professor Mark Ptashne describes evidence to explain the disputed Cell paper, Dr Herman N Eisen (who conducted the MIT inquiry in 1986) concurs, Dr John Cairns (in letter to an unidentified official of the US National Academy) says the affair is the equivalent of Watergate and a former co-worker offers a testimonal to Imanishi-Kari.
Professor Mark Ptashne describes evidence to explain the disputed Cell paper, Dr Herman N Eisen (who conducted the MIT inquiry in 1986) concurs, Dr John Cairns (in letter to an unidentified official of the US National Academy) says the affair is the equivalent of Watergate and a former co-worker offers a testimonal to Imanishi-Kari.
Professor Mark Ptashne describes evidence to explain the disputed Cell paper, Dr Herman N Eisen (who conducted the MIT inquiry in 1986) concurs, Dr John Cairns (in letter to an unidentified official of the US National Academy) says the affair is the equivalent of Watergate and a former co-worker offers a testimonal to Imanishi-Kari.
Professor Mark Ptashne describes evidence to explain the disputed Cell paper, Dr Herman N Eisen (who conducted the MIT inquiry in 1986) concurs, Dr John Cairns (in letter to an unidentified official of the US National Academy) says the affair is the equivalent of Watergate and a former co-worker offers a testimonal to Imanishi-Kari.
Chemists, like other specialists, ought to make it clearer what hypotheses they are framing and testing. They will thus avoid the suggestion that they are over-fond of empirical generalizations.