Skip to main content

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.

Volume 352 Issue 6331, 11 July 1991

Opinion

  • 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?

    Opinion

    Advertisement

Top of page ⤴

News

Top of page ⤴

Correspondence

Top of page ⤴

Commentary

  • 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.

    Commentary
  • 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.

    • JOHN CAIRNS
    Commentary
  • 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.

    Commentary
  • 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.

    Commentary
  • 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.

    • Eric Magnusson
    Commentary
Top of page ⤴

News & Views

Top of page ⤴

Scientific Correspondence

Top of page ⤴

Book Review

Top of page ⤴

Article

Top of page ⤴

Letter

Top of page ⤴
Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing

Search

Quick links