Re the 25 Scariest Science Experiments webpage, I'm perplexed by the compilers' placing "Sigmund Freud and the case of Emma Eckstein" as the first item under the subheading "Historical Atrocities", above the vile Nazi and Japanese WW2 medical experiment atrocities. Freud's and Fliess's treatment of Emma Einstein would nowadays be regarded as medical malpractice. By no stretch of the imagination was it an "atrocity".
Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London http://www.esterson.org -------------------------------------- [tips] Scary experiments sblack Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:45:35 -0700 With impeccable timing considering the season, and obviously inspired by it, the Chronicle of Higher Education has just released a list of the 25 scariest science experiments ever conducted. Unfortunately, the piece is only available by subscription but I can tell you about it. Although they use the term "experiment" loosely, not to mention the word "science", they relate projects dear to the hearts of psychologists. These include: Harry Harlow's "pit of despair" study which subjected young monkeys to severe deprivation and resulted in correspondingly severe psychotic behaviour Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment The Milgram experiments on obedience to authority The treatment of Emma Eckstein for "nasal reflex neurosis" by Freud and Fliess The Tuskegee syphilis experiment Jose Delgado's demonstration bull fight using electrical intracranial stimulation of the brain to stop a charging bull (couldn't they just have cancelled its credit card?) The CIA's MK-ULTRA's attempts at mind control (with an unfortunate Canadian connection to mad scientist Donald Cameron at the Montreal Allen Memorial Institute) I agree that all of these, although dubious whether all are "science" or "experiments", are all sufficiently scary to be worthy of Halloween and inclusion on this list, with one exception. This is the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, which as Allen Esterson recently reminded us, may not deserve its notorious status as a highly unethical experiment. But the myth is now unstoppable. Did they miss any? Nominations welcome. I'd like to mention one surprising entry on the list, although it doesn't pertain to psychology. This is the spidergoat project of Nexia Biotechnologies, which was once a small company based in Montreal. They inserted the spider silk gene into goats. Silk protein was extracted from the goat milk, and spun into thread. The aim was to produce artifical spider silk, which when it comes from a spider, is amazingly strong and light. What's scary about that? I was so taken with this idea that I invested in Nexia. Others were impressed as well, such as the acclaimed Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood, who included an account of the company in her science-fiction dystopian novel, Oryx and Craik (2003). Alas, it was not to be. After successfully demonstrating proof of principle (spinning fibre from spider protein extracted from goat milk), they suddenly went out of business, selling off their assets. Their president told me (I asked) that they couldn't find a market for their product, which seems incredible, given its obvious promise for medical and military applications. I've since discovered a comment which suggests that the real reason was that they didn't insert a complete gene for spider silk in the goats, but only a fragment, and the resulting silk was of inferior quality. I'm left with about $15 worth of stock in an oil industry service company, and a Chinese elevator company. I won't tell you what I started with. Now that's scary. Stephen ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: [email protected] 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
