.MTM5Nw.MTIwNzYz: Difference between revisions

From Newberry Transcribe
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "14 of a group from The University of Michigan which had performed the quantative determinations. Now it happened that I was working in a closely related field and was famili...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 4: Line 4:
the quantative determinations.  Now it happened that I was working
the quantative determinations.  Now it happened that I was working
in a closely related field and was familiar with the techniques which
in a closely related field and was familiar with the techniques which
were employed for such determinations.  Mainly it depended on
were employed for such determinations.  Mainly, it depended on
paper chromatography which is a tedious process by which an
paper chromatography which is a tedious process by which an
extract of steroids is dropped in a very small, measured amount on
extract of steroids is dropped in a very small, measured amount on
the end of a long strip of filter paper which has been treated with
the end of a long strip of filter paper which has been treated with
an appropriate solvent.  Under standard conditions, the drops
an appropriate solvent.  Under standard conditions, the drop
containing whatever steroids were present in the extract, is allowed
containing whatever steroids were present in the extract, is allowed
to travel along the moist paper, which is hung in a special
to travel along the moist paper, which is hung in a special
Line 15: Line 15:
possible to see the size of the spots made by the various
possible to see the size of the spots made by the various
hormones in a pure state, and the spots can even be quantitively
hormones in a pure state, and the spots can even be quantitively
removed and measured.  The whole thing is very rigorous, but
removed and measured.  The whole thing is very ingenious, but
it was terribly tedious and cumbersome, and far from reliable even
it was terribly tedious and cumbersome, and far from reliable even
when I used to move through the whole process alone.  there are too
when I used to move through the whole process alone.  There are too
many steps, and each step has its weak point.  And when the technique
many steps, and each step has its weak point.  And when the technique
was first used, it worked out fairly well for cortisone and for  
was first used, it worked out fairly well for cortisone and for  
hydrocortises, but aldosterone, percent in much smaller amounts,
hydrocortisone, but aldosterone, present in much smaller amounts,
failed to show up with the same pair of solvents, hence its relationship
failed to show up with the same pair of solvents, hence its relationship
to the others - particularly, cortisone and  hydrocortisone  - remained
to the others - particularly, cortisone and  hydrocortisone  - remained
a little vague.  So, on the occasion of the meeting that I've refused
a little vague.  So, on the occasion of the meeting that I've referred
to, and the paper on the aldosterone secreting bencol, the flush of my
to, and the paper on the aldosterone secreting [?], the flush of my
first admiration faded suddenly when it occured to me to wonder if
first admiration faded suddenly when it occured to me to wonder if
it was actually true.  I remembered that the leader of the two
it was actually true.  I remembered that the leader of the two
research groups were good friends and that the pressure from the medical
research groups were good friends and that the pressure from the medical
schools and from the sources of federal grades in aid is
schools and from the sources of federal grants-in-aid is
very great, it's produce, or else lose your grant.  On the other
very great.  It's produce, or else lose your grant.  On the other
hand, there are no nearly highly - specialized techniques that almost
hand, there are so many highly-specialized techniques that almost
no group is able to asses the cohibitives of another hence the
no group is able to asses the contributions of anotherhence the
ultimate analysis, to declare them "reproductible" or "not reproductible"
ultimate analysis, to declare them "reproducible" or "not reproducible"
or, in simple English, true or false.  Sometimes I wonder
or, in simple English, true or false.  Sometimes I wonder

Latest revision as of 18:50, 29 July 2021

14

of a group from The University of Michigan which had performed the quantative determinations. Now it happened that I was working in a closely related field and was familiar with the techniques which were employed for such determinations. Mainly, it depended on paper chromatography which is a tedious process by which an extract of steroids is dropped in a very small, measured amount on the end of a long strip of filter paper which has been treated with an appropriate solvent. Under standard conditions, the drop containing whatever steroids were present in the extract, is allowed to travel along the moist paper, which is hung in a special chamber for a given number of hours. The rate of travel serves to separate each hormone and by developing the strip, it is possible to see the size of the spots made by the various hormones in a pure state, and the spots can even be quantitively removed and measured. The whole thing is very ingenious, but it was terribly tedious and cumbersome, and far from reliable even when I used to move through the whole process alone. There are too many steps, and each step has its weak point. And when the technique was first used, it worked out fairly well for cortisone and for hydrocortisone, but aldosterone, present in much smaller amounts, failed to show up with the same pair of solvents, hence its relationship to the others - particularly, cortisone and hydrocortisone - remained a little vague. So, on the occasion of the meeting that I've referred to, and the paper on the aldosterone secreting [?], the flush of my first admiration faded suddenly when it occured to me to wonder if it was actually true. I remembered that the leader of the two research groups were good friends and that the pressure from the medical schools and from the sources of federal grants-in-aid is very great. It's produce, or else lose your grant. On the other hand, there are so many highly-specialized techniques that almost no group is able to asses the contributions of another, hence the ultimate analysis, to declare them "reproducible" or "not reproducible" or, in simple English, true or false. Sometimes I wonder