.MTM5Nw.MTIwNzY2

17

of the team, at the conclusion of which the Moderator would say: "Paper is now open for discussion!" And there wouldn't be any discussions, partly because nobody would know enough about it to wish to get his neck out, partly for the fear of antagonizing someone of power and influence whose help might be a a determinant when it was time to apply for a renewal of the grant. And the research journals would issue from the presses all over the country, and no member of the editorial boards would know whether the contents were true or false. I couldn't envisage any method from now on by which true and false could be separated.

I suppose that sounds to you like Orwell at his bitterest but if you want to stop and look, Inspector, I think you'll agree that it crossed out: is not only true but likely rather inevitable could hardly be otherwise. Such a landslide of deterioration has occurred in many other fields, why should the field of medical practice or medical research be immune? Its personnel stems from the same material civilization." "It's a ghastly prospect, Doctor, but I believe you." "As a matter of fact, I can cite as an example a man from one of the eastern universities who worked out a tremendously elaborate and detailed project which mushroomed into years of time and scores of papers. It had to do with certain vasodilators and certain vasotensors which he demonstrated in the blood stream by means of a special little assay which he invented. He contrived to display a certain tiny section of the intra-abdominal tissues which tissues carried demonstrable blood vessels. So he would inject his vasopressor principle into the experimental animal and then watch the contraction of the arteries or arterioles in the tissue under the scope. Then he'd give the vasodilator and show the arioles expanding. With this test as a basis he then postulates an entire system of physiology, so to speak, including opposing principles for each of the demonstrated substances: a vasodilator to oppose