A blanket statement that Immunologists are less "computer-minded" than
other scientists baffles me a little bit. Considering the nature of
Immunology, as the quintessential mutli-disciplinary discipline, there
are plenty of molecular biologists, cell biologists, evolutionists,
etc ad nauseum within the heading of immunology that the
generalization seems unlikely to hold.
My own humble opinion is that, so far, this forum has failed to
attract immunologists because of its content. In the time I've been
a part of it, I've seen 1) queries from laymen who were concerned
about a recent diagnoses of some immunological disease (three in
particular about SLE), 2) off-beat theories on the origin of
HIV, 3) nose-picking and tolerance, 4) and numerous requests for
immunological reagents that were easily found in sources like the
Linscott directory. Many of the postings included a disclamer
something to the effect of "I'm not an immunologist, but I was just
I have stayed a part of the forum because I believe in its potential.
After all, as a grad student I have the time to waste reading and
answering a few messages a week. My mentor, however, lost interest in
exploring any of the Bionet forums, because after spending a couple
months with this one, thought that they must all be the same waste of
time that this one is.
I encourage those immunologists who are connected to stay connected.
With enough dialog, we might yet be able to make this a worthwhile
forum, if all the drivel hasn't already scared the serious
Immunology is still, IMHO, one of the few remaining intrigues in
science, with all of its unknowns, exceptions, contradictions, etc.,
and I encourage non-immunologists to continue asking what may seem
naive questions, if for no other reason than to keep us on our toes.
But I caution the serious immunologists out there that the naive
questions which are asked here may belie the numbers of other
immunologists who are out here listening.
Department of Microbiology
Loma Linda University
dLee at ccmail.llu.edu