Experientia has recently published an article by H.F. Stahelin entitled THE
HISTORY OF CYCLOSPORIN A REVISITED: ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW. The author notes
that current understanding of the history is inaccurate and is perpetuated from
report to report. He writes "to prevent further copying of mistakes from one
author to another".
People, dates and documentation are mentioned, so that an assiduous historian
of science could probably have a reasonably chance at arriving at the truth....
..and surely arriving at the truth in the history of science is a laudable
goal?
I have no personal acquaintance with the players in this issue, but having
heard the case against F. Borel, I hope Experientia will be approaching the
latter for a response. If Borel chooses not to reply, then I hope Experientia
will inform its readers of this fact.
Sincerely,
Don Forsdyke
Discussion Leader. Bionet.journals.note
