Dr. Bruce Ames, one of the early heroes of the environmental movement and creator of the Ames Test, which showed how to use in vitro testing to determine if chemicals could cause DNA damage and thus cancer (sparing a lot of animals), went on to rank all kinds of chemicals in order of risk.
Thus, he was an early voice of sanity in the post-DDT world, where activists tried to convince people there is such a thing as chemical-free. His testing led to evidence-based decision-making about risks and the environment and The Scientist did a recent article on him.
He is an old school scientist, he came up before there was a political litmus test to get to the top tiers of academia. So he isn't a shill for environmentalists or industry groups or anyone else, he goes where the science takes him. Thus, he has made enemies everywhere, which is exactly where he should be.
Writing in The Scientist, Megan Scudellari does a nice article about his work then and now. But what caught my attention was a link to it from the American Council on Science and Health and their title: A well-deserved, overdue encomium for Dr. Bruce Ames. Encomium is simply Latin for praise and in the wrong hands it comes across as pretentious (we mean you, Led Zeppelin) or flowery. Used properly, it is egalitarian and exculpatory - see, I just used flowery words unnecessarily and it comes across as dopey.
Kudos to you for your linguistic artistry, ACSH!
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Sexual Fantasies: Threesomes Are Normal, Golden Showers Not So Much
- Ghost Light From Dead Galaxies - A Hubble Halloween
- US Wildlife Bans On GMOs And Neonics Lack Transparency And Scientific Rationale
- Is It Possible To Build A Spacesuit Or Spaceship To Travel Through The Sun With Future Tech? - Just For Fun.
- Does Max Tegmark Kill A Daughter In A Parallel World ?
- The Way Architecture Imitates Life, Biology Meets Geometry
- Greenpeace Says Its GMOs Are Better Than Science's GMOs, Still Hates Golden Rice
- "Verduyn is right on the money when he says it's not the emotion of sadness itself that's inherently..."
- "A very astute observation, given that they're both, in essence, electrical phenomena...."
- "A growing population is a huge problem because we take for granted the innovations that have..."
- " Well, perhaps, my inference and reply is faulty, but you do say Tolle basically claims his way..."
- "I'm flattered you think I wrote this. Jon will be less pleased...."
- Two-faced anti-GMO groups: Block crop and food innovations then claim Big Ag prevents GMO innovations
- Why support erodes for GMO labeling (Hint: It’s not because of spending by Big Ag)
- Genetic “hall of mirrors” with large palindromes, yet smaller: What’s mighty about the mouse
- Gut bacteria an easy scapegoat for disease, but connections hard to prove
- Vermont Rube Goldberg-like GMO labeling law exempts GMO filled natural supplements
- Downside to GMOs: Yields have become so good, they exceed processing capacity
- Fun and games make for better learners
- Avivagen publishes evidence for natural alternative to antibiotic use in livestock
- Drug tests on mothers' hair links recreational drug use to birth defects
- Bladderwrack: Tougher than suspected
- Scientists seek cure for devastating witches' broom disease of the chocolate tree