Distillations | Science History Institute

In 1976, Harvard University wanted to build a specialized lab for recombinant DNA research. But first, it had to get permission from the city of Cambridge. The resulting city council hearings drew TV stations and captured the attention of the whole country. At the center of the controversy? A wise-talking mayor, a young outspoken molecular biologist, and an important question: in scientific research, how much say should the public have? Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Executive Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Samia Bouzid Resource List Cobb, Matthew.  As Gods: A Moral History of the Genetic Age. New York: Basic Books, 2021. Krimsky, Sheldon. Genetic Alchemy: A Social History of the Recombinant DNA Controversy. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1984. Rogers, Michael. “Biohazard.” Nova: The Gene Engineers. Dailymotion. “Cambridge DNA Hearings, 1976.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Oral History Program, oral history collection on the recombinant DNA controversy.  “Cambridge RDNA hearings, volume 1, 1976.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Oral History Program, oral history collection on the recombinant DNA controversy.  “National Academy of Sciences. Forum. Washington, DC, 1977 March 7–9.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Oral History Program, oral history collection on the recombinant DNA controversy.  “The MacNeil/Lehrer Report: Genetic Engineering.” American Archive of Public Broadcasting. From Controversy to Cure: Inside the Cambridge Biotech Boom. MIT Video Productions. “Pantechnicon; Dna, 1976.” WGBH. The Andromeda Strain. IMDb. Jurassic Park. IMDb. CBS News – 04.06.1977 NBC News – 05.24.1977  

Genetic engineering breakthroughs in the late 1960s and early 1970s came with a lot of promise—and peril too. Fears about what could happen with recombinant DNA experiments put scientists in the middle of a moral dilemma. Did they have a responsibility to consider how  others might use their work? Or was their place simply to be on the lab bench? In this two-part episode, we’ll share the story about the first time scientists stopped and considered the ramifications of their work, with a self-imposed moratorium. And we’ll explore all the controversy that led to the historic pivotal meeting at the Asilomar Conference Grounds in 1975 to determine the future of genetic engineering. Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer Music by Blue Dot Sessions Resource List A Deep Conversation with Jon Beckwith: A History of Scientific and Social Activism. University of California Television. YouTube. Berg, Paul. "Paul Berg Letter." Wellcome Collection. Chemical Heritage Foundation: The Emergence of Biotechnology. Science History Institute. Cobb, Matthew. As Gods: A Moral History of the Genetic Age. New York: Basic Books, 2021. Cohen, Stanley N. Science, Biotechnology, and Recombinant DNA: A Personal History. UC Berkeley. DNA Learning Center. "Asilomar Meeting." Genetic Dreams, Genetic Nightmares. BBC. Fredrickson, Donald S. Asilomar and Recombinant DNA: The End of the Beginning.  DNA: The Secret of Life. IMDb. Jurassic Park. IMDb. Late 1960s-Early 1970s Anti-War Marches. YouTube. "Letter from Maxine Singer and Dieter Söll to Philip Handler." Lear, John. Recombinant DNA: The Untold Story. Goodreads. Mukherjee, Siddhartha. The Gene: An Intimate History. Simon & Schuster. McElheny, Victor. Attempting the Impossible at Asilomar. McElheny, Victor. Gene Transplants Seen Helping Farmers and Doctors. The New York Times, May 20, 1974. Nova: The Gene Engineers. Dailymotion. Protein Synthesis: An Epic on the Cellular Level. YouTube. Rejection of Science Worries American Scientists. The New York Times, April 5, 1970. Rogers, Michael. The Pandora’s Box Congress. Rolling Stone. The Gene: PBS. PBS Learning Media. "The MacNeil/Lehrer Report: Genetic Engineering." American Archive of Public Broadcasting.  

Genetic engineering breakthroughs in the late 1960s and early 1970s came with a lot of promise—and peril too. Fears about what could happen with recombinant DNA experiments put scientists in the middle of a moral dilemma. Did they have a responsibility to consider how  others might use their work? Or was their place simply to be on the lab bench? In this two-part episode, we’ll share the story about the first time scientists stopped and considered the ramifications of their work, with a self-imposed moratorium. And we’ll explore all the controversy that led to the historic pivotal meeting at the Asilomar Conference Grounds in 1975 to determine the future of genetic engineering. Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer Music by Blue Dot Sessions Resource List A Deep Conversation with Jon Beckwith: A History of Scientific and Social Activism. University of California Television. YouTube. Berg, Paul. "Paul Berg Letter." Wellcome Collection. Chemical Heritage Foundation: The Emergence of Biotechnology. Science History Institute. Cobb, Matthew. As Gods: A Moral History of the Genetic Age. New York: Basic Books, 2021. Cohen, Stanley N. Science, Biotechnology, and Recombinant DNA: A Personal History. UC Berkeley. DNA Learning Center. "Asilomar Meeting." Genetic Dreams, Genetic Nightmares. BBC. Fredrickson, Donald S. Asilomar and Recombinant DNA: The End of the Beginning.  DNA: The Secret of Life. IMDb. Jurassic Park. IMDb. Late 1960s-Early 1970s Anti-War Marches. YouTube. "Letter from Maxine Singer and Dieter Söll to Philip Handler." Lear, John. Recombinant DNA: The Untold Story. Goodreads. Mukherjee, Siddhartha. The Gene: An Intimate History. Simon & Schuster. McElheny, Victor. Attempting the Impossible at Asilomar. McElheny, Victor. Gene Transplants Seen Helping Farmers and Doctors. The New York Times, May 20, 1974. Nova: The Gene Engineers. Dailymotion. Protein Synthesis: An Epic on the Cellular Level. YouTube. Rejection of Science Worries American Scientists. The New York Times, April 5, 1970. Rogers, Michael. The Pandora’s Box Congress. Rolling Stone. The Gene: PBS. PBS Learning Media. "The MacNeil/Lehrer Report: Genetic Engineering." American Archive of Public Broadcasting.  

Check out our new season, dropping weekly on Tuesdays, starting August 5th.

Joining the discussion are Janet Poppendick, a retired professor and author focused on school food reform, and Jane Black, an insightful food journalist. They delve into the intriguing history of school lunches, exploring how crises like the Great Depression shaped nutritional policies. Discover the contradictory hunger amidst agricultural surpluses and the evolution of the National School Lunch Program. They also advocate for universal free school meals as a means to enhance student engagement and combat stigma in food quality.

ALS is a fatal neurological disease that kills motor neurons. Even though it was first described more than 150 years ago, there is no cure, and the few drugs available only dampen the symptoms or slow the progression by a few months. In recent years new drugs have emerged. However, there is one problem: the life expectancy is just two to five years after diagnosis. This timeline is incompatible with the FDA drug approval process, which takes years and even decades. This has created a tense situation for desperate patients who are demanding the FDA approve unproven drugs. What’s the harm in giving desperate patients an imperfect drug? Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer “Color Theme” composed by Jonathan Pfeffer. Additional music by Blue Dot Sessions

In 1973 a bombshell study appeared in the premier scientific journal Science. It was called “On Being Sane in Insane Places.” Its author, a Stanford psychology professor named David Rosenhan, claimed that by faking their way into psychiatric hospitals, he and eight other pseudo-patients had proven that psychiatrists were unable to diagnose mental illness accurately. Psychiatrists panicked, and, as a result, re-wrote what’s known as “psychiatry’s bible”—the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM. The study and the subsequent overhaul of the DSM changed the field forever. So it was a surprise when, decades later, a journalist reopened Rosenhan’s files and discovered that the study was full of inconsistencies and even blatant fraud. So should we throw out everything it revealed? Or can something based on a lie still contain any truths? Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer “Color Theme” composed by Jonathan Pfeffer. Additional music by Blue Dot Sessions  

For more than 100 years, biologists who suggested that some cancers may be caused by viruses were the pariahs of genetics. However, they persevered and incrementally built their knowledge, leading to the discovery of retroviruses, the development of a test to diagnose HIV, and the creation of the HPV vaccine. Join us as we interview Gregory J. Morgan about his book Cancer Virus Hunters: A History of Tumor Virology. Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer “Color Theme” composed by Jonathan Pfeffer. Additional music by Blue Dot Sessions  

In 1973 biochemist Bruce Ames created a simple test that showed if chemicals had the potential to cause cancer. The Ames test made him a hero of the emerging environmental movement. But then he completely changed course and said concerns about chemicals were overblown. So what happened? Did Ames change? Or did our understanding of what causes cancer change? Featured Oral History Bruce N. Ames, "Bruce N. Ames: The Marriage of Biochemistry and Genetics at Caltech, the NIH, UC Berkeley, and CHORI, 1954–2018" conducted by Paul Burnett in 2019 and 2020, Oral History Center, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 2021. Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer “Color Theme” composed by Jonathan Pfeffer. Additional music by Blue Dot Sessions  

Ozempic and others in this family of drugs are nothing short of miraculous. Meant to treat Type 2 Diabetes, the drug exploded in popularity after researchers found that patients were reporting losing 15-21% of their body weight in clinical trials. There were some side effects, but none so severe that it raised concerns. Doctors began prescribing it to people who weren't diabetic but could benefit from weight loss, and now, our only problem seems to be getting enough of it for all the people who need it. It all seems magical, but is it too good to be true? Join us as we dive into the history of weight loss drugs, drug manufacturing regulations, and the role we think medicine should play in our lives. Credits Host: Alexis Pedrick Senior Producer: Mariel Carr Producer: Rigoberto Hernandez Associate Producer: Sarah Kaplan Audio Engineer: Jonathan Pfeffer “Color Theme” composed by Jonathan Pfeffer. Additional music by Blue Dot Sessions