Your problems magnified in seconds.

UThe Polaroid MP-4 Camera.Instant photomacrography isonly one of the things it does.

Maybe you're measuring thegrowth rate of cracks in metals

under stress. Or maybeyou're studying the

% growth of a certainstrain of bacteria underno stress.

If you're using Polaroid's MP-4you can make your problems

up to 32 times bigger thanthey actually are and get fin-ished pictures in seconds. In

full color, or in black andwhite (with or without an instant

negative).Polaroid's instant pictures tell you right away

if you've got the shot you want and, insome cases, how your test is going.Whichever way it goes you'llhave time to do some-thing about it withoutstarting all over again.

You won't have to reshoot difficult sequences orrestage complex experiments. And you've got a perma-nent record to study-one minute or one year after themetal has cracked and the bacteria has grown up.

In addition to instant delivery, Polaroid's multi-purpose camera has a number of features you'd expectto find only in specialized macrophotographic systems.A reflex viewer for precise focusing (with aerial imagefocusing screens for extremely critical focusing at highmagnifications). And a system of interchangeablelenses for a wide range of magnifications and greaterflexibility. (The MP-4 can do photomicrography andphotocopying as well as photomacrography.)

If you have small problems, write us and we'll tellyou more about how to enlarge them.

Polaroid Corporation, Dept. 26-286, 549TechnologySquare, Cambridge, Mass. 02139. If you're in a hurry,

call collect (617) 547-5176.

- -̂Polaroid

90 xt\9.el

j I .-

IF,I',

ie -'.

If reproducibilityin electrophoresisis a must...BIO-PHORETM

may be too.What happens when you use Bio-Rad's new BIO-PHORE pre-cast gelelectrophoresis system instead ofmaking your own gel tubes?

! ! !

i jyo

j U liE

Figure 1. Electrophoretic separation of serumproteins from Iyophilized human serum, runon pre-cast Bio-Phore 7.5% gels using the Bio-Phore Basic Buffer.

Well, reports from many users arein. They clearly indicate that mostelectrophoresis applications can bereproduced from laboratory to labo-ratory using our BIO-PHORE pre-cast gel tubes and matching buffers.Good news for any one who musthave reproducibility, convenienceand system versatility. Look at theuniformity of bands in Figure 1.

The BIO-PHORE pre-cast gel tubes,7 mm OD x 125 mm long, are madefrom Bio-Rad's electrophoresis purityreagents in three monomer concen-trations-4%, 7.5% and 12%. Thisallows leeway for separation of pro-teins with molecular weights from5,000 to 1,000,000. Shelf life?-up to6 months at 40 C.

We will help make BIO-PHOREwork for you, too. Contact:

32nd and Griffin AvenueRichmond, CA 94804Phone (415) 234-4130

Also in: Rockville Centre, N.Y.;Mississauga, Ontario; London;Munich; Milan; Sao Paulo

Circle No. 518 on Readers' Service Card

LETTERS

XYY Chromosome Study

The ethical objection of Beckwithet al. (Letters, 31 Jan., p. 298) to theHarvard XYY study appears to be basedupon a simplistic notion of distinguish-ing the behavior of people either onthe basis of genetics or on the basisof social, economic, and familial con-ditions. Possible effects of the inter-action of genetic and social factors areoverlooked.

Beckwith et al. assume that thedesign of the study precludes obtain-ing information about the effects of in-forming parents about the XYY chro-mosome. This assumption is probablyincorrect. It is likely that some of theinformed parents will believe that theXYY chromosome is related to anti-social conduct and others will not, justas there is disagreement among sci-entists. And some parents may in thecourse of the experiment change theiropinion about this. Thus, the beliefsand related child-rearing behaviors ofthe parents in the study will probablyrange along a continuum, allowing ameaningful assessment to be made ofany effects of child-rearing practicesand of the XYY chromosome.

Genetic and ethical problems do notgo away by ignoring them. They shouldboth be subject to thoughtful investi-gation which balances the risks ofknowledge against the benefits, if any,of ignorance.

R. KIRKLAND SCHWITZGEBELDepartment of Psychiatry,Laboratory of Community Psychiatry,Harvard Medical School,Boston, Massachusetts 02115

Accountability in Science

The recent disclosure of yet anotherpossible breach in the integrity of sci-entific research raises some hard ques-tions about the public's right to over-see the conduct of science. Both in theSummerlin affair of last April, in whicha Sloan-Kettering cancer researcher wasgiven a psychiatric leave after tamper-ing with skin-graft data, and in the cur-rent case at Harvard, in which a sttu-dent is suspected of forging experimen-tal results, the research in question wassupported both directly and indirectlythrough public funds. Yet, the actionswhich have been taken to date haveinvolved internal "housecleaning" with

little or no public access to the factsor involvement with the issues. Whyshould research scientists be any lessaccountable to the public for the con-sequences of their misconduct than arephysicians, lawyers, or politicians?Some maintain that scientists should

be sequestered from malpractice ormalfeasance by virtue of the imper-sonal and indirect nature of their work.Behind such a proposition lies the falseassumption that scientific data, in con-trast to the surgeon's scalpel, "neverhurts anyone. After all," the argu-ment goes, "it's the use that's madeof science that deserves our scrutiny,not basic research." But ethical judg-ment is needed at the basic researchlevel as well. Those who practice itknow that the nature of the scientificenterprise itself hinges on the scrupu-lous integrity of its practitioners. Sci-entific. accountability begins at the re-search bench. One false lead can costscience (and society) years of poten-tially constructive work.

It is no accident that the current dis-turbing events are occurring in trans-plantation immunology, a field still inits infancy. Transplantation immunol-ogy may now be in the same inchoateand explosively expansive stage thatgenetics was in in the Lysenko era of25 years ago. When "normal" science,as Thomas Kuhn (1) described it, be-gins to falter, as new data repudiateold hypotheses, then basic researchtakes on new meanings-and basic re-searchers, new responsibilities. Im-munologists today are struggling for co-herent theories to incorporate seeming-ly divergent data. They are met atevery turn by paradoxes and anomalies.The immune system can seemingly betulrned to good or evil by a quirk ofhappenstance. Clinicians do not knowhow to predict when an immune re-sponse to a virus may cause a diseaseor cure it; or if they generate an im-mune reaction, whether it will stimu-late cancer growth or retard it. Repro-ductive biologists are met with para-doxical success in the survival of theimmunologically discrepant fetus andremain ignorant of the adaptive roleof the mother's immune response.

Historians of science would recognizein these perturbing uncertainties a sci-entific field ifl flux, an old paradigmcollapsing, and tentative new modelsproliferating. It is at just such a timethat a field becomes most vulnerable tochicanery and deceit. Total objectivitybecomes difficult for even the mostscrupulous practitioner. Often it is im-

SCIENCE, VOL. 187A

possible for the average scientist to dis-tinguish between a vagary of chance tobe noted and placed aside and a poten-tial breakthrough result which couldunlock a logjam of inexplicable data.Others, like Newton and Mendel beforethem, consciously or unconsciously SUP-press variations in their data which "donot fit" in order to sustain the hypothe-sis they believe to be the right one. Allof these perturbations of conduct andreasoning need not occur in the "per-fect" practice of the scientific method,with its insistence on blind observationand reproducibility. But htuman foible,ambition, and the urgency to straightenthings out often suppress the ideal.A science in revolution fairly invites

scientific entrepreneurs to ply their newhypotheses. It is these people who aresimultaneously the most valuable andthe most dangerous among the dramatispersonae of the morality play of sci-entific discovery. One extra bit ofegoism, one iota of self-aggrandizementand the play can become a tragedy. Thestakes are enormous, the tensions great.Some are keen to take up the challenge;others succumb to what Lawrence Ku-bie (2) described as "the neurotic dis-tortion of the creative process." Thereare those who have the courage topromulgate seemingly rash hypothesesselflessly, willingly taking responsibilityfor their actions by setting about torefute their own ideological progeny.This is when science is at its best.

Then there are those for whom thefragility of the times calls forth an op-portunism that leads to a contamina-tion of the free marketplace of ideaswith forged data or rigged experiments.This happened in the Summerlin af-fair. These events are so troubling andpotentially so damaging to the conductof science that they call out for ac-tion.

It is a disservice to science and so-ciety alike to treat such events as iso-lated and idiosyncratic. My experienceas a transplantation immunologist atthree major laboratories in this countrystrongly sLIggests that Summerlin-likeobservations are the rule, not the ex-ception. Indeed, as Karl Popper hasemphasized, the vitality of a sciencemay depend on the nuLmber and rich-ness of falsifiable hypotheses availableas grist for the scientific mill. How-ever, the proliferation of false (ratherthan falsifiable) hypotheses may also bea sinister symptom of the heightenedstakes for scientific success in researchareas, such as cancer or immtunology, in

28 FEBRUARY 1975

which public expectations have beengrossly inflated. Scientists in fast-break-ing areas and "normal" science alikeought now to take seriously the impli-cations of misconduct on the part oftheir colleagues. Some laboratories havealready instituted internal checks to ver-ify novel results. But such checks them-selves are likely to have a chilling ef-fect on innovative research. The linemust be strictly drawn between proffer-ing serious hypotheses, simple specula-tion, and outright fabrication. Some-how, the recognition must be engen-dered in scientist and citizen that thescientist who intentionally forges ormisrepresents basic research data is nosimple miscreant or neurotic. Such per-sons misuse the public trust as well aspuLblic fuLnds and should not be shieldedbehind a veil of "psychiatric illness" orbureaucratic maneuvering. ScientistsImlust be willing to look at the systemswhich create these pertuLrbations-bothin society and in their own enterprise-and begin to undertake a searchinganalysis of their roots.

MARC LAPPE'Institute for Society, Ethics and theLife Scien1ces, Hastings Center,Hastings-on-Hudson, New York 10706

References

1. 1-. Kuhn, The Struictiure of Scientific Ret olu-tionvs (Univ. of Chicago Piess, Chicago, ed.2, 1970).

2. 1. KuLbie, Tlze Neuirotic Distortiotn of theCreatit e Procses (F,trrar. Stratis & Girouix,New York, 1961).

Laser Fusion Research

The article 'Laser fusion: One mile-post passed-millions more to go" byWilliam D. Metz (Research News, 27Dec. 1974, p. 1193) seems to implythat only government and private com-panies are involved in significant workin this field. Actually, the academiccommunLity-specifically, the Universityof Rochester-has been active in thisarea f'ronm the timc that laser fusionwas first declassified in the late 1960's.More recently, the University of Roch-ester has joined with industry andgovernment in a long-range commitmentto the dcvelopment of controlled ther-monuclear fusioni as a fLuture energysou rce.

This collaboration has resulted inthe only suprakilojoule, subnanoseconidlaser target irradiation facility presentlyoperating. Data from this facility (thou-sands of on-target shots with neutron

You can order any item in this columndirect from the supplier... details below

World's Best pH ElectrodeWorld's best? Here'swhy. This combinationpH/reference elec-trode is so stable it's lprecalibrated - sel-dom needs restandar-dizing. Gel filled (neverneeds bothersome re-filling), rugged poly-mer body, protective"beaker bumpers TMReaches 10" down intotest tubes and flasks.Order direct No. 1808PolyMarklR- electrode,$118. Two or more,$108 each. Expensiveand worth every cent!Or for literature only...

Circle No. 546 on Readers' Service Card

Ohaus BalancesThe genuine article, Ohaus balancesare the standard of the industry. Model311 features magnetic damping, easy-to-read tiered beams. Capacity: 311 g.Sensitivity: 0.01 g. Order dfrect No. 783BOhaus Cent-O-Gram 311 balance, $60.Similar Model 310 also features conve-nient faster vernier dial. Same specs.Order direct No. 7838 Ohaus Dial-O-Gram 310 balance, $75 ... or for litera-ture only ..

Circle No. 561 on Reoders' Service Card

Spectro Cells are MatchedQuartz spectropho-tometer cells are nowavailable in matchedsets, any quantity. FarUV range Spectrosil ' 77-quartz windows are di-rectly fuzed to quartzcell body. Popular re-ctangular, open topType 1 cell w/lOmm op-tical path offered here.Immediate air ship-ment. Order directNo.1Q10 Cell, $35 ea.Also in optical glass,No. IG10, $12 ea. Nocharge for matching.Or for complete cata-log ...

Circle No. 562 on Readers' Service Card

order direct from:MARKSON SCIENCE INC.131-3 Oak Street, Del Mar, CA 92014Telephone (714) 755-6655

just off the press!

ChroraphyNotes

New quarterly edition. anupdate on solving chromato-graphic separations better andfaster (in minutes instead of inhours). This authoritative andvital resource from Watersfeatures application news,abstracts of new publicationsfor your library and offers ofselected laboratory aids forpracticing chromatographers.There's more!Send today for your copy of thecurrent 'ChromatographyNotes.' No obligation, ofcourse.

*WWATERSASSOCIATES

201 Maple Street, Milford Mass. 01757Telephone (617) 418-2000

The Liquid Chromatography PeopleCircle No. 374 on Readers' Service Card

measurements carried out as a standarddiagnostic) are published in the scien-tific literature. (Incidentally, Metz's ar-ticle mentions the General ElectricCompany's participation in laser fusionresearch but does not explain that GEis one of five major participants in theUniversity of Rochester's Laser FusionFeasibility Project; other principal spon-sors are the EXXON Research andEngineering Company, the NortheastUtilities Service Company, and the NewYork State Atomic and Space Develop-ment Authority.)The academic community has been

a primary source of many new ideasin laser fusion and related research. AtRochester, the laser fusion project iscompletely unclassified; thus, all infor-mation generated through its activitiesis made public. One laser fusion breed-ing concept (reenergizing used fuel rodsfrom fission reactors) has been devel-oped by researchers at Rochester. Theuniversity has filed several patents re-lating to this concept, and the patentswill be made available to others throughlicensing.Compared to efforts in governmental

and private industrial laboratories, uni-versity-based programs in fusion re-search appear relatively small. However,in a field that is largely idea-limited,universities have a major contributionto make in developing the scientificunderstanding necessary to develop thisprocess as a future energy source. Thekind of collaboration exemplified bythe Rochester project-involving gov-ernment, industry, and university-isa pioneering one that seems to holdmuch promise, and we hope it willserve as a model for cooperative re-search in other areas.

MOSHE J. LUBINLaboratory for Laser Energetics,University of Rochester,Rochester, New York 14627

Immigration Policy

Charles B. Keely, in his well-bal-anced article "Immigration composi-tion and population policy" (16 Aug.1974, p. 587), correctly laments thepoor quality of U.S. immigration andemigration data, especially the latter.But better data are likely to be slow incoming. Based on past experience, onemight estimate that it will take two ormore years for Congress to authorizesuch data collection and appropriatenecessary funds, another 2 years for

transition to the new system, and 6years to accumulate the experienceneeded to describe in detail what ishappening. Unfortunately, we do nothave a decade to wait. The questionof the demographic significance of im-migration will likely mature in thenext few years. As a result, decisionswill have to be made with the deficientdata now available, as is the case withmost political questions.

Beyond this, more accurate datamay not help much in deciding therole that demographic considerationsshould play in setting U.S. immigra-tion policy. What will count is thepolicy-maker's appreciation of the sig-nificance of additional populationgrowth for the United States. Thosewho do not see additional growth as a

problem are not likely to be movedby more accurate statistics. Those con-cerned about additional growth willfind little solace in refinement of thefigures. As Keely points out, it is avalue judgment.The projected addition of some 15

million to our population throughlegal immigration between 1970 and2000 (1) is a responsibility not to betaken lightly. (Illegal immigration,which also needs to be addressed, willadd an additional and perhaps even

larger number.) As competition forresources grows abroad and our do-mestic supplies dwindle, we may findourselves hard pressed to provide fortoday's numbers, much less those thatwill be added by natural increase andnet immigration. The situation callsfor great prudence in making any ad-ditions to our population, from what-ever source.The main numeric limitations on

immigration were established 50 yearsago, when there were 100 millionfewer people in the United States andthe world setting was quite different.These limits should be reevaluated inthe light of today's world. Demograph-ic concerns should take their placealongside the more traditional ones inthe setting of our immigration policy.Unfortunately, immigration law iscomplex and controversial. The publicis not well informed on the topic.These conditions make a reasonedpublic debate of this sensitive and com-plex topic difficult, but it must be at-tempted. Keely's article is a useful stepin this direction.

Finally, it is possible to envision aworld in which international migrationcould be relatively free of restrictions.A basic requisite would be a social

SCIENCE, VOL. 187

and environmental situation in whichthere were few incentives for peopleto move. This in turn would requirerelatively stable populations and equi-table distribution of opportunity andwwealth, hardly a descriptioni of today'sworld. Without these conditions, itappears that open immigration policiesaire about to be added to the growinglist of casualties of continued popula-tion growsth and resource depletion.

JOHN H. TANTON/Imlligr(atiol Study Committce,/Ze o Poputlationi Growth,W4'%libilgtoti, I.C. 20036

References

P'opfulltioni cii(1 tdie A nerican Futare: 1 lheRepot-t of the C omntt.ssioti ott PopulationGrowth and1 tilti Atnietrit an 'iFtlore (Ncs Amiiei-scain 1 brarts Ness York, 1'72'). p 201

Tanton correctly points out that de-cisions often have to be nadce with de-ficient data. Currcnt immigration dataare not equal to the task of providingneedced i nsights into the effects of pro-posed changes in immigration policy.I agree that population considerationsshouldl he included in immigration pol-icy, but political, econolic, and socialconisidcrations also have a place in suchdleliberations. Tanton's discussion andconclusion indicate the paramount im-portanice he gives to population. Restric-tionism has previously been viewed asan answx er to problems in the UnitedStates. OuLr experience should warn usto tread carefully. Ansley Coale's evalu-ation (I) of imnigration's contributionto popuLlation growth should give uLspaulse about considering radical cut-hacks of immigration as a way of check-ing the cffccts of populltion growth.

Concern for the quality of life shouLldalso cauSC US to be vigilant about equityin oLUr laws antd about repressive admin-istrationi and enforcement, which affectnot only aliens but native-born andnatuLralized citizens. Our shared concernabout population growth should notblind US to the complex effects of im-miigration policy and adlministration. Weshould seriously pondler whether meresuLrvival is enoulgh.

CIHARI FS B. KFr.i YI)epartment of Sociology,WetV er,/t Michigaii Universitv,.KalamaZoo 49001

Referenices.A. J. Coale, in Cotmtni.v.stats otl Ptpislati(s)

(Growts it itid thle Attiet is ait Futtre: ResearchiReports, sol. 1, Detniograpltic ati(i Social A.s-pects otf Popiulationi Growuth, C. F. Westoffasnd R. Pa,rke, Jr., Eds. (Governnienit Print-itng Otlice, Washington, D.C., 1972). pp. 589603.

Obvious Question

I was much interested in Irving H.Page's editorial "A sense of the historyof discovery" (27 Dec. 1974, p. 1161),especially the description of the ludi-crous circumstances under which Flem-ing discovered penicillin. I think I canadd a further ludicrous note to thediscovery of penicillin.When I was an undergraduate in

medical school and taking a bacteriol-ogy course (in 1914), we learned howto grow bacteria on agar plates. Oneday my plate had a number of blackspots on it surrounded by clear halos.I asked the instructor what those clearhalos wvere containing a black spot inthe center; I don't recall his exactwxords, but the tenor of his responsewas, 'Those are molds: yout were care-less in your techniquLe and you got yourplate contaminated by molds. You mUstbe more careful."

I am sure that bit of knowledgc wasnot his alone. The other instructors andthe professor of bacteriology must haveknowsn also of the black spots sur-rounded by clear zones. There musthave been hundreds of bacteriologistsaroLund the world at that time whohad seen this same thing. Incredibly, itseems that the perfectly obvious ques-tion, "If something diffuses out from acolony of molds which will preventbacterial growth in culture, might thisalso prevent infection in man?" seemsnot to have occurred to any of them.Why didn't that so very obvious ques-tion occur to me? Instead, I went backto my place thoroughly chastened, hav-ing been chided before the whole classfor carelessness in technique. Beforethe day was over, all my classmatesknew that molds destroyed bacterialgrowth. They were all reasonably intelli-gent; why didn't the question occur toone of themn?

If a reasonably intelligent and curi-ous high school student had wanderedin to visit the laboratory, he, beingthoroughly disinterested, might verywell have asked, after the situation wasexplained to him, "Is that what you usein sick people to kill bacteria?"

It has always seemed to me that thiswas a prime example of how extremelyobtuLse even intelligent people may be.After all, the only reason we werestUdying bacteriology was to learn howto control infectiousd-ise-ases!

A. C. HILDINGResearch Laboratory!St. Llke's Hospital,Dutluthl, Minnesota .55805

28 FEBRUARY 1975

Waring Blendors: 1 qt-1 geFamous Waring Blend-ors, rugged industriallab models. Choose ' -single speed, multi-speed, timer model, 1qt., 2 qt. or giant gallonsize. Accessories, too!Order direct No. 78821 qt., single speed,$49.95, No. 7883 1 qt.,7-speed, $88.95, No.7888 2 qt., 2-speed, $195,No. 7887 1 gal., 3-speed,$399. All include glasscontainer. Optional 1 lqt. stainless steel con-tainer No. 7873, $24.95.For literature only...

Circle No. 556 on Readers' Service Card

order directfrom:MARKSON SCIENCE INC.131 Oak Street, Del Mar, CA 92014Telephone (714) 755-6655

You can order any item in this columndirect from the supplier...details below.

Metric Converter/$79In a flash make 36 dif-ferent metric to U.S.conversions: °F-°C, in- I4EWcm, in2 -cm2, in 3 -CM3lb-kg, qt-liter. 5 fullcalculator functions (4regular plus percen-tage). RechargeableNiCd battery with ACcharger, deluxe carry-ing pouch, 5 oz. light,handheld, wire wheels,automatic trans., AM-FM, air cond., solidstate, gee whiz! Just 79(bucks till Mar. 31, 1975)Order direct No. 8166Metric Converter. Forliterature only...

Circle No. 555 on Readers' Service Card

3 pH Probes Cost Less Than 2It's our popular long,thin combination elec-trode that reaches 10inches down into testtubes and flasks. Andit's precalibrated andgel filled. Never needsmessy refilling. Orderdirect No. 808 pH elec-trode, $98.00 each.Special offer (expiresMarch 31, 1975):Three or more, $65.33each. Or for literatureonly...

Circle No. 554 on Readers' Service Card

N

separate:POL YPEPTIDES

ALL AMINO ACIDS

NUCLEOTIDES

MANY OTHER COMPOUNDS

MODEL D

high-voltage

ELECTROPHORESIS IN ONE DIMENSIONon 181/4" x 221/2' sheets of filter paper (Chromatography may be done in seconddimension). Many complex mixtures can be rapidly resolved by electrophoresisin one dimension on papers up to 4 feet long.Developed in the Laboratory of Cellular Physiology and Metabolism, NationalHeart Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. Specialthanks are due to Dr. William J. Dreyer, whose co-operation and suggestionsare gratefully acknowledged by Gilson Medical Electronics.

* Easy loading with folding rack

5,000 volts at 300 ma.

* Paper immersed in bifurcated fiberglass tank con-taining Varsol

* Varsol, a light petroleum fraction, has a high flashpoint (over 1000 F.), does not conduct electricity,and has the proper degree of volatility

* Cold tap water run through stainless steel coils attop of tank is only coolant necessary

=-IV

* Safety features:Strong, joint-free fiberglass tank eliminates elec-trical and fluid leaksHigh voltage connected to inside of tank by Nylonand stainless steel plugs attached to edge of tankHighly reliable interlock provided by an extensionof the cover handleWhen cover is removed, high voltage is ipso factoturned offNo capacitors to sneakily store electricity in ap-paratus

JILSON MEDICAL ELECTRONICSAiddleton, Wisconsin 53562 * Telephone 608/836-1551

GILSON products are also manufactured in Europe:GME * 69, Rue Gambetta - 95, Villiers-Le-Bel, FRANCE

Circle No. 273 on Readers' Service Card

p nt

u.m..--.-m., in;~- 1-' m mm-.mm-mI.u

m I 0

m L -

yphnode,kidney,iver,bonemarow.TheJB-4microtome cuts

aprecise sliceoflife.If the ability to consistently cut a precise

slice of life can make your life easier, check outthe advantages of the Du Pont/Sorvall JB-4microtome.

With this unique instrument, you getconsistently better thin sections for lightmicroscopy. Especially with plasticembedments of tissues that conventionalmicrotomes cut poorly, such as lymph node,kidney, liver or bone marrow.

The reason is the JB-4's unique blockadvancement system, which is smooth andsteady to give you precise, accurate sections atthe thickness you set the instrument for.

Even thinner than one cell layer ifyou choose.With the JB-4, you get greater clarity,

contrast and resolution without overlappingcell layers which can create misleading doubleimages. It cuts sections from 0.25 to 10 ,um.Handles block sizes up to 35 mm long.Uses glass, steel or diamond knives. And it'savailable in both manual and manual/automatic models.

Cut a precise slice of life in yourlab with the Du Pont/Sorvall JB-4. For moreinformation, write Du Pont Company,Instrument Products, Biomedical Division,Room 23696, Newtown, CT 06470., ) I | SORLL

\ // s -