Dr. Olivier Ameisen, a recovering alcoholic, says he “cured” himself of his alcoholism by self-prescribing high doses of the drug, baclofen…He found that it not only reduced the effects of alcohol withdrawal, but also eliminated the craving for alcohol altogether. “I saw a man drinking Cognac, and it did nothing to me. I looked at the bottles behind the bar, and they were neutral to me, like a vase. I thought I was dreaming and that I’d wake up from the beautiful dream. But the next day was the same, and the next and the next,” he tells GQ. For the past five years, making the case for high-dose baclofen has been his full-time job.

Needless to say, I turned to PubMed and lo and behold a paper from Brown University was published in print this month entitled: “Effectiveness and safety of baclofen in the treatment of alcohol dependent patients”. The paper says (it was online last October):

“Both preclinical and clinical research studies have shown the GABA(B) receptor agonist baclofen represents a promising treatment for alcohol dependence.”

It then tells us that: “Preliminary clinical studies indicate that baclofen is able to suppress withdrawal symptoms in alcohol-dependent patients affected by the alcohol withdrawal syndrome.”

Apparently, its efficacy and safety in promoting alcohol abstinence have been demonstrated. Indeed, there is a back literature stretching back to a 1980 study describing the effects of ethanol, phenobarbital, and baclofen on ethanol withdrawal in the rhesus monkey (Tarika JS, Winger G. in Psychopharmacol (Berl). 1980, 70, 201-208) and on the suppression of ethanol-induced locomotor stimulation by GABA-like drugs. Cott J, Carlsson A, Engel J, Lindqvist M.
Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 1976, 295, 203-209). Nothing new under the sun, they say.

The current paper from Brown University warns that, “more work is needed to clearly demonstrate the efficacy of baclofen and to ascertain whether efficacy is limited to certain subtypes of alcoholic patients.” It would be interesting to think that a simple, generic pill might be a cure for a growing global ailment in alcoholism.

However, I think two factors are probably against it.

The first is that the research seems desperate, it having been undertaken since at least the 1970s with hints that baclofen might be useful, but nothing proven conclusively. Is baclofen to ethanol what ibogaine is to cocaine?

The second (wearing my old cynic’s hat) is that the pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest in promoting the development, not only of products that require a repeat prescription rather than offering a cure. Baclofen (4-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)butanoic acid), which goes by the brand names brand names Kemstro and Lioresal, is a GABA derivative that’s been around for many years and is used as a muscle relaxant in spasticity. Various patents for different uses for this compound have been applied for. A patent in 2005, for instance for its use in alcoholism.

While looking for patents, I also spotted a blog post from about a year ago that discusses Olivier Ameisen’s book “The End of My Addiction”, which reveals his experience with baclofen. Ameisen is the subject of the current GQ article and the magazine does mention that his book is a year old. But, BusinessWeek also discussed baclofen in the same context back in 2005.

Leggio L, Garbutt JC, & Addolorato G (2010). Effectiveness and safety of baclofen in the treatment of alcohol dependent patients. CNS & neurological disorders drug targets, 9 (1), 33-44 PMID: 20201813

The site claims the chart is a representation of the scientific evidence for supplement efficacy for healthy adults on a good diet, apparently. Bubbles that float to the top are apparently those with more PubMed and Cochrane citations for a given supplement-condition. Bigger bubbles, means more Google hits.

A clinical friend pointed out that folic acid is shown as having only “good” evidence; whereas it is a standard prescribable medication. Folic acid/folate is standard first-line pregnancy advice and on FP10 prescription and has been for a long time to combat neural tube defects. One would have assumed that this would have been based on ’strong’ rather than just ‘good’ evidence.

Of course, good to strong evidence is pretty much all prescription medications get. There is no proof in science.

Bruce Head also pointed out some other problems with the bubbles. “I find the chart interesting but confusing. Some supplements are showing up equally in the ’strong evidence’ area and BELOW the ‘worth it’ line – for the same condition. For example, check ‘Cancer’ and ‘All types’ and ‘Selenium’ appears in both areas. Similar with ‘Mental Health’ and ‘Omega 3′,” he says.

It’s also worth noting that there are seemingly no magic supplements for sex, despite those ads in the back of the magazines and in your spambox. Glucosamine shows up as conflicting evidence for pain, whereas a whole range of supplements like acai, silica, taurine, wheat grass, dandelion, cranberry etc have no evidential links either way (pro or con) to any conditions. Green tea is below the worth it line for cancer in general and close to the bottom (no evidence) for breast and prostate cancer, and weight loss. Similarly, not a lot of proof that probiotics protect against colon cancer and no good evidence for black cohosh in menopause. It’s a mixed picture.

I suspect the bubble chart is not quite as scientific as it might seem, especially if it’s based on a loose PubMed and Cochrane citation count and Google hits, rather than a conventional meta analysis of the data. I would always suggest taking anything like this with a pinch of salt…although salt should of course be above and below the line for cardiovascular and dehydration cramps, so not too much now.

http://www.ihpst.org

Eric Scerri (2009) Selected Papers on The Periodic Table. Imperial College Press, London, ISBN: 13 978-1-84816-425-3, price: US$88

Reviewed by: Kevin C de Berg, Avondale College, Australia

The ten selected papers, preceded by a useful introduction, are arranged chronologically and cover a period from 1991 to 2009. Eric Scerri is the sole author of nine of the papers and is coauthor with John Worrall in the other paper. Three of the papers were originally published in the Journal of Chemical Education; two were originally published in American Scientist; and one each was originally published in The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science; Studies in History and Philosophy of Science; Chemical Heritage; International Journal of Quantum Chemistry; and Fundamental World of Quantum Chemistry: A Tribute to the Memory of Per-Olov Lowdin edited by E. Brandas and E. Kryachko.

The 2009 published version of the ten selected papers is hereafter referred to as Selected Papers. One might wonder why there was a need to publish this selection of papers given the excellent monograph publication on the Periodic Table by the same author in 2007. (The Periodic Table-Its Story and Its Significance by Eric R. Scerri, Oxford University Press).

What is important to realize is that the chronological presentation of the selected papers in the 2009 publication represents both Scerri’s consistent concerns relating to an understanding of the nature of the Periodic Table of the elements and his changing views on the nature of the Periodic Table over approximately a ten year period. The view that the Periodic Table should be thought of primarily as an organization of the macroscopic chemical properties of the elements rather than as a tool for accessing the electronic structure of the atoms of the elements is consistently presented over a ten year period. This does not mean that electronic structure is not important but Scerri consistently puts the primary emphasis on macroscopic chemical properties in the 2007 and the 2009 publications.

In the 2007 monograph Scerri favours a version of the Periodic Table known as the left-step version which places helium with the alkaline earths because of their similar outer electron configurations, but in the 2009 Selected Papers explains why he has now changed his mind and thinks a version which retains helium with the noble gases and which places hydrogen with the halogens is preferred.

Scerri explains in his 12-page introduction to Selected papers how he used to favour multiple versions of the Periodic Table, the choice of a version being a matter of convenience. He states that he now believes in a more objective picture which points to the existence of possibly one correct version, a version which most closely reveals the precise periodic relationship between as many elements as possible and for which agreement has not yet been reached. So Selected Papers provides an historical snapshot of Scerri’s own intellectual journey in matters relating to the Periodic Table. Four major themes seem to emerge from a reading of the ten selected papers.

1. The Dual Nature of an Element Scerri makes the point in at least five of the ten selected papers that elements can be thought of as simple substances or as basic substances and he insists that the Periodic Table should be thought of, in harmony with Mendeleev, in terms of the elements as basic substances. The example is given of the elements sodium and chlorine. As simple substances they exist as a soft silvery metal and a pale pungent greenish-yellow gas. In the salt sodium chloride, sodium and chlorine obviously do not exist as simple substances. Common salt shows no evidence of the presence of a soft metal or a pungent gas. In compound form sodium and chlorine are said to exist as basic substances. In Mendeleev’s mind, what remained constant about an element in simple and basic form was the property of atomic weight. In the early twentieth century it was seen to be more appropriate to organize the elements according to the property of atomic number. Focusing on elements as basic substances when considering the Periodic Table is consistent with Scerri’s opinion that the Periodic Table is an organization of the macroscopic chemical properties of the elements, rather than an organization of the electronic configurations of the atoms of the elements.

2. The question of the relationship between Quantum Mechanics and the Periodic Table This is a major topic in Selected Papers and is significantly addressed in seven of the ten papers. While Quantum Mechanics has undoubtedly proven to be a powerful explanatory tool in chemistry, and Scerri does not deny this, its strength as a theoretical tool can easily be overestimated when it comes to assessing the power of the Periodic Table as a chemical tool. The following quotes exemplify Scerri’s position. Quantum mechanics can generally be used to explain a particular atom s empirical electronic configuration, but that configuration usually cannot be deduced from quantum mechanics alone (Chemical Heritage 2007, p.27). The familiar sequence in which the s, p, d, and f orbitals are filled .has essentially been determined by empirical means. Indeed, Bohr s failure to derive the order for the filling of the orbitals has been described by some as one of the outstanding problems of quantum mechanics (Chemical Heritage 2007, p.26). The concept of electronic configurations cannot be derived from quantum mechanics Electrons in individual well-defined quantum states represents an approximation.

Chemistry textbooks often fail to stress the approximate nature of atomic orbitals and imply that a solution to all difficult chemistry problems lies in quantum mechanics (The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 1991, pp.309- 325). The sequence of atomic numbers denoting the closing of the periods has never been derived from the principles of quantum mechanics (Journal of Chemical Education 2008, pp.585-589). The periodicity in the chemical properties of the elements is a complicated matter and is only approximately reflected in the electronic configurations of the atoms (Journal of Chemical Education 1991, pp.122-126).

Some of the details in the published selected papers will prove rather complicated for scholars not trained in computational chemistry but statements such as those chosen above provide a reasonably clear orientation of the arguments advanced. The 4s / 3d electron occupation scenario is discussed in at least five of the selected articles and will be of interest particularly to those who teach this topic.

Scerri questions whether the periodic classification of the chemical properties of the elements can be ultimately reduced to an understanding of atomic structure. With our current knowledge of the Periodic Table it would appear, according to Scerri, that chemistry has not been reduced to physics . In the Fundamental World of Quantum Chemistry, the challenging task for chemists is stated as follows: To what extent the Periodic Table can be explained strictly from the first principles of quantum mechanics without assuming any experimental data whatsoever.

3. Prediction and Accommodation The question of whether Mendeleev’s fame was due to his prediction, using the data from his periodic table, of the existence of elements yet to be discovered, or whether his periodic organization of the elements already known, equally or even more so contributed to his fame is dealt with largely in the longest of the Selected Papers in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science.

The following are some highlights of the discussion.

(a) There is little historical support for the standard story that predictive successes were outstandingly important in the success of Mendeleev’s scheme. Accommodations played at least an equal role.

(b) In all, Mendeleev predicted a total of eighteen elements of which only nine were subsequently isolated. So there were failed predictions as well as successful ones.

(c) As well as failed predictions of the existence of elements, Mendeleev’s sometimes failed in predicting the properties of elements subsequently found to exist. For example, he predicted the melting point of gallium to lie between that of Al (660oC) and In (157oC). [Note that the paper mistakenly quotes the molar mass of indium (115 g mol-1) as the melting point but the argument being put still holds]. Gallium was subsequently found to have a melting point of 30oC.

(d) De Boisbaudran did not discover gallium as a result of Mendeleev’s prediction but operated independently using empirical means and in ignorance of Mendeleev’s prediction.

(e) When the Davy medal was awarded to Mendeleev in 1882, no mention was made of his successful predictions in the oration. At this time two successful predictions had been made over and against sixty accommodations.

4. Representations of the Periodic Table What is clear from Selected Papers is that Scerri has progressively moved toward adopting a version of the periodic table that gives priority to atomic number triads. An atomic number triad occurs when the middle element of the triad has an atomic number which is the average of that of the other two members of the triad. In Scerri’s favored version helium retains its position with the noble gases thus retaining the atomic number triad (He, Ne, Ar) and hydrogen is added to the halogen group thus adding an additional triad (H, F, Cl) to the table. The significance of atomic number triads is an interesting proposition and the extent to which it remains significant awaits further development. This arrangement also leads to a very symmetrical table with four groups to the left and four groups to the right of the transition series. Scerri also advances the proposition that the third and fourth transition series should commence with the elements lutetium and lawrencium rather than lanthanum and actinium. Chemistry teachers should take note of this fact because chemistry textbooks published as recently as 2009 still place lanthanum and actinium in these positions. Scerri argued against this as early as 1991.

Conclusion

While Selected Papers covers similar topics to those dealt with in the monograph on the periodic table by the same author, Selected Papers demonstrates how an author s perceptions of a single topic (the periodic table) have materialized historically. There is a sense in which the question of the periodic organization of the elements has not yet been satisfactorily resolved, contrary to the impression many may receive on studying chemistry. The Selected Papers confirms that this is still an active research area and is a worthy addition to a library of materials on the periodic table. The publication adds significantly to the historical and philosophical dimensions of the topic.

References

Scerri, E.: 1991, Chemistry, Spectroscopy, and the Question of Reduction , Journal of Chemical Education 68(2): 122-126. Scerri, E.R.: 1991, The Electronic Configuration Model, Quantum Mechanics and Reduction , British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42: 309-325. Scerri, E.R.: 1997, The Periodic Table and the Electron , American Scientist 85: 546- 553. Scerri, E.R.: 1998, How Good is the Quantum Mechanical Explanation of the Periodic System? , Journal of Chemical Education 75(11): 1384-1385. Scerri, E.R.& Worrall, J.: 2001, Prediction and the Periodic Table , Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 32(3): 407-452. Scerri, E.R.: 2003, Lowdin s Remarks on the Aufbau Principle and a Philosopher s View of AB INITIO Quantum Chemistry, in E.J.Brandas and E.S.Kryachko (eds.), Fundamental World of Quantum Chemistry Vol II, Kluwer, Netherlands, pp.675-694. Scerri, E.R.:2007, Mendeleev’s Legacy-The Periodic System, Chemical Heritage, Spring: 22-27. Scerri, E.: 2008, The Role of Triads in the Evolution of the Periodic Table: Past and Present, Journal of Chemical Education 85(4): 585-589. Scerri, E.R.: 2008, The Past and Future of the Periodic Table, American Scientist 96: 52-59. Scerri, E.R.: 2009, The Dual Sense of the Term Element, Attempts to Derive the Madelung Rule, and the Optimal Form of the Periodic Table, If Any , International Journal of Quantum Chemistry 109: 959-971.

Anyway, this period of using mega as a synonym for awesome was long before the days when even a few kilobytes were enough memory for anyone. We were all nerdy science majors into Rush and Zeppelin (some of us still are) and a decade or so before BBC kids TV latched on to the term and started rebranding its shows to fit.

This geeky predilection for prefixes seems to have come back into fashion decades later, and it was with amusement, that I read that a student in California was hoping to create his own scientific prefix – “hella”. Apparently, hella is Northern Californian slang for “really” or “a lot of.” Physics student Austin Sendek, of UC Davis has started a petition to establish hella as a new prefix alongside mega, kilo, yotta and yocto, for units of weight, distance, computer storage, etc.

Sendek proposes that under the International System of Units (SI), hella would follow zetta (10^21), and yotta (10^24) and be used to indicate quantities of 10^27 (a 1 followed by 27 zeros). It’s possible that there may be competition from the prefix “bronto”, but that prefix has a somewhat checkered history.

Just to give you an idea of how big the hella prefix is…the sun produces a mere 0.3 hellawatts of power and the known universe is just 1.4 hellameters across!

According to the Sacramento Bee, Sendek’s petition on Facebook already has hella signatures (20000+ at the time of writing). Hat tip to Daniel C for alerting me to this campaign.

Wonderful. Hat tip to Greg Laden and Skepchick.

(a) “The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes these treatments.”

(b) “The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes these bogus treatments.”

Spot it?

That single minor difference underpins a seriously spurious legal action foisted on fellow science writer Simon Singh and which he is currently fighting through the court of appeal. At stake is our freedom to conduct coherent scientific, evidence-based debate about alternative medical practice and the freedom of so-called practitioners to make unsubstantiated, pseudoscientific, evidence-free claims for costly yet generally non-efficacious quackery.

Let’s hope the court of appeal judges spot the difference and show us that the law is indeed a member of the mammalian subgenus Asinus* characterized by an equine appearance and bearing protuberant ears but because of its reputation for considerable toughness and endurance rather than stupidity.

You can sign for Singh here.

Related articles

• Test medicine in the lab, not in the court (stephenlaw.blogspot.com)
• UPDATE: Simon Singh libel case (blogs.discovermagazine.com)
• Simon Singh goes to Court of Appeal (blogs.journalism.co.uk)
• Telegraph.co.uk: It’s too late for me, but libel laws must change, says Singh (blogs.journalism.co.uk)

*For US readers who may not know, an ass is a donkey not an arse.

Jones offers a neat summary of the comment thread:

1) It is insane to think that any one product can cure everyone’s problems, and while some things may benefit one person’s body, they will not necessarily benefit all people or have the same effects.

2) Most often it is a person’s will to change themselves that actually changes how their body feels, and taking pills can often serve as rituals, if you will, to convince someone that they have decided to change.

3) Trying something might be beneficial – unless you are wary of the health benefits for your body in particular, and are unwilling to risk such a thing.

4) Scientific approaches to things must be taken if you’re going to try and give a general statement that can apply to everyone – for example, just because eating a cookie is okay for one person does not mean that a diabetic person would also enjoy eating a cookie. Thus, it is silly to try and say “cookies are good for everyone” is a scientific statement.

5) Skepticism is healthy – especially in an age where “facts” often prove to be “statements that we received more money for publicizing”.

She then asked whether I personally believe in the body’s natural ability to heal itself instead of relying on outside remedies, that may or may not have additional effects besides positive ones? But, I felt that a rhetorical question of that nature should be answered rhetorically by the inquisitor and she agreed:

“I think that there is definite evidence for both answers, and that the answer of an individual on the matter reveals more about their personality (the way they view the world) than it does anything else. That said, I also think that I have a lot to learn, and either answer would give both me and the respondent a new perspective; my question was in part an attempt at creating a win-win situation.”

Personally, I think we have to be over-skeptical of the claims made by marketeers, whether they’re selling something with genuine physiological activity or snake oil. After all, if a product is physiologically active, then strictly speaking it is potentially medicine or poison, or something in between. If it has not been properly trialled who’s to say what side-effects it might be having or what contraindications there are with conventional prescription drugs.

And, speaking of which, something like 30% of prescription drugs are derived from natural products, and yes they do have side-effects, there is no such thing as a 100% risk-free medicine nor any panaceas that can treat all ailments, regardless of what the snake oil marketeers or even pharmaceutical shills might tell you.

Reviewed by: Joseph E. Earley, Department of Chemistry, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.

What has philosophy to do with chemistry? Robert Boyle (1627-1691) a founder of modern chemistry had a low opinion of many philosophers. He claimed that the School-philosophers have their recourse to Agents that are not onely [sic] invisible, but inconceivable. Present-day chemists frequently form similar opinions on reading philosophical discussions of possible worlds in which water is XYZ or where items display the color grue. (X is grue if X is green and was examined before time t or blue and was not examined before t.)

Recently some British philosophers attacked many of their well-recognized colleagues (analytical metaphysicians) as neo-scholastics and accused them of being practitioners of the philosophy of A-level chemistry. This taunt does not suggest that secondary-school and elementary-level university chemistry courses (roughly corresponding to the British A-level) do not connect with significant conceptual issues, but rather it claims that adequately dealing with present philosophical problems requires real acquaintance with current work in advanced contemporary science adequate familiarity that cannot be gained merely from elementary-level instruction, or by means of thumbing indexes of beginners textbooks.

Collected Papers on Philosophy of Chemistry contains a generous sampling of the work of Eric Scerri, a chemist, historian and philosopher of science who brings a mature grasp of relevant current science to bear on the important philosophical problems that intersect elementary chemistry instruction. He does not engage in elaborate flights of philosophical fancy such as those that working chemists (and many others) find at best unconvincing, but rather he brings sound chemical, historical, and philosophic scholarship to bear on the many aspects of chemical teaching that concern long-standing philosophical puzzles. Such work illuminates chemical education in interesting and unexpected ways, and also may well contribute to resolving problems in academic philosophy that have resisted other approaches. The main topic of first part of the body of the book is whether or not chemistry has been reduced to physics, as physicist Paul Dirac (1902-1984) famously claimed or, if not, whether such reduction is possible. The obverse of this issue is the question of whether (or to what extent) truly novel coherences can properly be considered to arise ( emerge ) from simpler components. (These discussions are clearly relevant to whether chemistry should be recognized an autonomous science, rather than considered a mere off-shore colony of physics.)

The second main section of the book deals with the periodic table of the elements. Papers in this section provide the basis of parts of the author s well-received recent book The periodic table: its story and its significance, (NY: Oxford University Press, 2007). Scerri argues that much of the success of the work of Dmitri Mendeleev (1834-1907) was due to his use of a concept of chemical element that was rather different from that used by other nineteenth-century chemists. As Scerri points out (page 127) For Aristotle, the elements are themselves unobservable. the elements are immaterial qualities impressed on an otherwise undifferentiated primordial matter and are [all] present in all substances. Like this ancient concept, Renaissance and early-modern notions of elements those of Paracelsus (1493 1541) or Boyle, for instance were all more or less metaphysical. (The ancient element water was not the concrete liquid we all know and use. The Paracelsian principle sulfur was not the same as the yellow powder in the apothecary s jar.) Scerri claims that: this view was first seriously challenged by Lavoisier during the course of the chemical revolution. Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier (1743 1794) identified certain concrete kinds of tangible stuff as elements properly so called. Specific kinds of solids, liquids, and gases yellow solid sulfur, metallic liquid mercury, and pungent gaseous chlorine all merited the designation element. In the 1920s, Austrian-born chemist Friedrich (Fritz) Paneth (1887- 1958) pointed out that Mendeleev had employed a more complicated notion of elementarity than was usual in the century that followed Lavoisier s death. Paneth pointed out that the Russian chemist had used two quite different meanings of the term element depending on the circumstances. One the one hand, he construed the word element to denote concrete materials (solid sodium metal and gaseous dichlorine, for example) and, on the other hand, he interpreted the same word to refer to each of the several chemically ultimate constituents of specific compounds the sodium and chlorine in common salt, for instance. Paneth noted that this second meaning was quite different from the first meaning and also that is was just as metaphysical as Aristotle s concept of element had been. Contemporary chemists routinely follow Mendeleev s example and use a two-fold concept of element but generally they do so automatically and quite unconsciously. Chemistry instructors expect students to understand that the sodium that is a component of common salt is not a soft metal, and that chlorine (as a component) is not a pungent gas but they generally do not call attention to fact that they commonly use each of the terms element, sodium and chlorine with two quite distinct meanings. It seems likely that they themselves do not recognize this double-speak (more politely, polysemy or ambiguity ). Scerri usually designates one-component stable materials as simple substances and uses the term basic substance to refer to chemically-ultimate components of compounds. Elsewhere I have suggested that elementary substance instead of simple substance be used to stand for one-component stable materials (Lavoisier s elements ) and that the word element be reserved to designate components of compounds what Scerri calls basic substances. This minor shift in word usage would remove serious but unnecessary difficulties for English-speaking chemistry students.

The second section of the book also deals with aspects of quantum chemistry that pertain to whether or not the periodic law so important to chemistry has been (or could be) deduced from quantum physics. From the exact solution of the Schrödinger equation for the hydrogen atom one can reasonably infer the maximum population of each electron-shell and electron-sub-shell in multi-electron atoms but all known methods of prediction of the order of filling of sub-shells (the basis of the periodic law) require that empirical data be fed by hand into approximate computations. The degree to which chemical periodicity can be inferred from quantum physics is arguably much less than has widely been supposed (and claimed). The third section of the book contains papers that inter-connect the main themes of the earlier parts of the book and relate them to principal problems of science education and of recent philosophy of science. Several papers conclude that chemists generally adopt an intermediate attitude between naïve realism on the one hand and anti-realistic empiricism on the other hand. Scerri notes that philosophers of science have moved away from normative approaches that concerned how science should be done toward more naturalistic attitudes which deal with how science actually is (or has been) done. In the last chapter the author points out something that perceptive readers may have already noticed that his thinking has shifted and significantly developed over the period covered by this book. For instance, for the past half-century chemists have effectively interpreted their experimental results in terms of atomic and molecular orbitals even though quantum physics clearly teaches that such orbitals do not exist. for the multiple-electron systems with which chemists deal. For some years Dr. Scerri advised chemists to repent their errors and mend their ways a normative counsel. More recently he has come to a more complex ( naturalistic ) view. He reports:

The thought came to me that it is quite appropriate for chemists and chemical educators to not only use orbitals but to do so in a realistic fashion in spite of their status according to the fundamental theory of quantum mechanics. I fully realized at this moment the truly paradoxical situation that chemistry is an autonomous science while at the same time resting on fundamental physics. (Page 218)

This paradoxical situation of chemistry may account for the fact that, as the back cover of the book claims, the Philosophy of Chemistry is one of the newest and fastest-growing areas in the Philosophy of Science. General readers (or chemists, science educators, or philosophers) seeking an overview of this area could find no more effective, concise, convenient entry into this important and actively developing field than the one that this volume provides.

1 Ladyman, James and Ross, Don (2007). Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Section 1.2, especially page 24.

2 Earley. Joseph, (2009). How Chemistry Shifts Horizons: Element, Substance, and the Essential, Foundations of Chemistry, Volume 11, pages 65-77.

Archi, you’ve just had a bath, get some clothes on before you catch your death of cold, are you dense, or what?

Professor, these X-ray patterns are incredibly symmetrical, best not mention them to Jim and Francis

Stanley, is this circuit really 450 Volts, those people look like they’re in real pain? Shut up and just push the lever

Fido, get down, you’re slobbering all over my good lab coat…it’s only the doorbell

I’m sorry Alex, I forgot to put your Petri dishes away and now they’ve got all mouldy…hang on…

Brother Gregor, purple and white pea flowers are so boring, why can we not grow pink ones?

Ernie, either I’m a very bad shot with these alpha particles, or atomic nuclei in this gold foil are a lot smaller than we thought

Astronauts came back nanoseconds younger than their stay-at-home peers; Einstein was right…again

Dropped heavy and light ball at Pisa; saw landed at same time. Peer review problems now, especially after telescope incident.

I assume you can all figure out to which historical experiment each of these tweets referred, so no prizes for guesses. But, RPG is running his meme as a competition – Publish your scientific papers on Twitter, so do check it out.

If you want to tweet your own historical science results, then perhaps use #histsci140. I’ve got a stack of science books to give away to any tweets that are super original and clever.

I’ve compiled those that I caught yesterday (although there are many others under the #boffinsongs tag that came in after we started the meme on Sunday). If you had a great one that I didn’t list, please let me know. There were only one or two duplicates, some truly stupendous shoehorning of a scientist’s name into a lyric and some people (not listed here) who repeatedly didn’t get the meme at all and simply gave us some lyrics with a scientific theme (that’s a meme for next time, I reckon).

It looks like @LouiseJJohnson was the tweeter with the most time on her hands, having posted at least 17. @choklitfiend wasn’t far behind with 9. @rpg7twit had 8 (but special thanks to Richard for mentioning the meme on his Nature blog where several more people took up the challenge). @BioMedCentral and @JonSatriani excelled themselves too Jon’s Robbie Williams: “I just van’t Hoff feel real love, feel the home that I live in” is just a classic, while BMC’s “Who you gonna call? Gauss-busters!” got several well-warranted groans.

@LouiseJJohnson: AND AFTER AAAALL, YOU’RE MY VAN DER VAALS!
@LouiseJJohnson Maybe just the one more…. “Allen Orr Rigby”
@LouiseJJohnson Yalow Submarine
@LouiseJJohnson You Otto Know
@LouiseJJohnson By The Trivers of Babylon
@LouiseJJohnson Pavlov, will travel
@LouiseJJohnson Kandel in the wind
@LouiseJJohnson Haldane and all of the night
@LouiseJJohnson Anything you can do, Eigen do better.
@LouiseJJohnson It’s Raining Mendel
@LouiseJJohnson and the Beatles classic, “Kenny Lane”!
@LouiseJJohnson “I keep the Wolfram the door, but he calls me up” – Radiohead
@LouiseJJohnson Sagan All My Love For You
@LouiseJJohnson Gödel West
@LouiseJJohnson: Darwinner Takes It All
@LouiseJJohnson James Clerk Maxwell’s Silver Hammer
@LouiseJJohnson Sewall Wright Now

@bobmaccallum Sacks-ual healing
@bobmaccallum “The Boy with the Thornton His Side”

@skannie Charlie is my darwin, my darwin, my darwin.

Matt Brown “Planck You For The Days” (The Kinks)

@huwmjames Everybody Hz (REM)

@garwboy Gene Pitney: “24 hours from Tesla”
@garwboy Aerosmith: Love in a Space Elevator (off-topic, but good)

@choklitfiend Perutz-ing on the Ritz
@choklitfiend Paint it Black or Black in the Heart of Texas
@choklitfiend Watt’s the Story, Morning Glory?
@choklitfiend Florey D’Luna by Santana
@choklitfiend (Rosalind) ‘Franklin ‘ by Paramore
@choklitfiend King Faraday by Green Day
@choklitfiend I walk the Linus (Pauling)
@choklitfiend: Just another Crick in the Wall
@choklitfiend Anything from the His-Stone Roses?

@DrMobs “Way out Western” by James Reyne.

@enniscath Prusiner Whole Year: Third Eye Blind
@enniscath Pretty Fleming-o: Manfred Mann
@enniscath (Craig) Mello Yellow: Donovan

@ClaireAinsworth “Mad about the Boyle”, “Everybody Hertz” or “Eternal Flem(ing)”
@ClaireAinsworth @sciencebase “Thunderbolt and lightning, very, very frightening me (Galileo) Galileo (Galileo) Galileo” Oh hang on…

@ericmjohnson: “Bohr on the Bayou”

@JoergR A lazy one: Motörhead – [Nicholas] Metropolis
@JoergR The Scorpions – Dirac you like a hurricane

@BiomedCentral: Who you gonna call? Gauss-busters!
@BioMedCentral last ones, we promise! ‘Gimme gimme Bohr, Gimme Bohr, Gimme Gimme Bohr’ (Britney Spears) / Bohr than a feeling (Boston)
@BioMedCentral Watts love got to do with it? (Tina Turner) / Watts it all about? Run D.M.C)
@BioMedCentral Hooke you, I won’t do what you tell me (Rage Against the Machine)
@BioMedCentral I’m Hawking in the air.. Hawking in the moonlit sky (from The Snowman)

@rpg7twit El Zep: “We come from the land of the ice and snow/From the midnight sun where the hot Sussman Yalow”
@rpg7twit The Beatles Paperback Rita. (Rita Levi Montalcini) (could’ve just added Lovely Rita, Meter Maid, of course
@rpg7twit D’yer Meitner, Led Zeppelin
@rpg7twit The Mighty Quinn
@rpg7twit “Winner takes it (Good)all”
@rpg7twit Anything by Lawrence, or his father, Billy Bragg
@rpg7twit “I see Fred (Hoyle)” by Split Enz
@rpg7twit Roberta Flack: “The (Alan) Fersht time ever I saw your face”

@markfromhouston: Curie Eléison (traditional and Mr Mister)

@Adem Something Kinda Ohm
@Adem Watts Going On
@Adem What’s the frequency Kelvin?
@Adem Everybody Hertz

@suthers Hawking Bout My Baby
@suthers Burbridge (RIP) Over Troubled Water
@suthers Hoyle Lotta Love
@suthers Herschel ma belle sont les mots qui vont tres bien ensemble

@f1000: The Beatles: “(Elizabeth) Blackburn singing in the dead of night”
@f1000 The Unseelie Court: “My Bonny Light (Benjamin T.) Houseman”, UCSF
@f1000 Moody Blues: Just another (Greg) Winter’s tale
@f1000 “Should have been cloned by now”—Meatloaf

@LisaAMartin1 Off the Hooke
@LisaAMartin1 Nothing Amperes 2 U
@LisaAMartin1 Kelvin me softly?

@eroston: “…Take a sad song, and make Hans Be-e-e-the…”

@RKawabata Oasis: “And after all, you’re my van der Wa-al…”
@RKawabata Sade: “[George F] Smoot Operator”
@RKawabata The Smiths: “There is a light that Neher goes out”

@mattfromlondon: #scientistlyrics “Pasteur dutchie on the left hand side”

@sciencebase Nat King Cole: “Get your Higgs on Route 66″
@sciencebase Edsels: “Raman-ama-ding-dong”
@sciencebase Paul Robeson: “Oppenheimer, that Oppenheimer, he just keeps rollin’ along”
@sciencebase Killers: “Jenner was a friend of mine”
@sciencebase Mary Hopkins: “Bose were the days my friend…”
@sciencebase Glenn Frey: “The Edison, oh it’s on the street”
@sciencebase: The Byrds: “To everything (Turing, Turing Turing)
@sciencebase Paul McCartney: “Mullis Kintyre, oh mist rolling in from the sea…”
@sciencebase Jason Mraz: “Please don’t Teller that I miss her”
@sciencebase ZZ Top: “Gamow all your loving”
@sciencebase: Marilyn Monroe: “I Volta be loved by you…”

@StephaniePride “Oh, oh, oh what a Bohr, what a thundering, thundering Bohr” (Flanders & Swann’s The Bestriary)
@StephaniePride “Well it’s [Heike Kamerlingh] Onnes for the money, two for the show”
@StephaniePride with a Handelian turn “Herschel feed his sheep like a shepherd .. . .”
@StephaniePride “sitting in the back seat, Huygens and a kissing with Fred” (Paul Evans and The Curls 1959)

@SamWong1: Everybody’s Hawking at me
@SamWong1 Is this the way to Avogadro?
@SamWong1 Monty Python: Isn’t it awfully nice to have a Paul
@SamWong1 Wet Wet Wet: Loewi’s All Around

@markfromhouston “Curie” (by Dr Mister)

@trancedevo Hoyle in my Shoe (Traffic – 1967)
@trancedevo Avogadro under my skin
@trancedevo Masters of the Universe by Hawkingwind

@NeilWithers: My sole entry: Johnny B. Goodenough

@JonSatriani Chuck Berry: “Johnny B. Fenn.”
@JonSatriani Goldie Lookin Chain: “Oh son, your missus is a [David] Nutter!”
@JonSatriani Eurythmics: “When you need someone to depend upon, Venter-morrow comes”
@JonSatriani Robbie Williams: “I just van’t Hoff feel real love, feel the home that I live in”
@JonSatriani Van Morrison: “From the Harvard of the street… to the Whitesides of the road”
@JonSatriani: Pink Floyd: All in all, you’re just another brick in Zewail
@JonSatriani Happy Days: “Fara-day! What a day! Rockin all week with you…”

@bmljenny Up on Cripple Crick
@bmljenny Never gonna Gibbs you up, never gonna let you down… – Rickrolled. And rest.