LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Only Specks Before Your Eyes DEAR SIR:
In "News-Scripts" for C&EN, Aug. 4, page 3234, you quote Linus Webb in the Syracuse Chemist as presuming that the coldness of ice cream anesthetizes the nerve endings of the tongue insofar as the flavor of black pepper is concerned. At the IFT Grand Rapids Conference, June S to 12, 1952, Norman F. Girardot and David R. Peryam, Quartermaster Food and Container Institute, Chicago, reported as follows : The hypothesis that natural pepper is essential to food flavors was tested using consumer preference as a criterion of flavor improvement. The effect of natural pepper on prefer ence was determined in 32 foods, includ ing representatives of the following classes : soups, vegetables, juices, salads, eggs, and processed and fresh meats. Recipes for all foods normally include pepper, and particular emphasis was given those food classes where pepper is considered essen tial by the spice industry or by food proc essors. Only six foods, all belonging to the two classes of soups and processed meats, were improved by the addition of pepper. Using these s;x foods as the ma terials the natural pepper was compared with an imitation pepper compounded entirely from domestic materials. No pref erence was found for either pepper. Thus the hypodiesis of the essentiality of pepper was not confirmed.
STRING FILTER FEON Nylon lasts a year under severe chemical conditions, compared to 6 weeks for cotton. Soves $500
FILTER PRESS FEON Dynel \asts 9 rimes longer than cotin this pigment ton plant. Saves over $2500 a year.
a year.
E. F. _
KOHMAN
Camden, N. J. Russian Bars Exaggerated DEAR SIR:
DUST
SCRAPED FILTER Under less severe chemical cond.t.ons, FEON Nylon replac es heavy cotton, saves $150 a year.
COUECTOR
Hot copper sulfate dust d o g g e d w o o l bogs. F E O N O r i Ion costs less, eliminates clogl g i n g , lasts l o n g e r .
Fabric selector char*, technical d a t a , case istories. Send for it t o d a y . ,
J
FILTRATION FABRICS DIVISION FILTRATION ENGINEERS, INC.
1 5 5 Oraton St-, Newark 4 , N. J . 4234
It would appear that John Turkevich has concentrated so closely on the Soviet literature that he has ignored your own journal, and it is to be hoped that the errors in his article in C&EN for July 7 will be corrected before the symposium is published by the AAAS. For example, he says "Few, if any, of our scientists have visited the Soviet laboratories," over looking the long report by Irving Langmuir in your issue of March 25, 1946, when 1100 foreign scientists visited the U.S.S.R., and "were shown freely through their laboratories and had excellent op portunities to discuss the work being done." Later, he says "The Soviet physi cists and chemists are not permitted to come into personal contact with West ern scientists." This is not true. Leaving out well-known sympathizers like JoliotCurie and Bernai (who indeed are not allowed to enter the U.S.A.), several British scientists have visited the U.S.S.R. recently, some of their reports being available in the literature. In 1951, Kathleen Lonsdale, FRS, went with a party of Quakers, and in a lecture at University College, London, stressed that she had been given every facility to go wherever she pleased. The same year, S. M. Manton, FRS, went with a party of scientists, one of whom, E. Burhop, was not allowed by the British government to leave England. Manton has published an C Η ΕΜ I C A
account in Nature, May 3, 1952, has pub lished a book "The Soviet Union Today," and broadcast on July 24 over BBC. Early this year, Lord Boyd-Orr, FRS, visited Moscow and subsequently appeared o n the BBC television program. These axe only some of the names, chosen as likely to be well known in the U.S.A. In 1949,. a group of Russian scholars which included Prof. Glushchenko and academician Volgin visited this country for a lecture tour. There are no doubt many obstacles b e tween Western and Soviet scientists, b u t in view of the above, and of the recent experience of Linus Pauling, can anyone "be expected to believe Turkevich's implica tion Mhat they are all erected by t h e Rus sians? D. J. FOSKETT
London, England Hard Times for Everybody DEAR SIR:
I read with interest the letter of J. S. Hicks in C&EN Sept. 1. I am not employed by a large chemical company but, in my knowledge of tbeir practices, I would consider the statements made by Mr. Hicks distorted. While many of us had to work for a pittance during the depression, this ex perience was not confined to chemists. By far the majority of the competent chem ists of my acquaintance have held tlieir jobs during difficult times, and I know of very few companies who "threw men to the dogs" even during the last depression; they just didn't hire new ones for a while. There is no question but that manage ment can improve its practices, bizt I doubt whether these practices will be im proved by an irresponsible assault on the integrity of the management group a s a whole. If Mr. Hicks feels so strongly about chemistry as a profession, I consider it 'very unethical for him to continue to teaclx the subject. W.
S. GUXIIMANN
Ringwood, III, Misinformation Corrected DEAR SIR:
A "conCENtrate" item in C&ENT for June 23, on page 2576, states: First major postwar example of GermanBritish joint enterprise development has reached the hand-shaking stage. IFarhwerke Hoechst, one of the largest German chemical firms, and United Oxide, Ltd,, of Great Britain, expect to embark on a joint manufacturing program with a plant scheduled for Newcastle, England. We wish to advise you that a technical cooperation between Farbwcrke Hoechst and the Union Oxide and Chemical Co.» Ltd., has not been initiated. W e would therefore appreciate very much your re futing the above. Farbwcrke Hoechst Frankfurt, Germany AND
ENGINEERING
NEWS
