Opinion
 

Letters to the Editor

A job well done

To the editor:

My congratulations to Matt Dulin ("From beer to X-rays: a genetic history," Wednesday, News) for attempting to share some basic information on the history of our understanding of DNA, since there has been an outpouring of anti-biotechnology misinformation by those opposed to its use in agriculture. However, there are a couple of minor errors that should be addressed.

Contrary to the article, "hard-nosed biotechnology scientists" not only admit the industry began 8,000 years ago in Sumer and Babylonia, they also frequently use the argument to show that genetic modification of plants and the use of micro-organism in food production has been an integral part of the human endeavor since the beginning of civilization.

Without denying in any way the importance of the work of Oswald T. Avery, Colin MacLeod and Maclyn McCarty in identifying what they called the "transforming principle," it is only fair to note that in 1928, Frederick Griffith published an article on his work with bacteria in which he presented the first indication that nucleic acid carried the information for inheritance ­what he called the "transforming factor." That article, in fact, influenced Avery. We build on the findings of those who went before us and, as Avery clearly did, we admit it.

Griffith died in an air raid on London in 1941, but a recent examination of his research notes indicates he was well aware of the potential significance of his work. Even after the important work of Avery, MacLeod and McCarty, many still held to the idea that it was protein that was the primary factor in transmitting characteristics to offsprings. At least one science guru for the anti-biotechnology crowd gives every indication of still not accepting the findings of Griffith, Avery, Macleod, McCarty and many others, including James Watson and Francis Crick.

Once again, congratulations for trying to bring a calm, coherent, understandable article on DNA as we approach the 50th anniversary of Watson and Crickis article in Nature.

Tom DeGregori
professor, economics

Music for the soul

To the editor:

Cheryl Stell's review "October's 'Sale' worth every cent" (Arts & Entertainment, Wednesday) about the band Blue October is not completely true. She says the album could have been stronger if the band had left off the weaker songs, but those songs make the album strong.

"A Quiet Mind" and "Sexual Powertrip" are deep songs. Fans of Blue October truly understand the meaning behind his lyrics.

If you were to see them live, you would actually feel the lead singer through the music. It's a fulfilling experience for some people.

Justin Furstenfeld is an artist going through his own pain and recovery. Not many people (none that I know of) help other people get through life by sharing their music. It's very powerful.

Heather Boyett
registration and academic records staff

Letters to the editor are welcome from all members of the UH community and should focus on issues, not personalities. Letters must be typed and must include the author's name, telephone number and affiliation with the University. Anonymous letters will not be published. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, language and space. Letters may be delivered in person to Room 151, Communication; e-mailed to dclettrs@mail.uh.edu ; or faxed to (713) 743-5384.Send comments to dccampus@mail.uh.edu