State of competition: conceptual shoehorning behind priority on calcitonin precursor biosynthesis
Until the 1950s, the first results in the studies of calcitonin-thyrocalcitonin were ignored in the accepted research scheme. However, it was José Fernández Nonídez from the Spanish School of Histology, died in Augusta (Georgia, USA) in 1947, whose expertise in the parafollicular cells of the mamma...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences
2019-11-01
|
| Series: | Studia Historiae Scientiarum |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ojs.ejournals.eu/SHS/article/view/6913 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Until the 1950s, the first results in the studies of calcitonin-thyrocalcitonin were ignored in the accepted research scheme. However, it was José Fernández Nonídez from the Spanish School of Histology, died in Augusta (Georgia, USA) in 1947, whose expertise in the parafollicular cells of the mammalian thyroid had led him to an advanced understanding of this separate endocrine organ, which secretes calcitonin. The antecedent of the secretion was present in the cytoplasm of these cells, which Nonídez explained in a paper published in 1932.
In 1973, a Spanish group from the Instituto Gregorio Marañón (Madrid) leading the research into the ectopic production of calcitonin identified the precursor responsible for its biosynthesis. Nonetheless, given the informal power in connection with the communication between the scientists, this significative contribution was absolutely discarded in terms of acknowledgment within their social circle. The services responsible for dissemination of scientific knowledge considered that priority should be given to another group of young scientists dedicated to pro-calcitonin evidence.
The nature and extent of informal communication are highlighted in countries with different measures to guarantee the autonomy and independence of their state powers. Irrespectively of political circumstances, the paper is focused on the competition between two different approaches in science particularly important for progress in medicine: the perspective presented by experimental studies in basic sciences (in animals) and the models developed in clinical sciences.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2451-3202 2543-702X |