Return to search

Creating Controversy: Science Writers, Corporate Funders, and Non-expert Scientists in the Debate over Prions (1982-1997)

Stanley Prusiner’s proposal that a protein, the prion, was the infectious agent of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) created a great deal of interest, and discussion was not limited to the TSE research field. In fact, Prusiner actively appealed to individuals outside the TSE research field, particularly science writers, corporate funders, and scientists in other research areas. These individuals, in turn, provided Prusiner with the resources, publicity, and expertise to undertake his innovative research program. Prusiner’s emphasis on the revolutionary nature of prion and his claim that prion research could shed light on more common diseases fostered media interest and corporate support. Early newspaper reports stressed Prusiner’s interpretation of experimental results and helped to keep the idea of a protein agent alive until more evidence could be amassed. Corporate funders, with the aid of non-expert scientists, provided Prusiner with the means to carry out expensive, novel experiments and with the opportunity to collaborate with renowned researchers. Prusiner and his supporters were also adept at communicating the protein-only theory and were able to mitigate the impact of specialist criticism. They conceptualized prion protein conversion by using metaphors and analogies and by arguing that parallel phenomena already occurred in Nature. This shifted the discussion away from the problem of replication and recast the search for the TSE agent as a biochemical puzzle. These conceptualizations also enabled Prusiner to engage scientists in other fields, thereby turning his research program into an interdisciplinary enterprise. Moreover, the BSE crisis and Prusiner’s Nobel Prize provided opportunities to further discussion of prions to a wider audience. The engagement of non-experts ultimately created a vast and stable network of interested parties and supporters that was crucial to Prusiner’s success and to the acceptance of the protein-only theory.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:OTU.1807/31839
Date10 January 2012
CreatorsLiu, Patricia Ann
ContributorsMazumdar, Pauline M. H.
Source SetsLibrary and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada
Languageen_ca
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeThesis

Page generated in 0.0019 seconds