PEDIATRICS Vol. 83 No. 5 May 1989, pp. A30
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Student,
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Student,

HAS ANYTHING CHANGED?

Student

American and British styles of [biomedical] science were markedly different [in the 1970s]. British research grants were smaller, though longer term, and ideas there tended to be nurtured over the years like fine wine . . . There was nothing cozy about the Americans; even the best of scientific friends in the States might become fiercely competitive antagonists. It was part of the way of life; while plentiful, grants were short-term—usually two years. Researchers were therefore compelled to produce results or see their money whisked away. Publish or perish. No tolerance of failure, no safety net. Big science, big money.