Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Proceed with the payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Receive the final file

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you

I’m working on a biomedical engineering discussion question and need a sample dr

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

ORDER THIS OR A SIMILIAR PAPER NOW

 

I’m working on a biomedical engineering discussion question and need a sample draft to help me study.HE 1923 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was
awarded to Frederick Banting and James J. R. Macleod
for the discovery of insulin. Banting divided his share
of the prize money equally with Charles Best; Macleod
split his share with James B. Collip. As the discovery
of insulin passed into medical history, it was seldom
described in the most obvious ways, as the product of the researches of
Banting and Macleod; or of those of Banting, Macleod, Best, and Collip.
Instead the discovery of insulin was almost universally credited to Banting and Best.
In The Discovery of Insulin, published in 1982, and its sequel, Banting:
A Biography in 1984,1 documented the ways in which Banting, who had
clashed constantly and bitterly with Macleod and Collip during the insulin research, worked assiduously and with considerable success during
his lifetime to spread the view that he had discovered insulin with the
help of Best. Best had been his student assistant, one of two recent
graduates in Honours Physiology and Biochemistry assigned by Macleod to work with Banting for pay. There is convincing evidence that
Best won a coin toss with the other student E. C. Noble, to see who
would work first, and then, with Noble’s approval, stayed on with
Banting for the duration. Best’s job was to do the tests, mostly of blood
sugar, that Banting required. After one confrontation about Best’s
methods, during which the two almost came to blows, they settled down
and worked harmoniously. Their research adventure, directed by MacA shorter version of this paper was read at the Seattle meeting of the American Association for the
History of Mediane, i May 1992.
© 1993 BY THE JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE AND ALLIED SCIENCES, INC.
ISSN OO22-5O45 VOLUME 48 PACES 253 TO 274
[ 253 ] at University of California, Irvine on June 26, 2015 http://jhmas.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from
254 Journal of the History of Medicine : Vol. 48, July
leod, became increasingly complex, tense, frustrating, and then triumphant. The greatest frustration was probably the failure of the first clinical
test of their pancreatic extract, on Leonard Thompson, on 11 January
1922. The triumph came several days later when extract purified by
Collip brought dying diabetic children back to life and health.
Banting based his claim for precedence on having had the idea on
which the research was originally based and on the soundness of results
obtained without practical help from either Macleod or Collip. The
credit he gave to Best was sometimes extremely generous, at other times
pro forma. Banting’s loyalty to Best was strongest when he recalled the
moral support the younger man gave him during a personal crisis in the
spring of 1922. Banting never credited Best with specific ideas or proposals that advanced the research. Sometimes Banting thought of Best
as his equal partner, at other times as a kind of officer’s batman. Many
of Banting’s friends and admirers believed that he alone was the discoverer of insulin, and that Best had been just the student helper. The full
documentary record of the 1921—22 research tends to support that view
of Best’s contribution, but it also severely undermines Banting’s estimation of his own role, and re-establishes the vital contributions of Macleod
and Collip.
This essay traces the continuation and elaboration of the Banting and
Best myth after Banting’s 1941 death. Best then became the chief spokesman for the view that the two young researchers had discovered insulin
on their own in 1921, and had been deprived of their full share of the
consequent glory because of the machinations of Macleod, Collip, and
their friends. During the next thirty years Best and his friends championed a Banting-and-Best version of the discovery of insulin which
featured a substantial enlargement of Best’s part in the story. Their version of historical correctness became increasingly convoluted and difficult
to maintain as the years went by, however, because of
Requirements: 500   |   .doc file

ORDER THIS OR A SIMILIAR PAPER NOW