Journal of the History of Biology

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 707–735 | Cite as

Mice and the Reactor: The “Genetics Experiment” in 1950s Britain

Article

Abstract

The postwar investments by several governments into the development of atomic energy for military and peaceful uses fuelled the fears not only of the exposure to acute doses of radiation as could be expected from nuclear accidents or atomic warfare but also of the long-term effects of low-dose exposure to radiation. Following similar studies pursued under the aegis of the Manhattan Project in the United States, the “genetics experiment” discussed by scientists and government officials in Britain soon after the war, consisted in large-scale low-dose irradiation experiments of laboratory animals to assess the effects of such exposures on humans. The essay deals with the history of that project and its impact on postwar genetics. It argues that radiobiological concerns driven by atomic politics lay at the heart of much genetics research after the war and that the atomic links are crucial to understand how genetics became an overriding concern in the late 20th century.

Keywords

atomic age atomic fallout low-dose radiation debate mice experiments postwar genetics radiation biology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I thank Professor Dudley Goodhead for a first introduction to the history of the MRC Unit at Harwell, Mary Lyons for sharing her memories of the early mouse work in the unit, Peter Glenister for introducing me to the history of the mouse mutant and the frozen embryo and sperm collection, Maureen Bulman at the MRC library at Harwell for her invaluable help in locating relevant material and Adrian Ford, Kevin Glover and Steve Thomas of Imaging Service MRC Harwell for supplying scans. Earlier drafts of the paper were presented at seminars and conferences in London, Vienna, Manchester, Princeton, Harvard and Berlin. I thank the participants and especially John Beatty, David Cantor, Jenny Marie, Hans-Jörg Rheinberger and Alexander von Schwerin as well as Angela Creager and Maria Santesmases for many insightful comments and suggestions. Special thanks to Skuli Sigurdssen for careful reading and many stimulating discussions.

References

  1. Arnold L. 1992. Windscale 1957: Anatomy of a Nuclear Accident. St Martin’s Press, New York and LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Beatty J. 1991. Genetics in the Atomic Age: The Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission, 1947–1956 In: Benson K.B., Maienschein J., Rainger R. (eds.), The Expansion of American Biology. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp. 284–324Google Scholar
  3. Beatty J. 1993. Scientific Collaboration, Internationalism, and Diplomacy: The Case of the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission Journal of the History of Biology 26: 205–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. —— 1994. “Opportunities for Genetics in the Atomic Age.” Paper presented at the Fourth Mellon Workshop, Institutional and Disciplinary Contexts of the Life Sciences, MIT, Cambridge, Mass., April 1994Google Scholar
  5. The Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation: A Report to the Public. 1956. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences–National Research CouncilGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd W. 2001. Science, Technology and American Poultry Production Technology and Culture 42: 631–664Google Scholar
  7. Brown, P. 2004a. “Fission Vision.” Society Guardian 2 June, p. 12Google Scholar
  8. —— 2004b. “Meacher Rails at ‚Biased’ Cancer Report.” The Guardian 8 September, p. 11Google Scholar
  9. Carlson E.A. 1981. Genes, Radiation, and Society: The Life and Work of H. J. Muller. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.YGoogle Scholar
  10. Costello, P. 1955. “Harwell Team Investigating Atomic Radiation.” Oxford Mail 1955, 12 AprilGoogle Scholar
  11. de Chadarevian S. 2002. Designs for Life: Molecular Biology After WW II Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Divine R.A. 1978. Blowing on the Wind: The Nuclear Test Ban Debate. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Edgerton D.E.H. 1992. Whatever Happened to the British Warfare State? The Ministry of Supply, 1945–1951 In: Mercer H., Rollings N., Thomlinson J.D. (eds.) Labour Governments and Private Industry. The Experience of 1945–1951. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 91–116Google Scholar
  14. Effect of Radiation on Human Heredity: Report of a Study Group Convened by WHO together with Papers by Various Members of the Group. 1957. Geneva: World Health OrganizationGoogle Scholar
  15. Falconer D. 1993. Quantitative Genetics in Edinburgh, 1947–1980 Genetics 133: 137–142Google Scholar
  16. Fowler, J.M. (ed.) 1960. Survival: A Study of Superbombs, Strontium 90 and Fallout. London: MacGibbon & KeeGoogle Scholar
  17. Gaudillière J.-P. 2003. Making Heredity in Mice and Men: The Production and Uses of Animal Models in Postwar Human Genetics In: Gaudillière J.-P., Löwy I. (eds.) Heredity and Infection: The History of Disease Transmission. Routledge, London, pp. 181–202Google Scholar
  18. Genetics Conference. Committee on Atomic Casualties. National Research Council. 1947. “Genetic Effects of the Atomic Bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”Science, 10 October: 331–333Google Scholar
  19. Gowing M. 1974a. Independence and Deterrence: Britain and Atomic Energy, 1945–1952: Vol. I: Policy Making. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Gowing M. 1974b. Independence and Deterrence: Britain and Atomic Energy, 1945–1952: Vol. II: Policy Execution. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Hacker B.C. 1987. The Dragon’s Tail: Radiation Safety in the Manhattan Project, 1942–1946. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  22. Hacker B.C. 1994. Elements of Controversy: The Atomic Energy Commission and Radiation Safety in Nuclear Weapons Testing 1947–1974. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamblin, J.D. 2006. ‚‚‚A Dispassionate and Objective Effort:’ Negotiating the First Study on the Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation.’’ Journal of the History of Biology, DOI 10.1007/s10739-005-6531-8Google Scholar
  24. Hudson K.J. 2005. CND-Now More Than Ever: The Story of a Peace Movement. Vision Paperbacks, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Jay K.E.B. 1954. Britain’s Atomic Factories. The Story of Atomic Energy Production in Britain. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Jolly, J.C. 2003. Thresholds of Uncertainty: Radiation and Responsibility in the Fallout Controversy. PhD dissertation, Oregon State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  27. Kay L. 2000. Who Wrote the Book of Life? A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Kevles D.J. 1995. In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity. Harvard University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Kopp C. 1979. The Origins of the American Scientific Debate Over Fallout Hazards Social Studies of Science 9: 403–422Google Scholar
  30. Kottler M.J. 1974. From 48 to 46: Cytological Technique, Preconception, and the Counting of Human Chromosomes Bulletin of the History of Medicine 48: 465–502Google Scholar
  31. Kraft A. 2006. Between Medicine and Industry: Medical Physics and the Rise of the Radioisotope 1945–1965 Contemporary British History 20: 1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lindee S. 1994. Suffering Made Real: American Science and the Survivors at Hiroshima. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  33. Martin A. 2004. Counting as an Epistemic Theme in the History of Human Chromosomes Social Studies of Science 34: 923–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Medical Research Council 1956. Hazards to Man of Nuclear and Allied Radiations. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Cmd 9780, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Medical Research Council 1960. The Hazards to Man of Nuclear and Allied Radiations. A Second Report to the Medical Research Council. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Minnion, J. and Bolsover, P. (eds.) 1983. The CND Story: The First 25 Years of CND in the Words of the People Involved. London: Allison and Busby LimitedGoogle Scholar
  37. Muller, H.J. 1946. Nobel Lecture, December 12, 1946. http://nobelprize.org/medicine/laureates/1946/muller-lecture.html; accessed 7 March 2005Google Scholar
  38. Neuberger J. 1998. Radiation in MRC Supported Research in the 1950s and 1960s. Medical Research Council, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Nuclear and allied radiation (hazards to man): Motion, Parliamentary Debate of 16 July 1956. 1956. In Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Fifth Series-Volume 556. House of Commons. Official Report. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, pp. 928–975Google Scholar
  40. Nuclear explosions (genetic effects), Parliamentary debate of 22 March 1955. 1955. In Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Fifth Series-Volume 538. House of Commons. Official Report. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, pp. 1881–1947Google Scholar
  41. Olby R. 2003. Quiet Debut for the Double Helix Nature 421: 401–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Paul D.B. 1987. ‚Our Load of Mutations’ Revisited Journal of the History of Biology 20: 321–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pirie, A. (ed.) 1958. Fall Out: Radiation Hazards from Nuclear Explosion: Revised Edition Including a Report on the Windscale Disaster and an Analysis of the United States Congress Report on Radioactive Fall Out and its Effects in Man. London: MacGibbon & KeeGoogle Scholar
  44. Pound, N. 1994. A Permissible Dose? Ionising Radiation as a Genetic Hazard, Great Britain, 1935–1960. M.Phil dissertation., Faculty of Modern History: Oxford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  45. Rader K. 2004. Making Mice: Standardizing Animals for American Biomedical Research, 1900–1955. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  46. Rasmussen N. 1997. Midcentury Biophysics: Hiroshima and the Origins of Molecular Biology History of Science 35: 244–293Google Scholar
  47. Research in Genetics. 1957. In Report of the Medical Research Council for the Year 1955–1956. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, p. 9Google Scholar
  48. Schwerin A.V. 2004. Experimentalisierung des Menschen. Der Genetiker Hans Nachtsheim und die vergleichende Erbpathologie 1920–1945. Wallstein Verlag, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  49. Stern, C. 1949. Principles of Human Genetics. San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  50. Stern C. 1960. Principles of Human Genetics. W. H. Freeman and Company, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  51. Stern C. 1973. Principles of Human Genetics. W. H. Freeman and Company, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  52. Walker J.S. 2000. Permissible Dose: A History of Radiation Protection in the Twentieth Century University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  53. Weart S. 1988. Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  54. Whittemore, G. 2001. “The Multidimensional Chess of Science and Society: A Postwar Debate Over Plutonium Exposure.” G.E. Allen and R.M. Macleod (eds.), Science, History and Social Activism: A Tribute to Everett Mendelsohn. London: Kluwer, pp. 277–289Google Scholar
  55. Wittner L.S. 1997. Resisting the Bomb: A History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement, 1954–1970. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of History and Philosophy of ScienceUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations