50, 100 & 150 Years Ago: Nobel Viruses, Noble Gases and King of Fertilizers

Articles from the Scientific American archive

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

APRIL 1955
VIRUS REPLICATION--"A new view of the nature of viruses is emerging. They used to be thought of solely as foreign intruders--strangers to the cells they invade and parasitize. But recent findings, including the discovery of host-induced modifications of viruses, emphasize more and more the similarity of viruses to hereditary units such as genes. Indeed, some viruses are being considered as bits of heredity in search of a chromosome. --Salvador E. Luria" [Editors' note: Luria shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1969 for his work on the replication and interaction of viruses.]

POLIO VACCINE--"We shall soon learn the results of last year's extensive field test of the vaccine against poliomyelitis. Whatever the analysis of that test shows, the type of vaccine that is being tested will continue to be an issue among virologists, because an immunological principle is under test as well as a vaccine. The vaccine in question is made of a 'killed' virus, that is, a virus rendered noninfectious by treatment with formaldehyde. Many virologists believe such a vaccine can never be as effective as one containing live virus. I share the view that a killed-virus vaccine not only avoids the hazards of live virus but, if properly prepared and used, may be just as effective in producing immunity. --Jonas E. Salk"

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American