stirrer of public consciousness on a number Book Review of issues - a man with opinions on every- thing from uranium mining to eugenics, from Section smoking to medical education - with an inclination to put his arguments forcibly and with an authority that guaranteed that his Compiled by John Jenkin* views could not be ignored. Many of Australia's immunologists and microbiologists knew Burnet. These scien- Christopher Sexton, The Seeds of Time: tists will read the book out of interest rather The Life of Sir Macfarlane Burnet. Mel- than to find out more about him; they may bourne: Oxford University Press, 1991. x + hope that the book will do nothing to dimin- 301 pp., illus., $39.95. ish the image of a man they held in admi- ration. From people who knew Burnet, I have Sir (Frank) Macfarlane Burnet was a great heard generally favourable comments. biological scientist. He was responsible for The second group of readers comprises several major technical developments and Australian scientists who did not know Bur- conceptual insights in his first field of net, and that is my own perspective. To an research, virology, and for two conceptual immunologist who came to Australia after breakthroughs in his second, immunology. Burnet had retired, a life of Burnet holds His work was seminal - many of the impor- particular interest. The question has arisen tant steps leading to the development of viral amongst younger and emigre immunologists vaccines can be traced back to techniques whether the continuing focus on Burnet is worked up by Burnet, and much of the excit- unhealthy; but the evidence is that Austra- ing cellular and molecular immunology of the lian immunology is healthy in its diversity, last twenty years consists of answers to ques- that it has plenty of leadership, and that the tions that make sense only in the context of tribute to Burnet results from a mixture of Burnet's theories. He received the Nobel respect and courtesy rather than any unheal- Prize, jointly with Sir Peter Medawar, for one thy personality-cult. Indeed, Burnet in his of these, the concept that the immune system later years believed that immunology had distinguishes self from non-self, and the con- more or less run its course; his disciples have sequent concept of immunological tolerance. spectacularly proved him wrong but have had He and many other immunologists regarded the discretion not to point this out. the tolerance work as second in importance To Australian immunologists and micro- to his other major contribution to immunol- biologists who did not know Burnet, Sexton's ogy, the clonal selection theory for antibody book is full of interest. A comparison with formation. Virologists felt he might well have Fenner's biographical memoir of Burnet sug- earned a Nobel Prize for his virology studies, gests that Sexton's book is accurate, but of and he was indeed nominated for one. What- course it contains much more in the way of ever the limitations of prizes as indicators of personal detail, while Fenner's memoir con- merit, it would be hard to shrug off one Nobel centrates on the science.l Prize and two near-misses. The largest potential readership com- I have not yet used the word 'Australian' prises people further removed from detailed - Burnet was a great scientist on the world knowledge of the subject - people who nei- stage. His importance to Australian biologi- ther knew Burnet personally nor are active cal science eclipses that of others like Howard in his fields of research in Australia. This is Florey, because Burnet did most of his work a diverse group, and Burnet's later years as in Australia, built up an Institute that is a commentator on controversial issues will still possibly Australia's premier research interest a wider group than is usual for a centre, and inspired a generation of scientists biography of a great scientist. For the general who still dominate Australian biological reader, the book is well written and readable. science. Christopher Sexton has not shirked the task Burnet retired from experimental biology of explaining the scientific aspects in general at the age of 65 and started a second career, terms, and I believe the non-scientist would which spanned another 20 years. He wrote at least get a general grasp of the relevance extensively on biology during this later of Burnet's work. period, but was also a philosopher, elder and What does this book offer to the reader interested in how science and scientists * Dr J.G. Jenkin is a Reader in Physics at La Trobe work? In discussing this, it is appropriate to University, Bundoora, Victoria 3083. compare Burnet with Medawar. The two men Historical Records of Australian Science, 9(1) (June 19921 were very different. Medawar was consciously Historical Records of Australian Science, Volume 9, Number 1 (and delightfully) an aristocrat amongst Burnet's experimental skill was most rele- intellectuals, a renowned wit, and at ease vant to his virus work. He adapted a tech- with everybody. Burnet considered himself to nique for growing virus in eggs and continued be at a 'low place in the peck-order', in spite to adapt it until it became in his hands a of recognition bestowed on him.2 He wrote in powerful set of techniques, for assaying virus a straightforward, undecorated style, and (by injecting low numbers and counting was something of a social recluse. Medawar's 'pocks'), for assaying antibody against virus, essays, collected together in books such as and for the production of virus in sufficient The Art of the Soluble (Penguin, 1967) and quantity for vaccination. The appearance of Pluto's Republic (OUP, 19841, have influenced the pocks gave him clues on relationships the way we perceive how science works, not between viruses. His skill came partly from least because they were written by a success- his observation of detail (which he ascribed ful scientist who happened also to be a phi- to his hobby as a naturalist) and partly from losopher. Burnet didn't try to analyse, at least his tendency (again ascribed to his beetle- not for public consumption, how science collecting) to 'collect' information; having got works. And yet, if we understand the thought the technique working, he applied it to every processes of a man who made not one but virus that came to hand. His skill as an two major conceptual advances in immunol- experimentalist, and his continuation of lab- ogy, the working habits of a man who made oratory work with his own hands up until he several seminal discoveries in virology, and retired, is an important lesson for today, the interpersonal skills of a man who so when scientists, and medical researchers in dominated Australian biological science, then particular, tend to conduct their research we may obtain some insight into how science from their desk, with students and techni- and scientists work. Sexton's book is helpful cians doing the experiments. Burnet's pas- in this regard, although I found that I under- sion for 'collecting' information would be less stood Burnet as a scientist better when I had acceptable today, and would probably be also read Fenner's memoir and Burnet's labelled by any peer-review process as a autobiography. 'fishing expedition'. Burnet, as portrayed by Sexton, was not Burnet's most important immunological driven to medical research by a burning insight, the clonal selection theory of anti- desire to help humanity. Indeed, he seems to body formation, was not fully vindicated until have been somewhat indifferent to the suffer- many years after its formulation. Burnet ing of patients in his early days, developing used the term 'intrinsic unlikelihood' to only later a mission to overcome scourges describe what worried him about one of the such as influenza, over-population and the rival theories, which held that antigen was effects of smoking. This is probably not un- used as template for the design of antibody to fit the antigen. But clonal selection, or usual. The public image of the 'dedicated' earlier selective (as opposed to instructive) medical researcher is pleasant but inaccur- theories, implied that the immune system ate; scientists work long hours because of had a pre-existing repertoir, enabling it to their fascination with their work rather than react to an unbelievably large variety of anti- their dedication to helping mankind. gens, equally intrinsically unlikely. Burnet Sexton discusses the features of Burnet's postulated a mechanism of 'randomization' of work that seem to have had most bearing on the immunoglobulin genes by somatic muta- his success - his ecological approach to tion, such that a wide variety of different infectious agents, his wide reading, his abil- antibodies could be made. He was right in ity to integrate information from disparate essence, but it was a conceptual leap well fields, his capacity far lateral thinking. The beyond the experimental techniques of the discussion is interesting and informative. day to test. Clonal selection did not 'feel right' The same characteristics can be discerned until years later, when the genetic mecha- more precisely from the memoir and partic- nisms for generating diversity were discov- ularly from the autobiography, where they ered. An important knack required of a are more vivid because of t.he author's infec- scientist is the ability to decide which areas tious enthusiasm. Sexton's book provides an of uncertainty make a hypothesis untenable introduction to Burnet; anyone seriously and which will sort themselves out later. interested should also read Fenner and Bur- Regarding Burnet's second career - as net. There is space here to discuss only two elder, philosopher, stirrer of the public con- of the important characteristics of Burnet sciousness - Sexton brings out Burnet's sin- the scientist - his skill as an experimenter, cerity and honesty in these endeavours, and and his ability to see in a mass of data a indicates that they provoked a wide response, plausible model.