The authors of these eight essays examine the social and ethical implications of new biomedical technologies—from behavior control to organ transplants and human experimentation. They also examine the shortcomings in our system of medical care—from the disappearance of the general practitioner to problems of medical care for the poor.

In an introductory essay, Irene Taviss analyzes the allocation of resources to biomedical research and medical care and considers problems related to human experimentation, organ transplantation, and genetic and behavior control. She also discusses possible controls in these fields—legal controls as well as formal professional codes and informal professional practices. In discussing the rare disease phenylketonuria, a cause of mental retardation, Samuel P. Bessman and Judith P. Swazey point out the dangers of a hasty decision to institute legislative controls of diseases on the basis of inadequate scientific evidence. In separate essays, Edmund D. Pellegrino and Louis Lasagna examine the problems of establishing professional controls over different kinds of human experimentation. Everett P. Mendelsohn, Judith P. Swazey, and Irene Taviss present an overview of the new behavior control technologies and point out the dilemmas that have resulted from these developments. Victor Sidel's essay examines the effects of new technologies on the practice of medicine and the potential effects on society. The two final essays deal with the organization and delivery of medical care. Mark G. Field reports on the problems caused by medical specialization and the disappearance of the general practitioner and proposes some remedies. John H. Knowles analyzes medical manpower shortages in various specialties and the effects of these shortages on the health care of the nation.

Sir Charles Scott Sherrington is credited with having single-handedly crystallized the field of neurophysiology. Judith Swazey’s study is the first book-length treatment of his early research, from the 1880s through the publication of The Integrative Action of the Nervous System in 1906. In this work he offered an experimentally documented account of how the nervous system, through the mechanism of reflex action, produces a coordinated motor organism. Swazey first analyzes the development of the concept of integrative action and then discusses the significance of the concept for neurophysiology and, on a broader level, for the nature of biological thought.

Focusing on the interests, events, and influences that shaped Sherrington’s career, the author surveys the relevant knowledge about reflex action and the functional anatomy of the spinal cord at the time he began his research. Continuing with a detailed analysis of the major lines of his work she covers such material and the anatomical studies of spinal degeneration, the mapping of sensory and motor root distribution in the macaque monkey, the role of sensory nerves in and from muscles, and the nature of reciprocal innervation.

The scope of Sherrington’s contributions—which included new and important techniques, apparatus, and methodological canons—clearly marks him as a major figure in the history of the neurosciences. The greater significance of his work, however, lies in his “synthetic attitude” in the fact that he perceived the interrelatedness of his varied researches. The integrative action concept and the data it embodied finally brought together the previously unconnected channels of neurophysiological, anatomical, and histological research. As a result of this unification, Sherrington was able to provide investigators of the nervous system with their first major paradigm and to establish guidelines which altered the course of scientific research after 1906.

The author has gathered a vast amount of material from published and unpublished sources for this comprehensive study of Sherrington’s life and work. Her analysis of his writings, her portrayal of his delightful and extraordinary personality, and her account of the scientific setting within which his work was carried out provide a model for historians of science.