I disagree strongly with The Daily’s characterization of the book selected by the One Book One Northwestern program as a “dead horse” simply because it is another “science-based selection.” It is important for Northwestern students to learn about and be exposed to the story of modern medical research, and “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” is an intriguing and entertaining look at the early history of the field. Many of the most vexing problems our world faces are intimately related to the life sciences. Furthermore, solutions to our most pressing issues may come from biology. Biofuels may provide cheap, abundant and clean energy. Drugs that block neurodegenerative disease or control obesity and diabetes could dramatically reduce healthcare costs. The Human Genome Project has revolutionized human genetics and has the potential to make medicine more personal and less costly. It is necessary to expose students to biomedical research because of its impact on society and because life science research is often fraught with controversy. Stem cell research has tremendous promise but has ignited major ethical and political debates. Genomics may dramatically improve diagnostic medicine but also raises serious privacy questions. We all have stakes in the discussions about the questions that stem from biomedical research. Non-scientists are particularly suited to help unravel the implications of science and should have the opportunity to see how previous social and ethical quandaries that come with technical advances like the one described in the One Book One Northwestern selection have played out. Providing the opportunity to read and discuss “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” through a program like One Book One Northwestern should be welcomed, not denigrated for being another “science-based selection”.

-John Froberg

Weinberg senior