Good Fats and Thin Bats The Fats of Life By Caroline Pond Cambridge: Cambridge (1998). 344 pp. $59.95

unequivocal: the untruthfulness of witnesses appearing before their committee was a given; and the only issue The Fats of Life was to determine how far (and why) any particular per-By Caroline Pond son deviated from the truth. One embittered aide (not Cambridge: Cambridge University Press from the Dingell committee) launched into a tirade in (1998). 344 pp. $59.95 which she said " I know how science works. I have a Ph.D. I have seen people get Ph.D.s, and the way they Fats and fatness were not always viewed with dread, do it is to make up their data to agree with the prevailing as they are in the modern industrial world. Indeed, theory. " When asked about the subject of her Ph.D., she plumpness was seen by our ancestors as a clear sign stated it to be in sociology. I could not possibly comment of power, fertility, wealth, and good health. Today, nu-on whether her statements are generally true about soci-merous studies have documented the effects of obesity ology and sociologists, but it is at the least injudicious on human disease, especially concerning the associa-to extend them to apply to all of science. It was impossi-tions of obesity with type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular ble to have any meaningful dialog in face of the convic-disorders, and certain cancers. tion that all scientists are self-serving if not liars. The Fats of Life, by Caroline Pond, a zoologist trained Kevles reveals, however, a far worse case than one at Oxford University, explores the problem of fats and could have suspected, with a continuing process in adiposity from the perspective of comparative zoology. which the Dingell committee threatened and intimidated Perhaps the way various animal species deal with wax-anyone involved at NIH, from the Director down, in an ing and waning food supplies can teach us something attempt to bring in a guilty verdict. The Dingell commit-about why we are getting fatter, if not what we can do tee was aided and abetted by certain scientists and about it. bureaucrats. Kevles does not pass comment on the mo-Three questions dominate our scientific inquiries to-tives of individual scientists who for whatever reason day: (1) What are the molecular bases for the apparent decided that the authors were guilty, but the pernicious differences in health effects of ingestion of different role of Stewart and Feder is made clear. One of the fats?; (2) What are the …