ABSTRACT

Between 1920 and 1922, the University of Bristol biochemist, Maximilian Nierenstein, published four papers in a series exploring the structure of catechin in the Journal of the Chemical Society. The Society then abruptly refused to accept any more of his papers on catechin, or any other subject. It provided him with no reasons for the embargo until 1925. It then transpired that Nierenstein was boycotted because it was deemed that he had not responded adequately to criticisms of his work made by his rival in catechin research, the German natural products chemist, Karl Freudenberg. It was not until 1929 that, as a result of a petition by a group of his former Bristol pupils and friends, that Nierenstein was again permitted to publish in the Society’s journal. The paper explores the Chemical Society’s treatment of Nierenstein in detail, sheds new light on his career and his reaction to the Society’s unprecedented boycott, examines some of the structural chemistry involved in the disputes, and discusses whether Nierenstein’s research deserves the label of ‘bad science’.

摘要

1920 年至 1922 年间，布里斯托大学生物化学家马克西米利安·尼伦斯坦 (Maximilian Nierenstein) 在《化学学会杂志》(Journal of the Chemical Society) 上发表了四篇探索儿茶素结构的系列论文。该协会随后突然拒绝接受他关于儿茶素或任何其他主题的任何论文。直到 1925 年，这才为他提供了实施禁运的任何理由。后来发现尼伦斯坦遭到抵制，因为人们认为他没有充分回应他在儿茶素研究方面的竞争对手、德国天然产物化学家 Karl Freudenberg 对他的工作提出的批评。 . 直到 1929 年，由于他以前在布里斯托尔的一群学生和朋友的请愿，尼伦斯坦才再次获准在该协会的期刊上发表文章。这篇论文详细探讨了化学学会对 Nierenstein 的处理，揭示了他的职业生涯以及他对学会前所未有的抵制的反应，检查了一些涉及争议的结构化学，