THE BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND COSMETICS function, and chemistry of the animal organism. Chemistry also, as you well know, was leaving the alchemistic era and entering its own golden era. But let us not lose sight of the inter- dependence. Oxygen, arsenic, nitro- gen and its oxide, mercury, and, in fact, almost all chemicals were studied for their effect on animals. If they were poisonous, their effect was obvious if not, little was known of their action or function. Perhaps a slight digression to br/ng the plant science progress into perspective would be justifiable and illustrative. In this case the com- plex chemical, represented by the plant, was known both botanically and in the medical and apothecary arts. Therefore, the biological activ- ity could, and did, serve as a guide to the progress of the phytochemist. Under this co-ordinated double attack nature began to yield its secrets, but the attack still continues with all its intrigue witness corti- sone from "yams." Without the biological guidance, the production of cortisone, as a chemical, would have stirred not the slightest ripple of interest. Quite possibly it would not have been synthesised at all without the biological incentive. Certainly its importance would, to date, have been nil. Through all these years, from "in the beginning there was man" to the mid-point of the twentieth century, there has been going on another irresistible type of biological screen- ing. This is the knowledge built up through trial and error experience. Else how could we account for the bountiful knowledge of folklore ? They came bringing incense and myrrh, materials--complex chemi- cals-known for their biological attraction and benefits. Other plants, not too different in appear- ance, were screened for their deleteri- ous effect in the same manner--the calabar or ordeal bean as the basis for tribal rituals, the blistering action of croton oil, the dramatic suicide by poison hemlock. With such biological guideposts the chemist has been able to isolate and some- times to synthesise the active chemi- cal ingredient.. The work continues, and only recently it was my pleasure to meet and talk with the prominent Swiss chemist, Dr. Max Stoll, who received this year's Fritzsche Award from the American Chemical Society for his productive work in the field of aromatic chemicals. His work was guided by odour, a biological end-point. What has this to do with modern cosmetic chemistry in an era recog- nised as the golden age of chemistry ? I think the answer is that it is funda- mental and inescapable. The objec- tive of cosmetic chemistry is biologi- cal and, hence, biological guidance is indispensable. The great bulk of usable materials available to the cosmetic chemist to-day has been biologically screened by the trial and error method. The list of really new materials being added to the armamentarium, even in this age of chemical progress, is not impressive. It is not going to become impressive until there is a major swing back 169

JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS to the lessons of history in this field. One of the many facets of this problem is the change in educational background. Not so long ago the physical and biological sciences could be mastered by one person. In recent years, however, specialisation has all too frequently developed a complete cleavage between the two. It is amazing to me that this system can produce so many chemists who know so little biology and biologists with only a smattering of chemistry, and that they all are called scientists. Perhaps it foreshadows the doom of the term "science," unqualified, as a meaningful designation. By some unfailing mechanism progress spawns the mutations essen- tial to the well-being of each parent group. We are all familiar with the chemical engineer and the physical chemist as examples in the physical sciences. There has likewise devel- oped, in keeping with the pace, the indispensable liaison sciences of phy- siology, biochemistry, and pharma- cology, representing function, chem- istry, and alteration of the animal body. These complex disciplines are exacting task masters, for their disciples must master to a workable degree both the physical and the biological sciences. The modern status demands that they also master both the basic and the applied as- pects of their profession. The dis- tinctions between physiology, bio- chemistry and pharmacology are beyond the present scope, but they may be referred to collectively as the chemo-biological sciences. The modern chemist, cosmetic or other, who speaks only to chemists is facing the dead end of progress so long as his objective lies in the direc- tion of human application and usage. Sooner or later he must seek the liaison with the biological aspect of his problem. This can be achieved through the chemo-biological scien- ists who serve as the interpreters and the practitioners. This liaison is most highly developed at present in the pharmaceutical field where, with- in a single large organisation, both the chemist and the pharmacologist work together closely and give mutual assistance toward a common objective. Other fields are also seeking with ever greater clamour the service and specialised training of the chemo- biologicaI scientists. The basic chemical industry, nuclear science, military services, medical. agricul- tural and food chemists, and other groups dealing with the human population, rely ever more strongly on the pharmacologist for guidance in the adequate and safe screening, handling, manufacturing, transpor- tation and use of the particular materials of their interest. Equally important is the co-operative effort toward new product development. In keeping with these demands the chemo-biologists have not only con- tinued basic research, but have developed the methodology of the applied field. Trial and error selec- tion through human usage is no longer compatible witk progress, no matter how well it served in the past. In the first place, such 170