186 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS (1) Has the experiment been properly designed? (2) Has the experiment been performed correctly? (3) Have a significant number of tests been conducted ? (4) Have the test results been recorded accurately ? Are the results internally consistent and coherent ? (5) Do the test results warrant the conclusions drawn ? (6) Can the conclusion be expressed in a meaningful, accurate way to consumers who lack scientific training ? The distribution of responsibilities between the consulting scientist and the advertiser becomes clearer when we refer to these questions. The first four questions are addressed primarily to the scientist. They relate to method, not to characterization of results. The fifth question is hy- brid. If the scientist states the conclusions to be drawn from the test re- sults then this criterion clearly lies within the realm of his responsibility. However, it has been our experience that the advertising agency often enters the picture at this point. Members of the agency staff often par- ticipate in the statement of conclusions and, in some instances, the agency has simply asked the scientist for his test results and then proceeded to state the conclusions without consultation. The sixth criterion princi- pally relates to the responsibility of the agency. The agency's specialty is communication and it is at this point that communication skills take over. I suggest that both the public interest and the self-interest of scientists demand that scientists insure that any conclusions drawn from the results of tests conducted by them are logical, accurate and strictly limited to the arebit of the results. I suggest also that the scientist has an immediate interest in insuring that conclusions are communicated to the consumer in an accurate and meaningful manner. The discharge of these additional responsibilities requires some imagination on the part of the scientist. Communication between scientists is often conducted in a kind of verbal shorthand. In addressing another scientist, a scientist can express a naked conclusion knowing that his communicant understands any inherent limitations upon the conclusion that may exist. But this form of shorthand cannot be used in communicating with the lay public where all limitations must be spelled out and great care must be exercised to prevent deception. I do not think it inappropriate to ask scientists to assume a measure of responsibility in these areas principally within the domain of the agencies. If an advertisement based upon your test re- sults is challenged by the Federal Trade Commission, your professional reputation will suffer even though you are not subject to the pains and penalties of an Order to Cease and Desist. Therefore, both the public in- terest and your own self-interest dictate the full discharge of your pro- fessional responsibility in this area." REFERENCES (1) O-JIB-WA Medicine Co., et al., Docket No. 6548 Renor Co., Inc., et al., Docket No. 6617. (2) Livigen I.aboratory Sales Corp., et aL, Docket No. 7469. (3) Max Factor & Co., Docket No. 7280. (4) Helene Curtis Industries, Inc., Docket No. 6856. (5) Natone Co., et al., Docket No. 6365. (6) Loesch Hair Experts, et al., Docket No. 6305 Ward Laboratories, Docket No. 6346 Bishop Hair & Scalp Specialists, Docket No. 6554, etc. (7) Maxwell Distributing Co., Inc., et al., Docket No. 6745.

JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS CHICAGO CHAPTER 187 SPEAKING at the first 1961 meeting on January 17th was Paul Stout of the Quaker Oats Company. His topic, "Recent Developments in Ex- perimental Design," is one of general importance in the cosmetic field. Mr. Stout received his degree in Chemistry from Miami University (Ohio) and has done graduate work in chemistry at Northwestern University as well as statistical work at the University of Chicago. Mr. Stout is a member of the American Statistical Association, the Oper- ations Research Society and the Society for Quality Control. During his twenty-year association with the Quaker Oats Company, he has been in- volved in organic synthesis and in experimental design and evaluation. At present he is Section Leader of the Statistical Evaluation Section, where his work includes research, development and production. On February 14th Dr. I. Schurman spoke on "The FDA--What It Is and What It Does." Since the Food and Drug Administration will be playing an increasingly important role in the field of cosmetic chemistry, the information presented was of the utmost importance. Dr. Schurman has been with the Chicago District of the FDA for the last twenty-five years. He is now Chief Chemist of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Dr. Schurman received his A. B. in chemistry at Hope College in Holland, Mich. From there he went on to Ohio State University where he received his Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry. He is a member of the American Chemical Society. All meetings are held at Henrici's Restaurant in the Merchandise Mart. NEW ENGLAND CHAPTER THE FIRST MEETING of the year was held on January 26th at Ar- mand's Beacon Terrace, Framingham, Mass. Dr. Richard B. Maffei, Assistant Professor of Industrial Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, spoke on "Planning the Introduction of New Products: Perspectives and Implications." Dr. Joseph Harrington, senior research engineer with the engineering division of Arthur D. Little Company discussed "A Proper Perspective of Automation," at the February 23rd meeting of the Chapter.