Constructing Failure: Leonard Hayflick, Biomedicine, and the Problems with Tissue Culture

By examining the use of tissue culture in post-war American biomedicine, this paper investigates how scientists experience and manage failure. I study how Leonard Hayflick forged his new definition of failure and ways of managing it by refuting Alexis Carrel's definition of failure alongside hi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Park, Hyung Wook
Other Authors: School of Humanities and Social Sciences
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/87083
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/44266
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
Description
Summary:By examining the use of tissue culture in post-war American biomedicine, this paper investigates how scientists experience and manage failure. I study how Leonard Hayflick forged his new definition of failure and ways of managing it by refuting Alexis Carrel's definition of failure alongside his theory of the immortality of cultured cells. Unlike Carrel, Hayflick claimed that every vertebrate somatic cell should eventually die, unless it transformed into a tumour cell. This claim defined cell death, which had been a problem leading to a laboratory failure, as a normal phenomenon. On the other hand, permanent life, which had been considered a normal cellular characteristic, became a major factor causing scientific failure, since it implied malignant transformation that scientists hoped to control. Hayflick then asserted that his cell strains and method would partly enable scientists to manage this factor—especially that occurred through viral infection—alongside other causes of failure in routine tasks, including bacterial contamination. I argue that the growing biomedical enterprise fostered this work of Hayflick's, which had repercussions in both his career and the uses of cells in diverse investigations. His redefinition of failure in the age of biomedicine resulted in the broad dissemination of his cells, medium, and method as well as his long struggle with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which caused his temporarily failed career.