The National Library of Medicine curated the collections of journals with museum-like proficiency. For that I relied on the phonebook-like tomes of Index Medicus, the pre-computer version of PubMed.

This leisurely reading provided a historical framework, but it did not keep me abreast of the current literature. I could justify the mere browsing of the scientific literature as the acquisition of foundational knowledge and an examination of the scientific method. The works of Vesalius, Harvey, Perutz, and Avery were just as artistic and inspiring as the original folios of Shakespeare. My view of the scientific literature was similar to my view of classical literature. I could peruse the scientific literature for hours, not even looking for topics within my discipline. Reading scientific papers from 50 to 100 years ago instilled a sense of reverence. Pouring through the stacks of journals during my early scientific training, I was awestruck. Full disclosure: The Executive Editor of The Scholarly Kitchen is employed by Oxford University Press, publisher of Toxicological Sciences. Gary is a Professor and Associate Dean for Research, Rollins School of Public Health, and Professor of Neurology and Pharmacology at Emory University. Image from Finland in the Nineteenth Century, 1894, via The British Library.Įditor’s Note: This post is a re-publication, with permission, of the September, 2016 editorial from the journal Toxicological Sciences by the journal’s Editor in Chief, Gary Miller.

Emory endnote