Sir

In a recent leading article you mention work by my colleagues and me on the “headless frog embryos” (Nature 389, 767; 1997). I should like to correct some misapprehensions.

First, we are at the University of Bath and not the University of Bristol.

Second, we did not release this as a news story to “a British television company”. The media interest arose from an article in the Sunday Times. I had spoken to the journalist involved on the previous Thursday thinking that he was simply writing a feature about the BBC Television Horizon programme in which our work was mentioned.

But, presumably by the decision of a subeditor, the article appeared not buried in the television section, but on the front page. By Sunday afternoon, everyone all over the world seemed to want to talk to us. In the various interviews, I have tried to explain the type of work we are doing in terms suitable for a lay audience. I have found the journalists I have dealt with generally serious and responsible, although they do not necessarily have control over later editing, headlines or interpretation.

People familiar with this field will doubtless be puzzled because they will know that headless tadpoles have been created many times before, although by chemical or surgical means rather than by the maniplation of genes.

But in the course of the past week I have learned that even specialist science journalists do not realize how much progress has taken place in developmental biology in the past 10 years. They are fascinated to learn that dramatic changes can be made in the anatomy of organisms by introducing or inhibiting one or two genes. They also usually do not realize how similar are the genetic mechanisms in different types of vertebrate animal, something that surprised the research community a few years ago.

This has been a useful opportunity to communicate some of the findings of developmental biology to a wider audience than usual. I agree with your leading article about the desirability of having an informed public. There are certain areas of biology where regulation of future research is inevitable, and the better informed the public becomes, the more likely it is that controls will be reasonable rather than restrictive.