Reactions

SAFETY LETTER

Preparation of 1,5-Diamino-1H-tetrazole

We recently had an unanticipated explosion resulting in the injury of two chemists. The workers were repeating a recently published preparation of 1,5-diamino-1H-tetrazole by the aqueous diazotization of diaminoguanidine hydrochloride using a single equivalent of nitrous acid (Inorg. Chem. 2005, 44, 4237). After neutralization (pH 8) and evaporation, the desired product is extracted from the inorganic salts with hot ethanol. The ethanol is then evaporated and the resulting solid recrystallized from water. The preparation states that the product is pure after the ethanol extraction. Unfortunately, we have found that the ethanol extracts not only the desired product but also a very sensitive side product, 5-azidotetrazole. This side product is produced by either double diazotization of diaminoguanidine or possibly by diazotization of the desired product through the intermediate 1H-tetrazolo[1,5-d]tetrazole. If this procedure is repeated, it is imperative that the ethanol extract not be taken to dryness.

Michael A. Hiskey
Los Alamos, N.M.

Forensics false start

I am writing in response to "Academic Programs Gear Up To Meet Rising Interest in Forensic Science" (C&EN, April 25, page 31).

As a practicing criminalist, I am concerned with the large numbers of forensic science programs being established because of popularity. Nearly all forensic academic positions require a terminal degree in something (though some don't even require a degree in science), with many positions not requiring any forensic experience. I have worked in criminalistics nearly 30 years while teaching the subject part-time for 15 years. Few criminalists with experience want to teach and fewer have terminal degrees, but those with an interest, a master's degree, and ample crime laboratory and adjunct teaching experience are frequently excluded from full-time positions.

When giving interviews to candidates applying for crime lab positions, professors and college advisers have misinformed students regarding the course work and academic direction needed for entry into a crime laboratory. Additionally, students are either not informed or do not realize the extent of the background investigation conducted prior to employment in the profession. Many applicants fail to pass.

Colleges following the guidelines for accreditation by the Forensic Science Education Programs Accreditation Commission produce scientists in only two areas: DNA (forensic biology) and drugs/toxicology (forensic chemistry). Trace evidence, firearms, forensic document examination, forensic alcohol, and impression evidence are currently not in the curriculum requirements. Optical mineralogy, metallurgy, photography, physiology, textile science, and botany are but a few areas that should be encouraged as electives for a broad-based science background. The nature of casework requires sound research methodology.

The comment Charles Tindall made that "forensic science programs used to be looked down on by crime lab directors" leaves me puzzled. The traditional forensic science/criminalistics program baccalaureate graduates (from, for example, the University of California, Berkeley; John Jay College; Michigan State University; California State University, Sacramento; and so on) were routinely hired by crime laboratory directors. Many have become crime laboratory managers or supervisors or are leading members of the criminalistics community today. Of those mentioned, only the John Jay College undergraduate program still exists.

Criminalistics (forensic science), an applied science, should be taught by current or past practitioners with an interest in teaching and who understand the philosophy, requirements, legal issues, and theory and application of the science of the profession, regardless of the degree.

Wayne Moorehead
Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif.

ACS degree pass?

Nelson Marans' letter "Chemistry not so appealing" was a clear, concise summary of why so many students are avoiding the "central science" (C&EN, June 6, page 3). That so many students can succeed with "lesser degrees, lower grades, a less demanding curriculum, and much less academic effort" may be a sad commentary on our times, but nevertheless, it is true. What is true for students in general also applies to chemistry students when choosing whether or not to obtain the ACS-accredited degree.

What real, tangible, permanent, and significant benefit do holders of ACS-accredited degrees have over those holding nonaccredited degrees? Certainly, admission to graduate school or other professional schools is not contingent upon having an ACS-accredited degree. Many professional programs do not require the extensive training in mathematics, chemistry, and physics required by our accredited degree. Why should a student risk his or her chance of getting into medical school by taking the more advanced courses required for the accredited degree? If worst comes to worst, they can always enroll in a graduate chemistry program. After all, most chemistry graduate programs will admit students having only a chemistry minor.

It is time we recognize that the status of the ACS-accredited degree is minimal at best. While it is true that the holder of such a degree has demonstrated a level of accomplishment and commitment beyond that of the nonaccredited degree holder, what has their effort gotten them? ACS certainly does not make any significant distinction between accredited and nonaccredited degree members.

How can we expect chemistry students to value our accredited degree when our professional society places so little value in the degree? If it is of no practical lasting value to us, why should it be of value to anyone else? And if the accredited degree is of such little value, how much value can be placed on the nonaccredited degree?

Terrence A. Lee
Murfreesboro, Tenn.

Teenager's take on science

In my 22 years of practicing chemical engineering in an industrial environment, with brief incursions into academic research, I was never faced with the question of what engineers really do. Well, not until recently, when I tried to explain to one of my teenage daughters what I do for a living. She is 15 years old and already possesses all of the necessary knowledge to make a decent living (according to her). After spending an enormous amount of time (in a teenager's timescale) taking middle school science courses, she concluded that engineers, chemists, and physicists are all the same, their activities are interchangeable, and they all should make the same amount of money. I am sure that some members of the scientific community would agree with the third part of the statement (the equalization of wages).

In an academic environment, any first-year student of science would easily attempt to clarify the practice of engineering and the differences among the fields of science. He or she probably would mention the different courses in the corresponding curricula and the future activities and places where scientists and engineers carry out their daily activities. I assure you that this would be an exercise in futility.

After what feels like hundreds of sleepless nights invested in trying to regain the respect and admiration that my daughter had for me before she became a teenager, I developed a simple straightforward statement that I hope explains not only the differences between engineers and scientists in chemistry and physics, but also the differences in wages. I hope other fathers in the chemical and engineering communities can benefit from this statement: "Physicists and chemists know and change matter; engineers make matter matter."

I once tried to bring back the topic in one of the few conversations I've had with my daughter while taking her to the mall. The sudden appearance of a "really cute boy" in her field of vision thwarted my efforts. I will make another attempt when she is not in the company of other girls her age (if ever).

Erick Gamas
Baton Rouge, La.

Can't buy happiness

In her comment "ACS and The Great Dream Machine," Madeleine Jacobs cites the ACS federal charter as stating that our country's leadership in the global economy contributes to "the material prosperity and happiness of our people" (C&EN, June 13, page 37). Interestingly, material prosperity and happiness do not seem to be connected, according to data published by the Worldwatch Institute in "The State of the World 2004" (see www.worldwatch.org). The article "Rethinking the Good Life" shows a graph of average income versus happiness in the U.S. from 1957 to 2002. While average income increased steadily over this period, the percent of people reporting themselves to be "very happy" over the same period remained constant at a little more than 30%. The article concludes that the old adage is still true: "Money can't buy happiness--at least not for people who are already affluent."

Margaret E. Schott
River Forest, Ill.

Area on the small scale

We suggest the term "nanare" (nA), defined as (10 nm)², as a convenient measure of area at the nanometer scale. The derivation of this term follows from hectare, 100 "ares," where one "are" is (10 m)², and the prefix "nano." A Web search for the word "nanare" shows no current use in English.

We note that units of volume at the nanometer scale are already defined. Corresponding to the nanare, (10 nm)³ is a zeptoliter (zL), and (1 nm)³ is a yoctoliter (yL).

Douglass F. Taber
Newark, Del.
Robert P. Meagley
Berkeley, Calif.