PREFACE

I have chosen to describe the scientific process, in which I have participated, in a chronological fashion, describing how experiments led to new insights and provoked new ideas, and how they were abandoned or expanded upon. I have reviewed areas of relevance to our scientific field, and integrated our approach and results with those of other investigators. I have kept a narrative style throughout, because I trust this will increase the readability. Rigorous testing of the thesis hypothesis requires many different approaches, since practically any approach is flawed with its own set of errors, or its results are subject to alternative explanations. The beauty of science is when one can device experiments, the outcome of which is subject to only two interpretations: The hypothesis is either true or false. In experimental science, false is preferable to true, as true could mean compatible with and therefore not provide a definitive foundation to expand upon. Such outcomes are normally possible only with relatively simple experiments. The complexity, i.e. many variables, of most issues in biology almost inevitably leads to equally possible alternative explanations, and the correct interpretation must await the test of time and future experiments. Good science will lead to new insights and new questions, a pursuit without end ... I think that prior knowledge of this field is not absolutely required, in fact the reader might benefit the most from this journey beyond immunology without any such cargo. However, a summary of our studies and previous work in this area is found on page 30 (references 1-27).