For many members of SftP, science in China represents a possible alternative to the American system. In 1973, several SftP members visited China and wrote a book about their experiences called China. Science Walks on Two Legs. There is a China study group in the Boston chapter that is currently planning another trip.

The internal structure of the Boston chapter reflects SftP's anti-elitism. There are no officers; instead, a steering committee made up of the office staff person and representatives of the several activity groups arrive at all decisions collectively. Gordon says there are about 100 active members in the chapt defined as such by their attendance at weekly meetings in the various activity groups. About four times that number are active sporadically, he says.

Jon King says that membership is roughly one-third workers, secretaries, and draftsmen in scientific establishments; one-third high school science teachers, computer programmers, and technicians; and one-third academics and professionals, including industry scientists, professors and students. Within SftP, academic or professional credentials carry no status or privileges.

The activity groups are semi-autonomous, each pursuing its own investigations and research, publishing pamphlets and articles in the magazine, and organizing events. Active groups include a genetics and society group--responsible for a teach-in at MIT about recombinant DNA research, on September 22--a sociobiology group, a women's issues group (fighting sexism in science is a high priority, the organization says), and a food and nutrition group.

A science teaching group sends representatives to the National Science Teachers Association's meetings and holds workshops on issues for high school instructors. In addition the group develops and distributes materials dealing with the non-neutrality of science in society. They have special materials on issues like the XYY-criminality theory, which they say is widely and inaccurately reported as scientific fact in many high school science tests.

Members of the Boston chapter say an especially important activity group deals with occupational health and safety. Presently this group provides information and technical support to scientific workers in laboratories. Diana Echevarria, a member of SftP and a former research assistant at the Harvard Biology Laboratories, for example, has acted as a liason between SftP and the Harvard Employees Organizing Committee (HEOC), of which she is also a member. This relationship supports HEOC's drive to secure representation on the Branton Committee charged with setting safety standards for the recombinant DNA experiments at the Bio Labs.

Echevarria says SftP plans to expand its contracts and technical assistance to unions and workers in general. There is also an SftP backed organization of laboratory workers at MIT.

The activities of the China group, the teaching group, and the occupational health and safety group illustrate an important difference between SftP and other organizations of activist scientists, which are usually single issue lobbying groups. The Union of Concerned Scientists, for example, is essentially a public interest group limited to doing research and providing expert testimony at government hearings investigating hazards in the nuclear energy industry. In contrast, members of SftP say that their primary concern is to develop a mass consciousness, to convince people that the present system must undergo fundamental change.

Thus, SftP stresses its political analysis of scientific questions, which most often seems to be Marxist in character. King says they are interested in asking basic questions, such as the reason for the original development of nuclear energy as a priority instead of less dangerous alternative forms. On this and other issues, many members consider the best method for understanding social problems to be a recognition of monopoly corporations' dominance over public policy.

SftP says the capitalist system forces to focus on coercing the individual to fit the system, and that such a society places profit before people. Among the examples cited by SftP are: attempts to cure cancer through recombinant DNA research rather than by eliminating carcinogens from the environment; screening factory workers for genetic susceptibility to tungsten-caused cancer rather than eliminating the hazard; pinning the blame for deviant behavior and widespread social ills on the genes of individuals rather than on the structure of society.

Beckwith and others say SftP's political analyses of the issues are rarely reported adequately in the media, who also, according to some members of SftP, seem to have a "dangerous antagonism" toward reporting the SftP affiliation of prominent scientists in the organization, even though members often make it explicit that they are speaking for the collective and not as individuals.

Beckwith says the press finds it boring to report the theoretical context of the issues, and that it is just more interesting to write about what the "big names" are doing, rather than reporting the activities of an organization hard to understand. Another theory proffered is that capitalist society actively trains people to see things in terms of individuals rather than in social forces.

At any rate, the problem of individual vs. collective recognition is a persistant thorn in the side of SftP, one they hope to eliminate by strengthening the national structure of the group. A national organizing committee has been formed, and plans are underway to draw up eventual principles of unity.

SftP hopes to multiply its effectiveness by coordinating activities and protests on an international and national basis. With increased visibility, they say they hope to provide support to isolated but concerned individuals who might otherwise be intimidated from speaking out on the issues.

This year the AAAS returned to Boston for its annual meeting, and there seemed to be a change in its relationship to SftP. There were no disruptions. SftP was allowed to arrange and participate in sessions on the regular program, and members had their own meeting room and literature table.