Aristotle’s science writing serves as an instance of a classical science writer at work. Applying his theory of writing found in his Rhetoric, Poetics, Posterior Analytics, and Categories treatises to his History of Animals illustrates his work as a writer of life science. As rhetorical tools, his theory of tropes and figures and his theory of the model as developed in his theory of definitions and the enthymeme work as epistemic strategies. The essay concludes that further study should examine other rhetorical dimensions of his science writing.

Risk communication has been explored in technical communication for over 15 years, but it has been largely confined to communicating the risk of industrial activity, medical risks, or environmental threats to the public. Using the framework previous risk communication has provided, this article applies those ideas to research science, specifically to stem cell research, where government opposition until recently has limited this research, preventing it from potentially providing organs for those who need a replacement or more effective treatments for other diseases such as diabetes or Parkinson's disease. Risk communication in the United States and Europe is contrasted to delineate the greater effort being made in Europe to construct stem cell research socially for the researcher and the public.

Focusing on the issue of readability, this article examines problems that readability formulas present to the technical communicator, especially in terms of interaction with government agencies, and focuses on readability formula requirements mandated by The Office of Health and Industry programs [OHIP] for medical technology product support literature. Because the Flesch Reading Ease and the Flesch-Kincaid formulas are widely available, they are probably the ones most frequently used. Contemporary readability scholars have overlooked the Golub Syntactic Density Formula, which evaluates prose according to a sentence's syntax at a deeper level than the number of words per sentence and the number of syllables per word. The authors recommend it as a tool for evaluating readability. How it might be applied with current computer applications is discussed.

To determine the metaphor that represents cloning, a contemporary scientific revolution, this study examines articles published in Nature, Nature Biotechnology, Science, and Time that describe the cloning of the sheep Dolly. A plethora of figurative language may be garnered from these articles, and this study describes a number of them: metaphor (dead, natural, and technical), simile, hyperbole, personification, irony, cliché, paronomasia, antithesis, metonymy, anthimera, oxymoron, the rhetorical question, and analogy. The significance and relationship to cloning are explicated. The article concludes that the figures do not support a central metaphor. Further research is suggested to determine if the lack of a metaphor is a fluke or a trend in the development of scientific research and what the difference may be between scientific and technical metaphor.

The author reviews recent articles from the technical writing literature focusing on the controversy surrounding the appropriateness of readability formulas for technical writing, an issue of immediate concern for many writers and editors. While some authorities recommend readability formulas—if the writer recognizes the formulas as a tool limited by the variables manipulated—overwhelming argument from other experts suggests that the formulas should be ignored because they can mislead writers by lulling them into a false sense of security or into writing stilted prose to fit the formula. The author suggests that further research should be conducted to study empirically how readability as a concept might be used to aid the technical writer since readability formulas are shaping computerized editing programs.