Second, however, where is the good old-fashioned clinical research? Where are studies that examine epidemiology, descriptive psychopathology, and course and outcome? Studies in this area are becoming increasingly rare, since they are no longer perceived as "sexy," "cutting edge," "sophisticated," or even "scientific." They are incredibly low tech. They only require having a thinking brain/mind, observing many patients, and recording observations and measurements in a systematic way that can be analyzed by using statistical methods that range from very simple to very complicated. In the United States an older generation of clinical researchers who led the field for many years have died—Eli Robins, Gerry Klerman, George Winokur—or are dying out. Very few younger investigators are emerging to replace them. The word is out—if you want to succeed as a serious scientist, you need to do something relatively basic. Fortunately, the Europeans still have a proud tradition of clinical research and descriptive psychopathology. Someday in the twenty-first century, after the human genome and the human brain have been mapped, someone may need to organize a reverse Marshall plan so that the Europeans can save American science by helping us figure out who really has schizophrenia or what schizophrenia really is. The fledging American school of descriptive psychopathology will have become extinct. Yet we cannot apply the potentially great fruits of the Human Genome Project to complex mental illnesses if we no longer have clinical investigators who have devoted their research careers to conceptualizing the nature and definitions of symptoms, syndromes, diseases, or diagnoses.