The Science Debate 2008 initiative (which we blogged about earlier) has prompted Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science, Coturnix at A Blog Around the Clock, and Zuska at Thus Spake Zuska to suggest questions to be asked at a presidential science debate. I’m sure there are many other bloggers who’ve posed questions, but I haven’t gotten through everything in my RSS reader this week – so, if you know of a related blog post that’s worth checking out, please post a link in the comments.
Janet Stemwedel at Adventures in Ethics and Science reminds us that politicians “flip-flopping” isn’t necessary such a bad thing, especially when it comes to public officials and science.
Andrew Leonard at How the World Works brings us the news of a court decision in favor of California’s tailpipe emissions standards.
Robert Aronowitz, MD at Science Progress suggests stepping back from breast cancer fear and paying more attention to information on the disease and the effectiveness of treatments (Science Progress has also posted an excerpt from his book Unnatural History.)
Roy M Poses MD at Health Care Renewal considers threats’ to physicians’ core values.