Scientist/layperson relations

It's no surprise that the scientific and medical research in which the public tends to show the most interest is the research that is somehow connected to practical issues, like living longer and healthier lives. Scientists who depend on public monies to support their investigations have gotten pretty good at painting the "so what" for their findings. The problem, of course, is that the "so what" painted for a non-scientific audience is frequently oversimplified, glossing over a lot of the complexities that the scientists deal with daily. It's hard to cram complexities into a sound bite.…
I think after this one, we'll be ready to move on to cow (or soy) milk and solids! My last post on the breastfeeding issue pointed you to an academic examination of some of the claims being advanced in support of the superiority of breastfeeding. Joseph from Corpus Callosum left a detailed comment expressing some dissatisfaction with that examination. You really should read the whole comment, but his main points are roughly: You can find evidence that supporters of breastfeeding are biased, but that doesn't mean you aren't also biased. In a body of scientific literature, we ought to weigh…
A few days ago I pondered the ethical dimensions of breastfeeding given a recent article trumpeting its astounding benefits for infants and mothers. Those ethical considerations took as given that the claims trumpeting in the article were more or less true. Today, I want to point you to an examination of those very claims by Rebecca Goldin (Director of Research, Statistical Assessment Service, Assistant Professor, Mathematical Sciences at George Mason University), Emer Smyth (Assistant Professor of Pharmacology at Univ. of Pennsylvania), and Andrea Foulkes (Assistant Professor of…
I'm not sure I realized it while I was writing it, but my last post (on whether scientific knowledge about the benefits of breast-feeding imposes any particular obligations) has me thinking about another kind of case where scientific knowledge might -- or might not -- bring ethical consequences. That case? Global warming. My big question, thinking about these two instances where scientific knowledge, individual decisions, and public policy all coalesce, is what the relevant differences are. First, the disclaimer: I am not an expert in the scientific literature on the health effects of breast…
There's an interesting article in the New York Times about efforts by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to promote breast-feeding. Proponents of breast-feeding point to quite a lot of science that supports advantages -- for child and mother -- of breast-milk over formula. But there's also a real question about what we (i.e., individual families making choices, DHHS, employers, and society as a whole) ought to be doing in light of this information. From the New York Times article: "Just like it's risky to smoke during pregnancy, it's risky not to breast-feed after," said…
Sean Carroll at Cosmic Variance has a great post with some of his thoughts about Yearly Kos. In it, he describes the convention's heartening attention to matters scientific: The good news is: science! Thanks largely to DarkSyde's efforts, there was a substantial presence of science bloggers at YearlyKos. A "Science Bloggers Caucus" on Thursday night, which I expected to collect a dozen or so misplaced souls who weren't interested in the gatherings sponsored by some of the big political blogs, instead packed a room to overflowing with over fifty energetic participants from a wide cross-…
This post, originally posted 8 January 2006 on the old site, responds to an email I got after the last post. Given John's recent post on Pro-Test, the questions are still timely. * * * * * I received an email from a reader in response to my last post on PETA's exposing of problems with the treatment of research animals at UNC. The reader pointed me to the website of an organization concerned with the treatment of lab animals in the Research Triangle, www.serat-nc.org. And, she wrote the following: Some people may think that PETA is extreme. However, the true "extreme" is what happens to…
Wrestling overgrown rose bushes out of the ground may be harder than wrestling gators. (At the very least, it seems to take longer, while provoking less sympathy). Anyway, while I'm recovering from that, here's a "classic" post from the old location. It was originally posted 5 January 2006, but the ethical issues are still fresh. * * * * * Since I'm in the blessed wee period between semesters, it's time to revisit some "old news" (i.e., stuff that I had to set aside in the end-of-semester crush). Today, a story from about a month ago, wherein the Rick Weiss of the Washington Post reports…
From USA Today: The first vaccine to protect against most cervical cancer won federal approval Thursday. The vaccine Gardasil, approved for use in girls and women ages 9 to 26, prevents infection by four strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV, Merck & Co. Inc. said. The virus is the most prevalent sexually transmitted disease. Gardasil protects against the two types of HPV responsible for about 70% of cervical cancer cases. The vaccine also blocks infection by two other strains responsible for 90% of genital wart cases. Merck is expected to market Gardasil as a cancer, rather than an…
There's a lot going on in our world that might make you want to gnash your teeth. Some of that stuff, which you've heard about here before, involves the government trying to exert an influence over science -- either in what research gets supported (and who makes that decision) or in how the results of research are reported (or not) -- that maybe the government ought not to exert. Sometimes detailed analyses of these skirmishes are what is called for. Other times, satire is the best delivery method for a stinging condemnation. Cartoonists, the Union of Concerned Scientists is tagging you in…
Please notice that the title of this post promises a "paranoid response", not a careful analysis. It's one of those unscheduled features of this blog. Kind of like a snow day. Yesterday's Inside Higher Ed has an article about the U.S. Senate getting kind of testy with the director of the NSF about certain research projects the NSF has seen fit to fund. Regular readers know that I think we can have a reasoned debate about funding priorities (especially when that funding is put up by the public). It does not sound to me like the exchange in the Senate was that kind of reasoned debate. From…
There's an article in yesterday's New York Times about doubts the public is having about the goodness of scientific publications as they learn more about what the peer-review system does, and does not, involve. It's worth a read, if only to illuminate what non-scientists seem to have assumed went on in peer review, and to contrast that with what actually happens. This raises the obvious question: Ought peer review to be what ordinary people assume it to be? My short answer, about which more below the fold:Not unless you're prepared to completely revamp the institutional structure in which…
A couple posts ago I posed these questions: What do you want lay people to have as part of their store of scientific knowledge? What piece of scientific knowledge have you found especially useful, or would you like to have if you don't already? Among other things, my query prompted this response from commenter tbell1: I'm usually just a lurker here on science blogs, but I have a pet peeve about the use of the terms 'lay' or 'lay people' in reference to nonprofessionals in science. Doesn't it just stink of religion? Am I the only one who hates the term? Can we generate an alternative? 'non-…
Over at Evolgen, RPM links to an article that lists ten "basic questions" to which ten different scientists think high school graduates should know the answers. (It was one question from each scientist, so it's unclear whether all ten would agree that they are the ten most important questions, or even that all ten of these scientists could answer all ten to the others' satisfaction.) RPM opines that the list seems heavy on trivia (or at least seemingly random facts) and light on really helpful scientific knowledge. He writes: Let's focus on two things: the hypothetical deductive method and…
Today at Inside Higher Education, an article identifies "The Real Science Ethics Issues". Which means, I suppose, you don't have to keep taking my word about what's an issue and what is not. The focus of the article is not on the flashier instances of fraud, but on more mundane stuff that may rot the scientific enterprise from the inside. From the article: Nicholas H. Steneck, a University of Michigan history professor and a consultant at the Office of Research Integrity at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said that most research fabrication is "not very subtle or clever."…
One hundred years ago today, 18 April 1906, a major earthquake (estimated to be 7.9 on the richter scale) nearly destroyed the city of San Francisco and did some serious damage to other communities in the area. Here in the Bay Area, there are various commemorations of the event taking place, and the local papers have all hit the vaults to dig up accounts of the quake, and of the fires that followed. (See, for example, the Chronicle's "Great Quake" page. Of course, the U.S. Geological Survey has a page with great quake links, too.) So in a very obvious way, you could say there's lots of…
In a post last week, I was trying to work out whether science journalism can do something more for us than just delivering press releases from the scientists. Specifically, I suggested that journalists with a reasonable understanding of scientific methodology could do some work to assess the credibility of the research described in the press releases, as well as the credibility of the scientists issuing those press releases. Although the post was concerned with the general question of whether science journalism can do this bit of evaluative work for a lay audience that, by and large, is both…
You'll recall that the Lancaster(California) school district has recently adopted a "science philosophy" that calls for critical thinking about evolutionary theory ... but no other scientific theory in the curriculum. You'll recall that the school district trustees didn't seem to view this as having anything to do with opening the door for the teaching of creationism or intelligent design. If you read the comments, though, you've discovered that Alex Branning, the entrepreneur who spearheaded this new policy, and who claimed to have no truck with creationists or ID proponents, is the…
Hey, guess what? A California school district has adopted a new science policy aimed at getting students to think more critically ... about evolutionary theory. It is not entirely clear whether members of the Lancaster School District board of trustees recognize that the policy effectively singles out evolution for scrutiny, or whether they were duped. But I'm pretty sure I've heard this song before. Here's the coverage from the Antelope Valley Press: LANCASTER - The Lancaster School District board of trustees voted to implement a "philosophy" of science instruction that encourages…
The last two meetings of my ethics in science class have focused on some of the history of research with human subjects and on the changing statements of ethical principles or rules governing such experimentation. Looking at these statements (the Nuremberg Code and the Belmont Report especially) against the backdrop of some very serious missteps (Nazi medical experiments and the Public Health Service's Tuskegee syphilis experiment), it's painfully clear how much regulation is scandal-driven -- a reaction to a screw-up, rather than something that researchers took the time to think about…