During the Obama administration, he was concerned about vaccines causing autism and it showed when it came to guidance about swine flu vaccines. His administration banned multi-use vials because of his party's insistence that preservatives caused the disorder.
Though "medical" marijuana has long been available to much of the public, to the medical community it's been a joke. For example, over 60 percent of pain patients are older women, but the majority of medical marijuana users who got it for pain were young men. It's a nice non-specific system on a subjective scale so it became an easy route to get legal access to a drug.And it is a drug, it does things to receptors, but what they are really accomplishing is unclear.
Urban beards are all the rage this decade, often worn by men in Euroweenie tight suits who want to hearken back to older times, when men were manly and not afraid of science.Not so today. If you wear a beard now, it means you want to look masculine while virtue signaling that removing certain chemicals in soap will prevent your erectile dysfunction. In reality, such men probably needn't worry, women are swiping left because most don't want to date someone who looks ready for a Civil War re-enactment but they suspect has a bathroom filled with vegan skin care goop.Not a Dr.
What is old hype is new again, which is to say population bombs, starvation in Africa, nuclear plant meltdowns, and atomic destruction because an aggressive American president makes a wholesome dictator in Russia nervous and nuclear bombs start going off.These recurring doomsday narratives follow a predictable cycle:1) Hysterical activist with a credible title engages in crisis inflation2) It gets New York Times coverage and a whole bunch of other people talk about it3) A few questionable academics jump on the bandwagon4) Serious scientists debunk it, to little public acclaim5) The original scientists back off6) All the old critics die off7) A new generation of activists claim it was not a myth
The U.S Government Accountability Office (G.A.O.) has had NASA on its High Risk list since 1990, due to persistent cost inflation and missed schedules of its programs.Long before banks and General Motors set out to become "too big to fail", NASA had made it a core value. There is no better example of how far NASA has fallen from the can-do group that gave us the Apollo program than the James Webb Space Telescope fiasco. First proposed and funded in 1996 as the successor to Hubble, by 2002 they had told Congress that 11 years - longer than it took for the Apollo Program to put man on the moon from scratch - was not going to be enough time to send a mirror outside our atmosphere.
Though Johnson & Johnson and Purdue Pharma are on the hook for big judgments due to their marketing practices related to opioids, claims that they "created" an opioid epidemic are the scientific equivalent of fat shaming people if you don't like Burger King commercials.Attorneys will claim it, they will get thousands of people to sign up as litigants, and juries will agree with the emotional arguments they hear, but that has nothing to do with science or health. In appeals cases, science data is used, which is why so many spectacularly ridiculous judgments (like baby powder or a weedkiller magically causing cancer) get overturned.
One thing that makes the science community spit its Fresca out its collective nose is the organic industry's claims to be more natural than conventional.Mutagenesis, where seeds are literally dunked in chemical and radiation baths in hopes to get a good mutation, is placed under the organic halo (along with 50 synthetic ingredients exempted because there is "no organic alternative") but if one gene is moved from a Pacific Salmon to an Atlantic salmon so the latter grows faster, it is Frankenfish to environmental lawyers.
Some mosquito species, such as Aedes aegypti, have been able to weave their way through evolutionary time despite having no ecological value, basically being just delivery mechanisms for things like Dengue fever, the most common vector-borne disease in the world.We could wipe them out and the rest of the ecosystem would be just fine but environmentalists have promoted a lot of fear about science-based mitigation approaches, like a male mosquito rendered sterile, and they hate pesticides more than they love poor people, so that leaves...clothes?
China bans some chemicals whether or not the evidence shows it, and the United States should be more like communist dictatorships, suggests a Center for Biological Diversity blogger in a press release for their latest op-ed in Environmental Health.
A new scaremongering story about food and cancer is making the rounds but before you run off to find comfort in the arms of Mark Hyman, Mehmet Oz, or Joe Mercola, keep one thing in mind.This is in mice. This stuff is always in mice or a statistical correlation, which means without real science showing it in humans, it is not relevant to humans.
I didn't even know Scientific American Blogs still existed. They do, they were just irrelevant and no one remembered until a few days ago. Given their recent foray into nonsense, it can be the next place where denier for hire Paul Thacker pretends to be a journalist.Scientific American Blogs was the brainchild of blogging wunderkind Bora Zivkovic, who left Scienceblogs for PLOS, to build a blog network for them, and then when Scientific American wanted to retry blogging they recruited him.
America is producing more Ph.D.s than ever but federal funding for academic grants cannot keep pace with the expansion in university halls, bolstered by well-financed Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) outreach campaigns which promote the idea that technology is important for the 21st century, but then say that means working at a school.Meanwhile, tenured researchers are delaying retirement because they are still doing valuable work. With more applicants and experienced scientists with a proven track record competing at a later, is America in danger of a young brain drain?
An influential psychological theory, borne out in hundreds of experiments, may have been debunked, writes Daniel Engber, and then "how can so many scientists have been so wrong?"It sounds like a clarion call for concern about the scientific method. Yet it isn't. Instead, it was something that was rather predictable to anyone who knows how most modern (post-1960s) psychology experiments are conducted - and that in most cases they never are conducted, at least not in the way people who took science in school understand experiments.
