What Paul Krugman Could Learn From How Big Government Created The Obesity Epidemic

“One of the most frightening forces at work in the world today is the tendency of Big Government toward perversion of science. The scientific method is pristine. Scientists are human, and fallible. The secular beatification of scientists and demeaning of science is a perversion. Better to beatify the scientific method and reserve some skepticism for scientists (and bureaucrats).”

“We are witness to, and victim of, the ongoing perversion of science. The US nutritional guidelines now are indicted as the root cause of many unnecessary deaths. The suppression of the debate over climate change similarly portends much misery. We are enmeshed, in the subversion of science to political ends, in a battle of epic proportions.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2015/03/09/what-paul-krugman-could-learn-from-how-big-government-created-the-obesity-epidemic/

Why People “Fly from Facts”

“Research shows the appeal of untestable beliefs, and how it leads to a polarized society

“As public debate rages about issues like immunization, Obamacare, and same-sex marriage, many people try to use science to bolster their arguments. And since it’s becoming easier to test and establish facts—whether in physics, psychology, or policy—many have wondered why bias and polarization have not been defeated. When people are confronted with facts, such as the well-established safety of immunization, why do these facts seem to have so little effect?”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-people-fly-from-facts/?WT.mc_id=SA_DD_20150303

Lab mice can’t help us in the fight against cancer

Two articles linked below illustrate some interesting ideas about how we construct knowledge in the natural sciences. These cases raise a host of interesting issues. What assumptions do we hold when we try to learn about fighting human diseases by experimenting on mice? In what ways are these assumptions false? Is it ethical to run these experiments? Does the answer to that question depend on how effectively we learn from these experiments?

“Curing cancer in mice is unlikely to lead to a breakthrough for humans. So why do we persist in carrying out bizarre and freakish experiments?

“We are constantly being promised ground breaking advancements, cures, treatments and answers to this terrible and deadly disease that we have all lost someone to. It is, admittedly, beguiling speak and fulfils its purpose of justifying this kind of savage cruelty to animals.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/lab-mice-cant-help-us-in-the-fight-against-cancer-8316756.html

Retire the Use of Mouse Models in cancer studies

“We cured acute leukemia in mice in 1977 with drugs that we are still using in exactly the same dose and duration today in humans with dreadful results.”

http://edge.org/response-detail/25429

Big Bang, Deflated? Universe May Have Had No Beginning

universe-timelineA really interesting article that discusses some contemporary problems in Physics and gives us some insights into how science works.

“There are other problems brewing in physics — namely, that the two most dominant theories, quantum mechanics and general relativity, can’t be reconciled.”

http://news.yahoo.com/big-bang-deflated-universe-may-had-no-beginning-140017504.html

My Depressing Day With A Famous Climate Skeptic

What does this article tell us about how knowledge is constructed in the natural sciences? What makes scientific research “good”? What ethical concerns arise when being paid for your scientific work?

“But more troubling was a conversation I had with Soon earlier in the day. Every scientist has the right to his or her own perspective. But scientists also understand how research communities build their understanding about what is known and how anyone knows it. So, I wondered how Soon could fail to acknowledge that the weight of evidence was overwhelmingly against him when he made his overarching public statements of skepticism. I asked Soon why his testimony to Congress did not begin with something like, ‘I acknowledge that the majority of researchers in my field hold a different view from me, but let me now explain why I am taking such a contrarian position.'”

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2015/02/24/388682684/my-depressing-day-with-a-famous-climate-skeptic

Behind New Dietary Guidelines, Better Science

“Use of these types of studies happens far more often than we would like, leading to dietary guidelines that may not be based on the best available evidence. But last week, the government started to address that problem, proposing new guidelines that in some cases are more in line with evidence from randomized controlled trials, a more rigorous form of scientific research.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/upshot/behind-new-dietary-guidelines-better-science.html?abt=0002&abg=0

When the Government Tells You What to Eat

“Since the very first nutritional guidelines to restrict saturated fat and cholesterol were released by the American Heart Association in 1961, Americans have been the subjects of a vast, uncontrolled diet experiment with disastrous consequences. We have to start looking more skeptically at epidemiological studies and rethinking nutrition policy from the ground up.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/21/opinion/when-the-government-tells-you-what-to-eat.html