Posts about scientific literacy
animals bacteria biology Career Cats cool curiouscat economy Energy Engineering engineering education engineers evolution experiment food fun Funding government green Health Care human health innovation K-12 kids Life Science medical research MIT nature ocean physics Products Research Robots Science science education science explained science facts science webcasts scientific inquiry Students Technology university research USA water webcasts

Vaccines Can’t Provide Miraculous Results if We Don’t Take Them

Posted on June 27, 2010  Comments (6)

Vaccine preventable diseases used to ravage our health. In the USA, we are lucky to live in a society where those before us have taken vaccines and reduced to very low levels the attack vectors for these diseases. If nearly everyone is vaccinated for polio, even if it crops up with one person, most likely it won’t spread. As more people chose to risk the health of others in the society by failing to vaccinate, an infection can spread rapidly. There are some people who can’t be vaccinated for one reason or another (normally dangerous allergies) and vaccines, while very effective are not 100% effective. So any person that fails to vaccinate their kids endangers society and those who cannot be vaccinated.

Six Top Vaccine Myths

Myth 1: It’s not necessary to vaccinate kids against diseases that have been largely eradicated in the United States.
Reality: Although some diseases like polio and diphtheria aren’t often seen in America (in large part because of the success of the vaccination efforts), they can be quite common in other parts of the world. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warns that travelers can unknowingly bring these diseases into the United States, and if we were not protected by vaccinations, these diseases could quickly spread throughout the population. At the same time, the relatively few cases currently in the U.S. could very quickly become tens or hundreds of thousands of cases without the protection we get from vaccines. Brown warns that these diseases haven’t disappeared, “they are merely smoldering under the surface.”

Most parents do follow government recommendations: U.S. national immunization rates are high, ranging from 85 percent to 93 percent, depending on the vaccine, according to the CDC.

See the 2010 Child & Adolescent Immunization Schedules from the CDC and protect your children and society. The suffering caused by preventable diseases like polio and small pox was huge. We should not delude ourselves into thinking that those diseases are not dangerous. They are. We have been protected by all those taking vaccines. If people in the society don’t take vaccines that increases the health risks to the society at large.

Routine smallpox vaccination among the American public stopped in 1972 after the disease was eradicated in the United States. The United States government has enough vaccine to vaccinate every person in the United States in the event of a smallpox emergency (mainly due to concerns about bio-terrorism).

U.S. Adults Dying of Preventable Diseases

Diseases easily preventable by adult vaccines kill more Americans each year than car wrecks, breast cancer, or AIDS.
…
“We have a chronic disease epidemic in the U.S. It is taxing our families and taxing our economy,” the CDC’s Anne Schuchat, MD, said at the news conference. “We have a need for culture change in America. We worry about things when they are really bad rather than focusing on prevention, which can keep us out of the hospital and keep our families thriving.”

In other parts of the world the danger is not from those who chose not to vaccinate their children but those who are not provided the opportunity to.

Bill Gates’ war on disease, poverty is an uphill battle
Continue reading →

Poor Results on Evolution and Big Bang Questions Omitted From NSF Report

Posted on April 10, 2010  Comments (4)

Evolution, Big Bang Polls Omitted From NSF Report by Yudhijit Bhattacharjee

The section, which was part of the unedited chapter on public attitudes toward science and technology, notes that 45% of Americans in 2008 answered true to the statement, “Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals.” The figure is similar to previous years and much lower than in Japan (78%), Europe (70%), China (69%), and South Korea (64%). The same gap exists for the response to a second statement, “The universe began with a big explosion,” with which only 33% of Americans agreed.

The USA continues to lag far behind the rest of the world in this basic science understanding. Similar to how we lag in other science and mathematical education. Nearly Half of Adults in the USA Don’t Know How Long it Takes the Earth to Circle the Sun.

Jon Miller, a science literacy researcher at Michigan State University in East Lansing who authored the survey 3 decades ago and conducted it for NSF until 2001. “Evolution and the big bang are not a matter of opinion. If a person says that the earth really is at the center of the universe, even if scientists think it is not, how in the world would you call that person scientifically literate? Part of being literate is to both understand and accept scientific constructs.”

I completely agree. People have the right to their opinions. But those opinions which are related to scientific knowledge (whether it is about evolution, the origin of the universe, cancer, the speed of light, polio vaccinations, multi-factorial designed experiments, magnetic fields, chemical catalysts, the effectiveness of antibiotics against viral infections, electricity, optics, bioaccumulation, etc.) are part of their scientific literacy. You can certainly believe antibiotics are affective against viral infections but that is an indication you are scientifically illiterate on that topic.

2006 NSF chapter that included the results
Continue reading →

What Dogs Reveal About Evolution

Posted on January 17, 2010  Comments (0)

cover of the Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins

From, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution by Richard Dawkins

All breeds of dogs are domesticated wolves: not jackals, not coyotes and not foxes.
…
Coppinger points out that when domestic animals break free and go feral for many generations, they usually revert to something close to their wild ancestor. We might expect feral dogs, therefore, to become rather wolf-like. But this doesn’t happen. Instead, dogs left to go feral seem to become the ubiquitous “village dogs” – “pye-dogs” – that hang around human settlements all over the Third World. This encourages Coppinger’s belief that the dogs on which human breeders finally went to work were wolves no longer. They had already changed themselves into dogs: village dogs, pye-dogs, perhaps dingos.

Real wolves are pack hunters. Village dogs are scavengers that frequent middens and rubbish dumps.
…
Belyaev and his colleagues (and successors, for the experimental programme continued after his death) subjected fox cubs to standardised tests in which an experimenter would offer a cub food by hand, while trying to stroke or fondle it. The cubs were classified into three classes. Class III cubs were those that fled from or bit the person. Class II cubs would allow themselves to be handled, but showed no positive responsiveness to the experimenters. Class I cubs, the tamest of all, positively approached the handlers, wagging their tails and whining. When the cubs grew up, the experimenters systematically bred only from this tamest class.

After a mere six generations of this selective breeding for tameness, the foxes had changed so much that the experimenters felt obliged to name a new category, the “domesticated elite” class, which were “eager to establish human contact, whimpering to attract attention and sniffing and licking experimenters like dogs.” At the beginning of the experiment, none of the foxes were in the elite class. After ten generations of breeding for tameness, 18 per cent were “elite”; after 20 generations, 35 per cent; and after 30 to 35 generations, “domesticated elite” individuals constituted between 70 and 80 per cent of the experimental population.
…
The tame foxes not only behaved like domestic dogs, they looked like them. They lost their foxy pelage and became piebald black and white, like Welsh collies. Their foxy prick ears were replaced by doggy floppy ears. Their tails turned up at the end like a dog’s, rather than down like a fox’s brush. The females came on heat every six months like a bitch, instead of every year like a vixen. According to Belyaev, they even sounded like dogs.

These dog-like features were side- effects. Belyaev and his team did not deliberately breed for them, only for tameness.

The famous domesticated silver fox experiment offers interesting insight into animal traits and evolution.

Related: The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins – The Evolution of House Cats – Darwin’s Beetles Still Producing Surprises – Backyard Wildlife: Fox

Microbes Flourish In Healthy People

Posted on January 15, 2010  Comments (1)

Bugs Inside: What Happens When the Microbes That Keep Us Healthy Disappear? by Katherine Harmon

The human body has some 10 trillion human cells—but 10 times that number of microbial cells. So what happens when such an important part of our bodies goes missing?
…
“Someone who didn’t have their microbes, they’d be naked,” says Martin Blaser, a professor of microbiology and chair of the Department of Medicine at New York University Langone Medical Center in New York City.
…
Even though it is such an apparently integral and ancient aspect of human health, scientists are still grasping for better ways to study human microbiota—before it changes beyond historical recognition. Borrowing models from outside of medicine has helped many in the field gain a better understanding of this living world within us. “The important concept is about extinctions,” Blaser says. “It’s ecology.”
…
The first step in understanding these systems is simply taking stock of what archaea, bacteria, fungi, protozoa and viruses are present in healthy individuals. This massive micro undertaking has been ongoing since 2007 through the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) Human Microbiome Project. So far it has turned up some surprisingly rich data, including genetic sequencing for some 205 of the different genera that live on healthy human skin.

Despite the flood of new data, Foxman laughs when asked if there is any hope for a final report from the Human Microbiome Project any time soon. “This is the very, very beginning,” she says, comparing this project with the NIH’s Human Genome Project, which jump-started a barrage of new genetic research. “There are basic, basic questions that we don’t know the answers to,” she says, such as how different microbiota are between random individuals or family members; how much microbiota change over time; or how related the microbiota are to each other on or inside a person’s body.

Related: Microcosm by Carl Zimmer – Tracking the Ecosystem Within Us – Alligator Blood Provides Strong Resistance to Bacteria and Viruses – Beneficial Bacteria

Science Explained: RNA Interference

Posted on November 13, 2009  Comments (1)

Explained: RNA interference

Every high school biology student learns the basics of how genes are expressed: DNA, the cell’s master information keeper, is copied into messenger RNA, which carries protein-building instructions to the ribosome, the part of the cell where proteins are assembled.

But it turns out the picture is far more complicated than that. In recent years, biologists have discovered a myriad of other molecules that fine-tune this process, including several types of RNA (ribonucleic acid). Through a naturally occurring phenomenon known as RNA interference, short strands of RNA can selectively intercept and destroy messenger RNA before it delivers its instructions.
…
Double-stranded RNA molecules called siRNA (short interfering RNA) bind to complementary messenger RNA, then enlist the help of proteins, the RNA-induced silencing complex. Those proteins cleave the chemical bonds holding messenger RNA together and prevent it from delivering its protein-building instructions.

This article from MIT is one, of many, showing MIT’s commitment to science education of the public. Good job, MIT.

Related: Antigen Shift in Influenza Viruses – Posts explaining scientific principles and concepts – DNA Passed to Descendants Changed by Your Life – Why Does Hair Turn Grey as We Age? – Amazing Science: Retroviruses

Test it Out, Experiment by They Might Be Giants

Posted on October 2, 2009  Comments (4)

Put It to the Test is one of the songs on the great new Album and animated DVD from They Might Be Giants: Here Comes Science.

Are you sure that thing is true, or did someone just tell it to you.
Come up with a test. Test it out.
Find a way to show what would happen if you were incorrect. Test it out.
A fact is just a fantasy unless it can be checked.
Make a test. Test it out.

A fun song on fundamentals of experimenting to the scientific method.

Related: Here Comes Science by They Might Be Giants – posts on experimenting – MythBuster: 3 Ways to Fix USA Science Education – Science Toys You Can Make With Your Kids – Correlation is Not Causation

Neil Degrasse Tyson: Scientifically Literate See a Different World

Posted on September 22, 2009  Comments (4)

From the interview of Neil Degrasse Tyson from 3 July 2009.

“If you are scientifically literate the world looks very different to you. Its not just a lot of mysterious things happening. There is a lot we understand out there. And that understanding empowers you to, first, not be taken advantage of by others who do understand it. And second there are issues that confront society that have science as their foundation. If you are scientifically illiterate, in a way, you are disenfranchising yourself from the democratic process, and you don’t even know it.”

I agree, and, as I have said before, when a society allows a scientific illiteracy to continue then the potential for abuse by those that manipulate those that are scientifically illiterate leaves the society vulnerable to making very bad choices.

Related: Nearly Half of Adults in the USA Don’t Know How Long it Takes the Earth to Circle the Sun – posts on scientific literacy – Evolution, Methane, Jobs, Food and More – Astronaut self portrait – Cosmology Questions Answered – Sarah, aged 3, Learns About Soap

Experimenting Social Network

Posted on August 29, 2009  Comments (0)

Social media is definitely a fad filled with lots of ways to waste time. It also does have real value, ways to connect to things people care about and wish to focus on. Reddit is a good site for finding interesting resources online. Sub-reddits are topical areas within Reddit (I have set up management and investing sub-reddits). A new experiment subreddit looks very interesting:

Each experiment will go through a few threads. The first step will be a query for experimental methods. Someone will present a problem or piece of information they want to find out, and then others will suggest methods. Once this is agreed upon, it will be carried out, and a second thread will be posted detailing the method and providing a place to post results via the comments. Then, a third thread can be made to discuss the results. Having more than one thread for every experiment will make things more accessible and easier to sort.

Don’t research ways other people have experimentally determined these things. Submit original ideas to the experimental design thread. Try to come up with a novel way to discover things, but don’t be completely limited by this suggestion. This is chiefly about rediscovery, not repeating someone else’s experiment, but sometimes there’s fun and merit in that as well.

I have joined. You can go to Reddit and join this subreddit to see experiences with experimenting to learn about the world around us.

Related: posts about experimenting – General Relativity Einstein/Essen Anniversary Test – Curious Cat StumbleUpon – Home Experiment: Deriving the Gravitational Constant – Dell, Reddit and Customer Focus – Joel Spolsky Webcast on Creating Social Web Resources – Encyclopedia of Life, social science – John Hunter Online

What is a Molecule?

Posted on August 24, 2009  Comments (4)

One of the things I keep meaning to do more of with this blog is provide some post on basic science concepts that may help raise scientific literacy. Some of these will be pretty obvious but even reminders on some facts you know can sometimes help.

What is a molecule?

A molecule is the smallest particle of a compound that has all the chemical properties of that compound. Molecules are made up of two or more atoms, either of the same element or of two or more different elements. The example of molecules are water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) and molecular nitrogen (N2).

Organic molecules contain Carbon, for example, Methane CH4). The original definition of “organic” chemistry came from the misconception that organic compounds were always related to life processes.

A few types of compounds such as carbonates, simple oxides of carbon and cyanides, as well as the allotropes of carbon, are considered inorganic. The division between “organic” and “inorganic” carbon compounds while “useful in organizing the vast subject of chemistry…is somewhat arbitrary”

Ionic compounds, such as common salt, are made up not of molecules, but of ions arranged in a crystalline structure. Unlike ions, molecules carry no net electrical charge.

Related: Why is it Colder at Higher Elevations? – Why is the Sky Blue? – 10 Science Facts You Should Know – Bacteria Communicate Using a Chemical Language

Science Knowledge Quiz

Posted on July 14, 2009  Comments (4)

pew research science quiz results

Pew Research Center’s new study of science and its impact on society includes a science knowledge quiz. You can test yourself on the quiz. Thankfully I was able to get all 12 answers correct, which 10% of those taking the test have done. The median score was 8 out of 12.

I find some of the results surprising. The question most often answered correctly is “Which over-the-counter drug do doctors recommend that people take to help prevent heart attacks?”. The least often “Electrons are smaller than atoms,” a true or false question fewer than 50% of people got right.

Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media

Americans like science. Overwhelming majorities say that science has had a positive effect on society and that science has made life easier for most people. Most also say that government investments in science, as well as engineering and technology, pay off in the long run. And scientists are very highly rated compared with members of other professions: Only members of the military and teachers are more likely to be viewed as contributing a lot to society’s well-being.
…
Just 17% of the public thinks that U.S. scientific achievements rate as the best in the world. A survey of more than 2,500 scientists, conducted in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), finds that nearly half (49%) rate U.S. scientific achievements as the best in the world.
…
large percentages think that government investments in basic scientific research (73%) and engineering and technology (74%) pay off in the long run. Notably, the partisan differences in these views are fairly modest, with 80% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans saying that government investments in basic science pay off in the long run. Comparable percentages of Democrats and Republicans say the same about government investments in engineering and technology.

In this regard, public views about whether funding for scientific research should be increased, decreased or kept the same have changed little since the start of the decade. Currently, more than twice as many people say that, if given the task of making up the budget for the federal government, they would increase (39%) rather than decrease (14%) funding for scientific research; 40% say they would keep spending as it is. That is largely unchanged from 2001, when 41% said they would increase funding for scientific research.

Related: Nearly Half of Adults in the USA Don’t Know How Long it Takes the Earth to Circle the Sun – Understanding the Evolution of Human Beings by Country – Invest in Science for a Strong Economy – Try to Answer 6 Basic Science Questions – What Everyone Should Learn

Value of Prostate Cancer Screening Questioned by Two Studies

Posted on March 24, 2009  Comments (2)

Ben Goldacre, in his bad science blog, again takes on journalist’s articles of health research in: Venal, misleading, pathetic, dangerous, stupid, and busted

1410 men would need to be screened to prevent one death. For each death prevented, 48 people would need to be treated: and prostate cancer treatment has a high risk of very serious side effects like impotence and incontinence. These figures are not hard to find: they are in the summary of the research paper.

For complex risk decisions like screening, it has been shown in three separate studies that patients, doctors, and NHS purchasing panels make more rational decisions about treatments and screening programmes when they are given the figures as real numbers, as I did above, instead of percentages. I’m not saying that PSA screening is either good or bad: I am saying that people deserve the figures in the clearest form possible so they can make their own mind up.
…
So newspapers ignore one half of the evidence, and they fail to explain the other half properly.
…
They can also link directly and transparently to scientific papers, which mainstream media still refuses to do. Journalists insist that we need professionals to mediate and explain science. From today’s story, their self belief seems truly laughable.

He also says some journalists got it right including the Washington Post in, Prostate Cancer Screening May Not Reduce Deaths:

The PSA blood test, which millions of men undergo each year, did not lower the death toll from the disease in the first decade of a U.S. government-funded study involving more than 76,000 men, researchers reported yesterday. The second study, released simultaneously, was a European trial involving more than 162,000 men that did find fewer deaths among those tested. But the reduction was relatively modest and the study showed that the tests resulted in a large number of men undergoing needless, often harmful treatment.

I think it is true that most people need help having science mediated to some extent. But he is also right that those doing so need to do better. And also everyone needs to learn about science to understand the choices they personally and politically (for policy issues) need to make decisions on. Being scientifically illiterate is dangerous.

Related: Science Journalism – Poor Reporting and Unfounded Implications – Study Finds No Measurable Benefit to Flu Shots – How Prozac Sent Science Inquiry Off Track

  • Recent Comments:

    • Jason Monroe: Many of my friends do Crossfit and realize how quickly you lose weight when you increase your...
    • Denise Gabbard: Nice! This is the kind of thing we should all embrace. Not only are they helping the planet...
    • Huskar: Thanks your explanation.
    • Mark: Good point, my explanation is as follows. If someones got a better one I’d like to hear it....
    • Asad Wahab: I was just wondering if he can is round in shape then how come the electrons are shifted to one...
    • Sonia Bourke: That’s amazing – such a beautiful animal. I’ve always wondered how a...
    • Anonymous: Hi, Thanks for your nice article. I think India can overtake the China, because engineering...
    • Mark: We just bought one the other day at a plant sale, and it has just begun to flower. I didn’t...

  • Recent Trackbacks:

  • Links