BlueGenes's blog
The latest Skeptics' Circle is finally here, written by yours truly! By way of a teaser, I'll relay the first few words. *Hypnotic voice* As you read them you can feel the need to find out more rise up within you...breathe deeply...relax...and follow the link.
Academician: Welcome, one and all, to the 123rd meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle. Hat tip to one of the most important men ever to stand up and say ‘Er…hang on’ for tonight’s theme...
Head on over to Blue-Genes.net to find out more. We have an excellent cast including James Cole, several posts from Skeptic North and Richard Hughes from Young Aus Skeptics, covering topics from the H1N1 vaccine and prayer-healing to the Bald-Faced Bubul and hiking in the mountaints. Read the carnival, follow the links, and subscribe to interesting new skeptics!
Ladies and Gentlemen! Carnival Season is upon us, or rather: carnival season is upon Blue-Genes.net. For the uninitiated: the Skeptics' Circle is an ancient (by intertube standards) rite where the cleverest clogs in the world get together fortnightly to share their thoughts on many issues that have become clouded by poor logic, bias, and silliness.
Yesterday saw the release of the paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine containing the hotly awaited data concerning the RV144 HIV vaccine trial that took place in Thailand. There was already some discussion of the initial results, which were reported in September and discussed by Colin and Martin. As has already been discussed, there is a very cautious consensus due to the statistical analysis of the trial only *just* falling on the side of significant. Click here to read this post in its native environment, on Blue-Genes.net.
Most denizens of the interwebs (at least of this corner of the interwebs) will have heard the announcement that the 2009 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine will be given to Elizabeth Blackburn, Carol Greider and Jack Szostak for their work on telomeres - the structures found at the ends of human chromosomes. You may already have read a little about the research behind it (if not, the NobelPrize.org press release is a very good place to start) so I’ll try to keep the background as short as possible. What I would like to do here is to explain the assertions that “cancer research has also benefited from the Nobel-winning trio's work”. If you haven't already done so, I also recommend reading "Understanding Cancer Part 1"
At the end of April this year, a 90 minute film was released directed by a man called Brent Leung. This film was titled ‘House of Numbers’, and is shot in a documentary format with the claim of ‘objectively investigating whether HIV exists, and whether HIV causes AIDS’. The narrative soothingly reassures the audience that an objective and balanced approach is being taken, whilst the presentation in fact hugely attempts to lead viewers to a conclusion questioning scientific fact. The film gives credence to entirely invalidated arguments, and demands debate over subject matter long since resolved. Continue reading at Blue-Genes.net
When HIV was discovered as the causative agent of AIDS in 1984 (and has since been repeatedly proven, despite denialists claims - see Ben's post) scientists were relieved: "It's a virus! Phew, viruses are something we can deal with. Alright, somebody go cook up a vaccine: problem solved". According to wikipedia, senior figures in the US health system claimed that a vaccine would be ready in as little as two years. 25 years later HIV is getting the better of us like no other disease, and the vaccine front has seen failure after failure. Continue reading for a brief analysis of the latest HIV vaccine study: even better continue reading at Blue-Genes.net where this post was born and bred.
For scientists working in the field of HIV and AIDS, discussion of denialists can be at best tiring and at worst infuriating. This isn’t because a (‘good’) scientist can’t engage in a meaningful debate about their field with an honest dissident. It is because denialists of established science are not truly interested in objective examination of evidence. This may sound harsh, but it is important to realise that we’re not talking about any issues which have real controversy. The issue that I’m particularly talking about, the fact that HIV is the causative agent of AIDS, has over 25 years of medical science behind it, and is the subject of tens of thousands (1) of peer-reviewed research papers. The evidence is as irrefutable as that demonstrating that the earth orbits the sun, albeit perhaps less accessible to your average layperson. As this article is written by Ben Vincent, the newest contributor to Blue-Genes, you should give him a grand welcome by travelling over to Blue-Genes.net and reading the rest of it there!
It's been a month since the clamour and bustle about healthcare reform during the US Congress' summer break in August. The British blogosphere was then alight with spirited defenses of the NHS, like this piece from David Colquhoun. As Congress gets back to work, Obama is countering his critics with speeches on several of his main policy areas. Now that the dust has settled, I'd like to take a closer look at it. Please let us know what you think in the comments, either here on ScienceBlog or at Blue-Genes.net, where a spirited discussion has already started.
If you're a skeptic, particularly if you're interested in the fight against pseudoscience and fuzzy logic in health care, Professor Edzard Ernst is a man you should listen to closely. This post discusses his latest papers: two systematic reviews examining the evidence for chiropractic in treating asthma and colic, which may be quite important in the ongoing trial of Simon Singh. Click here to go on an incredible journey through the ether, leading you to the original version of this post at Blue Genes.net.
Should anyone be penalised for participating in a suicide, which of itself is not a crime? Should doctors be the guardians of life or should they be as Charon, providing passage between the worlds of life and death? This discussion is back on the books in Britain with the recent debate at the British Medical Association's (BMA) Annual Representatives Meeting, a court case in the House of Lords, and a decision by the Royal College of Nurses. Read the original post and subscribe to Blue-Genes.net to keep up with the latest news.
Geeks among you might be familiar with TED, a series of conferences that started 0ut very tech-oriented but now deals with everything including complex global issues and cutting-edge science. Its motto is 'Ideas worth spreading'.
Ladies and Gentlemen! Head on over to Beyond The Short Coat for the Skeptics' Circle: your fortnightly romp through skeptical posts, be they about the Obama birth certificate conspiracy, the latest pseudoscientific concoction, or whatever else people need a dose of evidence-based evaluation about today. You may also find a link to my first ever post! A cup of skepticism about the promises of green tea for prostate cancer.
Leukemia. I've dropped a hint or two that I may be talking a little about leukemia on this blog, and I've found the perfect way to start. Today, my attention was directed to a video about a girl called Melisa Paskova, a nine year-old girl from Macedonia, who's been diagnosed with a resurgence of the leukemia she thought she'd defeated a few years ago. If you speak German, I recommend you watch: it's a heart-wrenching story. On a more self-serving note: it is the personal recommendation of the author that you read this post in its native environment, by clicking here (although you are, of course, allowed to read it here on ScienceBlog too).
Those of you that have been paying attention to PZ Myers may be aware that some humanists in Austria managed to put adverts on buses in Vienna. That's not quite correct, but close enough: they weren't able to find anyone willing to publish their adverts on buses, but were able to advertise on static billboards, so they didn't have to stoop to renting their own bus and driving through the country, like the German equivalent did in May. For maximum effect, click here to read this post in it's original location
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics sent this email to Daniel MacArthur over at Genetic Future. The topics range from electronic records to full body scans to DNA profiling and internet-based medicine. Please think about the questions at hand and make your voice heard by sending your views to the Council. The deadline is the 21st of July (according to their website). Visit this page to respond. The council advises the future of medicine in the UK - I encourage Americans and other nationalities to think about the issues too though! Click here to read the post in proper blue-ness on Blue-Genes.net
