Effect Measure is a forum for progressive public health discussion and argument as well as a source of public health information from around the web that interests the Editor(s)
The Editors of Effect Measure are senior public health scientists and practitioners. Paul Revere was a member of the first local Board of Health in the United States (Boston, 1799). The Editors sign their posts "Revere" to recognize the public service of a professional forerunner better known for other things.
Today is Einstein's birthday. If he were still alive he'd be 131. Those of you who have been reading here for a long time know that Einstein was (and is) one of my "culture heroes." When I was a kid I sent him birthday cards (yes, I'm that old) and when he died made a scrap book filled with news clippings. One of the great loves of my younger life gave me an Einstein bust as a present and it still sits on my desk, more than 40 years later (she reads the blog from across the ocean, so I hope she sees this! Mrs. R. knows and likes her so this isn't a guilty secret). I also have first editions of his second and third published works and a fairly large library of books by and about him. Unlike quantum mechanics, relativity theory is essentially the achievement of a single person, Albert Einstein. Both are beautiful theories and quantum theory may be the most successful theory in the history of science. But relativity is no slouch, either, having been confirmed again as recently as this week. Not bad.
Given all this, it seems fitting to commemorate the occasion on the blog. Enjoy:
Happy birthday, Albert, hero of my youth. Still a hero.
The US and Israel are near the top of the list in having citizens who believe in evolution -- at or near the top, that is, if you turn the list upside down. In international surveys the US ranks last and Israel 4th from last among 27 countries regarding belief in the proposition that "human beings developed from earlier species of animals" being definitely or probably true (US, 45%, Israel, 54%). There's another similarity. The US has fringe fundamentalist crazies in positions of authority (like the Texas State Board of Education) who deny evolution (and this just in: took The Enlightenment and Thomas Jefferson out of their textbooks, possibly because he was a Deist; but they put Thomas Aquinas in to make up for it!). And so does Israel. In fact Israel does the US one better, because the official is the chief scientist in Israel's ministry of education, Gavriel Avital:
If you check the blog for tomorrow's Sunday Sermonette, it will be an hour earlier, astronomically speaking. That's because in the US the clocks are shifted forward by an hour for "Day Light Savings Time," starting at 2 a.m. tomorrow morning (before the Sermonette goes up). The time shift will last until November 7, next fall. The sudden discontinuity in time keeping has uses other than energy conservation, however, and clever epidemiologists have used such circumstances for their own purposes for years. Here's one example.
When last we visited the US food safety system during the Bush administration it was busy serving up peanut butter with a side of Salmonella. That one caused over 4 thousand product recalls, 700 Salmonella cases and at least 9 deaths. Now it's Salmonella serovar Tennessee in hydrolyzed vegetable protein (HVP), a common flavor enhancer used in all sorts of food products, including, according to the FDA, soups, sauces, chilis, stews, hot dogs, gravies, seasoned snack foods, dips and dressings. An important difference -- so far -- is that there are no illnesses traced to the contaminated ingredient. Progress, I guess. But in other respects the stories sound pretty similar:
The latest study on flu vaccine effectiveness in children has been well discussed in the MSM and the flu blogs, so I'll point you to those excellent pieces (Branswell, crof, Mike Coston at Avian Flu Diary) and just add some things not covered elsewhere. The full text of the article is available for free at JAMA and it's a pretty good read, so if you want to see for yourself what is involved I urge you to read it, too. First, let me back up a bit and connect this to the controversy about observational and randomized clinical trials we've been discussing here of late (before my grant writing interfered, anyway).
I'm not sure I completely understand the legal adage, "bad facts make bad law," but the Supreme Court may be about to give us all an object lesson in its meaning. If I do understand it, is that sometimes there are situations -- "bad facts" -- that are so unusual or so horrifying or both -- that they force jurists to make legal decisions in line with what any normal person would consider to be just but with unintended side effects that make "bad law," that is, bad legal precedent. An example is a Texas case where a drunk driver hit a car carrying a pregnant woman whose fetus was seriously damaged, was delivered alive by C-section but then died. He was charged with manslaughter in the death of the fetus, but the law required there be the death of "another," and "another" was defined by law to be "a person" and a person was defined to be "an individual," and an "individual" was defined by law as "a human being who has been born and is alive". Since the initial injury was not to something that had not yet been born, this became the basis for the defense's contention the driver could not be charged with intoxication manslaughter. This was not an abortion case but the circumstances instantly made what was a just decision -- that the drunk driver should be punished for the loss of this pregnancy and the damage it did to the family -- into one with vast consequences, once the verdict was upheld and became "settled law."
There is so much tragedy and sadness in the wake of the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile that to bemoan the fate of research projects there seems kind of trivial. But if you are scientist your heart really goes out to your Chilean colleagues. Jocelyn Kaiser and Antonio Regalado have some details at ScienceInsider, Science Magazine's science blog:
Most of you don't want to hear about my grant writing any more, but some of you are clearly interested in one of our innovations (at least I think it's an innovation; I've never heard of anyone doing it on this scale before): the Mock Study Section. So I'll take a break from writing (actually, re-writing) to describe it. First I should explain to the uninitiated what a "Study Section" is.
