Daily Mail ignores own terrible reporting and blames the media

The Daily Mail has reported on the suicide of an Indian girl that they have attributed to fears over the LHC.

Indian girl, 16, ‘killed herself over fears Big Bang experiment could lead to end of the world’

I don’t wish to discuss the circumstances behind her death but further information may be found here.

Her father, identified on local television as Biharilal, said that his daughter, Chayya, killed herself after watching doomsday predictions made on Indian news programmes.

‘In the past two days, Chayya had asked me and other relatives about the world coming to an end on September 10,’ Biharilal said.

‘We tried to divert her attention and told her she should not worry about such things, but to no avail.’

So the Daily Mail are pointing the finger at Indian news programmes being responsible for inciting such fear in this girl that she may have killed herself because of it. Obviously the Daily Heil, being a responsible newspaper, would never publish ridiculous scare-mongering crap such as:

Are we all going to die next Wednesday?

Meet Evans the Atom, who will end the world on Wednesday

If I ever meet someone from the Mail I may just have to call them a cunt.

Creative Differences

Michael Reiss, director of education at the Royal Society, suggested that creationism be taught along side evolution in schools. His reasoning being that if creationism is just ignored then it alienates those that follow it further from science.

He said that around one in 10 children comes from a family with creationist beliefs. “My experience after having tried to teach biology for 20 years is if one simply gives the impression that such children are wrong, then they are not likely to learn much about the science,” he said.

“I think a better way forward is to say to them ‘look, I simply want to present you with the scientific understanding of the history of the universe and how animals and plants and other organisms evolved’.”

Reiss, who is an ordained Church of England minister, told the British Association Festival of Science in Liverpool that science teachers should not see creationism as a “misconception” but as an alternative “world view”. He added that he was not advocating devoting the same time to teaching creationism or intelligent design as to evolution.

I can understand Prof Reiss’ point of view – telling a child that everything they have learnt from their parents/religion is bullshit is unlikely to help their education in the long run. When presented with two conflicting arguments from authority they are likely to side with the one that fits in with their current world view. I, however, do not agree with the teaching of creationism to school children.

Time for science education is already limited and the degredation of standards has been covered several times by Education Watch. Although I don’t know the current syllabus I would hazard a guess that only a matter of hours of childs education is concerned with the science behind the origins of life. Evolutionary theory is currently the only scientific way in which the origin of life has been explained and should be taught with explanation of both the theory and the evidence supporting it. To introduce creationism into the science classroom promotes  it above its standing in science. Creationism, including intelligent design, has no basis in science and is simply an answer of “God did it” to anything we cannot currently explain with science.

It is inevitable that, during the teaching of evolution, there will be occasions where pupils will challenge the teacher arguing that evolution is wrong and creationism is the correct explanation. Here, I agree, these childrens beliefs should not just be dismissed as being wrong. Instead this is an opportunity to explain the comparative evidence for both theories (I use the term loosely for creationism). The landslide of evidence for evolution over creationism should convert all but the most strident doubters and for these it is unlikely that any evidence will do.

Reiss’ regarding of creationism not as a misconception but as an alternative world view is a worrying one. Although I think that anyone has the right to believe anything they wish that does not mean we have to give equal credence to those views. If creationism is allowed into the science classroom as an alternative world view why not allow an alternative view of maths where 2+2=5. Or that incorrect spelling in an English Language class is an alternative view of how words are spelt.

Brian Cox: Master of Science Communication

This Wednesday is going to be one of the most significant days in science for the next few years as CERN finally switch on the first beam line at the Large Hadron Collider*. As if often the case in science some people who don’t understand what’s going on think it’s a bad idea. The result is that some of the scientists involved have received death threats. Legendary physicist, presenter and former D:ream keyboardist Prof Brian Cox has, this week, produced two of the finest quotes in the history of science.

Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat.

and

If these wormholes appear I will personally eat the hat I was given for my first birthday before I received it.

Brian I salute you and as a mark respect ask everyone to watch two of your finest performances

*Good to see imaginative naming is still going strong what with the Very Large Telescope and the Overwhelmingly Large Telescope.

Detection of breast cancer by hair

From the KKKly Mail today:

Hair test to detect breast cancer could be on sale ‘within months’
A revolutionary test that detects the first signs of breast cancer from a few strands of a woman’s hair could be on sale within months.

Having scanned the references from the website of Fermiscan there doesn’t appear to be anything wrong with the research. I can only assume that when they say on sale they mean to someone with a lot of money. According to there latest paper (free when I tried) they used the Advanced Photon Source at the Argonne National Lab (US), this is a rather large synchrotron and not going to be available for the routine analysis of hair samples.

According to the Daily Hate:

When normal hair is put under a microscope, it appears as series of arcs. In people with breast cancer, a distinctive ring is superimposed on to these arcs, New Scientist magazine reports.

Yet the papers and website all take about synchrotron x-ray diffraction, a bit harder than popping under a microscope. From what I can read of the NS article there’s know mention of microscopes. If anyone can enlighten me please do. This just seems to be the Mail getting excited a little too early. At least this time the research seems to right (cf. MMR) it’s just got a way to go.

Update

I’ve been in contact with the (very nice) people at Fermiscan, once I have permission I’ll post some of their response.

BBC Misunderstands Processor Technology Again

I wouldn’t normally bother with this as it’s just too easy but it’s not the first time I’ve seen the BBC misunderstand the technology of processors.

…Intel has replaced the gate dielectrics, previously made from silicon dioxide, with a material based on the metal hafnium.

Hafnium is a so-called high-K material, which refers to its dielectric constant, and has a greater ability to store electrical charge than silicon dioxide.

Between these two lines they seem to change their mind what they are taking about. Intel has replaced the gate dielectrics with a hafnium based material, hafnium dioxide. If, as they claim in the second line, they had used hafnium they would have made a useless processor. They tell us themselves that hafnium is a metal – it therefore cannot be a dielectric.

Sadly even Intel seem to make this mistake on their own site.

Intel has made a significant breakthrough in solving the chip power problem, identifying a new “high-k” (Hi-k) material called hafnium to replace the transistor’s silicon dioxide gate dielectric

But at least they get it right later on

“High-k” materials, such as hafnium dioxide (HfO2), zirconium dioxide (ZrO2) and titanium dioxide (TiO2) inherently have a dielectric constant or “k” above 3.9, the “k” of silicon dioxide.

I know this is pedantry to the extreme but it really isn’t that hard to grasp, is it?

The Pill and Cervical Cancer

In the media today there have been several reports of the increased risk of cervical cancer for women taking the contraceptive pill. All these reports relate to a Lancet article that has been published this week – unfortunately I won’t get access until next week when it hits “Pill cancer risk soars”. This seems a little strong for a headline considering the story continues thus:

The rate of cervical cancer for women up to 50 who have not used the Pill is 3.8 per thousand.

This increases to 4.0 per thousand in women on the Pill for five years and to 4.5 per thousand on the popular combined contraceptive pills for 10 years.

So, even if you want to reduce to simple percentages, women who have been on the pill for 5 years they have increased their risk from 0.38 % to 0.4 %. That’s just over a 5 % increase if you want to use the typical tabloid method of mishandling such figures. For 10 year users the increase is ~18% using the same rather dubious methodology.

What really matters is that the actual change in risk is actually rather small, 0.38 % to 0.45 % is probably not much to worry about considering the huge number of other factors that influence a persons well-being.

The other thing I want to comment about on this is an avenue that may or may not have been raised in the Lancet article – I’ll update when I know. One of the known causes of cervical cancer are certain forms of Human papillomavirus (HPV). HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. Is it not possible that, due to the use of the contraceptive pill, some women may be less meticulous with the use of barrier contraceptives thus leaving themselves open (that wasn’t supposed to be an innuendo) to infection with HPV and therefore an increased chance of cervical cancer?

Obviously this is all speculation so if anyone out there has more information on the subject please comment below or email me (address on the about page).

Observer learns about science again, sort of…

Recently the Observer has made a few scientific faux pas. In July we had the old MMR-autism chestnut and then we had thoroughly debunked at badscience.

Despite this inability to understand basic science there is an article in today’s Observer that is remarkably sensible – The cranks who swear by citronella oil. The article is a scathing attack on homeopathy, particularly in its use for the treatment of HIV-AIDS. Read it and understand that sometimes science journalism is good.

Unfortunately not everyone at the Observer is as well accustomed with the idea of scientific evidence as Nick Cohen. Dr Deborah McManners, a naturopathic physician and GP at the Hale Clinic, suggests, as a treatment for potentially stress induced hairloss.

Homeopathy could be another option – gelsemium is good for anticipatory anxiety, and arsenicum album is ideal for tense, ambitious perfectionists. A medical homeopath would be able to advise you (www.trusthomeopathy.org).

Looking at the Hale Clinic website it’s hardly surprising, they seem to offer all many of pseudoscientific bullshit.

Stem Cells ‘Prompt cancer spread’ – Updated

The BBC reports that “Stem Cells ‘Prompt cancer spread’”. This is a fantastically misleading headline. Although the story does concern the increased rate metastasis of tumours in the presence of stem cells the point of the research is “if stem cells increase metastasis then blocking stem cell action could reduce metastasis”.*

I’m just waiting for the pro-life/anti-stem cell brigade to jump on that head line and claim that stem cell treatments are all evil and ungodly and the direct cause of all that is bad in society.

*I can’t be overly sure of details of the research as 1) the Beeb haven’t referenced it, 2) they haven’t even given a name of one of the researchers and 3) I can’t find it on the Nature website anywhere suggesting this is all press release

Update: the paper has now been published and can be found here

North East Lecture Delights

For those of you in the North East of the UK, particularly the Durham area, there is a series of lectures over the next few months that may interest some of you.

(more…)