On the Nature of Things | Forum

“The Science of Breeding Better Men” 1911

Editorial from a 1911 edition of Scientific American [Source]:

Sci-Am’s Editor’s note: This editorial was written and published in 1911. Although our editors of a century ago pondered some lofty aspirations for the orderly future of humans, it was only three decades later that the brutal reality of a Nazi social order suffused with a eugenicist ideal brought home the practical shortcomings of the philosophy.

Pseudoscience is on the rise – and the media is completely hooked.

The darling of those who wish to explain why incompetent people don’t know they’re unskilled, the Dunning-Kruger effect may actually just be a data artefact.

- The Dunning-Kruger effect was originally described in 1999 as the observation that people who are terrible at a particular task think they are much better than they are, while people who are very good at it tend to underestimate their competence
- The Dunning-Kruger effect was never about “dumb people not knowing they are dumb” or about “ignorant people being very arrogant and confident in their lack of knowledge.”
- Because the effect can be seen in random, computer-generated data, it may not be a real flaw in our thinking and thus may not really exist

Group of highly respected experts fear medical world is rife with research fraud

One in five of the two million studies published annually could involve fake data

Former editor of British Medical Journal warned of a reluctance to address issue

How can we make sure that medical trials reported in the scientific literature are real? It is surprisingly hard — but not impossible.

Abstract

The question of whether Simian Virus 40 (SV40) can cause human tumors has been one of the most highly controversial topics in cancer research during the last 50 years. The longstanding debate began with the discovery of SV40 as a contaminant in poliovirus vaccine stocks that were used to inoculate approximately 100 million children and adults in the United States between 1955 and 1963, and countless more throughout the world. Concerns regarding the potential health risk of SV40 exposure were reinforced by studies demonstrating SV40's potential to transform human cells and promote tumor growth in animal models. Many studies have attempted to assess the relationship between the potential exposure of humans to SV40 and cancer incidence. Reports of the detection of SV40 DNA in a variety of cancers have raised serious concerns as to whether the inadvertent inoculation with SV40 has led to the development of cancer in humans. However, inconsistent reports linking SV40 with various tumor types has led to conflicting views regarding the potential of SV40 as a human cancer virus. Several recent studies suggest that older detection methodologies were flawed, and the limitations of these methods could account for most, if not all, of the positive correlations of SV40 in human tumors to date. Although many people may have been exposed to SV40 by polio vaccination, there is inadequate evidence to support widespread SV40 infection in the population, increased tumor incidence in those individuals who received contaminated vaccine, or a direct role for SV40 in human cancer.

Typhoon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 10:16 pm The polio vaccine saved countless children's lives - from a life severely crippled, possibly in an iron lung, or death.

The simian virus contamination was identified and fixed.

There is no good evidence that SV40 contamination caused cancer in humans.

OWID | Polio

Polio has been now eradicated globally.

Any new biological is not without risk.
Some individuals have allergic reactions, of varying severity, to penicillin.
Anecdotally, I know someone who is allergic to a common beta-blocker: only three such cases,
with the specific allergic reaction, have been reported in the global medical literature.

The key point is relative risk: lives saved versus potential side effects.

If anti-vaxxers want to obsess over imperfect history, that's fine.

Considering the life-saving benefits of the polio vaccine, I don't care.

When we see anti-vaxx misinformation on social media, we must resist falling into the trap of engaging with it, however tempting it may be to point out obvious flaws and falsehoods. Engaging with misinformation online spreads it further: if we scratch the itch, we spread the disease. It is far more helpful and effective to instead share good information about vaccines from trusted sources.

Beware of bad science reporting: No, we haven’t killed 90% of all plankton
A very misleading article on marine life has been getting a lot of attention.

A stunning case of possible fraud in Alzheimer’s research reinforces the need for scientific rigor at every level.

After months of investigation that identified networks of reviewers and editors manipulating the peer review process, Hindawi plans to retract 511 papers across 16 journals, Retraction Watch has learned.

The retractions, which the publisher and its parent company, Wiley, will announce tomorrow in a blog post, will be issued in the next month, and more may come as its investigation continues. They are not yet making the list available.

Hindawi’s research integrity team found several signs of manipulated peer reviews for the affected papers, including reviews that contained duplicated text, a few individuals who did a lot of reviews, reviewers who turned in their reviews extremely quickly, and misuse of databases that publishers use to vet potential reviewers.

Richard Bennett, vice president of researcher and publishing services for Hindawi, told us that the publisher suspects “coordinated peer review rings” consisting of reviewers and editors working together to advance manuscripts through to publication. Some of the manuscripts appeared to come from paper mills, he said.