August Readings & Thoughts

It has been awhile since I spammed my blog with interesting links.  While traveling last month, it was nice to be able to keep up on my reading through Google Reader, but I didn't have much to say about what I read.  Since I've been back home, it's been easier to focus and think.  Here's what I've been thinking about:

• Grocery Shopping: When I did my weekly grocery shopping last Thursday, a gallon of 2% milk had gone up to $3.13 from $2.86 just a week before.  That doesn't sound like much, but if 9.4% is indicative of rising grocery prices, no wonder my food budget has been creeping up a bit lately!  Get Rich Slowly (GRS) recently did an update to their ongoing "how much do you spend on food?" post.  It's garnered over 300 comments and reading through them is fascinating... everything from families of 8 living on $300/month to singles or couples spending $1500/month!  
• Comparative Statistics: Most of the comments on that article include info about urban/suburban/rural location and how picky people are about food choices.  This is a data goldmine that I really want to sink into.  For two suburban, non-organic eaters, we spend about $300/month on groceries and another $200/month on eating out; groceries includes entertaining an average of once a month.  Surprisingly, while our eating out amount varies, it never affects our grocery bill much.  As an added bonus, one of the comments introduced me to Bundle where you can compare how much you spend in certain categories relative to others in your age, family, income, and geographic groups.  Fascinating info!  This is one place where I don't mind being below average!
• Food & Science: Hmm, I'm starting to see a trend.  This article on biofortification of foods is why I love both the Freakonomics books and their blog.  This one is a guest post (which happens frequently) and, in addition to providing good data on a relevant social topic, gives a strong case for why waiting for the perfect solution is often a bad idea.  This is essentially why I'm an engineer and not a researcher; perfect theories blow up in the real world and you need to know how to adapt new knowledge to existing problems.  The article also brings up a favorite soapbox topic of mine: that engineered foods have, on the whole, been a Good Thing for the human race.
• Economic Circumstances: GRS had an entry last week about what part of your personal financial situation is your responsibility/fault and what is not.  This is a fascinating discussion and, interesting as the comments are, they don't begin to scratch the surface of how complex this topic truly is.  There's a lot of personal philosophy and experience revealed in how you feel about this subject.  We all know people who complain and yet do nothing to help themselves; equally, we know people who did "everything right" and still ended up broke (hopefully, we also know lots of people who did most things right and came out okay!).  Hindsight is 20/20 and articles like this remind me of two favorite quotes: "Chance favors a prepared mind" and "Statistics mean nothing to the individual".

That's enough thinking for me today... after all, I have homework to do.  ;-)

What's been on your mind lately?  How are issues like this affecting you?

Three Weeks!

Wow, I have not blogged in a long time.  Almost like I've been busy or crazily exhausted in the last few weeks...

First, I've finished a couple more books since my last post.  As always, my reviews are on Goodreads; this month I read The Wise Man's Fear (5 stars) and The Forgotten Garden (3.5 stars).  Wise Man's Fear was the second really excellent book I've read this year and Forgotten Garden is my latest book club read, which I think will yield some very interesting discussion!

Second, I haven't hyperlink spammed you recently:

• Elementary Math vs. The Real World - You'll be unsurprised to see how disconnected they are.
• Good Social Science - Were you aware there's a growing epidemic of whooping cough (pertussis) in this country?  If not, you should be, especially if you have young children.  This short article makes a great point about people who cannot vaccinate because of health complications.  If you can (and most people can), please vaccinate.
• Bad Science (i.e. NOT science) - What are all those researchers doing when we can just use how people feel about radiation to make judgments?  ~sigh~
• Sad Science - Well, not so much sad as disappointing.  Evolutionary theory is better proven than Newtonian theory.  No, really.  I'd love to see a similar survey from past years for comparison.
• Science & Society - This is a longer interview with the author of Panic Virus, a book about the autism/vaccine scare and what caused and propagated it (I have not read the book).  Fascinating mostly because the author fully acknowledges something that most scientists overlook: anti-vaccine (and anti-science) movements are popular because they give people answers, even if they're wrong answers.  Regardless, it's an interesting look at how misinformation gains credibility and the role that major media plays with its lack of fact checking.

Okay, that's a lot of science, but it's all relevant and readable and interesting, I promise.

And lastly, I have planned another financial post in honor of what would have been our debt payoff next month.  Coming soon!

Women's Health: Anemia

I'm fascinated by information on women's health.  Well, really, medical science in general, but especially the medical science that applies to me.  I've recently added a few new blogs to my Reader subscriptions that are science blogs by women, a group previously unrepresented in my reading.

And, unsurprisingly, that addition has unleashed a goldmine of good articles.  My favorite one so far is this one about women and iron-deficiency.  It discusses medical bias in the treatment of anemia in female patients in a (mostly) non-medical-scientist-friendly way.  The article is about how medical practitioners assume that anemia is caused by women's menstrual bleeding when studies show that this is not the case.

Information like this is always fascinating to me.  Does it really indicate an anti-female bias in medicine?  Or is this one of those common misconceptions (like that stress causes ulcers... it's actually a bacterial infection) and doctors just don't question their assumptions?  I could make a case either way.  Ultimately, this just reconfirms for me that everyone should take an active role in their health care.  If you think something is wrong, insist on testing, not opinions.

What do you think?  Ever been on the wrong side of a diagnosis or treatment because of your age or gender?*

*Side note: It drives me nuts that every time I go to the doctor with any symptoms, they insist on a pregnancy test, regardless of my cycle timing.  Just because I am female and of a certain age, not all my symptoms are related to reproduction!

Tea and Science

I have a better post to do in the next couple of days about our financial journey and our goals for this year, but for now, a little post to hold you over.

First, I love tea... its history, drinking it, the many ceremonies involving tea... it's all very fascinating to me.  I've come to realize that tea, like wine, can be very intimidating to the uninitiated.  The great thing about both drinks is that you don't have to know a lot about them to enjoy them or to find something you like.  However, "preparing" wine is mostly a matter of having white or red wine glasses and knowing to serve white wine chilled (and having a corkscrew on hand, but that's also a story for a different day).  Tea is a little more complicated, but still not hard.

Instead of going through it myself, January happens to be Hot Tea Month, which has yielded some good basic tea preparation info in the last couple of weeks.  Specifically, this blog entry from The Tea Maestro, which details six simple steps to better tea.  It's mostly a matter of clean water at the right temperature, but that article breaks it down in a very user-friendly way.

In a not completely related area of interest, I thought this Sense About Science review was particularly funny. It talks about celebrity science claims (diets, "resonating" bracelets, detoxing, etc.) and then talks to expert scientists.  The result?  That you shouldn't listen to celebrities.  About anything, really, but especially about science topics.

Lunar Eclipse

Tonight, all across the country, thousands if not millions of people are staying up late to watch the only total lunar eclipse of this year.  There's clear viewing across most of the country and this eclipse will have a totality of around 70 minutes, which makes for great viewing.  As I write this, the Earth's shadow is already creeping across the Moon's surface.

Historically, lunar eclipses are thought to be harbingers of evil and misfortune.  A quick survey of lunar eclipse and cultural significance reveals numerous cultures that told stories of Luna being swallowed by a dragon, a snake, a puma, or some other animal.  But tonight, all that is changing in a way that only 21st technology can bring about.

Tonight, people are not watching in solitude or isolated bunches.  As I'm writing this, I have dozens of friends whose Facebook statuses reflect their interest in this phenomenon.  They're staying up late and we're all watching the eclipse together, in a way that only 21st century technology makes possible.  Even those with no clear view of their own can watch via NASA's live feed on the web.

Tonight, I'd give a lot to have a decent telescope or pair of binoculars.  Rest assured, my digital camera is taking great pictures (to be shared tomorrow) but nothing beats a telescope for astronomical observation.

Pictures coming soon.  Happy viewing, everyone!  And Happy Winter Solstice!

Impossible Things are Happening Every Day

It's a big, wide, interesting world.  Every day, my RSS feed on Google Reader brings me something strange and fun... often, several things that are strange and fun.  I have a huge backlog of TEDTalks to watch, but in the mean time I've been reading up on all sorts of other interesting topics.

These articles are all about how the world is improving:

• A History of Violence: All about the changing realities of mortality in every day life and how violence has decreased in the last hundred years.  Yes, with two world wars, decreased.  Fascinating stuff by an author whose books are rising on my "to read" list.
• Genetic tests for fetuses: A new, safer method that uses very sensitive maternal blood tests to check for genetic factors.  This article gives me serious Gattaca flashbacks, but modern medical science still amazes me.  I also feel obligated to point out that the writer does a very responsible job of explaining the time needed for commercial viability and the systematic drawbacks to diagnostics that reveal so much information.
• MRI of baby being born: The title sort of speaks for itself, but the image is amazing.  It apparently required a whole new set up for an MRI scanner, but this sort of imaging can provide a wealth of information never previously available.
• History of Life Expectancy and Wealth: I've seen this graph in a TEDTalk previously, but the 5 minute video and mini-lecture is a better explanation of the data itself.  A cool look at how life really is getting better for most people, dramatically so in the last 150 years.
• Recognizing Women in Science: A long article that I'm still working through, but so far it's fascinating and well worth the time.  The Royal Society of Britain is celebrating its 350th birthday this year, but women were not allowed to join until 1945.  The article takes a look at what the RS and other scientific societies lost by excluding women (who were already winning international prizes for their work!).

And these articles are about things we could be doing better:

• Creative Groups: A short list of things to do with groups of people to inspire creativity.  I think his points about group size are incredibly important.  And of course, it all runs back to my devout wish to run a 21st century Parisian salon or British coffee house...
• Building Your Own Personal Finance Manual: A cool idea, which would never have occurred to me because I'm innately horrified of writing in books.  I would use Smart Couples Finish Rich, if I were to do this.  What would you use?
• Terry Pratchett on Alzheimer's: An article that reminds us that there are still demons to slay.  If there were ever a reason to encourage your children to become thinkers and researchers and scientists, this is it.
• Science in the Public's View: I don't necessarily endorse everything this article says, but the overall point is a great one, as shown by the pathetic coverage of NASA's newly discovered arsenic-using life form.  The second bullet point in the article is the scariest to me: 44% of people surveyed could not name a scientist role model; the top three choices of the remainder were not scientists (Bill Gates & Al Gore) or not alive (Albert Einstein).  Stephen Hawking, anyone?  Neil deGrasse Tyson?  Brian Cox?  Brian Greene?  All of whom are regularly featured on news programs and TV specials.  And those are just physicists, for crying out loud...

And last but not least, for sheet entertainment value, this clip about a family dinner date (complete with the man who would go on to play Ward Cleaver), with commentary brought to you by Mystery Science Theater 3000.  Not for the easily offended (i.e. those without a working definition of sarcasm), but very funny for the rest of us.

What about you?  Discovered anything lately that just amazes you beyond words?

Validation

Ten days since I posted last!  I hope that everyone had a happy Thanksgiving full of family, friends, and good food, just like I did.

After a very busy week (week?  month!), I had some downtime today to catch up on my Google Reader articles.  I've recently added several science blogs to my subscriptions, catching up on current science trends and discoveries.  Several articles and an email lead me to thoughts about validation through peer review.  It's a time honored scientific mantra that research isn't valid until it can be reproduced and subjected to critical review.  The underlying assumption, of course, is that the reproduction and review are done by other people.

Under certain circumstances, that is absolutely necessary.  Specifically, if you want other people to believe your science, your methodology needs reproducibility and peer reviewing.  But what if you don't want to publish your science?  Nothing in the definition of science says that it must be shared.

Regardless, that's largely a philosophical argument, the kind best done around dinner time with good food and wine available.  The practical implications of peer-reviewing are a little jarring to an introvert like me... maybe they are to extraverts, too.  For instance, this article, which describes a trial being started with autistic children.  It's a bit long but not dense and it rightfully points out that there are a number of unscientific and unethical aspects to this trial.  But the article also says this:

 There is no evidence, other than a non-peer reviewed paper Montagnier self published in a journal he edits, that this is possible.  This paper makes most extraordinary claims that remain unreplicated – a basic requirement for research to be considered worth responding too, much less accepted.

 If the science is wrong, say so.  If the evidence does not substantiate the conclusion, call it out.  But don't condemn the work just because you didn't have a chance to give your opinion.

Even that example is a little esoteric.  So let's bring it to the quotidian, shall we?  Let's say that you want to host a group event.  You check with a couple key members of the group, who green-light things (I did my social due diligence! screams the introvert).  You send the invitation.  You get good responses back until... The One.  Who says s/he is upset that s/he can't attend... but really means to say (and does a good bit of implying) that the real problem is that s/he wasn't consulted and her/his opinion was critical to this event.  Who has implied that their opinion is more valuable than yours, as is their time.  Peer review!  The opinions of the peer group (in this case, the invitees) is more important than the originator (the host), regardless of whether or not the original idea was quality or not.

In case it's not obvious, I'm very over this mentality today.  It does, however, remind me of a great quote by one of my favorite historical figures:

“Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.” ~Alexander Hamilton

I guess some things never change.

Today's Finds

While I'm waiting for my class' website to load, I'm happy to announce that I finished my final paper for my second class!  Yay!  I'd like to thank all the History and English teachers I ever had for giving me so much work that I learned to write a 4,000 word paper, complete with research and editing, in 10 hours.  And also for their unending patience with my stubborn reticence to improve my writing, despite their excellent teaching efforts.

Whew!  Now that that's done, let's move on to something more interesting.  Or rather, several somethings:

First up, yet another cool article from Get Rich Slowly.  This one is about how to make car dealerships fight over your business.  Or, at least, how to stop getting ripped off so horribly.  What I got out of this, besides how to make my introverted-self very happy if we ever buy a car from a dealership, was the writer's solution to a gender issue, namely that car salesmen offer better deals to men.  Because after all, a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do.

Secondly, a short article about natural versus human-made systems.  This one's particularly concerned with genetically modified food.  My favorite quote:

The fact that cross-species gene transfer happens without human intervention in nature, however rare, provides further justification for viewing transgenic technology not as a Frankensteinian intervention into the natural world, but as yet another method of trait selection, something we’ve been doing with heroic results since the dawn of agriculture.

Believe me, statistically speaking, you wouldn't be here without that intervention.  For info, look up the history of fertilized soil some time.  I'm reposting this article because the underlying lesson is a favorite philosophy of mine: That every choice, even making no choice through non-action, has consequences.  The point is not to avoid them, because you can't, but rather to engineer them to be positive consequences, something that human beings are uniquely suited to do.  In short, don't hate humanity!

Lastly, a few weeks ago I posted my review of Steven Johnson's new book, Where Good Ideas Come From.  As my review implied, I'm completely enamored by this book and have referenced it countless times since I read it just a few months ago.  This article from the UK's Guardian says everything I felt about this book, but in a more journalistic, readable way.  If I'd said it, it would have rambled.

And while I've been typing, my paper is officially submitted!  All done with my second class.  My third class, Project Planning Execution and Closure, starts Sunday.  Too bad I'll be at the Celtic Festival!

Catching Up

As I said last time I posted, I've had many topics I wanted to post about in the last week.  But fate in the form of training orders arrived today and, consequently, my week just became busier.  So instead of doing separate posts about each, I thought I'd post the links to articles I've read and let you enjoy them yourself.

• Freakonomics: Pesticide Politics - The Freakonomics blog, by the authors of the bestselling book as well as other contributors, is one I follow and enjoy because of the wide array of topics and viewpoints presented.  This one discusses pesticide in produce and centers on a favorite topic of mine: the misappropriation of science to scare people who don't understand science.
• Reason: Of Mice and Men - An interview with one of the scientists cited in the Freakonomics article.  It's older (1994) but a great source for insight into a true scientist's mind.
• Wired: The Geek Syndrome - Wired is a magazine and online site for people who revel in technology and science.  I often find informative and largely unbiased articles on a variety of topics contained within.  This article, also a little older (2001), is about the increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) diagnosed in the children of geeks.  It describes Asperger's syndrome extremely well, so it's worth reading just for that, but it's more interesting when you consider that recent studies show that ASDs are increasing across the country, which was not known in 2001.  One day we're going to understand autism spectrum disorders better and we're going to look at our society as a whole and say "Duh.  Of course it's that way.".
• Wired: Autism-Spectrum Quotient - I include this even though it's not an article because anyone who is interested in personality dynamics will find it interesting.  It's a 50 question test designed to look for autism tendencies in persons of normal or above-average intelligence, i.e. to locate potential high-functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome cases that may go unnoticed because of overall smarts and coping abilities.  I wasn't surprised by my own score... were you?
• TEDTalks: Temple Grandin - (19:44) Speaking of autism, one of the world's most famous autistic persons is Temple Grandin (there was a movie made recently about her that you can find on TV occasionally).  This is a speech by her about the need for all types of thinkers.
• TEDTalks: Steven Pinker - (22:39) Pinker has a couple of books out that I already wanted to read; after listening to this talk, they're going on my Christmas list.  If you've read Freakonomics or its sequel, SuperFreakonomics, you'll very much enjoy this talk about the brain and its characteristics.

There was more, but that's probably enough link-spam for one day.  Enjoy!

Why We Need the Explorers

Brian Cox: Why we need the explorers | Video on TED.com

This was just too beautiful not to post.  Brian Cox is a physicist who has a lovely way of explaining the wonder and magnificence in science.  This particular video is about the true value of science in response to government budget cuts of research and science programs.

I watched many TED Talks today but this one hit home.  Enjoy.