| Majority of Caesareans Are Done Before Labor A new study suggests several reasons for the nation’s rising Caesarean section rate. feeds.nytimes.com |
Humour: it's genetic! Bringing science into comedy One comedian's brave attempts to put science into stand up. (Guest post by Dean Burnett)Alice Bell recently did a very insightful article about the pros and cons of using humour in science, and referenced its growing popularity in online articles and blogs. Whether a cause or effect, the success of Robin Ince and colleagues reveals that combining science and comedy is becoming increasingly popular practice. But how does one go about introducing science into comedy, rather than the other way round? And what do non-London-based scientists do if they want some live comedy aimed at them? If they're desperate enough to trawl the internet for hours, they can contact me. As a recently qualified doctor of neuroscience who's also been a stand-up comedian for over five years, I've become something of a go-to guy for science conferences wanting a scientific comedy routine to round things off. As someone experienced in both science and comedy but currently not employed by either, I'm always glad of the work. However, so rare is my background that I am often asked to make jokes about and poke fun at areas of science that I know little about, in front of people who are experts in it. Preparing a routine about a field of study that isn't your own is fraught with unique challenges. Case in point: I was recently asked to perform at a conference of geneticists, meaning I had to do a 15 minute set about genetics. Although my studies crossed into genetics quite frequently, I've always found it very confusing. So confusing, in fact, that the original request for me to do the conference confused me.I had appeared at another conference several months before, and afterwards I was approached by a female professor who asked: "Do you have any genetics material?" This isn't a typical post-gig question, so I wasn't expecting it. I genuinely thought she asked, "Do you have any genetic material?" This alarmed me somewhat; I'm not at the level where I've been asked for my autograph yet, so for an unknown person to ask for a sample of my DNA for whatever reason was unprecedented. And terrifying. However, as a scientist, I felt compelled to be accurate. I told her yes, I do have genetic material (14.5 stone of it at last count, more if you include the leather in my belt)."Would you come and give us some at a conference in a few months?" was the even more unnerving follow-up question. I was struck with visions of me repeatedly swabbing myself and passing them. An unpleasant prospect, but out of all the methods I could think of to "donate" genetic material it was the most socially acceptable.Luckily, at this point I realised what she was asking, so agreed to perform at the conference, and prepare some "genetics and general science jokes". Trying to write jokes about science is, to me at least, a difficult task. Jokes and science are logically opposite in their purpose, so my efforts to combine them, even at a basic and familiar level, gave questionable results. For example:"Knock, knock" "Who's there?" "A disembodied kidney" "You taking the piss?" "Not anymore""Knock, knock" "Who's there?" "A logical paradox" "I'll be with you two minutes ago""Doctor Doctor, I feel like a pair of curtains!" "Really? That's a previously unheard of psychological disorder, would you mind if I wrote a paper about this?"Two scientists walk into a bar. The first one hits his head. The second one does too, in order to verify his results.A horse walks into a bar, and the barman says, "Why the long face?" "Evolutionary selective pressures," replies the horseAs if two different species, the product of combining science and jokes is unnatural, and strangely sterile. I also refrained from using the obvious "what do you get if you cross a sheep with a kangaroo" joke in front of a gang of geneticists, because a) They may take the question literally, and b) It might give them ideas. Genetics jokes are thin on the ground. Someone told me to take what jokes I have and recombine them, doubling my total. My friend Dave told me to just think of one joke and tell it over and over again, because geneticists should love "GAG repeats". I didn't understand the reference myself, though, but was assured it was funny.Genetics jokes rarely feature in the mainstream. This may be because it's not a very well understood subject outside the lab; ask a typical person what a retrovirus is and they'll probably think of influenza in the 70s, or maybe some long-tailed protein wearing flairs and a tank-top. This ignorance may be due in part to the fact that for quite some time, as far as the media was concerned, genetics was the bad-boy of science; unleashing GM crops into the wild one minute, attempting to crack the human genome the next (in response to the latter, I'm sure I once heard someone say: "We should stop them! We're still using it!"). Then the particle physicists tried to rip a hole in the universe and took the heat off. But the paranoia surrounding genetics still subsists, revealed recently by the furore surrounding cloned cows. People are still wary of cloning, perhaps understandably. My co-comic Dan Thomas mentioned someone he knows stating that they were scared of cloning, to which he replied: "That makes two of us," which didn't help matters. The cloned cow "scandal" amused me greatly though. Firstly, the cows in question weren't clones, but the offspring of clones. If we were to suffer ill-effects from eating animals that were the combined DNA of two separate creatures, I'm sure we would have found out by now. And as far as I know, no beef-eating customer has complained of bizarre side effects, or even noticed. Admittedly, it would take an extremely sensitive palette to determine if a burger tasted "suspiciously similar" to one consumed the previous week.There are several questions I would like to raise with the scaremongering papers regarding their coverage of this story.How exactly do pictures of "some cows" indicate they are derived from clone stock? Cows look fairly similar to each other at the best of times, and if anything the whole point of cloning means this aspect is emphasisedHow long before you find an individual who eats his body-weight in beef every week and suffers ill health, and tries to blame his condition on cloned meat? I know of several candidates already if you just want to get it over withDo you know how potatoes reproduce? A lot more of them are consumed than cows, are they exempt from risk for some reason? Or do you not eat vegetables yourselves, feeling it too similar to cannibalism for comfort? With publicity like this, is it any wonder that genetics gets a bad rap? I've tried to redress the balance where I can. Every time I'm in a supermarket with an organic food section, I always ask where the GM food section is. I accidentally bought some organic ketchup once. Highly processed sugar-rich bright red condiment: just as nature intended.Flippancy aside, the field of genetics is often much maligned, quite unfairly in my opinion. So, I felt it only fair to try and bring some levity to the subject. Despite my best efforts though, I couldn't come up with much, so after being announced as the final "speaker" of the conference, following a two hour discussion about how the impending budget cuts will impact on everyone's research (in fairness, I've had worse introductions), I explained to them how difficult it was to write a routine about genetics, raising the same issues as I've covered in this article.Much to my surprise, they seemed to really enjoy it. This was probably due to the novelty factor, but it goes to show that, despite the stereotypical image, scientists enjoy laughing about themselves and their work as much as anyone else.I don't know who it was, but a comedian I know once said: "Comedy is in the genes." Maybe so, but you have to dig damn hard to find it.Dean Burnett is a doctor of neuroscience, co-founder of Skeptics in the Pub: Cardiff, organiser of numerous science and academic-themed comedy nights and regularly writes satirical and/or humorous pieces about scientific and sceptical issues at his blog, Science Digestive.Martin Robbinsguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Ed Miliband's science challenge Labour's new leader will have to address several science issues, and the science community should make sure he keeps the subject at the heart of his agenda.This is a guest blog by Imran Khan, who is director of the Campaign for Science and EngineeringI don't know if we've ever had a self-confessed maths "geek" as leader of Her Majesty's Official Opposition before, but with threats to science funding as they are, perhaps it's not a bad time to start.The Campaign for Science and Engineering in the UK (CaSE) is pleased to congratulate Ed Miliband on becoming the new leader of the Labour party; he will be responsible for holding the coalition government to account on a range of issues. It's the job of everyone in the science and engineering community to make sure he puts these subjects at the heart of his agenda.So what are the key areas he'll need to address?Personnel The first is the appointment of strong and capable shadows to Vince Cable and David Willetts who together form the coalition's science team. Miliband's choice of Vince Cable's shadow is limited to those who come through the Labour party's shadow cabinet election process, so we should know his or her identity soon.But Miliband may have more freedom in appointing someone to take on the unenviable task of shadowing the universities and science minister, David "Two Brains" Willetts. Before the general election, we had three impressive science spokesmen – Lord Paul Drayson, Adam Afriyie, and Dr Evan Harris – who vied for the "science vote". Electoral misfortune and party politics have meant that all three are gone, and it's likely that the Lib Dems won't have an official science spokesman to replace Harris as it could undermine their coalition partners. This makes Miliband's choice all the more crucial.The Labour party is conspicuously blessed with MPs with a background or interest in science, technology, engineering or maths – particularly those who aren't first-term MPs and are therefore more likely to be in line for a shadow ministerial role. But since the job also involves keeping an eye on the university sector, an understanding of higher education is equally important.Research funding and the economy Ed Miliband has said he doesn't intend to oppose every funding cut made by the coalition. But he has also said that "we, as politicians, have a responsibility to defend science". Hopefully he'll make his decisions in an evidence-based way – and with the evidence clearly showing that investing in research and development can drive the economic recovery, it's vital that his economic plan takes that into account. We can be sure that there will be a lot of concerned scientists waiting for the opposition's response.And the Labour party needs to articulate a long-term vision for UK industry, too. CaSE strongly argues that given we're only going to get less competitive in low- and medium-skills sectors, it's unlikely we're going to find more stuff to dig out of the ground, and that over-reliance on the financial services sector has proven to be an unacceptable risk, we need a knowledge-intensive and technologically focused economy. That has to be a priority for Miliband and his shadow Chancellor.Policy and evidence Partly thanks to the efforts of former science ministers Lords Sainsbury and Drayson, New Labour enjoyed a reputation as being science friendly. It's a reputation that was helped by the party's stance on issues like animal testing, but tested and strained by an alleged failure of leadership over GM crops, and the sacking of David Nutt. Further tests will come, and probably from unexpected areas.How well Miliband and his team can respond to, say, the next drugs crisis or bioscience controversy – either in a few years' time, or next week – will largely depend on the efforts he puts in now to ensure that his policy-makers can quickly and effectively access evidence and advice from the scientific community, and treat it with due regard. Before he was elected, Miliband said he wanted to "revitalise the policy process" within Labour, including by "encouraging organisations like CaSE to bring their energy and expertise into the process"; clearly we hope he lives up to his word.Education In the long-term, science and maths education remains an absolutely critical policy area; if left unaddressed, all other efforts could be wasted. This year we've seen encouraging signs that more pupils are taking science and maths at A-level and GCSE, but worrying gaps in uptake and attainment between boys and girls and state schools versus the independent sector remain.The most important interventions to fix this and build upon gains will inevitably deal with teacher quality and quantity. Miliband and his forthcoming shadow education secretary will find lots of helpful voices in the science and teaching community to help them with ideas – if they make it a priority.On teaching and in other areas both the Lib Dems and the Tories made firm commitments before the election – some of which even chimed with each other. And yet we've seen very little from the coalition to meet those commitments. There's a lot out there for Labour to pin the government down on, and CaSE will continue to work with all the main political parties to make sure that the level of debate is as high as it can be.Imran Khan is director of the Campaign for Science and EngineeringScience policyEd MilibandLabour party leadershipLabourLiberal-Conservative coalitionImran Khanguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Foes Outspend Backers of Proposition 23 A coalition of environmentalists, investors and Silicon Valley technology companies is raking in the cash as they fight a move to repeal California's global warming law. feeds.nytimes.com |
Birdbooker Report 141 Compiled by an ardent bibliophile, this is a weekly report about nature, science and history books that have been newly published in North America and the UK.Books to the ceiling, Books to the sky,My pile of books is a mile high.How I love them! How I need them!I'll have a long beard by the time I read them. ~ Arnold Lobel [1933-1987] author of many popular children's books. Compiled by Ian "Birdbooker" Paulsen, the Birdbooker Report is a long-running weekly report listing the wide variety of nature, natural history, ecology, animal behaviour, science and history books that have been newly released or republished in North America and in the UK. The books listed here were received by Ian during the previous week, courtesy of these various publishing houses. Featured Titles: Forshaw, Joseph M. Parrots of the World. 2010. Princeton University Press/Christopher Helm Publishers Ltd. Paperback: 328 pages. Price: $29.95 U.S. [Amazon UK; Amazon US]. SUMMARY: From the macaws of South America to the cockatoos of Australia, parrots are among the most beautiful and exotic birds in the world -- and also among the most endangered. This stunningly illustrated, easy-to-use field guide covers all 356 species and well-differentiated subspecies of parrots, and is the only guide organized by geographical distribution -- Australasian, Afro-Asian, and neotropical. It features 146 superb color plates depicting every kind of parrot, as well as detailed, facing-page species accounts that describe key identification features, distribution, subspeciation, habitat, and status. Color distribution maps show ranges of all subspecies, and field identification is further aided by relevant upperside and underside flight images. This premier field guide also shows where to observe each species in the wild, helping make this the most comprehensive and user-friendly guide to the parrots of the world. * The only parrot guide to focus on geographical distribution * Covers all 356 species * Features 146 color plates depicting all species and well-differentiated subspecies * Provides detailed facing-page species accounts that describe key identification features, distribution, subspeciation, habitat, and status * Includes color distribution maps * Shows where to observe each species in the wildIAN'S RECOMMENDATION: This book is the field guide version of the author's Parrots of the World: An Identification Guide (2006) [Amazon UK; Amazon US]. The artwork by Frank Knight highlights this book! Anyone interested in parrots will want this book! Lamb, Andy and Phil Edgell. Coastal Fishes of the Pacific Northwest (revised and expanded second edition). 2010. Harbour Publishing. Paperback: 335 pages. Price: $29.95 U.S. [Amazon UK; Amazon US]. SUMMARY: A completely revised and updated edition of this best-selling comprehensive field guide to marine fishes of BC, Washington, Oregon, southern Alaska and Northern California. Written by a marine biologist and illustrated in colour by a prizewinning underwater photographer, Coastal Fishes of the Pacific Northwest identifies each fish by its common name and is illustrated with full-colour photographs and labelled sketches. Special sections present catching tips for anglers and commercial fishermen; location hints for divers, beachcombers and pleasure boaters; and cooking ideas for seafood gourmets. The information included in these sections provides a brief but detailed description of each fish's habitat, physical characteristics and behaviour -- everything that a fisherman or an amateur naturalist needs to know!IAN'S RECOMMENDATION: A must have for anyone interested in the marine fishes of the Pacific Northwest of North America! New and Recent Titles: Hangay, George and Paul Zborowski. A Guide to the Beetles of Australia. 2010. CSIRO Publishing. Paperback: 238 pages. Price: $40.00 U.S. [Amazon UK; Amazon US]. SUMMARY: A Guide to the Beetles of Australia provides a comprehensive introduction to the Coleoptera – a huge and diverse group of insects. Beetles make up 40 per cent of all insects known to science. The number of described beetle species in the world -- around 350,000 -- is more than six times the number of all vertebrate species. New beetle species are being discovered all the time. Of the 30,000 species that may occur in Australia, only 20,000 have been scientifically described. These include around 6500 weevils (Curculionidae), 2600 scarabs, dung beetles and chafers (Scarabaeidae); and 2250 leaf beetles (Chrysomelidae). A Guide to the Beetles of Australia highlights the enormous diversity of this unique insect Order. It emphasises the environmental role of beetles, their relationships with other plants and animals, and their importance to humans.IAN'S RECOMMENDATION: For those with an interest in beetles, especially the Australian species. Keddy, Paul A. Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation (Second Edition). 2010. Cambridge University Press. Paperback: 497 pages. Price: $69.00 U.S. [Amazon UK; Amazon US]. SUMMARY: Richly illustrated and packed with numerous examples, this unique global perspective introduces wetland ecology from basic principles to advanced applications. Thoroughly revised and reorganised, this new edition of this prize-winning textbook begins with underlying causal factors, before moving on to more advanced concepts that add depth and context. Each chapter begins with an explanation of the basic principles covered, illustrated with clear examples. More difficult concepts and exceptions are introduced only once the general principle is well-established. Key principles are now discussed at the beginning of the book, and in order of relative importance, enabling students to understand the most important material without wading through complex theory. New chapters on wetland restoration and wetland services draw upon practical examples from around the world, providing a global context, and a new chapter on research will be particularly relevant to the advanced student planning their own studies.IAN'S RECOMMENDATION: Those with a technical interest in wetland ecology will find this textbook useful. Møller, Anders Pape et al. (editors). Effects of Climate Change on Birds. 2010. Oxford University Press. Paperback: 321 pages. Price: $62.95 U.S. [Amazon UK; Amazon US]. SUMMARY: Climate change affects all living organisms; it has done so in the past and will do so in the future. However, current climate change is exceptional both in terms of the rate of change and the impact of multiple types of global change on individuals, populations, species, and ecosystems. Effects of Climate Change on Birds provides an exhaustive and up-to-date synthesis of the science of climate change as it relates to birds. Compared with any other class of animals, birds provide more long-term data and extensive time series (some dating back more than 100 years), a more geographically and taxonomically diverse source of information, and a longer tradition of extensive research. In fact this research record exceeds what is available in all other organisms combined. IAN'S RECOMMENDATION: For those with a technical interest on the subject. You can read the early Birdbooker Reports in the archives on my former ScienceBlogs site, and Ian now has his own website, The Birdbooker Report, where you can read his synopses about newly published science, nature and animal books.GrrlScientistguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |