FAIL!

They should just change the show to FAIL- or better yet, EPIC FAIL. The cardinal rule of Vampire fiction: you don't use Bella Lugosi's Dead (especially, a shitty version of it). Otherwise you violate the Laws on Pretension Prevention, a little known subsection of the Geneva Convention.

Also, knew it was the girl as soon as she was on screen.
Read More...

Is Alochol Bad for Women?

According to Charlie Stross:

[A] lot of headlines and newspaper column-inches were devoted to the shocking findings of a recent survey of women's health that apparently indicated that drinking any alcohol at all correlated with an elevated risk of cancer:

Even small amounts of alcohol increase a woman's risk of cancer" (The Guardian)"

"Drink a day increases cancer risk" (The BBC)

"Even a little alcohol ups cancer risk in women" (Reuters)

Daily drink for middle-age women cancer risk (Washington Post, syndicated)

But were those reports accurate?


Stross says no, and provides some proofs. He goes on to sum up the abstract- which appears to be the only portion of the actual study the reporters looked at:

"Alcohol is evil. We know this because it is True. And it's especially bad for women because, well, women shouldn't drink. If you run a study to confirm this belief and the facts don't back you up, the facts are wrong. So tell the public the Truth (alcohol is always evil) and bury the facts; the press won't be able to tell the difference because they're (a) lazy (or overworked, take your pick) and (b) statistically innumerate."

There is a general sentiment, among many people, to accept what one group says or another. I'm choosing to accept what Charlie Stross and Sandy Szwarc have to say. Why? Read Stross's post, and the article at Junkfood Science. The numbers tell a different story than what some are reporting, and the paper's authors are trying to say. How could that be?

(from Junkfood Science, linked and cited in Charlie Stross' post)

“[Moderate drinking] is a level of consumption that generally has been found in scientific studies to be associated with a relatively low risk of harms,” said Robert Brewer of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.* “But low risk does not mean no risk.”

* The newspaper failed to disclose that Dr. Brewer is manager and director of the Alcohol Team at the CDC; serves as Principal Investigator for Alcohol-Related Disease Impact software, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; and has authored numerous publications on alcohol and alcohol-related health effects.

Drink. It's good for you- if you're a woman and have no more than 2 drinks every day.
Read More...

Bad Science fights bad "science"!

For those of you who haven't seen this over at Boing Boing, like I did:

Ben Goldacre wrote a critical column about DJ Jeni Barnett, who was recently heard spewing loads of anti-vaxx psuedoscience on her 3 hour live radio show. He included an excerpt- about 44 minutes- of the show, with the critique.

So, what happened, then? The radio station (LBC), and it's parent corp (Global Audio), threatened to sue M. Goldacre.


We have "fair use", over there: fair dealing. It amounts to the same thing. LBC and Global Audio maintain, apparently, that 44 minutes of a 180min broadcast is too much. Plus, as deep pocketed corporations- especially when compared to Mr Goldacre- they have the conception that they can bully and browbeat anyone who doesn't do what they like.

It would be understandable if he hadn't been making a point, letting their own DJ condemn herself, but the case is just that. He excerpted, roughly, a quarter of the overall broadcast in order to make comments. That would be like using ~7min from a 30 min TV show to illustrate some aspect of the show. To me, that doesn't seem unreasonable.

But I'm not a corporation that cares about nothing other than its bottom line.

Of course, in my paranoia infused/narrative driven brain, another possibility presents itself: The corporations know how legal action produces lots of media, and they're trying to drive people to buy the nearly $6 (US) show online.

In reality, I fear they think they're protecting themselves from being exposed as people who don't care how much they hurt other people. A lot of psuedoscience is just stupid: magnetic wrist bands to help your arthritis, for instance. Anti-vaxx has a body count.

Anti-vaxx has a body count.

Read More...