Protest for Improving Science Education

 
John Pieret makes a very good point on his blog Thoughts in a Haystack. He points out that many American high school teachers avoid teaching evolution in their classes because it's too controversial. They'll skip that section of the curriculum even if it's required by the school board. "Who needs the hassle from parents," they say.

This fact needs to be widely known. It means the IDiots are winning in spite of the court cases that go against them. (John will probably disagree with this point.) If evolution is being removed from classrooms—and all the evidence suggests that it is—then we're fooling ourselves if we think the good guys are winning.

Stand up and protest if you think this is happening in your school district [Sounds of Silence]. Even better, encourage our students to take to the streets. You'd be surprised at how many of them want a decent education.

---

[Photo Credit: "Joining nationwide demonstrations, high-school students in Valparaíso [Chile] take to the streets on May 30 [2006] to protest [for] proposed changes in Chile's public education system." Eliseo Fernandez—Reuters /Landov (Encyclopedia Britanica Online)]

Ann Coulter Praises Canada for Sending Toops to Vietnam

 
That's right. You read the title correctly. Watch the video where she's challenged about her lack of truthiness. It's hilarious.

---

[Hat Tip: Canadian Cynic]

How to Think About Science

 
One of my colleagues send me a link to a CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) radio series about How to Think About Science. You can download podcasts of all 10 episodes.

If science is neither cookery, nor angelic virtuosity, then what is it?

Modern societies have tended to take science for granted as a way of knowing, ordering and controlling the world. Everything was subject to science, but science itself largely escaped scrutiny. This situation has changed dramatically in recent years. Historians, sociologists, philosophers and sometimes scientists themselves have begun to ask fundamental questions about how the institution of science is structured and how it knows what it knows. David Cayley talks to some of the leading lights of this new field of study.

A "new field of study"? I didn't know that.

I recognize the names of some of the people who were interviewed and I'm more than a little skeptical. What do you think? Are these the leading lights of a new way of looking at epistemology? Or, is this just a subtle version of new-age psychobabble?

Episode 1 - November 14 - Simon Schaffer
Episode 2 - November 21 - Lorraine Daston
Episode 3 - November 28 - Margaret Lock
Episode 4 - December 5 - Ian Hacking and Andrew Pickering
Episode 5 - December 12 - Ulrich Beck and Bruno Latour
Episode 6 - January 2 - James Lovelock
Episode 7 - January 9 - Arthur Zajonc
Episode 8 - January 16 - Wendell Berry
Episode 9 - January 23 - Rupert Sheldrake
Episode 10 - January 30 - Brian Wynne

---

Bowls: Super and Otherwise

 
PZ Myers makes a silly comment ...

I have heard a rumor that tomorrow there will be some strange game called the "superbowl" going on … I don't know who is playing, I won't be watching, and I really don't care who wins, so I think I'll just root for the Toronto Maple Leafs, if that's all right.

Silly PZ. The Toronto Maple Leafs aren't playing today (Thank God). Bowls is an individual sport not one that's played by teams. Furthermore, it has to be played outside in warm weather. That's why the Bowls Championship game is in Mexico, or Arizona, or wherever it is.

---

Blogroll: How Popular Is Your Blog?

 
According to Coturnix, and others, this weekend is the annual Blogroll Amnesty Day. The idea is to update your blogroll by adding blogs that have less traffic than your own blog.

I decided it would be a good time to update my blogroll but most of the blogs I added are more popular than Sandwalk. I'm adding them in the hopes that they will notice me and add Sandwalk to their own blogroll on Blogroll Amnesty Day. You can see my complete blogroll in the left-hand sidebar. I've moved it up for a few days.

Many of the blogs listed below should have been on my blogroll a year ago but I was just too lazy to add them. I read all of these blogs every day, that's one of the criteria. The others are that the blog has frequent postings and the articles are worth reading. In some cases the postings are less frequent than normal but the bloggers are friends, colleagues, relatives, or enemies (or some combination).

I'm very curious about the popularity of blogs. Here are the latest numbers for Sandwalk.

I think the standard measure of popularity is the number of Views per day or the number of Views per month. In January Sandwalk had 47,578 visits and 75,511 views. I think this is about average for the blogs on my blogroll but I really don't know. How about posting your numbers in the comments—if you want to reveal them? (Views per day, and total views in January.)

People also talk about the "Authority" ranking on Technorati. Sandwalk's is 273, whatever that means. What is the "Authority" ranking of your blog? Does anyone know if Pharyngula has authority? What about The Panda's Thumb?

Here are the new blogs I just added today. Read them. Now. They are all very interesting. My apologies to those who should have been there a long time ago.

Bayblab
beer with chocolate
Botany Photo of the Day
Canadian Cynic
Catalogue of Organisms
Eye on DNA
Effect Measure
Framing Science
Genetics & Health
Greg Laden's Blog
Helmintholog
Genomicron
Laelaps
Memoirs of a Skepchick
Mike's Weekly Skeptic Rant
Recursiity
Respectful Insolence
Runesmith's Canadian Content"
The Evilutionary Biologist
The Lippard Blog
The Loom
The Frame Problem
The Unexamined Life
Thoughts in a Haystack

---

Our Groundhog Is Better than Your Groundhog!

 

Wiarton Willie didn't see his shadow so Spring is coming.

See the video.

---

How to Describe People Who Reject Evolution

 
The following sentences are taken from performance reviews that were originally published in various places. They have often been brought together in a single email message that attributes all of them to the Canadian Federal government, the American Federal government, a large American corporation, the American military, etc. etc. I'm assuming that the site from the Kellogg School of management has the attributions correct [Sales Humor].

I may have to use some of them, since "IDiot" is losing its effectiveness.

These quotes were taken from real resumes, cover letters and Performance Reviews. Most were printed in the July 21, 1997, issue of Fortune Magazine.

These quotes are taken from actual performance evaluations.

1. "Since my last report, this employee has reached rock bottom and has started to dig."
2. "His men would follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiosity."
3. "I would not allow this employee to breed."
4. "This associate is really not so much of a has-been, but more of a definitely won't be."
5. "Works well when under constant supervision and cornered like a rat in a trap."
6. "When she opens her mouth, it seems that this is only to change whichever foot was previously in there."
7. "He would be out of his depth in a parking lot puddle."
8. "This young lady has delusions of adequacy."
9. "He sets low personal standards and then consistently fails to achieve them."
10. "This employee is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot."
11. "This employee should go far-and the sooner he starts, the better."
12. He certainly takes a long time to make his pointless.
13. He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier.
14. He's been working with glue too much.
15. He would argue with a signpost.
16. He brings a lot of joy whenever he leaves the room.
17. When his IQ reaches 50, he should sell.
18. If you see 2 people talking and one looks bored, he's the other one.

These are actual lines from military performance appraisals or OERS(Officer Efficiency Reports).

1. "Not the sharpest knife in the drawer."
2. "Got into the gene pool while the lifeguard wasn't watching."
3. "A room temperature IQ."
4. "Got a full 6-pack, but lacks the plastic thingy to hold it all together."
5. "A gross ignoramus -- 144 times worse than an ordinary ignoramus."
6. "A photographic memory but with the lens cover glued on."
7. "A prime candidate for natural deselection."
8. "Bright as Alaska in December."
9. "One-celled organisms out score him in IQ tests."
10. "Donated his body to science before he was done using it."
11. "Fell out of the family tree."
12. "Gates are down, the lights are flashing, but the train isn't coming."
13. "Has two brains; one is lost and the other is out looking for it."
14. "He's so dense, light bends around him."
15. "If brains were taxed, he'd get a rebate."
16. "If he were any more stupid, he'd have to be watered twice a week."
17. "If you give him a penny for his thoughts, you'd get change."
18. "If you stand close enough to him, you can hear the ocean."
19. "It's hard to believe that he beat out 1,000,000 other sperm."
20. "One neuron short of a synapse."
21. "Some drink from the fountain of knowledge; he only gargled."
22. "Takes him 1 1/2 hours to watch 60 Minutes."
23. "Wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead."

These quotes were taken from actual resumes and cover letters.

1. "I demand a salary commiserate with my extensive experience."
2. "I have lurnt Word Perfect 6.0 computor and spreasheet progroms."
3. "Received a plague for Salesperson of the Year."
4. "Wholly responsible for two (2) failed financial institutions."
5. "Reason for leaving last job: maturity leave."
6. "Failed bar exam with relatively high grades."
7. "It's best for employers that I not work with people."
8. "Let's meet, so you can 'ooh' and 'aah' over my experience."
9. "You will want me to be Head Honcho in no time."
10. "Am a perfectionist and rarely if ever forget details."
11. "I was working for my mom until she decided to move."
12. "Marital status: single. Unmarried. Unengaged. Uninvolved. No commitments."
13. "I have an excellent track record, although I am not a horse."
14 "I am loyal to my employer at all costs.... Please feel free to respond to my resume on my office voice mail."
15. "I have become completely paranoid, trusting completely no one and absolutely nothing."
16. "My goal is to be a meteorologist. But since I possess no training in meteorology, I suppose I should try stock brokerage."
17. "I procrastinate, especially when the task is unpleasant."
18. "Personal interests: donating blood. Fourteen gallons so far."
19. "As indicted, I have over five years of analyzing investments."
20. "Instrumental in ruining entire operation for a Midwest chain store."
21. "Note: Please don't misconstrue my 14 jobs as 'job-hopping'. I have never quit a job."
22. "Marital status: often. Children: various."
23. "Reason for leaving last job: They insisted that all employees get to work by 8:45 am every morning. I couldn't work under those conditions."
24. "The company made me a scapegoat, just like my three previous employers."
25. "Finished eighth in my class of ten."
26. "References: none. I've left a path of destruction behind me."

---

[Hat Tip: CWRB, via email.]

Bigots at Wilfrid Laurier University

 
Here's the complete story from Anatoly Venovcev posted on his blog Cosmopolitan [Campus Freethought Groups - Intolerant?]. The logic employed in rejecting the Laurier Freethought Alliance is juvenile at best and bigoted at worst.
From Wilfrid Laurier University: Mission, Vision and Values.

We believe in the dignity of all individuals, in fair and equitable treatment, and in equal opportunity.

We believe in the spirit of free inquiry, respect for the views of others and the obligation to formulate well grounded and investigative questions.

These values were approved in principle by the Board of Governors on December 6, 1994.

A couple of months ago, last April, the club that I'm the vice-president of submitted it's application to become an official campus club. Our name - "Laurier Freethought Alliance," our goal, to promote science, freedom of inquiry, skepticism, and a good life without the need for superstition or religious belief. Since that is, after all, what a CFI-affiliated group should be about. Yesterday, after not getting through to us for 9 months (a problem in it's own right), the representative from the Campus Clubs department sends us an e-mail: Our application has been denied. Their reasons?

While the Campus Clubs department understands the goals and visions of your organization, they are not compatible with the guidelines of what may be approved and incorporated into our department. While the promotion of reason, science and freedom of inquiry are perfectly legitimate goals, what is most in question in regards to your club's vision is the promotion of "a fulfilling life without religion and superstition". While this university is indeed technically a secular institution, secular does not denote taking an active stance in opposition to the principles and status of religious beliefs and practices. To be clear, this is not meant to say that the promotion of science and reason are illegitimate goals. But due to the need to respect and tolerate the views of others, the Campus Clubs department is unable to approve a club of this nature at this time. If you wish to adjust and rethink your club's application and vision, you may resubmit a revised proposal at any time.

So because we don't base our worldviews on dogma and wish to promote that ideal we are intolerant while the Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, and Christian (including the Campus for Christ group) can? That is quite absurd. The president of the club, who got this e-mail, for the lack of a better term "flipped out," when he got this and wrote a rant in response.

Fortunately I, with his later revisions, wrote a much more diplomatic response, explaining to them what the promotion of "a fulfilling life without religion and superstition" really means and saying how not allowing a freethought group on the Wilfrid Laurier University campus it is they who are in fact being intolerant. We suggested both a revision and a meeting with them. We'll see how this turns out but I wanted to let the freethought blogging community in on it and ask those who had previous experience founding freethought groups if they had any such problems and how they can be resolved.

---

[Hat Tip: Friendly Atheist]

Human Ribosomal RNA Genes

 
Humans 5S RNA genes are about 200 bp in size from the transcription start site to the termination site. The precursor is processed to give the mature 120 bp 5S RNA that is incorporated into ribosomes [Ribosomal RNA Genes in Eukaryotes].

5S RNA genes are arranged as tandem repeats in a large cluster on chromosome 1 (1q42). The number of repeats varies from individual to individual within the range of 35-175 copies (Stults et al. 2008). The length of the repeats also varies but most of the genes are part of a 2200 bp repeat. Since only a small part of this is actually transcribed (200 bp) it looks like much of this locus is non-essential DNA. (The 5S RNA repeat in macaques is 7300 bp and in rats it is 1800 bp.)

The reported human genome sequences do not contain the region of the 5S RNA genes. It is impossible to clone and assemble fragments of repeated DNA sequences.


The other ribosomal RNA genes are located in a single transcription unit that gives rise to an RNA precursor of 13,000 bp. This is known as 45 RNA and the "gene" (operon) is often called the 45S gene. This large transcript is processed to give three mature RNAs: 18S (1874 bp), 5.8S (160 bp), and 28S (4718 bp) [Ribosomal RNA Genes in Eukaryotes].

The transcription units are arranged mostly as head-to-tail tandem repeats of 43 kb. Thus, 30 kB of this repeat unit consists of non-transcribed spacer. The length of this non-transcribed spacer varies from species to species although it tends to be the same within a given species (but see below). The conservation of length and sequence in a region of DNA that is non-essential may seem surprising but it is related to the frequent recombination events that occur at the sites of ribosomal RNA genes. The genes themselves are almost identical in sequence as a result of concerted evolution or gene conversion. The flanking regions (non-transccribed spacers) are "conserved" because they are carried along.

Let's assume that 20 kb of the non-transcribed spacer is non-functional and non-essential (= junk). That means 23 kb (13 kb of 45S transcript and 10 kb of spacer) is essential for proper function of the ribosomal RNA genes.



The ribosomal RNA genes are located at regions called nucleolar organizer regions (NORs) because this is the site where a nucleolus forms within the nucleus. The nucleolus is actually a dense region of the nucleus where massive transcripton of ribosomal RNA genes is occurring.

In humans, there are five clusters of ribosomal RNA genes (NORs) located at 13p12, 14p12, 15p12, 21p12, and 22p12. All of them are found in distinctive regions at the ends of apocentric chromosomes (chromosomes with a centromere region near one end). Cluster lengths (number of repeats) varies from individual to individual. The frequency of recombination events leading to rearrangements is ~10% per generation. This means that almost every individual has a unique fingerprint of ribosomal RNA gene repeats. (Each of us has 10 clusters.)

There are about 600 repeats in the average diploid genome (Stults, 2008). (This means 300 repeats in the haploid genome.) As is the case with the 5S repeats, none of the nucleolar organizer regions has been cloned and sequenced. All five loci are represented by large gaps in the "finished" genome.

The total amount of DNA in the large ribosomal RNA clusters is 12,900 kb (300 × 43 kb). Of this amount 6,000 kb (47 %) is probably junk in the sense that it is dispensible.

Junk in Your Genome

Ribosomal RNA Genes

Total DNA = 13,120 kb (0.41%)

Essential = 7,000 kb (0.22%)

Junk = 6,120 kb (0.19%)

Many of the human 45S genes are pseudogenes and unusual rearrangements are common (Caburet et al., 2005). In mouse, up to half of all the 45S genes are non-functional pseudogenes. Presumably these are due to errors in recombination events and they are likely to be transient.

The minimum number of 45S genes in mammals is not known for certain in humans but in chickens the loss of anything more than half the average number is lethal. It seems reasonable that of the 300 or so human 45S genes only about 150 are absolutely required and the remainder are dispensable. However, concerted evolution of these genes is essential in the long run and the mechanism of concerted evolution and gene conversion requires lots of copies. Thus, all copies are necessary for the species even though only half may be required for any one individual.

Total ribosomal RNA genes in the genome:

5S: 100 copies of 2.2 kb repeats = 220 kb. (estimate 100 kb essential, 120 kb junk)
45S: 300 copies of 43 kb repeats = 12,900 kb. (estimate 7,000 kb essential, 6,120 junk)

UPDATED: May 10, 2011

---

Caburet, S., Conti, C., Schurra, C., Lebofsky, R., Edelstein, S.J. and Bensimon, A. (2005) Human ribosomal RNA gene arrays display a broad range of palindromic structures. Genome Res. 15:1079-85. [PubMed]

Stults, D.M., Killen, M.W., Pierce, H.H. and Pierce, A.J. (2008) Genomic architecture and inheritance of human ribosomal RNA gene clusters. Genome Res. 18:13-18. [PubMed] [Genome Research]

Matches Are Made in Heaven but not on eHarmony

 
John Tierney and his wife both went to the eHarmony matchmaking site and registered as single and divorced (a tiny white lie). They answered all 258 questions then sat back and waited until they were matched by the computer program. (They are very happily married.)

Find out what happened at My eHarmony Experiment: Can This Marriage Be Matched?.

---

Slow Poisoning of America (and Canada)

 
Friday's Urban Legend: FALSE

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is the salt of glutamate and glutamate is a common amino acid found in all proteins. According to an email message, MSG is killing us by making us all fat.

Here's the American version of the email message with the special Canadian inserts in italics. Stuff that's not in the Canadian version is underlined.

Subject: The effects of MSG
SLOW POISONING OF [AMERICA] [and CANADA]

[MSG The food additive MSG (Mono-Sodium Glutamate) is a slow poison. MSG hides behind 25 or more names, such as "Natural Flavouring."

MSG is even in your favourite coffee from Tim Horton's and other brand-name coffee shops.]

I wondered if there could be an actual chemical causing the massive obesity epidemic, so did a friend of mine, John Erb. He was a research assistant at the University of Waterloo, and spent years working for the government.

He made an amazing discovery while going through scientific journals for a book he was writing called The Slow Poisoning of America. In hundreds of studies around the world, scientists were creating obese mice and rats to use in diet or diabetes test studies.

No strain of rat or mice is naturally obese, so the scientists have to create them. They make these morbidly obese creatures by injecting them with MSG when they are first born. The MSG triples the amount of insulin the pancreas creates, causing rats (and humans?) to become obese; they even have a title for the race of fat rodents they create: "MSG-Treated Rats."

I was shocked too. I went to my kitchen, checking the cupboards and the fridge. MSG was in everything! The Campbell's soups, the Hostess Doritos, the Lays flavored potato chips, Top Ramen, Betty Crocker Hamburger Helper, Heinz canned gravy, Swanson frozen prepared meals, Kraft salad dressings, especially the 'healthy low fat' ones. The items that didn't have MSG had something called Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, which is just another name for Monosodium Glutamate. It was shocking to see just how many of the foods we feed our children everyday are filled with this stuff. They hide MSG under many different names in order to fool those who catch on.

But it didn't stop there. When our family went out to eat, we started asking at the restaurants what menu items had MSG. Many employees, even the managers, swore they didn't use MSG. But when we ask for the ingredient list which they grudgingly provided, sure enough MSG and Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein were everywhere. Burger King, McDonalds, Wendy's, Taco Bell, every restaurant, even the sit down ones like TGIF, Chilis', Applebees and Denny's use MSG in abundance. Kentucky Fried Chicken seemed to be the WORST offender: MSG was in every chicken dish, salad dressing and gravy. No wonder I loved to eat that coating on the skin, their secret spice was MSG!

So why is MSG in so may of the foods we eat? Is it a preservative or a vitamin? Not according to my friend John. In the book he wrote, an expose of the food additive industry called The Slow Poisoning of America,

http://www.spofamerica.com/

he said that MSG is added to food for the addictive effect it has on the human body. Even the propaganda website sponsored by the food manufacturers lobby group supporting MSG at:

http://www.msgfacts.com/facts/msgfact12.html

explains that the reason they add it to food is to make people eat more.

A study of elderly people showed that people eat more of the foods that it is added to. The Glutamate Association lobby group says eating more benefits the elderly, but what does it do to the rest of us?

'Betcha can't eat just one', takes on a whole new meaning where MSG is concerned! And we wonder why the nation is overweight?

The MSG manufacturers themselves admit that it addicts people to their products. It makes people choose their product over others, and makes people eat more of it than they would if MSG wasn't added. Not only is MSG scientifically proven to cause obesity, it is an addictive substance!

Since its introduction into the American food supply fifty years ago, MSG has been added in larger and larger doses to the prepackaged meals, soups, snacks and fast foods we are tempted to eat everyday.

The FDA has set no limits on how much of it can be added to food. They claim it's safe to eat in any amount. How can they claim it is safe when there are hundreds of scientific studies with titles like these?

= = = = =

The monosodium glutamate (MSG) obese rat as a model for the study of exercise in obesity. Gobatto CA, Mello MA, Souza CT, Ribeiro IA. Res Commun Mol Pathol Pharmacol. 2002

= = = = =

Adrenalectomy abolishes the food-induced hypothalamic serotonin release in both normal and monosodium glutamate-obese rats. Guimaraes RB, Telles MM, Coelho VB, Mori RC, Nascimento CM, Ribeiro Brain Res Bull. August 2002

= = = = =

Obesity induced by neonatal monosodium glutamate treatment in spontaneously hypertensive rats: an animal model of multiple risk factors. Yamamoto M, Iino K, Ichikawa K, Shinohara N, Yoshinari Fujishima Hypertens Res. March 1998

= = = = =

Hypothalamic lesion induced by injection of monosodium glutamate in suckling period and subsequent development of obesity. Tanaka K, Shimada M, Nakao K, Kusunoki Exp Neurol. October 1978

= = = = =

Yes, that last study was not a typo, it WAS written in 1978.

Both the medical research community and food "manufacturers" have known MSG's side effects for decades!

Many more studies mentioned in John Erb's book link MSG to Diabetes, Migraines and headaches, Autism, ADHD and even Alzheimer's. But what can we do to stop the food manufactures from dumping fattening and addictive MSG into our food supply and causing the obesity epidemic we now see?

[Even as you read this, George W. Bush and his corporate supporters are pushing a Bill through Congress, and it's called the:

"Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act" also known as the "Cheeseburger Bill". This sweeping law bans anyone from suing food manufacturers, sellers and distributors. Even if it comes out that they purposely added an addictive chemical to their foods.

Read about it for yourself at:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/8458081.htm

Last month the House of Representatives passed the "Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act" to protect the food and beverage industry from civil lawsuits. Under the measure, known as the "Cheeseburger Bill,"people who buy food or drinks couldn't sue the companies that made them, the stores that sold them or the restaurants that served them if they got fat from the products, so long as the products met existing laws. The Senate is expected to take up a similar bill later this year."

The Bill has already been rushed through the House of Representatives, and is due for the same rubber stamp at Senate level. It is important that Bush and his corporate supporters get it through before the media lets everyone know about MSG, the intentional Nicotine for food.]

Several months ago, John Erb took his book and his concerns to one of the highest government health officials in Canada. While sitting in the Government office, the official told him "Sure I know how bad MSG is, I wouldn't touch the stuff!" But this top-level government official refused to tell the public what he knew.

The big media doesn't want to tell the public either, fearing legal issues with their advertisers. It seems that the fallout on the fast food industry may hurt their profit margin.

So what do we do?

The food producers and restaurants have been addicting us to their products for years, and now we are paying the price for it.

Our children should not be cursed with obesity caused by an addictive food additive.

But what can I do about it?

I'm just one voice, what can I do to stop the poisoning of our children, while guys like Bush are insuring financial protection for the industry that is poisoning us.

I for one am doing something about it. I am sending this email out to everyone I know in an attempt to show you the truth that the corporate owned politicians and media won't tell you.

The best way you can help save yourself and your children from this drug-induced epidemic, is to forward this email to everyone.

With any luck, it will circle the globe before governments can pass the Bill protecting those who poisoned us.

The food industry learned a lot from the tobacco industry.

Imagine if big tobacco had a bill like this in place before someone blew the whistle on Nicotine? Blow the whistle on MSG.

If you are one of the few who can still believe that MSG is good for us, and you don't believe what John Erb has to say, see for yourself. Go to the National Library of Medicine, at http://www.pubmed.com

Type in the words "MSG Obese", and read a few of the articles for yourself.

We do not want to be rats in one giant experiment, and we do not approve of food that makes us into a nation of obese, lethargic, addicted sheep, waiting for the slaughter.

Put an end to this, and stop the Slow Poisoning of America. Let's save our children.

John Erb

Snopes.com covers the issue of additives in Tim Horton's coffee. There is no MSG in the coffee (and no nicotine either).

---

Uncommon Descent and the Great Debate

 
PZ Myers destroyed Geoffrey Simmons in a recent debate on radio [Was that fun, or what?]. You can hear it for yourself at [MP3].

The IDiots over on Uncommon Descent were following the debate live. It didn't go well so what did they do? They deleted the thread. Fortunately, it was preserved at Antievolution.org.

And you wonder why we call them IDiots?

---

[Hat Tip: Pharyngula]

Canada's Science Technology and Innovation Council

 
In response to the dismissal of Canada's Science Advisor, the Harper government proposes to get science advice from someone other than scientists. They have established the Science, Technology and Innovation Council. This body will not advise the Prime Minister or members of parliament. It reports to the Minister of Industry. Here's the mandate ...

The Council is an advisory body that provides the Government of Canada with external policy advice on science and technology issues, and produces regular national reports that measure Canada's science and technology performance against international standards of excellence.

We all know what this means. The role of the council is not to give scientific advice, it's to promote and enhance technology.

As far as I'm concerned, this is worse than having no science advisor at all. What it does is establish a group of people who will masquerade as real scientists and discourage the government from seeking real scientific advice about important science policies like science education and funding of basic research.

Let's look at the people who have agreed to serve on this council [Biographical Notes]. You can judge for yourself whether this group is going to give good advice on science policy or whether they are going to advise on technology issues that can benefit Canada.

Ask yourself whether you would take advice from this group on oil platforms in the arctic ocean, global climate change, stem cell research, evolution vs creationism, or investing in a large telescope. Of course you wouldn't. The fear is that by having this group, Harper can avoid having to seek out other sources of advice. I think it's better to have no "science advisors" at all than to have sham advisors [We Hardly Knew Ye].

• Chair: Dr. Howard Alper: A distinguished Professor of Chemistry at the University of Ottawa. He has an impressive record of scientific research.


• Dr. Francesco Bellini: Chairman, President and CEO of Neurochem, a drug company. Received his Ph.D. in chemistry in 1977 and worked in a drug company as a researcher until 1984.


• Mr. Eric Bergeron: He has "18 years of global international management experience in high-tech industries, including business development, sales, technology and finance. He is the Founder of Optosecurity Inc., a venture-funded company that develops breakthrough security products for the Transportation and Critical Infrastructure markets."


• Mr. Richard Dicerni: Deputy Minister, Dept. of Industry.


• Mr. David B. Fissel: President of ASL Environmental Sciences, a company that funds projects related to the ocean. "Most of these projects involved input to the design of offshore oil and gas facilities, port development, or environmental assessment and monitoring for coastal and deepwater developments."


• Mr. Peter MacKinnon: Former Dean of Law and currently President of the University of Saskatchewan.


• Dr. Terence Matthews: "Dr. Terry Matthews is the non-executive Chairman of a number of technology companies including Mitel Corporation, March Networks Corporation, DragonWave Corporation, Newport Networks and Solace Systems."


• Mrs. Marie-Lucie Morin: Deputy Minister, International Trade.


• Dr. Heather Munroe-Blum: Currently she is Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill University. She used to be a highly respected scientist working in the field of epidemiology.


• Mr. David O'Brien: "Chairman of the Board of EnCana and Chairman of the Board of the Royal Bank of Canada. He is a director of Molson Coors Brewing Company and TransCanada Corporation. Mr. O'Brien is also a director of Focus Energy Trust, the E & P Management Partnership (a private energy investment company) and Spur Resources Ltd. (a private exploration company)."


• Mr. J. Robert S. Prichard: President and Chief Executive Officer of Torstar Corporation, which publishes the Toronto Star. Rob is a former lawyer and the former President of the University of Toronto.


• Mr. Morris Rosenberg: Deputy Minister of Health.


• Dr. Guy Rouleau: A scientist interested in the genetic basis of neurological disease at the Université de Montréal.


• Dr. W. A. (Sam) Shaw: "President and CEO of the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (1997-present), one of the country's leading technical institutes." (I'm not familiar with this leading institute.)


• Dr. Molly Shoichet: A scientist who "is an expert in the study of Polymers for Regeneration which are materials that promote healing in the body. Dr. Shoichet's laboratory has numerous patents (published and pending) on drug delivery and scaffold design. She has founded two spin-off companies from her laboratory."


• Dr. Mihaela Ulieru: "Dr. Ulieru holds the NSERC Canada Research Chair in Adaptive Information Infrastructures for the e-Society at the University of New Brunswick where she founded and directs the Adaptive Risk Management Lab - an international leading centre for research and innovation in the design of holistic security ecosystems and resilient information infrastructures that link critical infrastructures."


• Dr. Harvey Weingarten: Currently President of the University of Calgary, he used to be a psychologist.


• Mr. Rob Wildeboer: "He is the Executive Chairman and co-founder of Martinrea International Inc., a leading Canadian auto parts supplier, specializing in automotive fluid systems and metal forming products, with leading edge expertise in hydroforming, hot stamping, stamping, laser trimming and welding."

---

Results of Junk DNA Poll

 
The poll is now closed and here are the final results (see sidebar on the left-hand side of this page). The question was "How much of our genome could be deleted without having any significant effect on our species?"

The results are surprising to me. I would have thought that a far higher percentage would have voted for 50% or more. As it turns out, half of you think that 50% of our genome is essential. That's not right.


Here's the plan. Over the next few days I'm going to try and post a bunch of articles on the composition of our genome. I'll try and explain why most of it is junk. Then I'll re-do the poll to see how many I've convinced to change their minds. Deal?

If anyone else wants to join in, send me the link to your posting and I'll put it on Sandwalk.

---

We Hardly Knew Ye

 
Arthur Carty has been dismissed and he won't be replaced when he leaves on March 31.

I'll let that shocking news sink in for a minute or two ....

♪♪ ...musical interlude ..... ♪♪♪

So, are you properly outraged? No?

If you're like 99.99% 0f Canadians you probably didn't know that Arthur Carty is Canada's National Science Advisor. Probably 99% of Canadians didn't even know we had a National Science Advisor.

It really doesn't matter 'cause soon we won't have one. Stephan Harper is eliminating the office of National Science Advisor. Good riddance, I say. I've seen no evidence that our science advisor ever did anything so I'm not going to get too upset about this. Check out the website for the Office of the National Science Advisor. Boooooring ....

Does Canada need a National Science Advisor? No. We already have people who are well-placed to advise the government about science. The heads of the granting councils, for example (Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council).

Of course, they haven't done a very good job either. The head of CIHR recently resigned after a couple of devastating grant competitions where the level of funding was far below what was necessary. Nevertheless, in an ideal world those are the people who should be advising the government on science policy.¹ It's not helpful to have a third party who has no chips on the table.

Lots of people disagree with me (). Over on Canadian Cynic LuLu thinks this is just a reflection of the science illiteracy of the Conservatives [Science? We don't need science.]. That's true but it's not going to be fixed by having a science advisor who hides out in the Department of Industry.

PZ Myers runs a little blog on the edge of Minnesota, near North Dakota, and a few miles south of Canada. He's secretly delighted that our Canadian Prime Minister is behaving as badly as George Bush [Congratulations Canada!]. I don't care. Our science advisor has only been around for three years but that's long enough to demonstrate that it's a useless job. I understand that Americans are upset about the demotion of their Presidential Science Adviser. I guess he was much more successful that Arthur Carty was in Canada. I dunno.

---

1. Along with Presidents of scientific societies, Presidents of leading universities, prominent scientists and teachers, and taxi drivers.

[The title of this posting is from an old Irish anti-war song called Johnny I Hardly Knew ye. Check out this version on YouTube.]

Nobel Prizes by Country

 
The number of Nobel Laureates in each country is often a matter of some pride. More importantly, it is often used to bolster arguments about the quality of science in different countries. Recently, I saw a creationist use these numbers to support the claim that acceptance of evolution was irrelevant. According to this IDiot, the USA has the most Nobel Laureates in spite of the fact that 50% of the population don't believe in evolution. He was thinking that scientists who are Christians can be better than scientists who are not.

Here's the data in case anyone is interested. The total number of Nobel Laureates in the sciences is given in column two for each country. Only the top ten countires are listed. The third column gives the population in millions [List of countries by population]¹. The last column is the number of Nobel Laureates per million people.

As you can see, a couple of countries are punching way above their weight (Sweden and Switzerland). Several countries are way further down the list than they should be (Canada, Russia, Japan, China, India). The USA is not getting any more Nobel Prizes than its population warrants.

Country	Nobel Prizes	Popn	Ratio
United States	154	303	0.51
Germany	51	82	0.63
United Kingdom	48	61	0.79
France	20	64	0.31
Netherlands	11	16	0.69
Russia/USSR	11	141	0.08
Switzerland	10	8	1.25
Japan	8	128	0.06
Sweden	8	9	0.89
Canada	8	33	0.24

---

1. The population numbers are from the last few years. Since the Nobel Laureates are from the past 100 years, you could argue that the ratios for Canada and the USA should be higher since their populations have grown a lot more than the populations of the European countries and Japan. This would be obvious if we normalized on the 1950 populations.

Intelligent Design Challenge

 
Calling all IDiots! This is your big chance to put your money where your mouth is. Take the Intelligent Design Challenge! on The Panda's Thumb and show us you can distinguish natural DNA from intelligently designed DNA.

If a real genuine IDiot wins the challenge, then in addition to the book prize I'll promise to stop using the word "IDiot" for one week!!

---

1,2,3, What're We Fightin' For?

 
From The Independent (United Kingdom) [Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights].

Everyone who supports Canada's role in Afghanistan should be very certain they know what kind of "freedom and democracy" we're supporting. The conclusion is obvious. It's time to cut and run and let the Afghans sort out things for themselves. We're not helping by choosing to support a government that; (a) can't control more than a tiny percentage of the country; and (b) shouldn't even be allowed to control that small bit. As for the rest of the country, we seem to be fightin' for warlords and the drug trade. Oh yeah, we also support Pakistan who allows a bunch of thugs to control 20% of the country where the meaning of "freedom" is very different from what we mean. [See the following links for other examples of rational thinking: This is what 77 Canadian lives buys]
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

George Santayana (1905)

A young man, a student of journalism, is sentenced to death by an Islamic court for downloading a report from the internet. The sentence is then upheld by the country's rulers. This is Afghanistan – not in Taliban times but six years after "liberation" and under the democratic rule of the West's ally Hamid Karzai.

The fate of Sayed Pervez Kambaksh has led to domestic and international protests, and deepening concern about erosion of civil liberties in Afghanistan. He was accused of blasphemy after he downloaded a report from a Farsi website which stated that Muslim fundamentalists who claimed the Koran justified the oppression of women had misrepresented the views of the prophet Mohamed.

Mr Kambaksh, 23, distributed the tract to fellow students and teachers at Balkh University with the aim, he said, of provoking a debate on the matter. But a complaint was made against him and he was arrested, tried by religious judges without – say his friends and family – being allowed legal representation and sentenced to death.

---

[Photo Credit: Reuters]
[Hat Tip: RichardDawkins.net]

Meet My Cousin!

 


Blue-eyed humans have a single, common ancestor

There's quite a resemblance, don't you think?

---

Pictures Worth A Thousand Words

 
A few days ago Jennifer Smith over on Runesmith's Canadian Content reported that Stephan Harper has redecorated the lobbies behind the benches in Parliament. (It's the place where lobbyists used to hang out back in the olden days.) The full description can be found on the Green Party website [Model Parliament].

What may have been the most fascinating part of the afternoon was my time in the Government Lobby. Behind the curtains that run along the last row of benches on both sides of the House, are doors to long skinny living room areas. One is called the Opposition Lobby; the other the Government Lobby. In my pre-Green Party leader life, I have spent a lot of time in both. The Government Lobby was a frequent work space when I was Senior Policy Advisor to the federal Minister of Environment back in the mid-1980s. And I frequented both lobbies when I was with Sierra Club of Canada from 1987-2006. It did not strike me until I walked into the Government Lobby to await my turn as Speaker that I had not been in there since Stephen Harper became Prime Minister.

It used to have some paintings on the wall. Past prime ministers, certainly a formal portrait of the Queen. Landscapes. I know there was the occasional photo of current Prime Ministers, but when I walked in this time, I felt chilled to the bone. Every available wall space had a large colour photo of Stephen Harper. Stephen Harper at Alert. Stephen Harper in fire fighter gear. Stephen Harper at his desk. Stephen Harper meeting the Dalai Lama. Even the photo of the Queen showed her in the company of Stephen Harper. None were great photos. None were more than enlarged snapshots in colour. They didn’t feel like art.

Jennifer wrote to her MP, Garth Turner, to see if this was true and if someone could supply pictures. The title of her latest posting, Ask And You Shall Receive, tells it all.

Not only did Garth Turner MP take pictures, he posted them on his blog [Let me count the ways…]. Cool. I stole some of them so you can see what's become of our government.

We need to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan and send over Stephan Harper, permanently.

---

Nobel Laureate: Bruce Merrifield

 

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1984.

"for his development of methodology for chemical synthesis on a solid matrix"



In 1984, Bruce Merrifield (1921 - 2006) was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for discovering a method of synthesizing polymers on a solid matrix. The technique laid the groundwork for the development of peptide and nucleotide synthesizers that are now common in biochemistry laboratories.

The presentation speech was delivered by Professor Bengt Lindberg of the Royal Academy of Sciences.
THEME:

Nobel Laureates

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen,

The chemical reactions which take place in living organisms are not spontaneous, but require the involvement of catalysts. These catalysts are called proteins and are composed of chains of amino acids called peptides. A number of hormones and other substances which regulate different life processes are also peptides. There are about 20 naturally occurring amino acids which are found in such peptides and since the chains can be very long, the number of possible variations is virtually unlimited.

Today we know the structures of a very large number of proteins and peptides. Important contributions to this area of knowledge were made by Fredrick Sanger, who received the Nobel prize in 1958, and Stanford Moore and William H. Stein, Nobel prizewinners in 1972. A very important contribution was also made by the Swedish researcher Per Edman, who unfortunately died relatively young and whose method for the controlled degradation of peptides is now generally used.

The chemical synthesis of peptides is an important task. The principle used in such synthesis is simple and was developed a relatively long time ago by Emil Fischer, who received a Nobel prize in 1902, although for completely different discoveries. Expressed simply, this principle involves the binding together of two amino acids which have been appropriately modified to give a dipeptide. This dipeptide is then combined with a third modified amino acid to give a tripeptide and so on.

Even if the principle is simple, in practice it is difficult to synthesize peptides, since a large number of individual steps is involved. After each step the desired product must be separated from by-products and unreacted starting material and this takes time and involves loss of the product. When Vincent du Vigneaud synthesized a peptide hormone, oxytocin, which is a nonapeptide, for the first time, this represented a great step forward which was rewarded with the Nobel prize for 1955. To use a similar approach for synthesizing a peptide containing 100 or more amino acid residues is truly a heroic task, requiring a very large amount of work and chemicals. This task can be compared to climbing a high mountain peak in the Himalayas, which begins with a large expedition carrying much equipment and ends, if all goes well, with a few lightly equipped alpinists reaching the top.

Therefore, Merrifield's development during the 1960's of a method for carrying out peptide synthesis on a solid matrix revolutionized the field. He attached the first amino acid to an insoluble polymer, a plastic material in the form of small spheres. Subsequently, the other amino acids were added one after one and only after the entire peptide chain had been synthesized was it released from the polymer. The advantages of this method are considerable. The complicated purification of the product after each synthetic step is replaced by simply washing the polymer to which the peptide is attached, so that loss of product is avoided completely. At the same time, the yield for each individual step is increased to 99.5% or better, a goal which cannot be achieved with conventional methods, but which is extremely important in syntheses involving a large number of steps. Finally, this method can be automated and automatic peptide synthesizers are now commercially available.

Thousands of different peptides of different sizes, as well as proteins, peptide hormones and analogues of these compounds have now been synthesized using this method. One milestone in this respect was the synthesis of an active enzyme, ribonuclease, containing 124 amino acid residues, by Merrifield and his coworkers.

The approach of performing a multistep synthesis with a compound attached to a solid matrix as the starting material has also been used in other areas. The most important of these is undoubtedly the synthesis of oligonucleotides, which are needed in hybrid DNA research. In this case as well an automated apparatus which can be programmed to synthesize desired products has been constructed. Although Merrifield has not worked in this area himself, it is clearly his ideas which have found a new application here.

Professor Merrifield,

Your methodology for chemical synthesis on a solid matrix is a completely new approach to organic synthesis. It has created new possibilities in the fields of peptide-protein and nucleic acid chemistry. It has greatly stimulated progress in biochemistry, molecular biology, medicine and pharmacology. It is also of great practical importance, both for the development of new drugs and for gene technology.

On behalf of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences I wish to convey our warmest congratulations and ask you to receive your prize from the hands of His Majesty the King.

---

Sophophora, the New Model Organism

 
Meet Sophophora melanogaster. It has some major advantages as a model organism. The genome is small and there are only four chromosomes; there are thousands of well-characterized genetic markers; the genome sequence is known; developmental pathways have been worked out; it has a short life cycle.

In summary, it has all the advantages of Drosophila melanogaster. In fact, it is Drosophila melanogaster.

The latest studies show conclusively that the genus Drosophila is paraphyletic. Many of the 1500 species cluster with flies from other genera rather than with those in Drosophila. This will prompt a renaming since taxonomists these days are mostly cladists—as they should be.

The type species for the genus Drosohila is Drosophila funebris. Unfortunately, Drosophila melanogaster is not very closely related so its genus name has to be changed. The new name is Sophophora melanogaster. Read all about it on Catalogue of Organisms [Drosophila forever?M].

Now if they could only get around to changing Caenorhabditis and Saccharomyces, we'd all be much happier .....

---

Mike Huckabee Says "It's Just a Theory"

 
This is a video from several years ago when Mike Huckabee was Governor of Arkansas. Here's the description on YouTube.

A young Arkansan asks Mike Huckabee what should be done about schools not teaching evolution properly. The former governor then advocates what the student has already said was against state standards...that schools should teach creationism because evolution's only a theory.

Huckabee is entitled to his opinion about creationism, of course, but what troubles me is his statement that evolution is only a theory. Most of us don't (usually) make statements about things that we know nothing about. I can't believe that Huckabee is completely ignorant about the basic facts of biology. Somebody must have told him at some time during his life that evolution is overwhelmingly supported by solid scientific evidence.

What is it about IDiots that makes them so immune to rationalism? Why aren't people like Huckabee challenged when they lie? Is it because it's not polite?

---

Learning About Evolutionary Theory

 
There seems to be a bit of a trend over on ScienceBlogs^TM. First Razib decides that it's finally time to read The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, then John Lynch figures he should too. And now Laelaps gets into the act.

I have long maintained that you can't have a serious discussion about evolutionary theory until you've read Gould's tome. You don't have to agree with him but at the very least you have to understand the arguments and there's no better way to do it than by reading all 1432 pages. Take lots of notes. Write in the margins. Use a highlighter.

There are several things you need to get out of this book. First, Charles Darwin Was a Gradualist. Second, try to understand punctuated equilibria. Don't just assume that you know what it is. Listen to Gould explain it in his own words. An open mind helps. Third, understand what Gould means when he talks about hierarchical theory. Fourth, pay attention to the description of species sorting. Don't read your own biases into the concept.

Enjoy. It's worth the effort.

---

Warning: The Structure of Evolutionary Theory is written at a very high level. It's not for high school students. If the language and style turns you off then maybe it's not for you. Try Dawkins or Dennett. Their version of evolutionary theory can be understood by 5th graders.

Who Accepts Evoluton?

 
Half Sigma has posted an interesting article on the results of a 2006 poll about evolution. The survey asked the following question:

Now, I would like to ask you a few short questions like those you might see on a television game show. For each statement that I read, please tell me if it is true or false. If you don't know or aren't sure, just tell me so, and we will skip to the next question. Remember true, false, or don't know. i. Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals. (Is that true or false?)

The overall results are not surprising. They have been discussed before. About 50% of Americans accept the fact of evolution and about 50% reject scientific facts.

The fun part comes when Half Sigma looks at a breakdown of the responses. Men are smarter more likely to accept evolution than women. In New England, 78% accept evoluton while in the states of Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi this falls to 32%. This is pretty much as we expect.

The interesting piece of information comes from analysis of the responses of difference races imaginary subgroups.

71% of blacks (Afro-Americans?) reject science. That's much higher than I imagined. What accounts for such a high percentage of IDiots in that subgroup? Is it true that Afro-Americans are much more religious than other groups? Is that why they reject evolution? Or is it a lack of decent science education in those states?

---

[Hat Tip: Gene Expression]

Famous Psychic Nikki Predicted Heath Ledger's Death

 
This is Earth-shattering news. If you go to the website of Nikki (psychic to the stars) you'll see that she predicted Heath Ledger's death [Nikki: Predictions].

Death Watch and Health Watch

Annette Funicello, Hillary Clinton, Doris Day, Willie Nelson, Pamela Lee Anderson, Loretta Lynn, Ted Kennedy, Unice Shriver, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Benazir Bhutto, President Masharaff, Billy Graham, Jerry Lewis, Chareleton Heston, Tony Curtis, Debbie Reynolds, Heath Ledger, Barack Obama, Zsa Zsa Gabor, Nelson Mandela, Farah Fawcett, Nancy Reagan, Dick Cheney, Dick Clark, Elizabeth Taylor, Larry King, Suzanne Pleshette, Mick Jagger, Arnold Schwarzeneger, Kirk Douglas, Hugh Hefner, Shirley Temple Black, Alex Trebek, and French President Sarkozy.

To find out why this isn't the end of rationality and the triumph of superstition, check out Way of the Woo. The surprise isn't that Nikki is a liar, it's that so many people fall for it.

---

Showing Respect

 
I couldn't resist copying this cartoon from Friendly Atheist [Lack of Respect]. It's by Don Addis. Hemant Mehta got it from Freethought Today.

---

Getting Into Graduate School

 
Julianne Dalcanton is an astronomy professor at the University of Washington. She works on the evolution of galaxies which is sort of like real evolution, but not quite. She blogs at Cosmic Variance.

Julianne decided to enlighten students about the process of getting into graduate school [The Other Side of Graduate Admissions]. It's a very informative posting and I recommend it to anyone who will be applying to graduate school next year, or who is waiting to hear right now.

I think it's really important to give undergraduates the straight dope about getting into graduate school. It's not about grades, as Julianne says. It's about the complete package. In our department we look at five things and each one is important.

1. Grades in undergraduate courses: If your grades are below a minimum value you will need to have something extraordinary to compensate. If grades are too low then nothing will help you. Just because you have high grades doesn't mean you will be admitted.


2. Reference letters: This is much more important than you think. If you don't have good letters then your chances of being admitted are slim. If the letters say that you are passionately interested in becoming a physician but you'll seriously consider graduate school if you don't get into medical school, then you've got a problem. The letters need to tell us that science is your primary objective in life.


3. Courses: You should have taken the right undergraduate courses to prepare you for graduate school. What this means is that you need to have a number of upper level (4th year) courses in the field you're applying to. In some cases, your undergraduate studies may have been in a related field but you still need to demonstrate that you can handle the most difficult undergraduate courses. That means you're ready for graduate school. This can be a problem in our system here at the University of Toronto because we allow student to graduate with a B.Sc. even if they have only taken a few 400-level courses. Those students may not be acceptable candidates for some graduate schools.


4. Research Experience: We look for students who have already demonstrated that they can work in a laboratory. They will have completed a research project in their final year and they will have worked in research labs during the summer. They will have glowing letters from their research supervisors.


5. Motivation/Enthusiasm: This will come out in your letters of reference and in the choices you have made as an undergraduate. In some cases, we will conduct an interview to determine whether you are a suitable candidate for graduate school. We look for students who really want a career in science or who really want to learn more about science at an advanced level in order to pursue a related career (e.g., teaching). Remember, we're not interested in students who are picking graduate school as their second choice.

It's not as bad as it might seem to get an offer of admission. In our department we get about 135 applications in a typical year and we make offers to about 70 of the applicants for a success rate of 52%. About 30 students end up joining our graduate program because most students have multiple offers.

The best advice I can give undergraduates is to apply to many graduate schools in several different countries. If I recall correctly, I applied to 18 graduate departments and got five acceptances. This is not unusual.

---

[Photo Credit: Graduate students in the Department of Biochemistry 2007-2008.]

Monday's Molecule #60

 
I'm a little pressed for time today 'cause my mid-term test is tomorrow. This is a molecule for all you hard-core biochemists out there.

You have to give me the common name of this molecule and explain what it's used for. You'll be pleased to know that I don't need the systematic IUPAC name for this one.

There's an indirect connection between this molecule and Wednesday's Nobel Laureate(s). Your task is to figure out the significance of today's molecule and identify the Nobel Laureate(s) who worked with it.

The reward goes to the person who correctly identifies the molecule and the Nobel Laureate(s). Previous winners are ineligible for one month from the time they first collected the prize. There are three ineligible candidates for this week's reward.¹ The prize is a free lunch at the Faculty Club.

THEME:

Nobel Laureates
Send your guess to Sandwalk (sandwalk(at)bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca) and I'll pick the first email message that correctly identifies the molecule and the Nobel Laureate. Note that I'm not going to repeat Nobel Laureates so you might want to check the list of previous Sandwalk postings.

Correct responses will be posted tomorrow along with the time that the message was received on my server. I may select multiple winners if several people get it right.

Comments will be blocked for 24 hours. Comments are now open.

UPDATE: The winner is Mike Fraser who correctly guessed that this is the tert-butyloxycarbonyl derivative of valine, also known as Boc-valine. The Boc group acts as a carboxy-terminal blocking group in the chemical synthesis of proteins. The most common peptide synthesizers are the solid phase peptide synthesizers originally developed by Bruce Merrifield. Merrifield received the Nobel Prize in 1984.

---

1. Here's an interesting bit of trivia. How many ScienceBlog^TM authors have won the free lunch? How many have guessed the correct answer even though they weren't the first to do so? The answers might surprise you.

Quackery in Academia

 
Last night was lots of fun. A bunch of us went to the Centre for Inquiry for a pre-talk reception with David Colquhoun (pronounced "Ca-hoon"). There were light refreshments and lots of talk about atheism, blogs, science, and of course pseudoscience. About 30 friends of the centre showed up.

David Colquhoun is cool. He even agreed to pose with me for a picture. We look like two old curmudgeons but of course we're really not.

After the reception we all walked up to the campus were we heard Prof. Colquhoun talk about alternative medicine. In case, anyone is confused about alternative medicine, the definition is very simple. We all know about evidence-based medicine. That's the kind that's been shown to work. Everything else is "alternative" medicine—medicine that has not been shown to work.

In some cases we know that the "medicine" is not effective. This is the case with homeopathy, a scam that charges patients $2000/litre for water. In other cases, we don't know whether the treatment is helpful or harmful (e.g., some herbal remedies). What we do know is that the claims are wrong. (Because the claimants don't know whether they work either.)

You can find reviews of the talk at Mike's Weekly Skeptic Rant, The Frame Problem, and The Unexamined Life. The only thing I want to add is that Prof. Colquhoun made a strong case for academic quackery. He showed us a long list of universities that now have Departments of Alternative Medicine. The list included some Canadian schools like McMaster University in nearby Hamilton. Colquhoun pointed out that there are many legitimate academics who have fallen for the anti-science crap that is alternative medicine and he calls upon us to take notice and do something about it.

Fellow blogger Ron Brown (right)(The Frame Problem) and old friend Rob Day (left) were at the reception. Rob is a veteran of talk.origins and the creation/evolution controversy from way back—even before my time. It was fun to meet them and Mike (Mike's Weekly Skeptic Rant) again. I'm sorry I didn't get to meet the student behind The Unexamined Life. I guess he/she wanted to remain anonymous.

---