You have probably seen this on TV or in the papers--the United States Preventative Services Task Force has issued recommendations that say something to the effect that women under 50 do not need early-detection breast cancer screening--that it provides little to no value and causes much harm / cost due to the high false positive rate. Not surprisingly, there has been a lot of passionate defense of the current recommendations (that women between the ages of 40 and 50 get this test once a year).
Now, I'm no medical doctor, but one of my favorite bloggers is. Yep, he's a skeptic too, big surprise there, but he's also a cancer specialist. That is to say, that's his day job, so he knows a wee bit more than yours truly and probably more than anyone else reading this blog. So, without further adieu...check out his article on this study and what it really means, sans all of the passionate (but ill-informed) arguments you've probably seen to date.
And not surprisingly, it's caused quite a lively debate over there. If there's one thing we skeptics do well, it's argue. :)
Kristen said 1 day later
Good article. Very interesting to think of the tumors that we now find that never would have surfaced to be life threatening. Without mammography these women wouldn't be the wiser. Now they wage a physical and psychological war against the cancer enemy...all for what might have never mattered. What we really need then, is #1 a more accurate screening method with fewer false positives and #2 a way to figure out which tumors are or will become life threatening.
I have to admit though, that I do not want to be the first person to be diagnosed with breast cancer at 49, with a tumor that could have had a much better chance of being fought if it had been found the year prior, but of course I wouldn't have a mammogram that insurance wouldn't cover.....
This was the coolest episode of Timewarp. I had no idea that's how a drop of water looked, but it makes perfect sense.
Geoff said about 2 hours later
I second coolness
GJ said 1 day later
Guess I didn't realize this was Time Warp. I think I've watched bits and pieces of it, but it didn't catch my interest because they were doing boring time lapse stuff. Some stuff is *very* interesting, like these water droplets. The stuff that isn't is where you slow it down and find it's just a smaller replication of what you're seeing on the macro scale. Plus, I think they were covering some things I've seen a zillion times at high speed.
Now, if you were into circuit design, nothing is cooler than playing with the timings of chips where the time steps are on the side of 60KHz--that's a square wave electronic pulse triggering things on and off 60,000 times a second. Oh, did I say cool? I meant absolutely freaking mind blowing frustration when your flip-flops won't trigger right and you're pretty sure it's a timing issue...time to drag out the oscilloscope! Ahhh, those were the days.
Marc said 1 day later
Or when your professors finally tell you...oh BTW, it's not a perfect square wave, there's a very small fraction of time where 0 and 1 is indistinguishable and you need to handle that. And I'm not even talking about that silly quantum computing! :)
Time Warp sometimes has neat things, like seeing the sound barrier being broken at the crack of a whip, etc. But you're right, for the most part it is gimmicky slow motion.
GJ said 1 day later
Yeah, I know, it's technically a zigzag triangular wave and you'd best stay the hell away from that transitory period. However, if you have the right combination of resistors, this shouldn't be a huge issue. I seem to recall that so long as one of the two needed was way bigger than the other, this transition period was very small relative to the size of the actual pulse, but it's been a few years so I'm a bit fuzzy on the details--kind of like this transitory period!
Geoff said 2 days later
geeks, please, take this trapezoidal wave jargon elsewhere, your hurting my head ;)
GJ said 2 days later
Just wait till we start talking about Schroedinger's Cat.
Well, if the Volt does ever come out, it's at least somewhat viable in the next year or two...this technology is decades away. Our darn city can't even repair potholes that have plagued our downtown streets for years.
GJ said about 19 hours later
How exactly is it decades away, just because Rochester doesn't want to pay for repairing their own streets again?
GJ said about 19 hours later
Oh, and how is the Volt viable? I'm still waiting to see a test mule that uses the generator, or a longer term environmental test of the battery (low temp operation and charge retention over time). There's a reason the ship date keeps moving out--actually, several of them.
Geoff said about 21 hours later
Ugh, because there are working prototypes and don't require a global infrastructure (or at least North American) change. Like I said, in year or two, you will see "volt like" vehicles. Much sooner than the concept presented above...especially if gas climbs back up. I'm sure it's on hold in part because gas is $2 cheaper than last year and for technical reasons of course.
Where the economy is now, I don't see a complete overhaul of our road infrastructure anytime soon. It may start in a decade or so in a small test region, but for the average American to be driving a car that runs off magnetic fields emitted from our roadways...I'm sorry but that isn't happening anytime soon. My bet is on advancements to batteries to make them smaller and more cost effective. My guess in 5-7 years you'll have cars running completely on batteries with no need for gas that will go very long distances. I'm sure you'll start seeing rapid charging stations at gas stations. That's my bet anyway.
GJ said about 22 hours later
Like I said: there are no working prototypes of the Volt. There is a test mule with a battery pack and electric motors--something GM did with the EV1, so they get no points for new development with this mule. Where is the prototype with the generator and fuel tank? That's the one that will be most similar to the proposed final product. It's yet to be shown to the public--for a car that has seen its delivery date pushed back several times now.
You think the Volt is on hold due to gas prices? Seriously? Try this one on size--they're still trying to acquire a Li battery pack that can last 10 years / 150,000 miles without appreciable degradation in charge retention during that span, and oh yes, also work reasonably well in the cold North American climate year-round.
Add the fact that the generator hasn't shown up in the test mules, and you have to think they're having other troubles with that setup that just isn't public knowledge yet. I don't see any reason why this hasn't shown up yet, but maybe Steve can come up with a good reason why they wouldn't have done this yet.
You can bet on batteries all you want, but a road mounted mag system is far more efficient than any battery system. Why do you think we have wiring strung to practically every house in the US, rather than use a battery system? Think efficiency might have something to do with it?
The technology to get cars running on this mag line is proven. All they have to solve is deployment--which amounts to coming up with a cost effective installation that doesn't require a huge capital investment, and also figure out who's going to own that system and collect fees. Unlike power lines, most roads in the US are owned by a government agency, so they might have to lease out space to run power lines in the roads like they do with national parks and above ground power lines today.
Best of all, these roads can accept both electric and gas vehicles, but there will need to be a significant percentage of electric vehicles to justify the ongoing maintenance. Additionally, these kind of electric cars would be cheap--no expensive battery to buy and maintain--and much less weight, too.
Tell me again how the battery in the car is the optimal solution, please. :)
Geoff said 1 day later
I didn't say optimal...practical :)
We already have the technology to do it...I'd like to see this magnetic idea in motion with full scale (not 1/28th) and then maybe we can consider it. At this point, they have some catching up to do before you can even consider it viable in the next decade or two.
First video is one year old. Nice pretty package. They never popped the hood, nor did they ever get out of electric mode. Want to know why? It has no gas tank and no generator. That's not a Volt, funny guy, even if it's dressed up like one.
Your second item is a "news" article that has no real data on the release date or manufacturing status of the Volt. So how is that relevant to the discussion?
Practical? So, was it practical to wire the USA for electric power? If battery technology is so good, why aren't we replacing those high maintenance (and outage susceptible) lines with batteries?
What exactly is there to scale up that might not work? Electromagnetism isn't a new concept, and I've seen this demonstrated on full scale vehicles on a closed circuit. This isn't so much a proof of concept at this point, it's more about making it work more optimally in an everyday environment.
Meanwhile, the huddled masses still wait for your proof the the Volt is more practical, and also closer to reality. :)
Oh, wait, you added a third item from that wonderful repository of gm-volt.com. :) What does it say? Oh yes, that they are building more prototypes. Of what, we're not sure--more battery-only mules? Or will these have a generator now, too? That'd be cool--but why aren't they saying so? :)
GJ said 1 day later
"We already have the technology to do it...I'd like to see this magnetic idea in motion with full scale (not 1/28th) and then maybe we can consider it. At this point, they have some catching up to do before you can even consider it viable in the next decade or two."
I like your pun--magnetic idea in motion. :) The rest of this sentence isn't grounded in reality. The relationship between electricity and magnetism is well known, and it is core to our current power generation infrastructure. Have an AC/DC adapter? That's doing the same kind of power transfer over magnetism. So, this isn't a shot in the dark--more like, a new way of implementing this concept.
As for slapping this into all roads, you don't need to go with that approach. Try this one:
Slap a battery in the car--take the Volt, for example, in its current form, sans generator. Now, add in the charging hardware in the car, and energize just the interstates. For folks that use the interstates pretty regularly, presto, that's all the charging they need. Now, for someone like Darcy, that's not going to work, so you still have the ability to charge at home as need be.
Eventually, as more and more e-cars show up, more and more of the roadway can be electrified. It's entirely possible that this entire conversion could be COMPLETE inside 20 years.
Steve said 1 day later
While I do believe that GM has Volts running around, I honestly have not seen any prototypes on the roads yet, and I typically do see prototypes of all locally designed vehicles on the road at some point. That said, I'm sure GM doesn't want the cars driven on public roads much yet.
Chrysler has several plug in hybrid mules up and running. You may not have heard of Chrysler's ENVI project. Well, it's real. I've seen them in real life, in fact they've had several of them at the proving grounds undergoing testing. We're currently working on getting two of them into production. One has been publically announced - it's a plug in hybrid minivan, being developed first for use by the US postal service - a use that is perfect for plug in hybrids.
Yes, battery technology is an issue. But GJ, you sound just like me when the Toyota Prius came out. Everybody was so worried about battery life in the Prius and the cost of replacements. The public was so worried, that Toyota stepped up and offered a 5 year gauranty on battery packs. Well, guess what? They've had very little warranty on the battery packs, and are actually getting much more life out of them than even Toyota expected. No, they are not lithium ion, but none the less - they perform much better than the skeptics thought they would.
The magnetic system would be awesome, especially if it allowed the amount of batteries required in the vehicle to be decreased. The US government would be smart to get moving on this, it would be a great way to help reinvigorate the economy (jobs) while improving environmental concerns.
The difference between the Prius and Volt batteries is significant. Li batteries are far more dense and way better suited to high power applications, but they come at a cost--you need to treat them well for them to work, and treat them bad enough and they blow up. The fact that you haven't seen any prototypes says more to me that the car isn't ready rather than simple secrecy. GM's dumb pr game has thrown any security value out the window, imho.
The concern about old gas in the Volt is also significant. I really don't know how they're going to beat that one--gas breaks down over time, and if gas is sitting in a volt over the course of months without being replenished, I'm not sure what they can do besides recommending customers put gas preservative in the tank. That could be a gigantic warranty issue for GM, at the least.
Can't check facebook from work--I'll check it out later. Please tell me they did more than show off the creature comforts of the vehicle, or talk to excited future customers! :)
Geoff said 1 day later
Like I said, I want to see magneto in motion with a real vehicle on a real road. At that point, we can talk practicality. At this point, there are already batteries in vehicles running. Whether the Volt is ready or not, I said it will be out in 1-2 years...and from what I've read and see, seems like a decent probability it will be out by then.
As far as practicality...I see manufacturing vehicles with battery technology similar to the volt in the future far more practical. If this Magnetic idea is so practical, why is this the first I've heard of it? It's an idea, a great idea, and perhaps a technology we can put to use "decades" away...2020 would classify as decades since that is 11 years :)
In the short term though, as in 10 years or less, I see batteries being predominant. They seem to work well for powering our little electronics...I'm sure advances will make it easier to use for big electronics.
Oh, and if you want the "Optimal solution", a car that runs on solar power would be optimal...but not practical.
Oh, those pesky scientists. First, in 1988, they used carbon dating to show the Shroud of Turin to have been created around 1350 AD, a little out of whack with the Jesus Timeline (TM). Of course, at that time, those evildoers couldn't explain how to create the artifact, so of course most religious artifact fans pooh-poohed the dating method. Now, an Italian chemist has shown precisely how to create a look alike Shroud using medievally-known chemicals. Looks like (surprise) a fake, likely created by religious profiteers and later obtained by the Church, having bought the profiteers stories hook, line and sinker.
I'm thinking religion might want to rethink the whole physical evidence angle. They don't win those battles much anymore, what, with the Scientific Method (TM) deployed by their sworn enemies over the past several centuries.
Oh, in other news...seems some neocons don't much care for that Liberal Commie Jesus of the New Testament and are rewriting the King James version of the Bible to suit their beliefs. I actually have no problem with this--this is how the Bible has been edited since it was first written.
I always thought the Church's stance on the Shroud was that it was merely a symbol and that they didn't officially support that it was a real thing. Is that not true? Granted, I will admit they certainly don't try to show this stance, by neither officially confirming or denying, they are essentially leaving it up to the millions of people to make the choice, and we all know how large crowds usually work out supernatural things. :)
GJ said about 22 hours later
Here's a snippet of the timeline for the shroud:
1983 The House of Savoy gave the shroud to the Holy See.
1988 Postage-stamp-sized pieces of the shroud were sent to three different laboratories for radio-carbon testing. All three labs dated the shroud to between 1260 and 1390. The Catholic Church accepted this, announced that it was not authentic, but could continue to be an object of devotion. The shroud is widely considered a medieval fraud.
1997 Another fire (possibly arson) threatened the shroud, but it was rescued from further damage by a fireman.
1997 Two Israeli scientists said that the shroud could not be from Jesus' time because the material could not have remained intact for 2,000 years.
1998 Pope John Paul II said of the shroud, "Since we're not dealing with a matter of faith, the church can't pronounce itself on such questions. It entrusts to scientists the tasks of continuing to investigate, to reach adequate answers to the questions connected to this shroud."
2000 Shroud is publicly exhibited for the 2000 Jubilee.
2000 An archaeologist discovered shroud-wrapped remains in a Jerusalem tomb, and the shroud was dated to the first century.
2002 The Holy See had the shroud restored. In the process, the cloth backing and 30 patches were removed, enabling the reverse side to be viewed for the first time.
2004 A National Geographic article suggested that the samples tested in 1988 came from a medieval repair job on the shroud.
so...
The Church says it's not authentic in 1998 (ten years after the first scientific study cast serious doubts on it), and yet can still be a symbol of devotion. Meanwhile, they pull it out for the 2000 Jubilee. In other words, they seem to want it both ways--and yes, like you said, leaving it up to millions of people to make the uninformed choice to believe in it and further bolster their faith--with a medieval fraud. That says an awful lot about the Church leadership, and their respect for their flock's intelligence and dignity.
Pew Pew Pew Reseach (if you got that pun you're a geek) is hosting a survey to study how science-savvy the general public is. You can try it here. Be sure to check out the demographics breakdown after the survey, it's kind of interesting to see how the result break out across gender, age and education.
I missed one. Those darn electrons...I swear they were bigger :)
GJ said about 4 hours later
Going 0-2 in Fantasy Football can do that to you. This, from Mr. 1-1.
Geoff said about 5 hours later
no doubt...in close bouts too. May have helped if I remembered to set my lines, I made a few trades and had to wait. Then I forgot to put them in the line up.
Abby said about 6 hours later
Hmm, not quite 15 and I got all 12 correct.
Even though they didn't have an age group for me. Lol ;)
Steve said about 12 hours later
I missed one two. Despite my mild passion for space, I missed the mars question.
Marc said about 12 hours later
The 66% college graduate score for lasers being focused sound waves is a bit saddening. Not surprising, just sad. 12/12 here. I'll be honest though, I didn't know for sure about the Mars one, but I just assumed it was water. Don't pay enough attention to the news for that one. :)
This was hilarious, but he made an accidental and important point when he said that "Horrible medicine has been around for years and then we tested it all and the stuff that worked became medicine." Homeopathy is the cheapest form of human drug testing. So by all means, anybody who is willing to risk their life on the horrible medicine, go for it. :)
GJ said about 21 hours later
Homeopathy is so cheap because there's no medicine IN it. :)
That is a good point, though--if you want to try out "alternative" medicine, go right ahead. Just do it knowing that the snake oil business is alive and well in the 21st Century, and they all play a very convincing game. Good luck with that! Btw, I may have a bridge you might be interested in buying.
We nearly got hit by a small asteroid the other day--it sailed overhead, about 45,000 miles away. Before you say, "gee, that wasn't very close" let me add that our TV satellites orbit around half that distance. Had it hit, and hit land, you would have seen something very similar to the 1908 Tungusta blast--basically, the equivalent of a moderate nuclear blast. Check out this animation that shows the path of the offender of late:
Glad to know this after the fact. I'm pretty confident if we were going to be hit by a large asteroid, the government/media wouldn't alert us to anything until after the sky was covered in ash.
Thank you CNN, at least in my final moments I'll know just how popular Thriller really was.
Marc said 18 minutes later
I don't remember hearing anything about this, and it looks like it happened in early March. Did they have any clue it would be so close, or knew it would be plenty far away? Physics will tell you some pretty good numbers, especially in space, but 45,000 miles is pretty close.
I'm just wondering if I'll be notified if an asteroid is about to slam into earth or if it'll be more of a surprise when one does. Not like it matters, we have yet to build the gravity tractor to help save us from one.
Geoff said about 1 hour later
Welp we've got roughly 30 years to figure it out before Apophis hits us. :)
Marc said about 3 hours later
Better figure it out sooner rather than later, it would likely take several years with a gravity tractor following the asteroid to steer it off course. Most likely we'd be better off just evacuating the area it was expected to hit from an economical standpoint. I'd like to know the area ASAP so I can setup a store or something in the area and grab some asteroid insurance. :)
GJ said about 7 hours later
The very real problem is that we just don't know of many of these smaller ones until just before they'd hit. Check the name: d009-dd45. I wouldn't read into the dd45 part, but the 2009 bit does mean it was discovered this year. Six months advance notice of an asteroid hit isn't nearly enough time, and look how close this one came.
GJ said about 7 hours later
And yes, it passed by 3/2/09.
Geoff said about 10 hours later
we can only hope if one does hit, North Korea is its target.
It should come at no surprise to anyone that this was not taken by a US spacecraft--oh, no, this was done by the Japanese. They actually spend money on this sort of thing. :)
