15 Oct 2003
A-Maizing

I got some bad news for these fellas: the entire corn plant has always been useful! Let's see, grain, obviously. The so-called "stover" is used (by smart farmers anyway, not those running food factories) as forage for livestock - and they have the "powerful enzymes" built right in to turn a stalk of corn into [leather] lingerie ... and ethanol has been distilled for centuries from the grain - is it really that "new" to be able to add some amount from another part of the plant to this process? How is this "news", except in the fact that it seems to cut Mother Nature out of the equation for our sustanance? Is that supposed to be a good thing?

Reaping and Sewing From Corn. Scientists are developing a biochemical process that for the first time converts the entire corn plant into useful materials. Powerful new enzymes help turn corn stalks and grains into lingerie or cheaper ethanol. By John Gartner. [Wired News]

00:00 /Agriculture | 0 comments | permanent link

Local Weather Patented

Outrageous! I am rapidly losing sympathy for M$ in the battle with Eolas ...

Microsoft Patents Your Local Weather Report [Slashdot]

00:00 /Copywrongs | 0 comments | permanent link

Criminal Writings

Picked this up link to a Wired story from Sannion's Journal:

Write a story, go to jail

I gotta wonder: would Will Shakespeare be arrested and charged with felony child pornography for writing 'Romeo and Juliet'?

00:00 /Politics | 0 comments | permanent link

More fun with statistics

More fun with statistics ... this stuff really pisses me off! I find it simply incredible that our vaunted news media, with such a nose for bogus claims by politicians, businessmen and celebs, will take nearly any data presented as "scientific" as absolute, indisputable fact.

Note: I'm not arguing the effects of secondhand smoke here, only the public policy effects of bad or skewed science. I certainly have a position myself on the issue, but it's pretty much a low priority for me, as I don't eat out much and hardly travel at all anymore...

Helena, Montana passed an 'Indoor Clean Air' act that became effective in June 0f 2002. When local voters later (successfully) tried to rescind the ordinance, two of the "activist" doctors involved "discovered" that the law had dramatically reduced heart attacks in helena in just three months.

Here's the NY Times editorial today that set me off:

The Secondhand Smoking Gun

Here's a link to a Power Point presentation (in PDF format) of the actual study:

Helena Study

Like I said, the ban went into effect June 1, and was suspended December 1. Notice the pattern of the number of heart attacks (starting in January of 2002):
January: 8
February: 6
March: 2
April: 8
May: 6
June: 2
July: 1
August: 3
September: 7
October: 5
November: 4
December: 6

The number of heart attacks in June was 2 - a dramatic drop indeed! Unfortunately, that's the same number of heart attacks recorded for March, well before the ban was in place!

Note the spike in heart attacks in September - might one surmise that elderly farmers are cutting wheat in September? Note also the generally higher number of attacks in the winter months as opposed to the summer months. Chest colds and flu have long been factors in the onset of other problems, especially for a senior population.

Note the very low number of attacks overall - this is a tiny study! If these results were reproducible, wouldn't it be logical to assume that California, with it's overall ban, would have seen such similar dramatic results?

Ach - I've been beaten to the punch (thank you, Google). While just now looking for more data on this, I noticed Jacob Sullum's fine debunking of this study in Reason Magazine.

Let's wrap this with my favorite quote from Mark Twain:

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics!

00:00 /Home | 0 comments | permanent link

iPods for Audiophiles

But we knew this already ....

iPods are for Audiophiles [Slashdot]

00:00 /Technology | 0 comments | permanent link