Much has been said recently about the possibility of cloning a Neanderthal, now that the Neanderthal's genome has been sequenced. Mistaken reports in recent days claimed that a Harvard researcher, George Church, was searching for an adventurous woman to become the surrogate mother of a Neanderthal baby. Those...
Category: ivf
Much has been said recently about the possibility of cloning a Neanderthal, now that the Neanderthal's genome has been sequenced. Mistaken reports in recent days claimed that a Harvard researcher, George Church, was searching for an adventurous woman to become the surrogate mother of a Neanderthal baby. Those stories were debunked by a number of science reporters, including Faye Flam here on the Tracker.
Tabitha M. Powledge, who likes to find a theme for each weekly edition of her On Science Blogs, wrapped last Friday's post around Neanderthals and Denisovans, the more recently discovered relatives of Homo sapiens. While praising science bloggers generally for correcting the misleading stories about George Church, she expresses some...
In a short essay at rhrealitycheck.org, Elizabeth Gregory, the director of Women's Gender & Sexuality...
In a short essay at rhrealitycheck.org, Elizabeth Gregory, the director of Women's Gender & Sexuality Studies at the University of Houston, argues that new research linking older fathers to an increased risk of autism, schizophrenia, and other ailments in their children, is "not the end of the world." That's from the headline, and maybe she didn't write it. But it's vague. And if it means we shouldn't be too concerned about the risks of older fatherhood, it's premature.
Rhrealitycheck.org, which I'm not familiar with, says it is "an online community and publication serving individuals and organizations committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights," and a "resource for evidence-based information,...
OK, it's late, I just cleaned up the kitchen, and I turned to The New York Times for a little relaxation reading. And it wasn't relaxing.
Turning to Science Times, I saw this: Nicholas Bakalar ...
OK, it's late, I just cleaned up the kitchen, and I turned to The New York Times for a little relaxation reading. And it wasn't relaxing.
Turning to Science Times, I saw this: Nicholas Bakalar is reporting on a study that found "a 28 percent greater risk for birth defects in babies conceived with fertility treatment."
Why wasn't this on page one, you ask, for the benefit of Times readers who are considering fertility treatment? That's a huge increase.
Or maybe it isn't.
How big is a 28 percent increase? If the risk in people who didn't have fertility treatment is large, then a 28 percent increase is a large increase. If the percentage of problems in the control group is very, very small, then the 28 percent increase is very, very small.
I searched for "percent" in the Times story...
©2010 Knight Science Journalism at MIT. All Rights Reserved.