Showing posts with label scientific method. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scientific method. Show all posts

Friday, October 17, 2014

Evidence-based medicine--Ebola edition

So at least two nurses caught Ebola from the Liberian patient cared for in Dallas. What does that tell us?

We already knew that cautious, well-trained American professionals could contract the disease because it happened with the American missionaries, including a doctor. Many African medical professionals have caught and died of Ebola too.

The right way to handle it

In contrast, three Ebola patients have been cared for at Emory University Hospital without a transmission. What does that tell us? That Emory knows how to handle this disease better than the Dallas hospital does. There must be important differences in how the personnel gown or perform tasks, and Emory does it in a superior way. So learn from Emory.

Also, it makes sense for current and future Ebola patients to go the Emory for treatment rather than have the treatment administered at a lesser hospital. We didn't know this beforehand, but we shouldn't be surprised. We did get a warning from African hospitals that were trying hard to prevent transmissions, but still failed. We had another warning from the Spanish nurse who caught the disease.

Luckily, the medical administrators (whoever they are) see the evidence too. One of the Dallas nurses has been flown to Emory. The other is quite healthy and was staying in isolation at the Dallas hospital, but has just been transferred to Maryland. Since she remains well, she probably doesn't require extensive care with lots of handling of bodily fluids. There's little chance that she'll infect someone else.

There's more luck too. Among the exposed civilians in Dallas, there are no reports of any developing the disease... so far. What a relief.

No abundance of caution

Another thing we learned is that the Dallas hospital wasn't careful enough. They didn't wear higher level protection gowns for the first two days of isolation despite the high chance that the patient had Ebola. They had a large number of staff caring for the patient instead of a small dedicated team. They didn't provide housing for this dedicated staff, who mingled with family. The second infected nurse even flew to Ohio and back again.

The Dallas hospital acted was though their precautions were 100% fail safe. That was an incorrect assumption and a stupid risk to take. A smarter approach would have been to limit the number of people exposed and limit their contacts with others. Finally the Dallas hospital is doing this. This precaution should have been implemented at the beginning. But at least they're learning instead of being in denial.

We still have to wait to see what happens with the exposed people in Dallas. Now we have to wait even longer to find out whether any relatives or fellow travelers caught Ebola from the second nurse. Those later exposures should never have happened. Instead of finding out around Oct. 19 whether we face a larger epidemic, we won't know until after Nov. 4. We didn't need this extra stress.

Possibly flying Ebola to your destination
Image: latimes.com

Extra. Read about and marvel at the facilities at Emory. Only three definite cases of Ebola have been imported to other countries (Nigeria, Senegal, and the US). Nigeria had the worst situation, but they have stopped the spread and ended the crisis. It never spread in Senegal. We'll have to see what happens here in the US, and also what happens elsewhere. Our response needs to be based on evidence and reasonable caution, not panic.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Last outpost of crazy: Annoying birthers

I just wasted time refuting another birther who says the long form Obama birth certificate is a forgery. To prevent the effort from being a total waste, I'm saving the links to the expert information. This investigator printed out a copy of the birth certificate (so a piece of paper with ink on it), scanned it, looked at the resulting PDF using Adobe Illustrator, and found layers! You can get layers from a regular scanned document.

This investigator looks very closely at the various bits in Adobe, and does a great job explaining why some text is on one layer while other text is on a different layer. It's due to optimization of the image in order to compress the size of the file. Some text is flat black, other is gray scale. Thank God a program makes the decision and it doesn't require human oversight. Otherwise, the decisions would drive us crazy (just like a birther).

Image: rcradioblog.wordpress.com

Update 1/7/18. I'm still having arguments with annoying birthers. One today claimed that the phone call with Obama's elderly step-grandmother was believable evidence that Obama was born in Kenya. No, not at all. A long distance phone call to an elderly woman with a translator involved and a carnival atmosphere, with others immediately correcting her statement (via translator). No followup clarifying what she said. That is so incredibly weak. Here's a report.

Update 1/11/18. In researching info to refute the latest annoying birther (who was so uninformed that he didn't know of the long form certificate), I found this interesting compendium of birther lore. Sure there are some of the common debunked objections. There's also a comparison of Obama's birth certificate versus the birth certificates of twin girls born a day later at the same hospital. But the real gem is located further down the document, where it's revealed that DARPA and the CIA have time travel abilities, and contact presidents in advance of their election.

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Last outpost of sanity: Pat Robertson

Pat Robertson has stated on the 700 Club that the Earth isn't 6000 years old and that doctrine wasn't divinely inspired. He also said:
"If you fight revealed science, you're going to lose your children. I believe in telling them the way it was."
What, no more tying yourself in knots to argue for the "young Earth" and against evolution? I'm hoping this is the start of a major trend among evangelicals. I'll have to check back in a decade or two and see if the creation science wars are over.

Snide aside: Robertson should call Marco Rubio and tell him it's OK to say the earth is very old. However, Pat Robertson is still a false prophet, as are most other preachers according to the Google search auto-completion truth-o-meter.

Image: apostasywatch.com

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Against dogmatism

I'm not a religious person, but I'm quite familiar with religion.  I grew up with fairly devout parents, several siblings are devout, and my sweetie enthusiastically goes to church nearly every Sunday and holy day. As I've said before, I greatly respect religion.

That said, religion is a horrible basis for politics. This suddenly strikes me as strange. Why is religion a good basis for religion, but a bad basis for politics? Such a simple question, but perhaps there's a lot to explore there.

What got me thinking about this is Andrew Sullivan's post about another blogger at National Review insulting his thought process. I don't want to comment on blogger squabbles, which are endless and tacky in their inbreeding, but it did remind me how important one idea is to me: empiricism.

I fell in love with philosophy in college, and have used critical thinking forever afterward. I also studied physics and psychology, with a sprinkling of art history and geology and other assorted bits. It was a wonderful example of a wide-ranging liberal education. Of all these fields, the one with the strongest basis was the philosophy of pragmatism.

Pragmatism has a lot of similarities to science. It calls for empirical observation, reflection, and testing. It is also explicit about some processes that are implicit in science: follow-through to see the results, iterations on promising theories to refine them, trying out alternative approaches. What makes pragmatism work is what makes science work so well: it is based on honest, unbiased, and careful observation. You don't jump to a conclusion, you wait for enough evidence. If only politicians of all stripes would do that.

"I wrote my dissertation on the primacy of practical wisdom in human conduct - in contradistinction to ideology... Dish readers can judge for themselves whether this blog is about imposing 'theoretical, theological, and ideological certainties' or whether it is about taking positions but always subjecting them to scrutiny, re-evaluation, re-thinking." -- Andrew Sullivan
 Graphic: chemheritage.org