Laboratory research

Several years ago when I was visiting my parents, my father and one of my sisters had some fascinating dinner conversation.

He was a giant in the field of organizational and industrial psychology. I can’t remember if the conversation took place before or after she finished her doctorate in gerontology.

His response to something she said was, “Is that real science, or just what gets reported in the New England Journal of Medicine?” That surprised me, and I asked for an explanation.

The New England Journal of Medicine is one of a number of important journals that publishes only seminal research. That is, studies no one has done before. Studies that often make the news the next day.

Science reporters who know what they are doing will emphasize that more study is necessary. One study in isolation doesn’t mean much.

There is a time-honored process by seminal research becomes real science. Other teams of scientists must perform the same experiments and obtain the same results.

Other scientists must analyze the research procedures and the assumptions and hypotheses behind the study. If the study turns out to be poorly designed it will never become real science.

This entire process of testing and judging the study takes place in meetings and is published in journals that never get reported on the network news reports. Meanwhile, we hear about new study after new study.

Climate change

Global warming projection chart

Climate change has become so politicized that I wonder how many people arguing so passionately know or care what the real science is.

I’ll tell you what I know for sure. I see video of calving glaciers. I read of studies that consistently show glaciers retreating. I read of permafrost thawing in Arctic summers. I read that ships have been able to travel through the Arctic Ocean during the summer in recent years.

I have no reason not to believe those reports. I conclude that the climate in Arctic regions has gotten warmer since Henry Hudson gave his life looking for the Northwest Passage. I conclude that it has gotten warmer in recent decades.

Why has the climate gotten warmer?

Environmentalists say they big culprit is human activity, beginning with the Industrial Revolution something over 200 years ago. Many loudly proclaim that science proves that human activity causes global warming. I have even read posts on discussion groups to the effect that, “I’m a scientist, and I believe the scientific studies.”

But is real science a matter of belief?

Is an expert in one field of science professionally competent to judge what’s real science in some other field? If the ones who proclaim, “I’m a scientist” teach science in high school and do not take part in active research, why should anyone else care?

There is another possible culprit: cyclical climate that has taken place for millions and millions of years.

The period from about 1400 to about 1800 or 1900 is known as the Little Ice Age. The Medieval period was warmer

So is human activity the only cause of climate change? If the Little Ice Age ended in 1800, is the fact that the Industrial Revolution started about the same time mere coincidence?

Answering either question in the affirmative seems absurd. Unfortunately, if any scientist dares to suggest a negative answer to the first, “environmentalists” will rise up to punish the heretic. Some skeptical physicists are even afraid to voice criticism for fear of the backlash.

Meanwhile, it appears that, for all the heated rhetoric, we have no access to real science on the subject in any of the most obvious news outlets. Scientific papers are available to anyone willing to hunt for them. Most people don’t. That’s why only a minority of Americans find motivation to go green from warnings about global warming.

BPA and public health

BPA not only in plastic bottles and jars, but in the lining of cans.

BPA is a chemical used in the manufacture of certain plastics, including some used for food storage. It has been used for so long that more than 90% of Americans have it in their bodies. Should we worry?

At least no one has declared evidence for one answer or another “incontrovertible.”

New studies get reported by the news media all the time. One claims BPA is a public health menace, and the FDA ought to take steps to limit the damage. The next seeks to reassure the public that at such low levels of exposure, there is nothing to worry about.

A recent article about the clash over BPA provides some real help in understanding the controversy. I have already referred to various scientific specialties. This controversy turns out to be a clash between toxicologists and biologists and their different research methods.

Once they hash out their differences, we’ll have some real scientific consensus. We’re not there yet.

I’m a musician and a librarian. I can read and understand some scientific literature, but I’m not about to wait for a consensus on this one. I will err on the side of caution.

I have a collection of plastic containers that conveniently hold a single serving of leftovers. I used to heat them in the microwave. No more. Since learning about BPA I transfer them to a non-plastic bowl.

I hardly ever eat the kind of microwaveable meals they sell at grocery stores, but most of them come in plastic trays. I don’t know if they’re the same kind of plastic or not. I don’t know if they have BPA or some other suspect chemical. Instructions say to pull back the film and heat in the microwave.

I may occasionally need to keep some around for an emergency shelf. In that case, I’ll want to take them out of the plastic and put them in a ceramic bowl, too.

If any reader has already figured out how to adjust the instructions, please let us all know.

Photo sources:
Laboratory research. Some rights reserved by IRRI Images.
Global warming chart. “Concerned Scientists Reply on Global Warming” WSJ. 
Grocery aisles. Source unknown