https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/02/15/editing-out-diseases-with-the-help-of-bioengineering/ Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:22:49 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/02/15/editing-out-diseases-with-the-help-of-bioengineering/#comment-458351 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:22:49 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=23718#comment-458351 What I got out of this infographic: University of California doesn’t know what a Canadian flag looks like.

]]> https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/02/15/editing-out-diseases-with-the-help-of-bioengineering/#comment-458350 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 16:10:05 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=23718#comment-458350 The infographic appears to be more marketing propaganda than good medical science. The marketing aspect seems especially pronounced when the historically greatest category (of unintended, secondary harm) is quite literally the last item before the footnotes. This is not generally regarded as appropriate in analysis circles. As for an example of bad science: The first list is labeled as a subset of those “conditions that make” disease eradication “scientifically feasible”. This implies conditions in the list are individually necessary, but as a subset they are not collectively sufficient. That’s a fair scope limitation we can accept since we don’t need a complete list to do good science. However, when we look at each condition, we run into trouble. Consider the first: “Demonstrated elimination in the past”. The logical consequence of that condition would be that it excludes any first eradication from being considered “scientifically feasible”. This doesn’t seem like something we would want to exclude if, as is generally the case, we think good science is often distinguished by firsts. Similar problems flow down the infographic, and it seems to positively advocate HGE. Further, the position layout, shapes, and nearly all other imagery appears included mainly oriented toward artistic goals rather than to facilitate understanding. My personal view is that work should continue until the intersection of good science, effective learning, and attractive presentation is found – which I hope the creators will pursue in subsequent versions.

]]>