A sciencey word salad


Larry Moran quotes this closing paragraph from an actual, published paper in a respectable journal. I don’t understand what it means. Can somebody explain why these terms are mashed together in this way?

We close this essay by postulating that there has been a pervasive influence of the gene centrism inherent in the Modern Synthesis in conjunction with the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology on biomedical thinking. We believe that this influence has now become counterproductive. Thus, it is critical for new ideas stemming from evolutionary biology highlighted in this special issue of The Journal of Physiology and elsewhere to more fully inform biomedical thinking about the complex relationship between DNA and phenotype. The time has come to stop chasing Mendel.

[Read more…]

Why is Jerry Coyne blocking scientific discussion?

This is a guest blog by Ben Allen of the Plektix blog. I don’t agree entirely with it; Jerry Coyne has the right to police his blog in any way he chooses, and I also don’t find Nowak’s critique of inclusive fitness theory at all convincing — so I’m actually more on Coyne’s side on this issue! But Ben works with Nowak, has some expertise on this subject, and was not allowed to express himself on Coyne’s blog, so I offered him an opportunity to say his piece here.

Posting it here is not an endorsement of Ben’s position, but he has reasonable arguments that I’m willing to give an airing.

PZ Myers

I imagine most readers of this blog are familiar with Jerry Coyne.  If not, he’s a prominent biologist and atheist who maintains the blog Why Evolution is True.   And apparently, he has taken to blocking commenters who disagree with him, even over substantive scientific issues. 

First, some background: A conflict has been brewing over how to model the evolution of social behavior.  At issue is a method called inclusive fitness theory, which emphasizes the role of genetic relatedness between interacting organisms.  In 2011, Martin Nowak, Corina Tarnita, and EO Wilson (hereafter, NTW) published an article arguing that inclusive fitness is a mathematically limited method, and that the role of relatedness has been overemphasized in the evolution of worker castes in social insects. 

NTW’s article generated a strong response—most famously, a letter signed by 137 prominent researchers (also some talking bears).  I happen to agree with Nowak, and have collaborated with him and Wilson on follow-up work.  However, intelligent people can disagree on this issue, and I trust that science will sort it out.

[Read more…]

Icelanders are awesome


It’s not just because they are lucky enough to live in one of the most spectacular landscapes on the planet. It’s also because they’re great model organisms, guinea pigs — the zebrafish of humanity. They represent a small, isolated population with a well-documented history and excellent medical records, so they’re just the people you might want to do in-depth genetic studies on.

[Read more…]

Does this cause cancer?


I get asked that question so often. My usual answer is, “I don’t know, probably.” (It’s also a good answer if they ask, “does this prevent cancer?”) That’s safe to say, because just about anything can be found associated with cancer, if you look hard enough. I’ve read enough papers to know that if you can find a study accusing a food to be of the devil, you can find another one saying it’s angelic. And there will probably be some feckless mass media organ screaming CAUSE or CURE.

[Read more…]