←back to thread

473 points Bostonian | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.418s | source
Show context
crispyambulance ◴[] No.42183539[source]
I read Scientific American from time to time. It's not what the Reason author claims it is. It's a popular, non-specialist science magazine that reaches out to the public (mostly through Dentist's office waiting rooms). It's OK for it to have a political point of view.

I see this a lot lately. Someone takes issue with something(s) in a magazine or journal and tries to burn them to a crisp because of it. Even on here, folks periodically roast Quanta magazine for something that's not exactly right from a subject matter expert perspective. It's a perfectly good magazine, also for the general public (perhaps a little more high-brow than Sci-Am).

The Reason article takes a very rigid and persnickety point of view, which is common in libertarian arguments. It's like the kind of rhetoric you hear from insufferable debate-club enthusiasts in high-school and college.

replies(7): >>42183806 #>>42183846 #>>42184710 #>>42184894 #>>42184910 #>>42184934 #>>42185390 #
1. krunck ◴[] No.42184910[source]
I wish my dentist had Sci-Am in the waiting room.

But seriously, those rants quoted in the article about normal distributions and the use of the acronym "JEDI" are really, really, pathetic. A science magazine needs to be science first and politics second. Anyone who wants to reverse that should work for a different rag.

replies(1): >>42185615 #
2. horsawlarway ◴[] No.42185615[source]
I mean, the normal distribution point is fairly compelling.

If you actually read the piece, it's pretty clear that modeling medicine/health with a normal distribution is generally not great. It's not complaining about normal distributions, it's complaining about their application in health sciences.

And in that context... it's a compelling and reasonable argument, and a lot of negative health outcomes result from applying "average" results to a specific person.

I mean, the US Air Force figured this out 80 years ago...

https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/when-u-s-air-force-disc...

---

No comment on the "JEDI" thing. I haven't read the article so no idea if it's as unreasonable as it sounds.

I would suggest that this piece as written by Reason is ultimately garbage, though. Which should surprise very few folks.