In the internet age, sometimes we simply have too much information on our hands, and too few tools to determine which of it is valid. For anyone without access to scientific journals and a few days of free time on their hands to separate the wheat from the chaff, prudence may be the best option. However, if a “better safe than sorry” approach involves eliminating pizza and beer from your life, then safe IS sorry.
Read MoreJust what is a virus, and where did they come from? Considering that the field of virology dates back to the mid 1800s, it may come as a surprise that these questions are still controversial, and yet, they are. Recently, a team of French scientists discovered viruses of a size and complexity never seen before, and this discovery has been highly disruptive to the controversy.
Read MoreRemember taking children’s cough syrup as a kid whenever you got sick? Some flavors were more palatable than others, but all have left most of us with distinct, visceral memories of dissolved plastic fruit. It comes as no surprise that the intended purpose of these flavors was to mask the taste of the medicine enough to take a full spoonful with only mild fuss. However, for one crucial drug called praziquantel, dealing with the horrible taste of medicine was under-funded and overlooked. Recently, scientists previously unknown to each other joined forces to tackle this issue and provided a look at how science can be done.
Read More
The history of science is full of examples of discovery, both intentional and accidental. But how do scientists study subject matter incapable of being explained by simple models? And additionally, if science can produce favorable results (say, in the clinic), to what extent does it matter whether or not the results can be fully explained? Here, Siddhant Iyer outlines the ways in which scientists may study as-of-yet unexplained phenomena and argues for a framework involving the use of complex models while also acknowledging limitations.