Science Funding

This is somewhat old news, but I was listening to a Aspen Ideas Festival discussion of Science and Politics today and it really crystallized an issue for me. Namely, America is falling behind in its support of science on many fronts, including science education, Do-It-Yourself home tinkering (see my earilier post and this Popular Mechanics podcast), corporate funding, and government funding.

Although this is a distressing trend, there are some positive developments. Including the sudden rush to create X-Prizes, the cultural pushback in books (link) and on the Web (Make Magazine).

Perhaps the place in which I have the least optimism in the area of government funding. Cuts were made in the current budget. In this op-ed Intel Chairman Craig Barrett decries this situation (via Cosmic Variance). He specifically mentions that Congress manages to pass a $250 billion while cutting science funding.

I think part of the problem is the disconnected nature of the some of the advanced science being conducted (post here), some of it is related to ideology. Whatever the problem, it will cost us in the long-run.

A Practical Crisis

Ham Radio. Computing. Woodcraft. Homemade Electronics. Photography. Model Trains. Model Ship Building. This is a list of the many hobbies in which my grandfather immersed himself. Not only did he have many hobbies, but he was accomplished at quite of few. He knew how to work with his hands and how to build things. When my dad was young, he built his own speakers. My uncle is serious model plane maker.

I've always admired my grandfather's enthusiasm for these hobbies. However, I never picked up on his ability to work with his hands. I am a poor craftsman and have less of a knowledge of the tech I use than I'd like. I am also concerned that my children may find themselves even farther removed from the hands-on. This is a serious problem.

In Wired, Clive Thompson crystallizes this issue in this article about the loss of hands-on skills. According to Thompson, this skill gap is resulting in a paucity of innovation. Instead of creating a technical work-around to improve gas mileage, we use a theoretical approach. He also relates this problem to the lack of concern about our crumbling infrastructure. If we had a better understanding of how the world works - how bridges and roads can decay - we might be more worried about it (Related post here).

However, he also writes about a nascent movement to return to our technical roots. He points to Make magazine as an example. I would also point to the popularity of the Lego Mindstorms as another example. The Mindstorms is an awesome toy, helping to teach both mechanical and programming skills (which we also lack link).

As I posted before, I've started to try to do my part to address this. However, I am somewhat hampered in my ability to teach my sons how to get hands-on because my skills are so underdeveloped. We are learning together.

Superbugs: Why are Virulent Strains of Anti-Science so Hard to Shake?

In a previous post, I discussed why Americans are unhappy with health care. It is a problem that could lead to a potentially catastrophic solution (nationalized health care). But, I think the health care problem may be related to an even more troubling phenomenon: the worldwide suspicion/distrust of science.

A possible tipping point in this trend came last week in the Hannah Polling case, in which the government conceded that:

In sum, DVIC has concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory
criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19,
2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which
predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as
a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder.
Therefore, respondent recommends that compensation be awarded to petitioners
in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(C)(ii).

Many have trumpeted this as a turning point in the battle to prove that vaccines cause Autism (See this link for militantly anti-Vaccine Web site). John McCain also endorsed the idea (see earlier post and this link). There is, fortunately, plenty of solid response posts to the Polling case and the McCain issue, including a well-done round-up of the Polling case from Respectful Insolence (post here via Instapundit and Volokh Conspiracy).

My question is how did we arrive at this point? There is a growing body of science which disputes the vaccine connection and there a fair amount of circumstantial evidence that Autism has genetic origins. Why are we still debating this?

There are numerous factors, but one major factor is that there is a credibility gap in science and medicine. It's related to the old cliche that "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate." People have a long memory for scientific failures, but a short memory for achievements. The ravages of science and technology receives the most attention while the staggering achievements of science and medicine as run-of-the-mill or possible curses in disguise.

There have been major failures. For instance, the science of child-birth and breastfeeding in the mid-20th century was woefully wrong, misguided, arrogant, and sexist. In the case of breastfeedingm, it took modern medicine only a single generation to nearly wipe-out a practice that had been very successful for millions of years. Fortunately, better science has prevailed and breast-feeding is now mainstream. But, that is the beauty of science, better science will prevail.

Skeptism about science has been exasperated by poor science reporting, poor marketing, and poor decision-making in the private sector, including hype surrounding the often contradictory science of nutrition (eggs are bad for you, eggs are good for you), the prevalence of anti-bacterial products and over-sanitation, and the botched introduction of genetically-modified foods.

While these failures have cost lives and injury, caused environmental degradation, and caused general confusion, they should not overshadow the achievements of science. Before the advent of modern science, infant mortality was high, life expectancy was lower, many people succumbed to diseases which have been wiped out. We have made amazing strides in these areas and we are on the cusp of many, many more. This is an unequivocal societal good.

I think few people feel this way. Many people believe that science is co-opted by profit and greed, that we were better off when we were "closer to the Earth," and that they can find better answers and treatments from the alternative or peripheral community. The problem with investing emotional and mentally in the alternative community is while they provide a correct every once in awhile, they far more often led people down a false path. For every Dr. Bradley, there are far more Dr. Nicks. Many studies are not peer-reviewed, or when they are disputed, the scientists behind them continue to promote their views despite the evidence. True, good, and well-done science can be proven wrong and will yield to even better science. Somehow, poorly done science on the periphery seems to linger. For this, there is not yet a vaccination.

The Year of Living Dangerously

One trend I've noticed recently is a cultural blowback against over-protecting our children. The Dangerous Book for Boys is at the forefront of this trend, but something else along these lines that really piqued my interest was a TED talk given by Gever Tully (Note: there are hundreds of video TED talks available through iTunes and many of them are fascinating. They are short, snappy, and powerful. The TED Web site is here). Tully has founded the "Tinkering School." The concept of the school is to allow children to mess around things that they are underexposed to because many parents that think they are dangerous, including knives, fire, and technology.

A TED talk in which J.J. Abrams mentions the impact his grandfather had on him, particularly in the way his grandfather allowed to mess with technology reinforced my conviction that I had to act on Tully's advice.

Well, today I got out an old HP computer and let my sons help me take it apart and the result was smashing. They were fascinated and my oldest son took a real sense of pride in the whole endeavor. Hopefully, it is a first step toward a relationship to technology that my family has a rich history in but I have not carried on quite to the level of my grandfather, who is a lifetime tinkerer.

There are so many reports about America falling behind in science and technology and the lack of hands-on experience may be a major part of it. So, if you have some old lying around pcs, don't recycle, destroy.

(Of course, we can only hope that maybe the LEGO Mindstorm will inspire a new generation of innovators).