textstream2

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Letter RE: John Tierney's "Heavy Doses of DNA Data, With Few Side Effects" NY TIMES 1/17/20

The lack of response by consumers to their genetic tests, as reported
by John Tierney, is disconcerting. Rather than signifying admirable
levelheadedness, the fact that people neither worried about results
nor were spurred to take up preventive measures suggests that the
general public has yet to become sufficiently engaged in genetic
information to the extent hoped for by the genetic testing industry --
or to the extent necessary to make testing effective on a large-scale.
It is also symptomatic of the public's general disengagement from
numerical and statistical findings.

Dov Greenbaum, JD PhD

Mark Gerstein, PhD

Unpublished letter in response to
John Tierney's "Heavy Doses of DNA Data, With Few Side Effects"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/science/18tier.html
NY TIMES 1/17/20

Similar post in response to
Eryn Brown's "Genetic testing doesn't spook patients, study finds"
LA TIMES (1/16/2011)
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/16/health/la-he-dtc-gene-tests-20110113
X

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Word Cloud of this Blog

created at TagCrowd.com

Trafficcams New Haven to Merritt Parkway

* New Haven: I-91 at Trumbull St.
Starting out, right before junction with I-95; closest lane going South on I-91 towards I-95; this spot often gets lots of traffic!

* New Haven: I-95 s/o Long Wharf Dr
Leaving New Haven. However, view is approaching New Haven, with bottom lane (to left) going N.

* New Haven: I-95 @ 1st Ave (CT-122)
One camera South from above, right after small "bridge" on N. Haven outskirts. Traffic to right is now going S.

* Bridgeport: I-95 @ River St
Right before turnoff to Merritt. Traffic closest to camera is going S.

Traffic on Google Maps

Trafficcams Merritt Parkway to Stamford

* Bridgeport: I-95 @ Myrtle Ave
Traffic closest to camera is traveling North

* Southport: I-95 s/o Mill Hill Rd
Traffic closest to camera (on right) is traveling South

* Westport: I-95 @ Hales Rd
Traffic closest to camera (on right) is traveling South. Right before Saugatuck river.

* Norwalk: I-95 @ East Ave
Traffic closest to camera (on right) is traveling South. Right before turnoff to US-7.

* I-95 s/o Tokeneke Rd (CT-136)
Camera is facing S. Traffic closest to camera (on left) is traveling North. Just south of Darien.

* I-95 n/o Elm St
Traffic closest to camera is traveling South. Near train station in Stamford. Right before "narrowing" of road.

Traffic on Google Maps

Trafficcams South of Stamford into the City

* Hutchinson River Pkwy @ Purchase St (Exit 27)
Right before (i.e. North of) junction with i-684 and weave under I-287.
Traffic closest to camera (on left) is traveling South (looking towards Southbound traffic).

* I-95 n/o Delavan Ave
Right before (i.e. North of) junction with I-287.
Traffic closest to camera (on right) is traveling South

* Hutchinson River Pkwy s/o I-287 (Mobil Gas Station)
Camera is located in Median. It appears to be looking South, so that more prominent Northbound traffic is to the left of the picture.

* Hutchinson River Pkwy @ Cross County Pkwy
Traffic closest to camera is traveling North. View appears to be just South and East of where Cross county joins to Hutch, so closer cars are going North. There are two streams of Northward-going cars, those from the Hutch (closer) and the CC (farther). Southward-going cars are at the back.

* New England Thwy @ East Tremont Ave
Right before (i.e. N of) junction with Bruckner. Traffic closest to camera (to the right) is traveling North

* Triborough Bridges @ Manhattan Bound
Traffic closest to camera is traveling West

* FDR Dr @ 78th St
Camera located Median. Traffic to Right is going South.

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Letter RE: "Technology outpaces Privacy (Yet Again)" -- NY TIMES

Ms. Singer suggests that we are again witnessing the continual conflict between technology and privacy protections. Ms. Singer is wrong. Things have changed, drastically. Rather than have our privacy taken away from us by new technologies, we are now actively giving it away (albeit often due to the not-so-subtle coaxing of the new technology companies --like camera companies encouraging exhibitionism). We twitter or post our most banal experiences and thoughts, or provide websites with intimate financial details and genomic predispositions.
Perhaps we need to first reassess our shifting perceptions of privacy before we look to our slow moving legislatures and even slower to evolve laws.

Dov Greenbaum, JD MPhil PhD
Mark Gerstein, PhD

Unpublished letter in response to
Natasha Singer's "Technology Outpaces Privacy (Yet Again)" (12/12/2010)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/business/12stream.html

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Letter to the Editor RE: "Rare Hits and Heaps of Misses to Pay For" -- NY Times

Mr. Wade criticizes California for placing such a large bet on stem cell research at the potential expense of other research efforts. Government regulation and funding are, to some extent, tied to the public's understanding of science, including their misconceptions and/or misapprehensions. These errors in conventional wisdom are often fueled by instances of misrepresentation or unwarranted hyperbole in the news and entertainment media. The Science TImes however, and Wade in particular, more often than not reflect a more balanced science journalism. Rather than tout every preliminary result as a monumental breakthrough, as many of his colleagues might do, Mr. Wade has consistently tamped down the hype, particularly when reporting on stem cells. Perhaps with better communication between science and the media, and more journalists like Mr. Wade, we might have less egregious use of funds and better regulatory oversight of basic science research.

Dov Greenbaum JD PhD & Mark Gerstein, PhD

Unpublished letter in response to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/science/09wade.html
"Rare Hits and Heaps of Misses to Pay For"
BY Nicholas Wade, November 9, 2010, New York Times