61 Nobel Laureates Endorse Obama

Back to the science posting while I have a second. Yesterday, Obama's campaign released a letter of endorsement signed by 61 Nobel Laureates. This is the largest number of Nobel prize winners to ever endorse a Presidential candidate and it shouldn't be surprising.

Obama's answers to the ScienceDebate2008 questionnaire were scientifically sound and gave the impression that he had a very good scientific advising team. This was confirmed last week when Wired detailed the five members on Obama's scientific advising team (which included 2 signees of the Nobel letter). The team is very strong, with a former NIH director and some well respected researchers.

McCain has yet to release his scientific advisory committee members.

A short blurb from the endorsement letter:

During the administration of George W. Bush, vital parts of our country’s scientific enterprise have been damaged by stagnant or declining federal support.  The government’s scientific advisory process has been distorted by political considerations. As a result, our once dominant position in the scientific world has been shaken and our prosperity has been placed at risk. We have lost time critical for the development of new ways to provide energy, treat disease, reverse climate change, strengthen our security, and improve our economy.

Senator Obama understands that Presidential leadership and federal investments in science and technology are crucial elements in successful governance of the world’s leading country. We hope you will join us as we work together to ensure his election in November.

More After the Fold...

Summary only...

John McCain Reveals His Jackassery Once Again

John McCain has been in the news quite a bit recently. His comments on the economy are the definition of irony, and the media has finally begun calling a spade a spade, and McCain's campaign press, well, bullshit. Not to mention the Palin soap opera/Law & Order episode.

Little noticed news item, McSame finally answered the ScienceDebate2008 presidential candidate questionnaire. Obama's answers here. On the energy question, McCain made a passing reference to wind, solar, geothermal, tide, and hydroelectric energy potential, without mentioning a serious effort to increase the use of these technologies. Seems like he was primarily concerned with explaining away all those votes he had cast against renewable energy. He mumbles something about "reforming" the tax credits for the industry (in repubspeak: remove all responsible regulation). Just more lip-service, no policy.

Then he rants about nuclear power. He proposes building 45 new reactors by 2030. Thats a lot of nuclear power plants folks. You want one in your backyard? I don't. And he completely whitewashes the reality of this option as well.

Nuclear power is a proven, domestic, zero-emission source of energy and it is time to recommit to advancing our use of nuclear energy.

"Zero-emission?" Yucca Mountain, anyone? Was he even awake when his lobbyists/advisers were writing this tripe?

Under the previous topic "Climate Change," he plugged for 30 billion dollars over the next 15 years for the freakin' coal industry. "Clean coal" is still coal, my friend, euphamisims wont change the fact. Filtered cigarretes will still kill you. And really? I'm no econimist, but $30 billion seems like a lot for an industry we should be moving away from anyway.

Read his other answers at your own peril.

More After the Fold...

Summary only...

Obama Embraces Reality; Will McCain Follow His Lead?

Just ran across this on kos. I'm sure Tye will have much more to say about it than I will (or can), but I am very pleased with the responses Obama made to the ScienceDebate 2008 questionnaire. The questions addressed climate change, stem cell research, Math and Science education, defense research, healthcare and several other areas, but this is the line that got me excited.

I will restore the basic principle that government decisions should be based on the best- available, scientifically-valid evidence and not on the ideological predispositions of agency officials or political appointees.

After the anti-science, ideology worshipping we have seen from the Bush Administration and its appointees in areas of science and public health, some professional integrity in these crucial fields will be a welcome change.

I can't wait to see McCain attempt to answer these questions without destroying either his batshit-crazy, Religious Right street-cred or his appereance of sanity by attempting to appease their flat earth ideology. Should be fun to watch.

I bet Palin's responses would be hilarious.

More After the Fold...

Summary only...

Senate Passes Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

This last week has seen a small victory in healthcare coverage for consumers. The Senate, on a 95-0 vote, passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA, H.R. 493). The bill's goal is to "prohibit discrimination on the basis of genetic information with respect to health insurance and employment," filling what was considered a large gap in coverage protection of employees' and patients' rights.

This vote has been a long time in the making, with multiple votes coming up on it, but never in the same congressional session. This year, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev) determined that the bill needed to be on the front burner and its about time. Francis S. Collins, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute and leader of the Human Genome Project said, "this is a day for celebration...I think the American public can breathe a sigh of relief that the fear of genetic discrimination, which has basically been a cloud over our future, has been dealt with." (Washington Post, April 24)

This doesn't seem like a big deal now but a big reason of that is due to the doubt citizens had about their coverage if genetic tests were performed. A January survey conducted by the Genetics and Public Policy Center found that 93 percent of respondents would not participate in genetic research projects unless it were illegal for employers and insurers to use the results against them.

And for those of us like myself who work with DNA research and clinical samples, a long standing problem has been solved. During my research many times it is necessary to confirm that my own DNA has not contaminated the samples that I have been working with. The only way to do this is to perform a genetic fingerprint on my own sample and compare it to the working samples. Although I am the only one who uses the information it is written down to document the full procedure. If my employer or insurer happened to find an underlying genetic problem, such as a risk of cancer, heart disease, or diabetes, previously they would have had the right to terminate my employment or coverage in order to save themselves the problem in the future.

There are still some questions that were not answered in the bill including life insurance, but a gaping hole in employee and patients rights has been closed.

The bigger debate surrounding this issue should be under what circumstances should it be right for health insurers to decline coverage? Under a more sophisticated and consumer friendly system, such protection would be completely irrelevant, as nobody could arbitrarily be declined care. The Congress has put a band-aid on a system that needs a complete reconstructive operation, but until there is an administration in the White House who cares to acknowledge the damage a market-driven system has inflicted on America's health and pocketbooks, this looks to be all Congress can do.

I'll take a quote from Barack Obama's new book, The Audacity of Hope, to explain a pragmatic way to look at the healthcare problem for those that really think accessible, affordable healthcare should be spurned in favor of a pay-or-die attitude.

"Given the amount of money we spend on health care (more per capita than any other nation), we should be able to provide basic coverage to every single American. But we can't sustain current rates of health-care inflation every year; we have to contain costs for the entire system, including Medicare and Medicaid. With Americans changing jobs more frequently, more likely to go through spells of unemployment, and more likely to work part-time or to be self-employed, health insurance can't just run through employers anymore. It needs to be portable." (The Audacity of Hope, p. 184)

More After the Fold...

Summary only...