I'm not quite a GeekDad yet, only 2 months to wait, but I have been thinking about a project that I'm sure many people on these forums might be able to assist with.
I currently write for Scientific American on the blog Disease Prone but recently I have begun to change my perspective on what a good blog should do. Instead of being another place for reporting or commentary I want to start a site that, instead of covering topics because they are topical, covers topics that are interesting or important. Instead of the focus being on timeliness the focus should be on passion for the topic.
It is for this reason I am looking for expressions of interest in either reading or contributing to an idea I am calling "Stuff People Should Know". What do you know about that you think others should know about because it is interesting (such as the sex life of plants) or because it is important (did you know some bacteria can cure cancer? Information like this can change perspectives in medicine)?
If you have any ideas, posts, comments or feedback please leave them here or you can email me directly at firstname.lastname@example.org
Are you still looking to stay within the realm of medicine with this blog? If so, one thing that I would be interested in is public health and awareness topics, such as what illnesses are on the rise and how to prevent them, practical advice for taking care of sick kids, etc.
A good point I forgot to mention. No.
My intention at this stage would be to split posts into maths, chemistry, biology, physics and technology. That way it will be laid out as 'stuff people should know about...physics' etc.
If you do pursue this idea, please, please, please ensure to your very best ability that the information you are teaching is factual and science/evidence-based. The "some bacteria cures cancer" idea sounds dubious, and if it was evidence-based, we would be seeing treatments involving them. One good resource I read semi-regularly, is sciencebasedmedicine.org. Its a group of physicians, pathophysiologists, pharmacists, etc. that tackle issues of pseudo-science, medical quakery, etc.
Dave, I think you just gave me an idea! How about a type of medical/health equivalent to Snopes, where you either confirm or debunk a lot of different notions about modern health and scientific studies?
Oh absolutely. I would be strongly encouraging referencing and the use of Researchblogging.org in articles. It annoys me when sources are kept hidden so that is absolutely something I would require.
I read sciencebasedmedicine.org as well so I know what you mean.
As for the bacteria thing, clinical trials have been done in the past using various strains but they all have downside when put in humans for various reasons. Having said that some recent work has allowed manipulation of clostridia genomes and this looks to be the most promising. work in a long time. In fact I have previously written about it here http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2010/11/03/bacteria-...