Given that I seem to be fairly under pressure for time to write this blog and equally that I am beginning to get requests for particular articles I thought it might be appropriate to publish some possibilities. These are a few topics/articles I will be considering writing in the future. If you want anything added or have any feelings on anything on the list let me know. In the unlikely event you cannot figure out how to get in touch with me otherwise then just post a comment. I do enjoy researching real problems so do not feel shy.
DNA Data Base Articles
I will probably write a few more articles about how DNA matching works, how DNA evidence works, how DNA evidence can and should be used why the DNA database can't work. Any queries on particular questions just let me know and I will address them.
Privacy and Data
As I spend most of my life gathering data in the latest ways I feel it is at least partly my responsibility to lead the way around ethics and data management. I am bound to write a few articles on what would and would not seem reasonable with combining and using personal and aggregate data. I may also write something on how such data can and should be obtained and a few ways that data should not be gathered.
Online Branding
Given my experiments in this area and the fact that I seem to have an aptitude for SEO, web analytics and related matters I will probably write a few articles on any of these as and when they seem interesting. For example would anyone be interested in something on SEO for mobile or in how online branding interacts with search online and how this is not the same on mobile.
Media Integration
This is the whole cross platform, cross channel integration issue. Online and Mobile are just digital channels and as such should be treated like any other channels. The problem with this argument is that currently most channels live in silos and are not integrated. They should be tied together so that they can help each other. I have done a fair amount of work in this area, one way and another, so if I can think what people might like to know I shall write about that. If not I shall just rant about why it works and is the way things should be done.
Breast feeding
This one was by request. I have very little in the way of solid results so far. Claims seem to include health intelligence, immunity and almost anything else you can imagine. People often refer to research abut are rarely willing to allow it to be subject to scrutiny. There will be more on this as I get hold of the original research.
Terrorism and Risk
There is so much poor understanding of this that we are willing to take terrible risks to avoid smaller risks. You are five times more likely to be struck by lightening than to be killed by terrorism in the UK. Despite this I receive phone calls from market researchers asking me whether I am worried about travelling because of terrorism. No one asks whether I am worried about travelling because of Lightning. In fact the statistic above is massively inflated. To get it down to only five times as likely I had to select enough years to include the bus bombings. I then had to make sure my sample time did not go any further back or terrorism became to remote a possibility to compare with lightning strike. At some point I will write this and a few similar things down and then wonder whether to laugh or cry.
Gender Stereotyping
Another one I have been asked to look at. I have found a few amusing examples and really ought to write something about this soon.
Education
A subject close to my heart. Whether I will write about problems that exist or ways we might help remains to be seen. I feel too strongly about education to write much on this as I would hate to risk biased reporting.
Thursday, 1 November 2007
Monday, 22 October 2007
Take the pressure off mums!
There is little question that while you are breast feeding (if you decide to breast feed) then some of your immunity to sniffles and so forth is passed on to the child. So there is a benefit in terms of the parent not having to deal with and worry about sniffles.
The question is whether, in countries with good hygiene and decent food, there is a significant difference to the child, whether in terms of survival or in terms of freedom from disabilities and serious disease.
A huge amount of pressure is put on educated and well off people to breast feed. The NCT classes imply that doing anything else is not normal. The breast feeding counsellors imply it is close to negligence. There is a government directive to support breast feeding and even the milk formula companies have to carry notices recommending it.
My observations suggest that those with less money or less education are not exposed to nearly as much of this propaganda. This may not be true, and the pressure may be on everyone. Certainly some or all women are made to feel as if not breast feeding is a failure to be a good mother.
Given my anecdotal experience it looks as if this pressure is unjustified. I have been asked to find out by one mother whether this is the case.
A preliminary search has turned up an epidemiological study from 2004 which suggests there is a relationship between SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) and bottle feeding. After my previous experience with the SIDS research this will need a lot of careful examination.
Almost all SIDS related behaviours are tied to lower socio-economic or socio-demographic status. Where this is the case an epidemiological study must by its nature pick up a lot of potentially false signs. At least one government/FSIDs recommendation is not supported by their research, but seems like a good recommendation to make anyway. So the question comes down to is this pressure unjustified, and if so should we take the pressure off the mums?
Rufus Evison
P.S. Manuella who requested I look into this should get all the credit.
The question is whether, in countries with good hygiene and decent food, there is a significant difference to the child, whether in terms of survival or in terms of freedom from disabilities and serious disease.
A huge amount of pressure is put on educated and well off people to breast feed. The NCT classes imply that doing anything else is not normal. The breast feeding counsellors imply it is close to negligence. There is a government directive to support breast feeding and even the milk formula companies have to carry notices recommending it.
My observations suggest that those with less money or less education are not exposed to nearly as much of this propaganda. This may not be true, and the pressure may be on everyone. Certainly some or all women are made to feel as if not breast feeding is a failure to be a good mother.
Given my anecdotal experience it looks as if this pressure is unjustified. I have been asked to find out by one mother whether this is the case.
A preliminary search has turned up an epidemiological study from 2004 which suggests there is a relationship between SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) and bottle feeding. After my previous experience with the SIDS research this will need a lot of careful examination.
Almost all SIDS related behaviours are tied to lower socio-economic or socio-demographic status. Where this is the case an epidemiological study must by its nature pick up a lot of potentially false signs. At least one government/FSIDs recommendation is not supported by their research, but seems like a good recommendation to make anyway. So the question comes down to is this pressure unjustified, and if so should we take the pressure off the mums?
Rufus Evison
P.S. Manuella who requested I look into this should get all the credit.
Sunday, 14 October 2007
How DNA Matching works (without the technical bits)
I have been asked about this by a number of people. The problem seems to be that everyone knows our DNA is unique (we are all individuals) and so how can we possibly have a DNA match with someone else?
The answer is that DNA testing does not examine the whole of our DNA. DNA is made up of around 220 million base pairs. If we were to compare all of these we would have a unique genetic fingerprint. INstead we compare 20 different tiny areas of the DNA and see if they match.
This is a bit like taking a physical person (also unique) and then takign a set of details about them to compare. It will quickly get rid of a large number of people who do nto match, and it might happen to be unique. How many long haired six foot blonds are there with a mole at the top of their inner thigh and two gold teeth? Probably not very many, and possibly only me.
The problem arises when you take large numbers of people as some of them will have ambiguous descriptions. The same is true with genetic matching. The bits do not necessarily match to anything obvious to look at (my gold teeth do not show up on a DNA test, so that seems fair), but might match to someone else's sequence.
Given the possibility of matches there is also a possibility of accidental matches. This is where my post about the combinatorics of the DNA database and how it leads to the probability of innocent people getting in trouble becomes important.
Rufus Evison
The answer is that DNA testing does not examine the whole of our DNA. DNA is made up of around 220 million base pairs. If we were to compare all of these we would have a unique genetic fingerprint. INstead we compare 20 different tiny areas of the DNA and see if they match.
This is a bit like taking a physical person (also unique) and then takign a set of details about them to compare. It will quickly get rid of a large number of people who do nto match, and it might happen to be unique. How many long haired six foot blonds are there with a mole at the top of their inner thigh and two gold teeth? Probably not very many, and possibly only me.
The problem arises when you take large numbers of people as some of them will have ambiguous descriptions. The same is true with genetic matching. The bits do not necessarily match to anything obvious to look at (my gold teeth do not show up on a DNA test, so that seems fair), but might match to someone else's sequence.
Given the possibility of matches there is also a possibility of accidental matches. This is where my post about the combinatorics of the DNA database and how it leads to the probability of innocent people getting in trouble becomes important.
Rufus Evison
Monday, 8 October 2007
A successful experiment in Search Engine Optimisation
As mentioned in my frivolous blog (ReasonedFrivolity.BlogSpot.Com) I was presented with a Search Engine optimnisation challenge. I did not expect to succeed, but thought I would manage something and had to try. I did extrememly little actual Search engine optimisation and used only a few of the standard SEO tricks. After about 20 minutes I had to get on to other things. When the google alert came through saying the search engine had picked me up whilst spidering I tried a search. I was quite surprised to see I had reached position 1 in the rankings. Clearly there is very little competition for the term my colleague chose (Whisper it, "Rufus Sexgod") but as the image shows there were a few hundred other pages out there. This is particularly surprising as the other pages were all related to celebrities and so were more prominently linked to than I could manage with my own resources with little work.
All in all I am quite pleased with this as a one off bit of page promotion.
Rufus Evison
ReasonedRants.BlogSpot.Com
All in all I am quite pleased with this as a one off bit of page promotion.
Rufus Evison
ReasonedRants.BlogSpot.Com
Friday, 28 September 2007
Proper Data Uses Of Credit Card Data
Proper Data Uses Of Credit Card Data
Mainstream: Privacy and data capture/storage/usage
A credit card gathers an awful lot of information. Here is my summary of my thoughts on:
1) Who should use it.
2) What it should be used for.
Who Should Use It?
First only people I feel comfortable with.
Second only people I have agreed to.
Third only people I might expect.
What should it be used for?
First it should never be used against me.
Second it should be used to benefit me.
The data can be used to provide the contracted service. It can also be used to provide the benefit of targeted offers. Finally it can be used to provide feedback to improve corporate offerings.
Rufus Evison
ReasonedRants.BlogSpot.Com
Mainstream: Privacy and data capture/storage/usage
A credit card gathers an awful lot of information. Here is my summary of my thoughts on:
1) Who should use it.
2) What it should be used for.
Who Should Use It?
First only people I feel comfortable with.
Second only people I have agreed to.
Third only people I might expect.
What should it be used for?
First it should never be used against me.
Second it should be used to benefit me.
The data can be used to provide the contracted service. It can also be used to provide the benefit of targeted offers. Finally it can be used to provide feedback to improve corporate offerings.
Rufus Evison
ReasonedRants.BlogSpot.Com
Tuesday, 25 September 2007
DNA Database is poorly conceived
Innocences is no defence against large numbers.
Mainstream, Justice system, Evidence and Privacy
The DNA database is a poorly thought out and ill considered idea. I am not talking about the privacy implications. I am talking about evidence to implicate innocent people in crimes they know nothing about.
The combinatorics of large numbers means that if you have a large database you will have people who are innocent being falsely implicated. The risk of this happening in the future grows exponentially as the size of the database grows. Given the number of prosecutions using evidence from the database that already exists I am not at all sure it has not already happened.
Rufus Evison
ReasonedRants.Blogspot.Com
For more information about the reasoning see http://reasonedrants.blogspot.com/2007/09/dna-databases-sending-innocent-people.html
Mainstream, Justice system, Evidence and Privacy
The DNA database is a poorly thought out and ill considered idea. I am not talking about the privacy implications. I am talking about evidence to implicate innocent people in crimes they know nothing about.
The combinatorics of large numbers means that if you have a large database you will have people who are innocent being falsely implicated. The risk of this happening in the future grows exponentially as the size of the database grows. Given the number of prosecutions using evidence from the database that already exists I am not at all sure it has not already happened.
Rufus Evison
ReasonedRants.Blogspot.Com
For more information about the reasoning see http://reasonedrants.blogspot.com/2007/09/dna-databases-sending-innocent-people.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
