Re: [Phys-L] Mesmerizing

[brian whatcott <betwys1@sbcglobal.net>]

On 9/16/2013 3:23 PM, Bernard Cleyet wrote:
> On 2013, Sep 16, , at 12:37, brian whatcott <betwys1@sbcglobal.net 
> <mailto:betwys1@sbcglobal.net>> wrote:
>
> > It is true that a few papers have contradicted the early work: using 
> > [non-]synchrony of cohabiting lesbians: [non-]synchrony of Israeli 
> > athletes for example, but I offer you a review from an early pioneer, 
> > who did NOT rely on anecdotes about male scientists' spouses 
> > aggregated to a published paper (!!):  that of Martha McClintock (1998)
> >
> > <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10532528.1998.10559927#preview>
> >
> >
> > Brian Whatcott     Altus OK
>
> [bc]
> This bio includes the contrary work w/out requiring time consuming log 
> on to "my" library.
>
> Martha McClintock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_McClintock>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_McClintock
>
>
> bc wonders if his presence at three women's home disrupted their 
> reported synchronicity. (ca 1976)

Allow me to include the beginning of the Abstract for the 1994  H Clyde 
Wilson paper (Anthropology, U Miss-Columbia)  on which  the Wiki 
refutation depends:

"Two experiments and three studies reported a significant level of 
menstrual synchrony after subjects had been treated with applications of 
axillary extract from a donor subject or after subjects have spent time 
together. Four studies failed to replicate these results. A comparison 
of the studies shows the only consistent difference is that those 
studies not finding menstrual synchrony reported problems with subjects 
who had irregular cycle lengths, while those finding menstrual synchrony 
reported no such problems. All experiments and studies were based on the 
methods and research design introduced by McClintock (1971). Three 
errors are inherent in research based on her model: (1) an implicit 
assumption that differences between menses onsets of randomly paired 
subjects vary randomly over consecutive onsets...."

<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/030645309290016Z>



Putting it in terms that may be more familiar:
 "It will not be possible to synchronize cyclic phenomena whose Q is 
sufficiently low."
 As to Error 1) mentioned there - if anyone can translate this to terms 
I can understand, I will be grateful.

Applying parity to the dialog, I should offer the Wiki bio for H Clyde 
Wilson Jr., who died in 2010. This WW2  naval officer who became mayor 
of Columbia was involved in the early testing of the (killed) Salk vaccine.

Reference to the Salk Polio Vaccine Wiki will show that Wilson was no 
stranger to disputed field trials on humans.
"After the success of the field trials, the Salk vaccine was put into 
widespread use. Unfortunately, one improperly manufactured batch of the 
vaccine caused polio in a number of children, and the vaccination 
program was temporarily halted . By the early 1960s, the Sabin 
live-strain virus had been perfected and soon replaced the Salk vaccine.

Salk was at once lionized by the public and the media and criticized by 
other scientists, who felt that he had rushed the development of the 
vaccine for the sake of personal glory (and to beat Sabin).

In an invited review article [1] for the Journal of the American 
Statistical Association in 1955, shortly after the trials, KA Brownlee 
did not mince words in his scathing criticism of the original observed 
control experiment, referring to the design as "stupid and futile," and 
the results as "worthless.".... "



Brian Whatcott   Altus OK