<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Peter M. Sandman website update</title>
<description>Risk &#061; Hazard &#043; Outrage</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<webMaster>webmaster@psandman.com (Elenor Snow)</webMaster> 
<link>http://www.psandman.com/index.htm </link>

<item>
<title>May 2:  When a Ship Captain Abandons Ship Prematurely</title>
<description>&lt;p&gt;by Peter M. Sandman  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Email to Sheila M. Eldred, April 30, 2014&lt;/p&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;On April 29, 2014, reporter Sheila M. Eldred of the <a href="http://news.discovery.com/">Discovery News</a> website emailed me about an article she was writing in the wake of an April 16 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_MV_Sewol">ferry disaster in South Korea</a>  on &#8220;why captains abandon ship.&#8221;  My brief email in response stressed that a captain who abandons ship prematurely isn&#8217;t panicking, but is simply failing to be a hero in a situation where duty demands heroism.  The temptation afterwards, I wrote, is to self-justify instead of admitting as much.  Sheila&#8217;s story used a lot of my email. &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
<link>http://www.psandman.com/articles/abandon.htm</link>
<guid>http://www.psandman.com/articles/abandon.htm</guid>
</item>


<item>
<title>May 2: Why Do Captains Abandon Ship? </title>
<description>&lt;p&gt;by Sheila M. Eldred &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Posted on the Discovery News website, May 1, 2014&lt;/p&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;On April 29, 2014, reporter Sheila M. Eldred of the <a href="http://news.discovery.com/">Discovery News</a> website emailed me about an article she was writing in the wake of an April 16 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_MV_Sewol">ferry disaster in South Korea</a>  on &#8220;why captains abandon ship.&#8221;  My brief email in response stressed that a captain who abandons ship prematurely isn&#8217;t panicking, but is simply failing to be a hero in a situation where duty demands heroism.  The temptation afterwards, I wrote, is to self-justify instead of admitting as much.  Sheila&#8217;s story used a lot of my email.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
<link>http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/why-do-captains-abandon-ship-140501.htm</link>
<guid>http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/why-do-captains-abandon-ship-140501.htm</guid>
</item>




<item>
<title>April 23: Tamiflu report comes under fire</title>
<description><p>by Declan Butler</p>
<p>Posted on the <cite>Nature</cite> website, April 22, 2014; published in the print edition of <cite>Nature</cite>, vol. 508, pp. 439&#8211;440 (April 24, 2014).</p>
<p>In early April 2014, <cite>BMJ</cite> (<cite>British Medical Journal</cite>) published two articles reporting a research review by the Cochrane Collaboration, arguing that antiviral drugs are of minimal use against influenza.  When reporter Declan Butler of <cite>Nature</cite> emailed me and my wife and colleague Jody Lanard asking for comment on how the Cochrane Review was communicated, we quickly sent back a response summarizing two key criticisms of the Cochrane researchers: that they ignored the downsides of the Cochrane methodology, which considers only randomized controlled trials; and that they massaged and cherry-picked their own results to make them look worse for antivirals.  Declan&#8217;s article addressed many aspects of this complicated story, and he had room for only a little of what we had sent him.  Meanwhile, we had written a more comprehensive assessment, which we are posting on this website as an introduction to what we originally sent Declan.</p>
</description>
<link>http://www.nature.com/news/tamiflu-report-comes-under-fire-1.15091</link>
<guid>http://www.nature.com/news/tamiflu-report-comes-under-fire-1.15091</guid>
</item>


<item>
<title>April 23:  Overstated Attack Hiding Behind Scientific Assessment: An April 2014 Cochrane Review Trashes the Usefulness of Influenza Antiviral Drugs</title>
<description><p>by Peter M. Sandman and Jody Lanard</p>
<p>Email to Declan Butler, April 15, 2014</p>
<p>In early April 2014, <cite>BMJ</cite> (<cite>British Medical Journal</cite>) published two articles reporting a research review by the Cochrane Collaboration, arguing that antiviral drugs are of minimal use against influenza.  When reporter Declan Butler of <cite>Nature</cite> emailed me and my wife and colleague Jody Lanard asking for comment on how the Cochrane Review was communicated, we quickly sent back a response summarizing two key criticisms of the Cochrane researchers: that they ignored the downsides of the Cochrane methodology, which considers only randomized controlled trials; and that they massaged and cherry-picked their own results to make them look worse for antivirals.  Declan&#8217;s article addressed many aspects of this complicated story, and he had room for only a little of what we had sent him.  Meanwhile, we had written a more comprehensive assessment, which we are posting on this website as an introduction to what we originally sent Declan.</p></description>
<link>http://www.psandman.com/articles/Cochrane.htm</link>
<guid>http://www.psandman.com/articles/Cochrane.htm</guid>
</item>


<item>
<title>April 7: What to say when a chemical that's outlawed in some countries is legal in yours</title>
<description>Guestbook comment and response</description>
<link>http://www.psandman.com/gst2014.htm#buckets</link>
<guid>http://www.psandman.com/gst2014.htm#buckets</guid>
</item>


<item>
<title>March 29: Going after pregnant women who drink: It's not just straightforward precaution advocacy </title>
<description>Guestbook comment and response</description>
<link>http://www.psandman.com/gst2014.htm#FASD</link>
<guid>http://www.psandman.com/gst2014.htm#FASD</guid>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>
