"It was a quiet Thursday afternoon when 'A.S.', a 68-year-old woman from a suburb of Chicago, awakened from a nap to the realization that something was terribly wrong." It isn't the start to a mystery novel, but to a scientific paper. Jordan Gaines fills in the details: Sight without seeing: Bálint's syndrome
"This week's big autism story was a genetic test able to predict with 70% accuracy whether or not a child had autism," writes Jon Brock. And, of course, the predictable breakdown between science and science reporting. "A screening measure with 70% accuracy would only be slightly better than completely useless." Find out why.
The views expressed are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)
Jason G. Goldman is a science journalist based in Los Angeles. He has written about animal behavior, wildlife biology, conservation, and ecology for Scientific American, Los Angeles magazine, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, Conservation magazine, and elsewhere. He contributes to Scientific American's "60-Second Science" podcast, and is co-editor of Science Blogging: The Essential Guide (Yale University Press). He enjoys sharing his wildlife knowledge on television and on the radio, and often speaks to the public about wildlife and science communication. Follow Jason G. Goldman on Twitter
