Image: Courtesy of the White House (Obama)
The ethical and policy ramifications of deploying science and technology in the service of society hold the same importance as the act of invention itself. Getting antiretroviral treatments to HIV/AIDS patients in sub-Saharan Africa. Ensuring that the world’s largest chip manufacturer takes every possible step to reduce the company’s environmental footprint. Lending the currency of one’s celebrity (as well as cold, hard cash) to a global campaign to abolish smoking.
Leadership in these realms requires vision and imagination that transcends mere engineering ingenuity. This year’s Scientific American 10 pays tribute to the exceptional foresight and accomplishment of a select group whose achievements, particularly during the past year, stand out from those of their peers. The 10 winners have demonstrated that establishing a public health program or running a green business requires more than administrative efficiency and good public relations. Bringing creativity to bear in overcoming institutional and bureaucratic impediments to adoption of not just new technology but innovative procedural methods is crucial for improving health care and the environment.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
17 Comments
Add CommentJust stumbled upon this article and Im so pleased to see the incubator is named here. Ive seen a number of demos and presentations over its development process and it seems to keep overcoming the challenges, but I think it going need a big push to get it into production. I hope in the end it can be easily deployed or dropped from helicopters/aircraft in the event of a disaster.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSecond, it is also good to hear about this breathing tube and training New to me and illustrates how keeping healthcare in the developing world simple can have a huge impact. I googled for it and found this video by Olson, which elaborates a bit.
http://cimit.typepad.com/cimit_forum_blog/2009/05/small-thing-move-quickly-updates-in-global-health.html
Im a huge proponent of Global health and frequent these Causes, which build upon some of the themes in this SciAm article.
http://apps.facebook.com/causes/186768?m=de0957a2
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Global-Health-Council/26106820985
Finally, it is good to see that stem cells are going to get a little time in the light - Well be able to determine what value they have instead of just guessing. Over the last 15 years there has been a lot of speculation and hope wound up in them and clarity and exact science is needed now.
Eugene Scott has been a champion to science educators across the country! Kudos to her and NCSE.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEugene Scott has been a champion to science educators across the country! Kudos to her and NCSE.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEugene Scott has been a champion to science educators across the country! Kudos to her and NCSE.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEugene Scott has been a champion to science educators across the country! Kudos to her and NCSE.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wish that she would accept the fact that the weight of evidence shows no teleology at works in Nature rather than her silly, contemptuous comment in her book that scientists should not state that. Nay, her notion of the demarcation between science and philosophy is false as Paul Draper in an email told me. And elsewhere she states that logically one cannot gainsay that we came into existence ten minutes agos with our memories of a past, which ignores the facts and thus is silly.She thus overbends to theists! Dawkins has her number!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYea, otherwise she does indeed merit great praise!
Folks, Google Jerry Coyne to ponder his " Seeing and Believing," where he conclusively demantles theistic obfuscation.
I wish that she would accept the fact that the weight of evidence shows no teleology at works in Nature rather than her silly, contemptuous comment in her book that scientists should not state that. Nay, her notion of the demarcation between science and philosophy is false as Paul Draper in an email told me. And elsewhere she states that logically one cannot gainsay that we came into existence ten minutes agos with our memories of a past, which ignores the facts and thus is silly.She thus overbends to theists! Dawkins has her number!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYea, otherwise she does indeed merit great praise!
Folks, Google Jerry Coyne to ponder his " Seeing and Believing," where he conclusively demantles theistic obfuscation.
Thankyou and also how dare you. The Scientific American 10 was great. You selected a good balance of people who really contribute to the well being of humanity. There were down to earth folks and others more in the domain of science and of course the philantropists and enablers. Bill Gates was indeed a major contributor to the betterment of humanity in the time he actually created something. Now he and Michael Bloomberg are enablers. That's a vital role too. Without them the creators would not be able to deliver. Finally and thankyou very much, you recognized the policy maker, Barack Obama for without the top level direction the whole process dies as we have seen in the past years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow for the how dare you part. Having done a splendid job well balanced and wise you went off on a strange tangent caught up in but two words in the second paragraph of the introduction. The two words were entirely uneccessary. The kind of thing most of us learned to delete when we were young since the added nothing and might offend. Well you have offended me. The two words were "mere engineering".
I have spent my life proudly as an engineer. I have designed refineres, and helped send man to the moon and bring him back alive. And then I worked hard to assure you would have a totally dependable communitcations system. I am proud of my work.
Do you have any grasp on the extent your daily lives, at home and at work, depend on the work of engineers. Think about water supply, waste removal and treatment, traffic flow, electricity into your home, highways, air traffic operations, railroads, ---- good grief it goes on forever.
So I think an apology to the engineers of the world is in order.
Charles Davis
dear all
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswe are thinking about the possible correlation between neurotransmitters (dopamine level in specific)/genes and positive emotional behavior/satisfaction, any idea about the related markers to be assayed and the technique to be employed.
sincerely yours
Leili E.Fard(post grad. student)
dear all
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswe are thinking about the possible correlation between neurotransmitters (dopamine level in specific)/genes and positive emotional behavior/satisfaction, any idea about the related markers to be assayed and the technique to be employed.
sincerely yours
Leili E.Fard(post grad. Student)
The inclusion of Eugene Scott in the list throws a shadow over its credibility. To put her in with people who are mainly doing worthwhile science and trying to help others in difficult situations while all she can do is try to defend evolution and scientism reflects poorly on those responsible for choosing the ten people in the first place.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCalling right now to cancel my subscription after reading your ridiculous opening sentence. Afterward, I will go and put on a sweater because your mythical "global warming" has not arrived in the northeast as of yet. Talk about superstitious and phony science, you take the cake.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSee ya!
If I actually had a subscription to this rag, I would cancel it immediately after seeing this pathetic attempt at just another deification of Barack Obama. Didn't know that so-called "Scientific" America was just another shill for the Democratic Socialist Party.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe editorial about Barack Obama welcoming science back to the White House is precisely why I cancelled by subscription to SA years ago. Your cult-like worship of global warming was the essence of anti-science. That was bad enough. But to blindly praise a man who simply reads someone's words on a TelePrompTer is absurd. Obama's idea of science is only that which advances his political beliefs. Scientific American is merely a useful idiot.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLooks like you may need to take back Obama's Award:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml
He's worse than you make Bush out to be.
Engineering can be applied to good government too. In fact (I have almost completed a book to show it) the system analysis to economics can show us better how it works and so enable build a better world.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDetails: chesterdh@hotmail.com
Interesting choices. But there are many other people who did so well the world wonder and stand in the shadows.<a rel="follow" href="http://www.all-auto.ro/asigurari-auto" rel="nofollow">asigurari auto</a>
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this