As a biologist frustrated with publication turnaround times, I took some time to encourage a collaborator to submit one of our manuscripts to bioRxiv this morning.
A rambunctious black Labrador named Bear — one of only five dogs in the nation trained to sniff out electronic data devices — played a key role in the arrest of former Subway pitchman Jared Fogle on child-porn charges.
Bear's dog whisperer, Todd Jordan, gave NBC News a demonstration of how he works his magic, walking him through an apartment while repeatedly giving him the command "Seek!"
According to Bear's trainer, the dog was trained to smell the chemicals used in the manufacture of the devices, in this case a thumb drive. And it he substance of the article is true, it works as the dog found a thumb drive that otherwise eluded detection.
No, dogs cannot smell porn. Not kiddie porn. Not adult porn. Not lawful or unlawful porn. Not porn at all. A $5 footlong, sure, but pretty much anyone can smell that, not that they necessarily want to unless they've made millions off them.
The 2-year-old rescue pooch nosed out a thumb drive that humans had failed to find during a search of Fogle's Indiana house in July, several weeks before he agreed to plead guilty to having X-rated images of minors and paying to have sex with teenage girls.
The dog zeroed in on a kitchen drawer, which Jordan opened to reveal a device. "Good boy!" he told Bear, giving him a handful of food.
While the question of whether dogs can and should be used as a proxy for probable cause, whether to search directly or to obtain a warrant to search, is one of grave concerns, as it's fraught with substantial failings, plus its efficacy is little different than a coin toss, the âoeporn sniffing dogâ presents a very different picture.
Yet, apparently, dogs (Labradors in particular) can be trained to sniff out data storage devices. Whoda thunk?
“Principal investigators (PIs) on an NIH grant must contact NIH through their institution to seek prior approval for a change of institution. NIH grants are made to institutions, not to individuals. When a PI moves to another institution, the original grantee institution frequently agrees to relinquish the grant to the PIs new institution but NIH must approve this transfer. If the original grantee institution does not wish to relinquish the grant, they must seek NIH approval to appoint a new PI to the grant. NIH must assess whether the project can continue under the new scientific leadership at the original institution, and if so will approve a change in PI. If not, the grant is terminated.”
UCSD—not Aisen— “is contractually obligated by its agreements with the NIH and research partners to maintain and safeguard data from clinical studies conducted by ADCS. ”
p>If you really want to "get money out of politics," you need to (as much as possible) get politics out of the economy. (Ideologues will always lobby, and that's fine, because it's the crony capitalism and pay-to-play aspects that are most objectionable.) Which, of course, is not what many reformers want to do. Until they do, they are basically advocating spreading sugar around their picnic blanket, and then complaining about all the ants.
Check out Laurence Lessig's speech "We the People, and the Republic we must reclaim" . The premise is that there is no way to even start getting politics out of the economy (or any other sensible legislation) until we remove money from politics.
The scientists that published that just must not be up on their literature or the author is just confused and the scientists are trying to talk up their research.
Do you suffer painful recrimination? -- Nancy Boxer, "Structured Programming with Come-froms"