One Year after Sandy, Uneven Recovery at New York University’s labs

writing

How were researchers faring one year after Hurricane Sandy? I wrote this article to answer that question. I got the cleaned-up version of reality from NYU Medical Center, and the unvarnished truth from some researchers. This article appeared on SFARI.org, and was also syndicated on Scientific American on 29 October 2013, Hurricane Sandy’s one-year anniversary.

Walking through Gordon Fishell’s lab now, you would never know that much of his research was swept away by last year’s superstorm. Other scientists at New York University’s medical center cannot say the same.

Walking through Gordon Fishell’s lab now, you would never know that much of his research was swept away by Hurricane Sandy, almost exactly a year ago.

The lab’s staff is back at work, studying — among other things — the role of certain neurons in disorders such as autism. With gleaming floors under glowing lights, the space resembles nothing of the dark, dank disaster zone it was back then.

“It’s really hard to remember how bad it was,” says Fishell, director of the Smilow Neuroscience Program at New York University (NYU). Until, that is, he begins to recall the damage.

On 29 October 2012, ‘superstorm’ Sandy surged through the east coast of the U.S., with water levels in New York Bay reaching 13.88 feet — 2.68 feet higher than the nearly 200-year-old previous record.

At NYU’s Langone Medical Center, which sits right next to the East River, the staff successfully evacuated 322 patients, including 20 babies from the neonatal intensive care unit. But mice and machines did not fare as well.

Read the rest of the article on Scientific American‘s website.

Experts evaluate DSM-5

writing

(This article is an introduction to a special report on the DSM-5 that appeared 30 May 2013 on SFARI.org. You can view the special report here. For the report, I conceived the idea, commissioned and edited the articles, and worked with the web producer on the images and presentation.)

It’s been nearly 14 years in the making, with heated debate for at least 2, but finally it’s here: The American Psychiatric Association published the DSM-5, the newest revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, on 18 May.

For this special report, we asked several experts to review the DSM-5 criteria for autism — and their reactions are surprisingly positive overall.

Unreasonable doubt

writing
(This Opinion column ran on Nature’s website June 15, 2007. You can see the original post here.)
A ‘vaccine court’ case on autism could have disastrous consequences if people confuse its verdict with scientific consensus.vaccine-mercury

Why are there so many more cases of autism now than there were 30 years ago? It’s a question the best scientific minds have been unable to answer. But I’m afraid a US court now looking at that question may settle it on the basis of emotion rather than science.

The parents of thousands of autistic children think that the routine measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and the mercury-based vaccine preservative called thimerosal damaged their healthy children’s brains and made them autistic — and they’re now suing the US government for damages. On Monday, three ‘special masters’ of the US Court of Federal Claims began hearing testimony in the first of nearly 5,000 such cases, some of which have been pending for years.

I sympathize with these parents and can understand their need to find a reason for their children’s suffering. But I trust in science, and I can’t ignore the fact that so many peer-reviewed studies — and every scientific panel entrusted with evaluating those studies — has come to the same conclusion: neither the MMR vaccine nor thimerosal is associated with autism.