"...11,000 adverse reactions ... each year, including more than 112 deaths"
Do you mean 113 deaths? What does "more than 112" mean?
I remember reading something awhile back describing something as "one of
the top seventeen <whatever>". Now, I ask you, if you were rated, say,
third, would you describe yourself as "one of the top seventeen". There
are times when it's good to have our language reflect uncertainty. Too
often it's a cover for ambiguity, or a desperate need for a publication.
But come one, what is "more than 112" about?
One of the reasons I opted out of research science in favor of freelance
writing was because of the ridiculous stories you'd find embedded in
unclear use of language. If you're gonna be silly, it's nice to be able
to display playfulness in your writing.
One of my favorite classes in grad school was one in which we went
through selected scientific papers phrase by phrase, basicly dismantling
the experimental design (right down to the physical layout of the
experiments - luckily the prof. was a large-scale ecologist so we looked
at stuff like experiments showing "magnetic navigation" in salmon). But
I ramble.
I rant on language every so often, forgive me. My writing niche is
interpreting scientific lit for a general audience. My plea to the
reviewers and editors is to take your job seriously. I just voted my
AAAS ballot, and gave some thought to issues being raised like the
public, and/or the Congress, don't properly appreciate the role of
science. I ask you to make sure the work you give me is good enough to
trust without detailed analysis of the design and stats; make sure your
conclusions aren't artifacts, etc. Then I can concentrate better on my
job of popularizing good science.
I guess I better stop now.
Thank you for your patience.
E.
