Rejected by the New England Journal of Medicine in 2009.
This topic is a bit of a personal bugaboo. See this publication.

To the Editor:

In case 32-2009 (1) I was surprised to see the patient’s height measured with impressive, millimeter precision: 165.1 cm. More likely, of course, this was simply a ludicrously precise conversion to SI units from an imprecise 5-foot 5-inch estimate.

Information, as defined by communications scientists, has been likened to the amount of surprise in a system (2). Thus, to feel surprise when reading about a patient’s unremarkable height indicates that a perturbation of informational content has occurred – surely undesirable in any scientific journal.

To maintain informational aequanimitas, I suggest the Journal report measurements in the units in which they were originally obtained. Converted values – in full misleading precision – could follow in parentheses.

(1) Tager AM, Sharma A, Mark EJ. Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Case 32-2009. A 27-year-old man with progressive dyspnea. N Engl J Med. 2009 Oct 15;361(16):1585-1593.   PubMed 19828536. doi 10.1056/NEJMcpc0905544

(2) Applebaum D. Probability and Information: An Integrated Approach. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Pages 105-106.

Biotechnology and the Lifetime of Technical Civilizations

When will human civilization end?I don't know the precise answer to that question (no one does), but here I'd like to share with you one ...… Continue reading

Popeye Arm

Published on January 29, 2018