We've written about BIG data before and while some reckon it's sexy, you better roll up your sleeves because you'll invariably need to do a lot of 'janitorial' (a.k.a. shit) work first!
Ron Sandland recently wrote about the new phenomenon of 'big data' - weighing up the benefits and concerns. Terry Speed reflected on the same issue in a talk earlier this year inGothenburg, Sweeden noting that this is nothing new to statisticians. So what's all the fuss about? Here's another take on the 'big data' bandwagon.
Professors David Fox (Environmetrics Australia / University of Melbourne) and Wayne Landis (Western Washington University) respond to renewed calls to retain the NOEC in ecotoxicology.
Last year, the respected journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published another in its series of Perspectives. This one, titled Statistical Challenges in Ecotoxicologywas led by John Green - an advocate and campaigner for the retention of the widely discredited toxicity measure called the NOEC (No Observed Effect Concentration).
Green and his supporters have long argued that this metric is worthy of continued use despite 30+ years of severe criticism. In the latest ET&C, Fox and Landis continue their rebuttals of Green's many and varied assertions in support of the retention of the NOEC. Significantly, Fox and Landis have called a time-out on the constant cycling through the same old arguments and suggest instead that the Ecotox profession establishes a sub-discipline of Statistical Ecotoxicology as a way forward.
Click here to go to our document repository and download a copy of the Fox and Landis paper.
