#scientific process

Nature has like a dozen or two actual articles about it, and most are pretty scant on information about transmission methods. Wiley has a couple hundred hits which might make you think it’s under control, but the majority of them are basically highly formal emails saying “yo this shit’s wild” between medical professionals (note the word “potential” shows up a couple dozen times in titles alone).

Other than autopsies, the way we’ve found out most of what we’ve found out about it (ie it has a lipid outer layer easily destroyed by soap) is based on electron microscopy, gene sequencing, etc. Many studies are basically using machine learning or other fancy computer software to just throw a billion different chemicals at it at once, and see if any show up as having certain potentially useful electro-chemical properties. The end result is a “potential”, which then has to actually be checked.

Then, if you want to like, actually run laboratory tests on real living patients (about, say, the efficacy of masks), you need a fancy piece of machinery such as this lovely fellow here

As you may imagine, this sort of machinery is simultaneously very expensive, and very one-person-at-a-time, must be disinfected after every use - and, the biggest drawback - it only analyzes a small portion of the breath you exhale. This is why you haven’t seen anyone put any actual percentages for how effective certain facemasks are or aren’t - we largely don’t have the data yet (turns out medical institutions don’t have much time to run complex controlled experiments while dealing with a pandemic)

This article is one of a series of Experiments meant to teach students about how science is done, from generating a hypothesis to designing an experiment to analyzing the results with statistics. You can repeat the steps here and compare your results — or use this as inspiration to design your own experiment.

Your fingertips are sensitive to touch. They have to be, to help you type, get dressed and pet kittens. But are they more sensitive than your leg, arm or back? How would you be able to tell? This is something that’s pretty easy to test. And it’s also easy to turn into an experiment. All you need is something to measure with, a blindfold or two — and a lot of very patient friends.

A test called two-point discrimination can help to determine which parts of the body are more sensitive than others. Two-point discrimination refers to the ability to perceive two points touching you as two actual points instead of one. You can demonstrate this by poking yourself or your friends (with permission, of course). But to turn this into an experiment, I need to start with a hypothesis. This is a statement that I can test.

My hypothesis: Fingertips are more sensitive to two points of contact than the arms or upper back.

Poking and prodding

To test my hypothesis, I need volunteers. But I can’t just run around the office and start prodding my colleagues. It is wrong to perform an experiment on someone without their consent. My friends and colleagues need to know what I am doing, why I’m doing it and if there are any risks.

I wrote up a protocol — a plan of action that details exactly what I am going to do and why. I also drafted a consent form. This is a form my colleagues can read and sign, noting that they understand any risks from my experiment. I submitted the protocol and the form to an Institutional Review Board. This is a group of scientists that determines whether my experimental plan is safe.

The group of scientists I consulted evaluates studies conducted by students at the Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair reviewed my documents. The board suggested changes I could make to the wording of my consent form, so that no one would misunderstand my experiment. And they approved my study. I was free to do science.

When my colleagues at Society for Science & the Public gathered for a monthly staff birthday celebration, I struck. My editor, Sarah Zielinski, helped as I asked my coworkers to line up, sign a consent form and put on a blindfold. Sarah also wrote down information about each participant’s age, gender and whether they were right- or left-handed.

To test touch sensitivity, doctors use a pair of calipers and move them slowly apart, trying to see when someone can feel two points instead of one. This is an experiment you can do, too. Though maybe not on someone’s tongue.

CREDIT: HOUSE, EARL LAWRENCE. PANSKY, BEN./WIKIMEDIA COMMONS/PUBLIC DOMAIN

I asked each person to hold out their dominant hand (the right hand, if someone is right-handed). I then carefully touched a pair of calipers to the tip of their index finger. (Calipers are a device that’s used to measure the distance between two points.) I started with the calipers completely closed, forming a single point. Then I moved the points farther apart and touched the person’s fingertip again. Every time I touched their finger, I asked them if they felt one or two points of contact. I widened the calipers each time, testing 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 5 and 10 millimeters (between 0 and 0.39 inch).

At first, people would say they only felt one point. Of course, they did; the calipers were only a single point. But as the calipers expanded, people began to feel two points. Sarah carefully noted when each person felt two points instead of one. I took a measurement of each distance twice.

Then I did the same experiment with each person’s dominant lower arm. I poked them gently about 50 millimeters (2 inches) below their elbow. Each time I asked if they felt one or two points. This time, I tested between 0 and 50 millimeters, waiting to stop measuring when people told me they felt two points of contact. I repeated this on my coworkers’ upper backs.

To make sure I was detecting a difference that wasn’t entirely accidental, ideally I would have tested 41 people. Unfortunately, the experiment took a long time. Many people didn’t want to wait around. They had work to do. I ended up with 38 participants. Not bad.

By Barbie Latza Nadeau

“ROME—In 2009, the straight world swooned when archaeologists discovered two ancient skeletons from between the fourth and sixth centuries A.D. holding hands in a grave in Modena, Italy. They were dubbed the “Lovers of Modena” and have become synonymous with heterosexual romance, their image now often used in Italy to symbolize undying love.”

“When they were discovered, archeologists said the bones were in such a state of decay that the usual genetic-based methods used in confirming the biological sex of ancient remains was of no use. Still, one of the figures was slightly smaller than the other, so it was assumed they were male and female. The individuals did not die in situ—their hands were placed holding each other's by whoever buried them, most likely to represent a relationship between the two people. Eleven people were buried in the cemetery where they were found, all initially thought to be soldiers and victims of an ancient war, based on wounds consistent with battles. The consensus among anthropologists was that the presumed female hand-holder was the lover of one of the warriors.”