Check it out y'all.

It's all so poetic. The same year the student science mag that Anna and I started at the University of Toronto kind of limped to a standstill (Jargon R.I.P.), another one began. It's called Hypothesis. While our stab at pop sci was, surprise surprise, all about being pretty and fun, Hypothesis is pretty straight up. Articles about the Discussion of Science are peer-reviewed by grad students and pertain mostly to "basic, clinical and translational science." This means that it's brainy and high brow and well researched - with proper references. Take for example the recent review by Editor Eva Amsen, "Who benefits from science blogging?" where big luminaries like Carl Zimmer are interviewed. As are we. Get it? There's some just-short-of-full circle action going on here.

P.S. Just to give you an idea of the mag's wide and commendable scope, take a look at Rami Bishay's article "Lent, Lust and the Libido: What Patristic Theology Taught us About Testosterone Biosynthesis," also in this issue. Who knew alliteration could surprise like that.

Comments

[Peter McGrath]

If people weren't lent so much lust they wouldn't have such a problem with their libido.

[Mr.Orange]

Off-topic:

Tag, you're it. This is us hitting you with a book meme. This is how it goes down:

http://www.frinktank.com/blog/?p=342

e.g.

http://www.frinktank.com/blog/?p=341