It’s important to stress that the follow up paper isn’t a retraction nor specifically about the original specimen but simply a suggestion as to how the original result might’ve come to be. There is doubtless more that could be said about it but I think I’ve put my foot sufficiently far into my mouth and will likely stick to more familiar matters for at least a month or two 🙃
Thanks for the clarification. I personally take this “apology” video as a clarification on what by definition falls into “frontier science”. This frontier allows your previous video that was well supported at the time being updated with new information from the main source that still stand strong. In other words, the situation does not relate to fake news, purposely misinformation, etc. Thanks again for your professionalism and I am looking forward to read more of your standard videos as well as these short ones. Greetings from Mexico City
Rohin, you're one of the smartest guys on TH-cam and certainly much smarter than me. But no one can know everything. I'm glad you're humble enough to admit when you're wrong, even if being "wrong" in this case means you didn't find a relatively obscure correction. But the fact you're willing to do that tells me you're one of a relatively small number of sources that I can trust for information because when you find information that contradicts what you've told us, you'll let us know. Thank you for being one of that small number of people.
Biology is weird. There are always possibilities you can miss no matter how careful you are. Even for simple stuff... I TA'd a class as part of my PhD requirement last year. When we were talking about trisomies, I thought they were always sterile which was what I learned back in the days. Then I found out from my students that a good portion of trisomy X and Down syndrome individuals are fertile. How does that work? No idea.
I was JUST thinking that (not about this, before seeing this, let alone watching it) - in relation to the chaos that is my life - that I have to write, explain stuff - it important, critical stuff I need to deal with, but ... having the _time_ the _energy_ to do a short version...
Sure sure but I’ll have to go through the time-honoured process of becoming jaded by the ‘primary’ channel and explaining I’m burned out, THEN move on to a third channel where I crave the stage everything was smaller etc etc. It is the way.
Bad science? More like old science. It's just that there was follow up science which showed the first science to be no longer accurate science. This isn't an apology video, it's an updated science video!
First rule of biology, medical research, etc., NEVER draw any firm conclusions form just ONE study. Science is a collective process, in time the dust will settle and things will be seen more clearly.
I very much appreciate this video. I wrote myself some comments under that short, pointing out the mistake. Honestly, I doubted that any progress would have come out from this. But here we are. I already had a good amount of trust towards your online communication, but now it increased even more :-)
I think being aware of the limits of your expertise is sooo massively important, so kudos on that. "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" is one of the truest sayings I know.
Well, at least you were able to publish the follow-up video in the same channel and platform so it's likely anyone who saw the first video will see the second one too. A pity the researchers couldn't do that with their papers (I'm not placing any blame, just pointing it out).
Sigh. I spent most of the last 24 hours preparing to leave my life as a Walmart stocker to take up a new life researching this new form of life, not because I thought it was important, but because I wanted at last to do something with my life on the cutting edge. In fact, I was just explaining to my children that I was going to be leaving them and their mother so that I could take up this vitally niche research in Massachusetts or Britain or somewhere far from the small desert town where we live, when my wife came up to me and put her phone in my face and said, "Oh yeah, here's your hero, jerk". And it was you, with this video. I'd like to thank you for saving me from making the biggest mistake of my (or anyone else's) life, but it remains to be seen if my wife will forgive me. Oh well, in the morning I'll have to go back to Walmart and beg for my stocking job back. PS: My wife says I have to unsubscribe from your channel, but don't worry, I'll get a burner phone so I can keep watching your content. (Long form videos only from now on, obviously.)
Thanks for the follow up, I find that often the most spectacular science claims you hear on the internet are false. This one was just kind of on the edge of believable enough, given my limited knowledge on biology. Oh and maybe it's worth unlisting the other video, before that one goes viral while this one doesnt
i respect the apology. i also respect that sometimes we get excited about something new in an area we aren't masters in but do enjoy & want to talk about it with people we think might enjoy it also, then when we learn we misunderstood it, we correct what we thought we knew. that is how we learn things, it's a wonderful & delightful way to keep learning.
How dare you .... apologize. It shows you have integrity that you're willing to admit your mistakes and learn. Plus, teach all of us along the way. Thank you.
Many many thanks to you for correcting (or maybe updating ?) previous information. I love hearing about unusual scientific discoveries. I love it even more when we can follow a line of research through its investigation to its myriad possible conclusions. It helps give context to the research process.
Believe me it pains me more than you but 2024 is about trying new things. Which is why I’ll film my ayahuasca retreat and perineal sunning sessions in a diagonal format.
@@medlife2 I'm no expert but I think this is a proper joke! At least I got asked what I was laughing at. I really enjoy your videos. Thanks. I'm sure I learn as much about being a good person as I do about science or medsin.
Everyone is bad at it, that's why it is a bad idea. It reminds me of an incident (TRUE) in which a biochemist who was bored of speaking about his own work again and again, at lunchtime seminars, decided to give a talk on particle physics despite being totally unqualified in the subject. Not long into the talk he could not understand why so many people kept sniggering and supressing laughter. After the talk he turned to a biophysicist colleague to ask him why this was happening. The physicist replied "They are called HADRONS, not hardons."
Maybe it's just your usual satire and that maybe I'm reading too much into it, but... Don't feel bad. You're actually demonstrating - in what I see as a pretty dramatic way - how independent media is a revolution in accelerating the process of less-wrong-seeking. You're simultaneously revealing: Some of the deep flaws with our scientific publishing paradigm; failure of corporate media science reporting; hazards of an information consumer relying on a narrow source pool; capacity for speed of adaptation of competent individual communicators; the dramatic, potentially dangerous, misunderstanding about the *universality* of the Dunning-Kruger effect (not by you, but many times I see it mentioned, it's misapprehended, in S-tier level irony, that high IQ, or more educated people, are somehow better at discerning their competence level)... I could go on. Keep sharing your brain with us. The idea that making a "mistake" (not knowing everything about a topic the first time you talk publicly about it) should discourage you from doing so is - dare I say - the actual hubris. We're in a new information landscape where the danger can only counter the benefits of everyone speaking if the best minds withhold their voice for fear of lacking credentials.
I love both videos on this subject! Please DO NOT stick to medicine, we desperately need science communicators and discourse on science, which these videos have achieved.
Happy with this, the negative result gets the same publicity as the positive result - that's good science. Bring on the journal of unsuccesful results. Actually: Journal of Unsuccesful or Negative Knowledge gives a better acronym.
It’s an unfortunate trend in modern science publishing, only the amazing positive correlational experiments and findings get published in prestigious journals and the negative or null results either don’t get published or are published in unknown journals.
I am glad you're correcting or adding additional context to the video, but I also think there's nothing wrong with being wrong. You have just speedran (speedrunned? spedran?) science: you learnt something, then you learnt something else that contradicts what you first learnt, then you learn from that, then you repeat the cycle ad infinitum! Being honest about that is always going to be better than hiding it. And the people who uniromically say that they don't trust you anymore don't understand that this is how all science works, including medicine, and the videos you do now may be wrong in the future but that doesn't mean that they are wrong now. I would also like to continue to have your random facts from things you read! This is the kind of thing I enjoy! Not all of them are going to stay right but I like learning new things! I don't think it's misinformation if you (general you) are wrong or correct yourself or add additional context on the internet, because we don't have all the information at any one time; even specialists in subjects don't. It sucks that people aren't allowed to be wrong or openly learn anymore.
While it is great that you own up to the mistake, I think the fault lies more in the scientific publishing industry than you. There is far more incentive to publish positive results than negatives or corrections, and I'd be willing to bet that a lot of mistakes are still out there in the scientific record because the tests disproving a published paper never got published themselves.
Really appreciate this video! Science is ever changing and it's impossible to keep up with everything. Great point about follow-ups to studies not being as widely publicized - I believe a similar instance contributed to people believing vaccines cause certain conditions when they do not.
It's OK to make mistakes in biology. This stuff is so information dense and you can be hit with weird nonsense that appears remarkably sensible at first, or even tenth glance. In fact, it is how the field progresses. In my subfield of virology, some Stanford group made a mistake in the 90s and no one realized it until mid-2000s. However, research that utilized that mistake still made significant progress in the field. The only one who suffered were probably poor grad students like me trying to understand why everything seemed to contradict each other 20 years ago.
Great clarification video! Sad it wasn't real endosymbiosis this time. Also glad to hear you are in fact not the super famous, monotone sounding scientist mentioned on the "list". Had us all worried for a second.
Video could have done with a grey hoodie or maybe a ukulele? Now that I think about it you didn't fake cry at all! Worst apology ever! I do appreciate the correction though. That video was the first I saw on Medlife Crisis 2 and the comments pointing out your error had me leaving with a bit of a bad taste in my mouth but a correction video really does work for me. I get that if you're a politician you're probably better off never admitting your mistakes but as a science communicator a correction is definitely the much better call, in my opinion.
Lol - I am a biologist (turned med student) and my immediate response to your video was “wow, that’s amazing”… Though I did intend to actually look into the paper. It’s really easy for anyone, even people within that field, to get carried away with the exciting implications of something well before one looks into whether it’s actually true.
I think there's value in having this error and correction, rather than having correct information from the outset, which in this case would mean no video at all. 1) I wouldn't have learned about the significance of this type of discovery and research area, and why it's important for understanding the emergence of life. 2) You explained where and how you erred, as well as what could go wrong with this type of paper and how corrections are published. 3) Content creators seem to almost never issue corrections, which I think is actually shameful, while making a correction shouldn't be. I like the frequent, lower effort, short form content. It's nice to have something low commitment to listen to (will you upload to your podcast?) With the departure of Tom Scott, there's an even bigger void of interesting things to learn about on a regular schedule. I'd imagine the long form content also keeps raising the bar, until you have a Michael Reeves upload schedule.
props to you for following up on this, and for how quick youve been. Im kinda confused as to how you noticed it was wrong, because i myself saw the original video and left a comment about it, and there were already a lot explaining how it was wrong but i guess its not that important anyway. whatever, its great that you do realise how it went wrong and why and that you care not to spread misinformation, thank you! good luck with whatever comes next :)
It’s just to do with how the TH-cam studio app works, you have to switch accounts which I forgot to do as I haven’t used this account so much, so I saw the comments on the main channel first (I subsequently saw some people mention the error under the original video when I came to upload this one…anyway, all’s well that ends well and thank you for pointing it out!)
This is why you're one of my favourite TH-camrs and quite possibly my favourite science communicator And congrats on having a successful kid you can live your failed dreams through ;) Looking forward to lots more videos from you :)
You made another good point about scientific journals. Most are obscure, poorly edited, and out of the "view" of search engines. One professor of mine once said that a poorly titled paper is the fast track to obscurity. Also most biologists have more love of the field then income. Journals are $$$ and usually require university libraries with with wealthy benefactors to keep up. Many hours spent going through 3X5 index cards. So called search engines, and their over rated cousin AI, don't put in the funding for this type of content. Or require $$$ subscriptions...
I do appreciate the built in subtitles, or more particularly that "no, I've not been inappropriate with fans or flogging" - - "supplements" - cause, that "flogging" was left hanging a bit too long... 😶😂 (oh 'you do you'... 'each to their own' etc etc - & yes, yes, flogging supplements, _flogging supplements_ ) - sorry I am easily amused, and this amused me.
Interestingly, both TikTok and TH-cam autogenerated captions seem to think that "cursory searching" in an English accent is "curs(e) researching". I'm glad Rohin posted both of these videos, I think I learned more than if he hadn't posted either.
Unfortunately some people of the main channel also watch your short video's. So now your entire credibility is ruined! 😛 I personally can handle a bit of misinformation and I am glad you handled it well. Everyone can make a mistake but not everyone can admit to it. So you learned a valuable lesson and you told us right away. That is good. Integrity is of the utmost importance. For us as viewers: keep an open mind but be aware that anybody can make a mistake. (As long as it is not being on Epsteins list.)
Thank you for doing this video! You have saved me from looking the fool at my next party attendance. 🍸 (Also, you may want to do some research on the Dunning-Kruger paper. It doesn't claim what most people think it claims, ironically. 😅)
We all learned so much from this video... Actually a great video! We learned about science, about biology, about influencers (yes you are), about people and your son's backhand.
All I hear is that making a misinformed video is better than making no video! How wrong can you be when the original researcher isn’t sure what they found.😅
Thank you!! Also amazing that youtube gave me the follow up after I watched the original. And, the original was interesting, but this followup caused me to subscribe.
Doing your due diligence pays. It turns out after all these years that mitochondria are not the powerhouse of the cell as I had foolishly believed, but in fact they are the rumpus room of the cell.
I'd rather hear these tidbits from you than some random all-topic popsci youtuber like WATOP because at least you have the integrity to correct mistakes, and in this case you seem to have received your info from a credible source. A pinned comment with the correction would suffice I think going forward at least for me - it's not a biggie. I used to be subscribed to many of these aforementioned popsci channels - but I tend to unsubscribe when they make an aggregious mistake and especially if they don't correct it years on - these channels tended to have a very similar format and presentation style. Links to sources and further reading are nonexistent - probably because they don't want you to see that they just read a huffington post article out word for word.
Thanks for the update. But also, while mitochondria are thought to be the first endosymbiotic event, they're not the only one: chloroplasts are likely from a second endosymbiosis event.
Endosymbiosis has probably occurred several times, but this isn’t surprising once eukaryotes has evolved phagocytosis. It’s not clear, but many things that chloroplasts post date this stage, so less remarkable. Hence why in the first video I said mitochondria represent “the only time this has happened to a prokaryote”, which, as that finding is probably not true, remains the case!
It’s important to stress that the follow up paper isn’t a retraction nor specifically about the original specimen but simply a suggestion as to how the original result might’ve come to be. There is doubtless more that could be said about it but I think I’ve put my foot sufficiently far into my mouth and will likely stick to more familiar matters for at least a month or two 🙃
So, it was, unintentionally, clickbait after all.
Thanks for the clarification. I personally take this “apology” video as a clarification on what by definition falls into “frontier science”. This frontier allows your previous video that was well supported at the time being updated with new information from the main source that still stand strong. In other words, the situation does not relate to fake news, purposely misinformation, etc. Thanks again for your professionalism and I am looking forward to read more of your standard videos as well as these short ones. Greetings from Mexico City
Rohin, you're one of the smartest guys on TH-cam and certainly much smarter than me. But no one can know everything. I'm glad you're humble enough to admit when you're wrong, even if being "wrong" in this case means you didn't find a relatively obscure correction. But the fact you're willing to do that tells me you're one of a relatively small number of sources that I can trust for information because when you find information that contradicts what you've told us, you'll let us know. Thank you for being one of that small number of people.
Biology is weird. There are always possibilities you can miss no matter how careful you are. Even for simple stuff...
I TA'd a class as part of my PhD requirement last year. When we were talking about trisomies, I thought they were always sterile which was what I learned back in the days. Then I found out from my students that a good portion of trisomy X and Down syndrome individuals are fertile. How does that work? No idea.
Will the Chief of the NHS be ringing a bell behind you shouting shame everywhere you go now?
My trust in people named Rohin has significantly declined and I’m now putting all trust in quack TH-camr doctors.
I agree. They are never wrong, as I've never seen any of them post a video admitting it.
Rule number 3 of Quack Club: You can never be wrong if the truth bends around you
Disabling likes and dislikes for extra apology authenticity.
The fact you are so open about when you've made mistakes is one of the reasons I trust you so much more than most other TH-cam influencers.
OK but can I interest you in a crypto supplement scam
Behaviours like this just raise the standards of science comunication. It's a process, not a statement.
As the apochrypha go, "I am sorry I don't have the time to write a shorter letter."
I was JUST thinking that (not about this, before seeing this, let alone watching it) - in relation to the chaos that is my life - that I have to write, explain stuff - it important, critical stuff I need to deal with, but ... having the _time_ the _energy_ to do a short version...
This video is for when youtube realizes that the 60 second limit on shorts is stupid in like 10 years.
Okay but genuinely i hope you keep doing these snippets into your science nerd thoughts. I got rather excited for these.
Also don't stick to medicine Rohin! Surely a second channel is where to nerd more freely. Unless *gasp* ... third channel?
Sure sure but I’ll have to go through the time-honoured process of becoming jaded by the ‘primary’ channel and explaining I’m burned out, THEN move on to a third channel where I crave the stage everything was smaller etc etc. It is the way.
Bad science? More like old science. It's just that there was follow up science which showed the first science to be no longer accurate science. This isn't an apology video, it's an updated science video!
Best apology video of 2024 (until now).
First rule of biology, medical research, etc., NEVER draw any firm conclusions form just ONE study. Science is a collective process, in time the dust will settle and things will be seen more clearly.
I very much appreciate this video. I wrote myself some comments under that short, pointing out the mistake. Honestly, I doubted that any progress would have come out from this. But here we are. I already had a good amount of trust towards your online communication, but now it increased even more :-)
I think being aware of the limits of your expertise is sooo massively important, so kudos on that. "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" is one of the truest sayings I know.
If only we got apologies like this with bad science publications in journals......
interesting how the algorithm properly recommended this video following the last lol
I want to see TEARS, Rohin! How can I believe you’re truly sorry for all the harm you’ve caused unless I see you CRY!
I cried in my last long video, that’s my quota for the decade. Who do you think I am, Jordan Peterson?!
Admiting mistakes only adds to the credibility in my book!
The amazing thing here is how effective the comment section search algorithm is.
The best way to answer a question on the internet is to post a wrong answer, then wait for someone to correct you. It's known as Godwin's Law.
Saw that comment, I think it had 20 likes or something? Definitely respect how you handled it so well.
I love the transcription of cursory searching into "curse researching" in the subtitles at 2:23 😂
Well, at least you were able to publish the follow-up video in the same channel and platform so it's likely anyone who saw the first video will see the second one too. A pity the researchers couldn't do that with their papers (I'm not placing any blame, just pointing it out).
Sigh. I spent most of the last 24 hours preparing to leave my life as a Walmart stocker to take up a new life researching this new form of life, not because I thought it was important, but because I wanted at last to do something with my life on the cutting edge. In fact, I was just explaining to my children that I was going to be leaving them and their mother so that I could take up this vitally niche research in Massachusetts or Britain or somewhere far from the small desert town where we live, when my wife came up to me and put her phone in my face and said, "Oh yeah, here's your hero, jerk". And it was you, with this video. I'd like to thank you for saving me from making the biggest mistake of my (or anyone else's) life, but it remains to be seen if my wife will forgive me. Oh well, in the morning I'll have to go back to Walmart and beg for my stocking job back.
PS: My wife says I have to unsubscribe from your channel, but don't worry, I'll get a burner phone so I can keep watching your content. (Long form videos only from now on, obviously.)
If there’s one place a new form of life might be discovered, it’s on the shelves of Walmart (or perhaps shopping there). I believe in you!
Oooohhhh, definitely plenty of choices amongst the patrons....!!
Thanks for the follow up, I find that often the most spectacular science claims you hear on the internet are false. This one was just kind of on the edge of believable enough, given my limited knowledge on biology.
Oh and maybe it's worth unlisting the other video, before that one goes viral while this one doesnt
i respect the apology. i also respect that sometimes we get excited about something new in an area we aren't masters in but do enjoy & want to talk about it with people we think might enjoy it also, then when we learn we misunderstood it, we correct what we thought we knew. that is how we learn things, it's a wonderful & delightful way to keep learning.
How dare you .... apologize. It shows you have integrity that you're willing to admit your mistakes and learn. Plus, teach all of us along the way. Thank you.
Many many thanks to you for correcting (or maybe updating ?) previous information. I love hearing about unusual scientific discoveries. I love it even more when we can follow a line of research through its investigation to its myriad possible conclusions. It helps give context to the research process.
You have the integrity and the objectivity to issue your own self-retractions. That speaks volumes. :)
Well done - Thank you for your honesty. I appreciate that.
No, your mistake is filming in portrait..
Believe me it pains me more than you but 2024 is about trying new things. Which is why I’ll film my ayahuasca retreat and perineal sunning sessions in a diagonal format.
@@medlife2 I'm no expert but I think this is a proper joke! At least I got asked what I was laughing at. I really enjoy your videos. Thanks. I'm sure I learn as much about being a good person as I do about science or medsin.
@@medlife2 You understand that if you ever do a video while suffering from perineal sunburn I will expect it be in a diagonal format.
4:48 It's a promise. Ukelele apology videos are the bomb nowadays.
Everyone is bad at it, that's why it is a bad idea. It reminds me of an incident (TRUE) in which a biochemist who was bored of speaking about his own work again and again, at lunchtime seminars, decided to give a talk on particle physics despite being totally unqualified in the subject. Not long into the talk he could not understand why so many people kept sniggering and supressing laughter. After the talk he turned to a biophysicist colleague to ask him why this was happening. The physicist replied "They are called HADRONS, not hardons."
Amazing
I am disappointed that you came to this apology with receipts. No influencer worth their clout would have done that
Maybe it's just your usual satire and that maybe I'm reading too much into it, but...
Don't feel bad. You're actually demonstrating - in what I see as a pretty dramatic way - how independent media is a revolution in accelerating the process of less-wrong-seeking. You're simultaneously revealing: Some of the deep flaws with our scientific publishing paradigm; failure of corporate media science reporting; hazards of an information consumer relying on a narrow source pool; capacity for speed of adaptation of competent individual communicators; the dramatic, potentially dangerous, misunderstanding about the *universality* of the Dunning-Kruger effect (not by you, but many times I see it mentioned, it's misapprehended, in S-tier level irony, that high IQ, or more educated people, are somehow better at discerning their competence level)... I could go on.
Keep sharing your brain with us. The idea that making a "mistake" (not knowing everything about a topic the first time you talk publicly about it) should discourage you from doing so is - dare I say - the actual hubris. We're in a new information landscape where the danger can only counter the benefits of everyone speaking if the best minds withhold their voice for fear of lacking credentials.
You should probably edit the old title to make sure people know its outdated and link to this one in the desc as well as the comments
I love both videos on this subject! Please DO NOT stick to medicine, we desperately need science communicators and discourse on science, which these videos have achieved.
Dr. Vertical Rohin makes me uncomfortable.
I hit the like button for the "ukulele in hand" line
Happy with this, the negative result gets the same publicity as the positive result - that's good science.
Bring on the journal of unsuccesful results. Actually: Journal of Unsuccesful or Negative Knowledge gives a better acronym.
Rohan the Incredible! Thanks for the updated info and links. I'm sad though, classic case of I wanted the theory to be true
Thanks for showing such integrity. One of my favourite creators on TH-cam and trusted sources.
It’s an unfortunate trend in modern science publishing, only the amazing positive correlational experiments and findings get published in prestigious journals and the negative or null results either don’t get published or are published in unknown journals.
Actually, I prefer you being wrong and discussing it afterwards. This is just as interesting (about human psychology) as the original biology "fact".
I am glad you're correcting or adding additional context to the video, but I also think there's nothing wrong with being wrong. You have just speedran (speedrunned? spedran?) science: you learnt something, then you learnt something else that contradicts what you first learnt, then you learn from that, then you repeat the cycle ad infinitum! Being honest about that is always going to be better than hiding it. And the people who uniromically say that they don't trust you anymore don't understand that this is how all science works, including medicine, and the videos you do now may be wrong in the future but that doesn't mean that they are wrong now.
I would also like to continue to have your random facts from things you read! This is the kind of thing I enjoy! Not all of them are going to stay right but I like learning new things! I don't think it's misinformation if you (general you) are wrong or correct yourself or add additional context on the internet, because we don't have all the information at any one time; even specialists in subjects don't. It sucks that people aren't allowed to be wrong or openly learn anymore.
Very gracious! I was quite exited about your original video but I am now equally exited about how you are handling this. 🤷♀️🤗
I am sad. I am also slightly concerned that I will forget this and just remember the new form of life
It is because of errorcaryotes...😅
*angry upvote*
Don’t tell anyone but a big short form guy (is that an oxymoron?) told me he leaves in typos deliberately to provoke engagement in a harmless way…
@@medlife2 ❤️ I won't be surprised to find out that this second chane will surpass the official one. We like to mess around, comment and have fun.
Error carrots???
Eh, Doc what's up??!
Without an instrument is it really an apology, Rohin? Or at the very least, a moustache? Nah jokes, good form to be candid here, you love to see it 👏
While it is great that you own up to the mistake, I think the fault lies more in the scientific publishing industry than you. There is far more incentive to publish positive results than negatives or corrections, and I'd be willing to bet that a lot of mistakes are still out there in the scientific record because the tests disproving a published paper never got published themselves.
Still, I appreciate it.
Is it just me, or do science TH-camrs tend to be way better at apology videos?
Really appreciate this video! Science is ever changing and it's impossible to keep up with everything. Great point about follow-ups to studies not being as widely publicized - I believe a similar instance contributed to people believing vaccines cause certain conditions when they do not.
It's OK to make mistakes in biology. This stuff is so information dense and you can be hit with weird nonsense that appears remarkably sensible at first, or even tenth glance. In fact, it is how the field progresses. In my subfield of virology, some Stanford group made a mistake in the 90s and no one realized it until mid-2000s. However, research that utilized that mistake still made significant progress in the field. The only one who suffered were probably poor grad students like me trying to understand why everything seemed to contradict each other 20 years ago.
I cant believe youve done this. How will I ever forgive you?
Keep uploading vids, that might do it.
Great clarification video! Sad it wasn't real endosymbiosis this time. Also glad to hear you are in fact not the super famous, monotone sounding scientist mentioned on the "list". Had us all worried for a second.
I call it a Hawking Hole
Video could have done with a grey hoodie or maybe a ukulele? Now that I think about it you didn't fake cry at all! Worst apology ever!
I do appreciate the correction though. That video was the first I saw on Medlife Crisis 2 and the comments pointing out your error had me leaving with a bit of a bad taste in my mouth but a correction video really does work for me. I get that if you're a politician you're probably better off never admitting your mistakes but as a science communicator a correction is definitely the much better call, in my opinion.
Just remove the "not" from the previous title and you should be good to go
Haha good idea
I think I'm prouder of this interaction than I am of my graduate degree
The madlad actually did it! @@medlife2
"looked at wikipedia, read through the top links isn't proper researching"?? that was the entire source for my masters thesis :|
Lol - I am a biologist (turned med student) and my immediate response to your video was “wow, that’s amazing”… Though I did intend to actually look into the paper. It’s really easy for anyone, even people within that field, to get carried away with the exciting implications of something well before one looks into whether it’s actually true.
That was so fast, we didn't have the time to spread your BS. Well done!
I think there's value in having this error and correction, rather than having correct information from the outset, which in this case would mean no video at all.
1) I wouldn't have learned about the significance of this type of discovery and research area, and why it's important for understanding the emergence of life.
2) You explained where and how you erred, as well as what could go wrong with this type of paper and how corrections are published.
3) Content creators seem to almost never issue corrections, which I think is actually shameful, while making a correction shouldn't be.
I like the frequent, lower effort, short form content. It's nice to have something low commitment to listen to (will you upload to your podcast?) With the departure of Tom Scott, there's an even bigger void of interesting things to learn about on a regular schedule. I'd imagine the long form content also keeps raising the bar, until you have a Michael Reeves upload schedule.
Really well put, couldn't agree more!
I can guarantee however that a lot of people will see the error video, and never the correction though, it's only good if you see both
True. Perhaps he should reupload, tacking this onto the original....
props to you for following up on this, and for how quick youve been. Im kinda confused as to how you noticed it was wrong, because i myself saw the original video and left a comment about it, and there were already a lot explaining how it was wrong but i guess its not that important anyway.
whatever, its great that you do realise how it went wrong and why and that you care not to spread misinformation, thank you! good luck with whatever comes next :)
It’s just to do with how the TH-cam studio app works, you have to switch accounts which I forgot to do as I haven’t used this account so much, so I saw the comments on the main channel first (I subsequently saw some people mention the error under the original video when I came to upload this one…anyway, all’s well that ends well and thank you for pointing it out!)
@@medlife2 understandable, had no idea how this worked, never been on the posting side of yt.
This is why you're one of my favourite TH-camrs and quite possibly my favourite science communicator
And congrats on having a successful kid you can live your failed dreams through ;)
Looking forward to lots more videos from you :)
This was a long errata corrige
bro i didn’t even know you had a second channel
This is what the real apology should be for! Why didn't we know about this channel earlier, Rohin?! >:( (Glad to find it now though! :D )
You made another good point about scientific journals. Most are obscure, poorly edited, and out of the "view" of search engines. One professor of mine once said that a poorly titled paper is the fast track to obscurity. Also most biologists have more love of the field then income. Journals are $$$ and usually require university libraries with with wealthy benefactors to keep up. Many hours spent going through 3X5 index cards. So called search engines, and their over rated cousin AI, don't put in the funding for this type of content. Or require $$$ subscriptions...
You know, I haven't been recommended anything from your main channel in about a year, and now I get recommended this 😅
My mom made a Mistake also. At least that what she tells me
thanks so much for making this correction
I do appreciate the built in subtitles, or more particularly that "no, I've not been inappropriate with fans or flogging" - - "supplements" - cause, that "flogging" was left hanging a bit too long... 😶😂 (oh 'you do you'... 'each to their own' etc etc - & yes, yes, flogging supplements, _flogging supplements_ ) - sorry I am easily amused, and this amused me.
That is o.k. Rohin. I enjoyed thinking about your subject. I certainly forgive you. Please keep doing what your are doing.
Commenting to take away the "first" from everyone else.
First reply!
Just to mention, there is some debate about this paper in the talk page of the Wikipedia article. It's complicated, and interesting!
This is devastating. Almost as much as when I found out you CAN lick your elbow, but it's definitely not worth it
Do not besmirch this house with lies. That’s my job.
Interestingly, both TikTok and TH-cam autogenerated captions seem to think that "cursory searching" in an English accent is "curs(e) researching".
I'm glad Rohin posted both of these videos, I think I learned more than if he hadn't posted either.
Unfortunately some people of the main channel also watch your short video's.
So now your entire credibility is ruined! 😛
I personally can handle a bit of misinformation and I am glad you handled it well. Everyone can make a mistake but not everyone can admit to it.
So you learned a valuable lesson and you told us right away. That is good. Integrity is of the utmost importance.
For us as viewers: keep an open mind but be aware that anybody can make a mistake.
(As long as it is not being on Epsteins list.)
I had not seen it but I was taught this is how science works… more research in order to check findings… so it never stands still…
Lol on the auto subtitles... "I did some curse research" 😂
yeah, this is why I always *watch* as well as listen - so many awesome bits like this
Thank you for doing this video! You have saved me from looking the fool at my next party attendance. 🍸
(Also, you may want to do some research on the Dunning-Kruger paper. It doesn't claim what most people think it claims, ironically. 😅)
My main takeaway from this is that you don't read the comments on your second channel.
We all learned so much from this video... Actually a great video! We learned about science, about biology, about influencers (yes you are), about people and your son's backhand.
I was only here to learn about his son's backhand. The rest was filler.
He's good from behind.
Yes, that was a fine backhand compliment, wasn't it.....
Very helpful. Thanks. No shame in making a mistake.
Ukulele and singing "Cleaning windows" would make my day. ;) Thanks for informing your viewers!
To err is human, but we all know a cardiologist is not human so is this some elaborate ruse?
Thanks for the correction.
Sigh at start, grey jumper....+2
Not sitting on ground or mention of your lawyers advising you not to post...-2
good effort, try harder next time!
just play the damn ukulele already and all will be fine
All I hear is that making a misinformed video is better than making no video!
How wrong can you be when the original researcher isn’t sure what they found.😅
one of the most pleasant internet voices to hear and listen. Camera objective was hugely distorting
Thank you!! Also amazing that youtube gave me the follow up after I watched the original. And, the original was interesting, but this followup caused me to subscribe.
Welcome to the insane asylum; Im sure you'll enjoy your stay!
🤭
We all do!!
😁😂🤣🤣🤣
I thought that video was a little sketchy. Just kidding, but I wondered why I had not heard any more on the subject previously. Thanks!
tired: cursory searching
wired: curse researching
It was still cool to hear about. I wonder if we are the product of contamination....
That…. Doesn’t make any sense and isn’t how hypotheses work
Thanks for being honest. I for one love your content and your approach.
Although I would have thought there might be other primordial structures in the procaryotic cell like cillia. Thanks again for iniciting my thoughts.
Please return the Guybrush Threepwood poster to the back wall ☠️🎮 🐒🏝️
Doing your due diligence pays. It turns out after all these years that mitochondria are not the powerhouse of the cell as I had foolishly believed, but in fact they are the rumpus room of the cell.
That....actually, that explains a LOT....
Meh. I was just so pleased to discover that you're a Nick Lane fanboy.
One vote here for the ukulele.
I'd rather hear these tidbits from you than some random all-topic popsci youtuber like WATOP because at least you have the integrity to correct mistakes, and in this case you seem to have received your info from a credible source. A pinned comment with the correction would suffice I think going forward at least for me - it's not a biggie. I used to be subscribed to many of these aforementioned popsci channels - but I tend to unsubscribe when they make an aggregious mistake and especially if they don't correct it years on - these channels tended to have a very similar format and presentation style. Links to sources and further reading are nonexistent - probably because they don't want you to see that they just read a huffington post article out word for word.
You made a severe and continuous lapse in your judgement 😢
Thanks for the update. But also, while mitochondria are thought to be the first endosymbiotic event, they're not the only one: chloroplasts are likely from a second endosymbiosis event.
Endosymbiosis has probably occurred several times, but this isn’t surprising once eukaryotes has evolved phagocytosis. It’s not clear, but many things that chloroplasts post date this stage, so less remarkable. Hence why in the first video I said mitochondria represent “the only time this has happened to a prokaryote”, which, as that finding is probably not true, remains the case!
So no clickbait was clickbait after all. Ironic. Happens!
Original title has been edited to reflect this! It now marks it as clickbait 😂
@@medlife2 ah, honest marketing! I like it.