JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - South Africa's benchmark index ended slightly lower on Tuesday as a pull-back in some of the strongest performers this year cancelled out a rebound in recently beaten-down mining shares.
Investors also refrained from making aggressive bets at the start of the U.S. earnings season.
The blue-chip JSE Top-40 index inched down 0.16 percent to 33,930.95 points after setting a 2013 low of 33,774.82 during the session. The wider JSE All-share index edged down 0.11 percent to 38,540.81.
"We are seeing a bit of a sell-off on some of the shares that have actually been holding up nicely this year," said Ferdi Heyneke, a portfolio manager at Afrifocus Securities.
"At the same time, some can see value in mining shares because they have been hit quite a lot this year."
Global brewer SABMiller, one of the four best-performing stocks on the benchmark index this year, lost 2.5 percent.
Private hospital group Mediclinic retreated 1.87 percent to 63 rand, paring this year's gains to just under 15 percent.
Mining shares restricted the downside momentum, boosted by higher commodity prices and Chinese data suggesting sustained demand from the world's biggest consumer of industrial metals.
Base metals producer Assore, the second-worst blue chip performer this year, jumped 7.03 percent to 293 rand.
Gold Fields, the worst blue chip performer year-to-date with a near one-third drop, climbed 5.28 percent to 67.61 rand.
Elsewhere, Tsogo Sun surged 6.08 percent to 25.99 rand after the hotel and casino operator said it would invest $83 million expanding its two flagship casinos.
Here are some things I am doing to lose 30lbs and become healthy! I will be on a 30 day fitness challenge that will progress into a 60 day fitness challenge!?
BEIJING (AP) ? A Chinese pigeon association has decided to temporarily stop racing the prized birds, while advising members to keep their pets caged for up to two months to try to prevent infection with a bird flu virus that has recently been found in people for the first time.
The Hangzhou Carrier Pigeon Association said Monday it will also inoculate up to 90,000 pigeons with a vaccine that protects against types of bird flu other than the new H7N9 strain, since no vaccine exists for it yet. It was unclear what vaccine they would use, and the Xinhua News Agency quoted a pigeon association member as saying the move was primarily meant to ease public concern.
Raising carrier pigeons, also called homing pigeons, is a popular hobby among Chinese.
Pigeons became a source of worry after live birds in Shanghai were found infected with the H7N9 strain. At least 24 people have been sickened by it, and seven have died since the first cases were announced just over a week ago.
The H7N9 virus is believed to circulate in poultry stocks without sickening birds, making it harder for experts to identify and eliminate outbreaks in birds. However, experts say there is no evidence that the virus is spreading from person to person.
Shanghai and the capital cities of neighboring provinces Zhejiang and Jiangsu, which have all reported H7N9 cases, have halted the sale of live poultry. Shanghai also slaughtered all fowl at a market where the virus was detected in pigeons being sold for meat.
McConnell (ABC OTUS News)Liberal news website Mother Jones on Tuesday morning published audio from a private February discussion between Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and aides about the Kentucky Republican's 2014 re-election campaign and potential Democratic challenger Ashley Judd.
The audio and transcripts?billed as a "secret tape" by Washington Bureau chief David Corn?show the McConnell camp discussing how to use the actress' religious beliefs and history of depression against her in a potential campaign.
Judd announced March 27 that she would not be a candidate for the Senate, citing family obligations.
But how did the website get its hands on the audio?
McConnell's team believes the tape was obtained illegally and has asked the FBI to investigate.
"Senator McConnell?s campaign is working with the FBI and has notified the local U.S. Attorney in Louisville, per FBI request, about these recordings," Jesse Benton, McConnell's campaign manager, said in a statement. "Obviously a recording device of some kind was placed in Senator McConnell?s campaign office without consent. By whom and how that was accomplished presumably will be the subject of a criminal investigation.?
Benton added, "We?ve always said the Left would stop at nothing to attack Sen. McConnell, but Watergate-style tactics to bug campaign headquarters are above and beyond."
Mother Jones didn't immediately respond to Yahoo News' requests for comment. During the discussion of Judd's mental health on the tape, one individual said, "She's clearly, this sounds extreme, but she is emotionally unbalanced. I mean it's been documented. Jesse can go in chapter and verse from her autobiography about, you know, she's suffered some suicidal tendencies. She was hospitalized for 42 days when she had a mental breakdown in the '90s.
The group also poked fun at a reference Judd made about St. Francis, a revered Catholic saint, and other religious statements.
During the 2012 presidential campaign, Mother Jones also famously revealed secretly recorded comments made by Republican hopeful Mitt Romney where he said 47 percent of Americans were dependent on government and refused to take "personal responsibility" for their lives. Romney later apologized.
We were unable to forward you to the advertisement you clicked on.
The likely cause for this is that your browser, feed reader, or email application is configured to not accept cookies, or your reader may launch an external browser to view links without sharing cookies.
If you're using Internet Explorer, make sure your privacy setting is at medium or below.
Select 'Internet Options' from the 'Tools' menu in your browser window
Click the Privacy tab
Adjust your privacy setting if necessary ?
If you're using a reader that embeds Internet Explorer (examples: Microsoft Outlook, Outlook Express, Feed Demon), you'll also need to select Internet Explorer as your default web browser.
Open Internet Explorer
Select 'Internet Options' from the 'Tools' menu in your browser window
Click the 'Programs' tab and check the box for Internet Explorer to check if it is the default browser and save your change
Close your browser, re-open it, and when prompted, select Internet Explorer as your default
You can then click on an ad in your newsletter and visit the site you wish to view
Reliability of neuroscience research questionedPublic release date: 10-Apr-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Philippa Walker philippa.walker@bristol.ac.uk 44-117-928-7777 University of Bristol
New research has questioned the reliability of neuroscience studies, saying that conclusions could be misleading due to small sample sizes.
A team led by academics from the University of Bristol reviewed 48 articles on neuroscience meta-analysis which were published in 2011 and concluded that most had an average power of around 20 per cent a finding which means the chance of the average study discovering the effect being investigated is only one in five.
The paper, being published in Nature Reviews Neuroscience today [10 April], reveals that small, low-powered studies are 'endemic' in neuroscience, producing unreliable research which is inefficient and wasteful.
It focuses on how low statistical power caused by low sample size of studies, small effects being investigated, or both can be misleading and produce more false scientific claims than high-powered studies.
It also illustrates how low power reduces a study's ability to detect any effects, and shows that when discoveries are claimed, they are more likely to be false or misleading.
The paper claims there is substantial evidence that a large proportion of research published in scientific literature may be unreliable as a consequence.
Another consequence is that the findings are overestimated because smaller studies consistently give more positive results than larger studies. This was found to be the case for studies using a diverse range of methods, including brain imaging, genetics and animal studies.
Kate Button, from the School of Social and Community Medicine, and Marcus Munaf, from the School of Experimental Psychology, led a team of researchers from Stanford University, the University of Virginia and the University of Oxford.
She said: "There's a lot of interest at the moment in improving the reliability of science. We looked at neuroscience literature and found that, on average, studies had only around a 20 per cent chance of detecting the effects they were investigating, even if the effects are real. This has two important implications - many studies lack the ability to give definitive answers to the questions they are testing, and many claimed findings are likely to be incorrect or unreliable."
The study concludes that improving the standard of results in neuroscience, and enabling them to be more easily reproduced, is a key priority and requires attention to well-established methodological principles.
It recommends that existing scientific practices can be improved with small changes or additions to methodologies, such as acknowledging any limitations in the interpretation of results; disclosing methods and findings transparently; and working collaboratively to increase the total sample size and power.
###
Paper
'Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience' by Katherine Button, John Ioannidis, Claire Mokrysz, Brian Nosek, Jonathan Flint, Emma Robinson and Marcus Munafo in Nature Reviews Neuroscience.
For further information, please contact Philippa Walker in the University of Bristol's Press Office on 0117 928 7777 or philippa.walker@bristol.ac.uk
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Reliability of neuroscience research questionedPublic release date: 10-Apr-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Philippa Walker philippa.walker@bristol.ac.uk 44-117-928-7777 University of Bristol
New research has questioned the reliability of neuroscience studies, saying that conclusions could be misleading due to small sample sizes.
A team led by academics from the University of Bristol reviewed 48 articles on neuroscience meta-analysis which were published in 2011 and concluded that most had an average power of around 20 per cent a finding which means the chance of the average study discovering the effect being investigated is only one in five.
The paper, being published in Nature Reviews Neuroscience today [10 April], reveals that small, low-powered studies are 'endemic' in neuroscience, producing unreliable research which is inefficient and wasteful.
It focuses on how low statistical power caused by low sample size of studies, small effects being investigated, or both can be misleading and produce more false scientific claims than high-powered studies.
It also illustrates how low power reduces a study's ability to detect any effects, and shows that when discoveries are claimed, they are more likely to be false or misleading.
The paper claims there is substantial evidence that a large proportion of research published in scientific literature may be unreliable as a consequence.
Another consequence is that the findings are overestimated because smaller studies consistently give more positive results than larger studies. This was found to be the case for studies using a diverse range of methods, including brain imaging, genetics and animal studies.
Kate Button, from the School of Social and Community Medicine, and Marcus Munaf, from the School of Experimental Psychology, led a team of researchers from Stanford University, the University of Virginia and the University of Oxford.
She said: "There's a lot of interest at the moment in improving the reliability of science. We looked at neuroscience literature and found that, on average, studies had only around a 20 per cent chance of detecting the effects they were investigating, even if the effects are real. This has two important implications - many studies lack the ability to give definitive answers to the questions they are testing, and many claimed findings are likely to be incorrect or unreliable."
The study concludes that improving the standard of results in neuroscience, and enabling them to be more easily reproduced, is a key priority and requires attention to well-established methodological principles.
It recommends that existing scientific practices can be improved with small changes or additions to methodologies, such as acknowledging any limitations in the interpretation of results; disclosing methods and findings transparently; and working collaboratively to increase the total sample size and power.
###
Paper
'Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience' by Katherine Button, John Ioannidis, Claire Mokrysz, Brian Nosek, Jonathan Flint, Emma Robinson and Marcus Munafo in Nature Reviews Neuroscience.
For further information, please contact Philippa Walker in the University of Bristol's Press Office on 0117 928 7777 or philippa.walker@bristol.ac.uk
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](http://www.eurekalert.org/images/back2e.gif){kind=small}
Public release date: 10-Apr-2013
Share ] 
