I think your comment is spot-on, except for one sentence: > It’s an understandable problem — if you are a biologist, you want to think about biology, not stati

I think your comment is spot-on, except for one sentence: > It’s an understandable problem — if you are a biologist, you want to think about biology, not statistics and most biology work doesn’t require math so it appeals to the scientifically-minded that dislike math and programming. I think you are being polite, but what on earth does scientifically-minded mean when math is elided from it? When it comes to biology or medicine the information sources tend to be very wishy washy on average, but tend to be illuminated crystal clear in settings of systems biology (which is basically mathematical models in the context of biology), where simplifying assumptions aren't hidden in a wall of text, and the effects of ignoring terms become clear. If you pay attention you can find non-systems biology descriptions of supposedly unexplained phenomena or interactions for further investigation that are entirely explained long before in systems biology texts... > most biology work doesn’t require math The proof of the pudding is in the tasting, not the high-school experience of what a field should continue to look like in higher education.