ORDER OF THE SCIENCE SCOUTS OF EXEMPLARY REPUTE AND ABOVE AVERAGE PHYSIQUE

since i received the email accepting me into the order, i have been like a school girl who just got asked to the prom by the high school football team quarterback [yeah i know...poor analogy...i was excited, lets just leave it at that]

i mean this is my kind of group here is what the group is:

For the propagation of an ideal where science communicators can meet firstly, for drinks; secondly, for communicating; and ultimately, for networking.

and member's are:

- not opposed to alcohol.

- fond of IPCC reports (especially the pictures).

- mostly in agreement with the “truth.”

- into badges.

- grieving for the slow and miserable death of the Hubble Space Telescope.

- possibly possessed of supernatural powers.

- not in the business of total world domination

- committed to the constant and diligent presentation of science stories, be it to editors, producers, directors, educators, relatives and/or friends of various ilk, in an effort to lessen the gap that is this thing we call public scientific literacy.

seriously, come on, what isn't awesome about any of the above [nerd, yes i know]


but the best part of being in the order is the badges!

ORDER OF THE SCIENCE SCOUTS OF EXEMPLARY REPUTE AND ABOVE AVERAGE PHYSIQUE: the official badge

The “talking science” badge: if you know me you get this one

The “MacGyver” badge: i have used lab supplies more than once, for uses other than what they should be used for...mostly to escape from meetings with PIs

The “I blog about science” badge: um what they hell are you reading?

The “I’m pretty confident around an open flame” badge: don't question my bunsen burner competence

The “inappropriate nocturnal use of lab equipment in the name of alternative science experimentation / communication” badge: all i have to say is that when you are doing an experiment at 2am some things seem much cooler than they are

The “destroyer of quackery” badge: wanna to debate creationism?

The “sexing up science” badge: crossing and prokaryotic conjugation studies, i have done, but science is already sexy enough...isn't it? actually wait...don't answer that.

The “I can be a prick when it comes to science” badge: debate me regarding something i am passionate about...you'll see

The “has frozen stuff just to see what happens” badge (LEVEL I): yeah since i was 5

The “has frozen stuff just to see what happens” badge (LEVEL II): dry ice freezes stuff so much faster and all i have to say is sublimation

The “has frozen stuff just to see what happens” badge (LEVEL III): liquid nitrogen might be the reason i became a scientist...seriously...no really

The “I work with way too much radioactivity, and yet still no discernable superpowers yet” badge: radioactive uptake assay anyone?

The “I’ve done science with no conceivable practical application” badge: this one depends on your definition of practical, but i worked with humic acid...thats right you have no idea what that is!

The “I know what a tadpole is” badge: yes i do, plus it looks like sperm and i only know how to collect sperm from one other species [sea urchin] so i can get The “knows how to collect semen from more than one species” badge yet.

The “cloner” badge: i am a biochemist...nuh said.

The “totally digs highly exothermic reactions” badge: i like to blow things up...don't hold that against me

The “science has forced me to seek medical attention” badge: see above badge

The “statistical linear regression” badge: actually that looks like a gaussian distribution

The “I’ve set fire to stuff” badge (LEVEL I): fire is fun to play with

The “I’ve set fire to stuff” badge (LEVEL II): fire is fun to play with and there are rules to how it works [combustion principles]

The “I’ve set fire to stuff” badge (LEVEL III): fire is fun to play with and there are more rules to how it works [thermodynamic principles]

The “I’ve set fire to stuff” badge (LEVEL IV): see the exothermic reaction and medical attention badge

The “works with acids” badge: the easiest badge i achieved

The “has done science whilst under the influence” badge: normally late on fridays

The “what I do for science dictates my having to wash my hands before I use the toilet” badge: i am not touching my stuff with my hands after touching what i was just touching

so there it is...the badges that i am awarding myself!

so to everyone who has ever called me a geek or nerd...yeah i got nothing now...

Stumble It!  Subscribe in a reader

6 freaking months...so sad right now...

so David Ng of The Science Creative Quarterly and The World's Fair fame wrote a piece entitled: "Hypothetical question of the day: How long do you figure your post graduate degree would've actually taken if everything you did, worked?."

needless to say i am extremely depressed with his results.

Several years back, myself and some colleagues (all in the molecular biology genre) had a discussion about this over some drinks. Specifically, we tried to calculate how long our doctorates would have actually taken, if we assumed that all the experiments we did in our theses worked right off the bat. Always with the first time success, reproducible results in triplicate no problemo, no troubleshooting required, or literally, a case where we had "magic fingers" for the entire length of our graduate career.

And so, if we assumed that taking courses was not factored in, and that we would have about 3 months to actually write up the damn thing, we all agreed that our Ph.D. would have taken somewhere in the 6 month range to complete. 6 freakin' months!

Anyway, in the end, I took just over 5 years, which means for the 3 months or so of "thesis bound" results, there also existed about 54 months of "non-thesis" bound results. And that is like a 5% success rate - which ultimately means that, really, you just have to work one day every three or so weeks, and as long as you pick the right day, you'll still get your degree in the normal length of time.

so this means that in my 5years of graduate school career [i hope?] about 3 months will be the actual work that gets me my PhD, awesome, freaking awesome...

i love how in science this is completely accepted...can you imagine another career in which a 5% success rate is allowed?



"i am sorry we only deliver 5% of babies successfully."

"i am sorry i only win 5% of my cases."

"i am sorry i only make 5% of my customer's meals."

"i am sorry only 5% of my products work."

"i am sorry only 5% of my buildings stay standing."

"i am sorry only 5% of my students graduate."



oh science, i don't know if this is why i love thee or hate thee...well actually it depends if it is a "magic fingers" day or not!

well here's to 54 months of crap intertwined with 3 months of genius...yay grad school!

Stumble It!  Subscribe in a reader

academia and industry; what about the grad students

Gershom Edwin Samuel wrote a great article over at The Science Creative Quarterly about the interface between academia and industry [ACADEMIA-INDUSTRY - ALLIANCE AT WHAT COST?]. in it he discusses the implications of the fusion of these two cultures and the benefits and risks for each.

Samuel brings up some interesting points such as the key differences between the two cultures:

In the academic world, there is a traditional rule; for career advancement (to obtain tenure and receive full professorship), one has to secure research grants and publish papers. Thus, the old saying “publish or perish” is a reality...In contrast, for pharmaceutical industry, the vital thing is the new-drug application to the FDA. A journal article is worth nothing without the FDA approval. However, publication in prestigious journals along with FDA approval is just like icing on the cake that would influence physicians to prescribe the company’s product. (Bodenheimer, 2000)

he also talks about disclosure, conflict of interest, and the "JAMA Fiasco:"

The lead author — Lee Cohen, director of Massachusetts General Hospital’s Center for Women’s Mental Health, is a consultant to three antidepressant manufacturers, a paid speaker for seven of them and has his research work funded by four drug makers. None of those ties were reported in the study. Dr Cohen and his colleagues maintained that it was not relevant to disclose their ties with industry in the paper in part because the study was funded by the government, not drug maker (Armstrong, 2006). Such incidents ruin the academia’s reputation as independent truth seeker and reduce public trust in research. Henceforth, more often questions will be raised on integrity of research, researchers and science journals.

one key point regarding the fusion of industry and academia that Samuel doesn't talk about is the rock and the hard place that graduate students can be put in.

for example, if there is a discovery by a graduate student, which greatly benefits the company that is funding the work, the company will most likely not want the data published, for then it becomes part of the public domain and more importantly available to competitors. the PI might have signed a contract before the work was started, stating that the work will not be published for three years if the company feels that it has future implications for monetary gain, but what about the grad student?

this poor student busted their ass trying to get results just to have them withheld from being published because industry funded their work. since in most grad programs publications are what get you out faster and determine where you get a post doc or job after finishing your PhD this student's career may be damaged before it begins since their current and any future work on this project is no longer publishable. never mind the fact that three years is half of the time you are in grad school and about three quarters of the time you are actually working on your thesis project.

in the simplest terms, the grad student is being punished for doing good science.

i do understand the monetary crunch and how funding via industry can be beneficial to both the PI and the company, but i plead with the PIs out there, who do accept funding from industry, to think about your grad students and make sure that if you put someone on an industry based project, that it will be amicable to their career as well as yours.

Stumble It!  Subscribe in a reader