Where are the real doctors?

Read this on the BBC.

What do these people get paid for?
But I guess it won't show up on an X-ray, and maybe the kid had a wonky ear canal that made it difficult to see inside (BTW, I have a rather straight ear canal, according to a doc who saw it).

And I kinda like the kid's response.

Don't patronize me

I'm a foreigner, working in an English society, where my language of work(place) is English. I speak English very well thank you, and I have a mid-Atlantic accent. No one has complained of not being able to understand my spoken English.

Anyway, when I get tired and lazy, I start making mistakes in the grammer.
I mix up my prepositions.
I know it is lazy, and it's because I can't be bothered to think about the correct one. There is also an assumption that the person listening to me, will be able to understand what I mean, even if the preposition is incorrect. I mean, most people can understand what another native speaker is saying, even if the preposition is incorrect. One preposition does not make a wrong sentence.

And nothing makes me more infuriated, than people who actually point them out to me (with a snicker of laughter). It might be funny for them, and something to pull one's leg, but it. is. not. funny.

It is patronizing. It smacks of English superiority. Especially when it comes from a non-scientist, but that is an aside. Scientists should know better than to make fun of foreigners (especially moi, who can speak it well), when a higher percentage of the workforce is made up of foreigners than the national average (okay, maybe that's not true anymore in the UK).

This patronizing attitude is something I am very sensitive about, because of how I grew up. You know, a Jack of all trades - being sort of fluent in two languages, but not a master of either one.

And, no one has the right to be treated like that just on the basis of language. I think the UK is very good about it, all across the board (of class, I may add), probably because it has a history of immigrants. But they do tend to be more patient.

But some assholes that irritate me immensely...

Scary!

I was trawling through the blogosphere and came across this post in Dr.Shellie's blog. I was reading through the comment from the particular reader, and...I'm appalled.
I have to applaud Dr.Shellie's response though.

So many points about the comment makes me worried.

(1) This is a parent, looking for a Ph.D. studentship for his/her daughter.
Um, whatever happened to free will for the child? Shouldn't a child of (I'm guessing) age 22 or over be able to decide on where and what to do for Ph.D. herself? As a person who has been through a Ph.D., and have seen a few quit, I don't think a strong parental pressure (or expectation) is good for the child. It's a good few years of slogging and hard-work. It takes at least three years (usually four) in the UK, where you can get a Ph.D. pretty fast. Across the pond, I hear it's longer.

(2) The person is looking for a female PI for his/her daughter, in a male-dominated field.
That's sexist. Just because the PI is female doesn't necessarily mean that she'll play the "girl club" game and be sympathetic to a female student. And male PIs can be just as (or even better than) female PIs. I don't think gender has anything to do with how good a mentor a PI can be. And it's dangerous to decide like that. Personality, yes. Gender, let's not go there.
On top of that, as a parent, if you have that kind of biased attitude, doesn't that give a bad example to your kid?

(3) The afore-mentioned field is in fact, life sciences.
The last time I checked, in a life sciences department, there ratio of male to female students tend to be around one. Yes, hard to imagine to the outside world, but it is more close to one than two. Maybe not biochemical engineering, but life sciences with no engineering components? I don't think it is male-dominated.
Now, even if the parent is talking about the number of female PIs to male PIs, I still think life sciences have a "fairer" ratio than any engineering.

(4) And the daughter has a biochemical engineering/biology degree.
What kind of "life sciences" is the daughter exactly interested in? Life sciences is a wide wide field. I don't think a biochemical engineering degree is a bad thing per se, just that life sciences is a big, all-encompassing net.

(5) The daughter wants to do "meaningful" research.
What-ever (readers, can you sense that I am getting frustrated with this?). What does meaningful mean anyway? Curing cancer? I automatically think "disease related!" because that grabs headlines (and money). And cancer is not an easy target.
Anyway, any research, is meaningful to the student. It has to be.

(6) The daughter can get letters of recommendations from foreign researchers who are difficult to reach.
It's the 21st century. All researchers, if in an academic institution, will have e-mail. Email is the way to go. And if not, I am sure you (the parent) can cough up a few dollars for an international phone call. Or fax. Or courier.


Man, I was shocked to read the comment, I tell you. And more shocked that this was a parent of a prospective Ph.D. student, let alone an undergraduate...

Serial or parallel?

DrugMonkey makes a good point on my previous post. It got me thinking about multi-tasking.

When you are a PhD student, you don't need to do a lot of multi-tasking. Oh, and I don't include doing three experiments in one go, as multi-tasking. The closest a student gets to is, say, doing experiments and writing an abstract for a poster at a conference. Most PIs I have known actually allow students to have writing time for reports (of course, writing a thesis involves a lot more effort so having writing up time is obvious), and also some time for writing a paper, if the student actually gets to write any of it at all.
But all involving (typically) one project. The sequence of events and deadlines are mostly linear, and despite hearing the PhD student readers objecting, I don't think it is hard to schedule that.

When you get to a postdoc level, you have to step up. You are typically involved in more than one project, even if there is a major and minor projects. You might have a student to look after (in my case, when I did, I spent quite a lot of time, effort, and vocal chord health for the student. Talking takes so much energy...). Your supervisor might dump you to write an abstract, some kind of short paragraph for a grant he is writing, take part in interviews (i.e. show the applicants around and "chat" to them). And not only do you not have a rought idea according to the academic calender when they will happen, they might not tell you before hand about it.

You also should be looking out for yourself. It is up to you to find fellowships, go to interesting seminars, keep up to date with journals, if you haven't gotten into the habit already.

And you should realise that things don't happen in an instant. You do not get the results of your actions quickly. So you have to keep going, and change tack everytime you get new information.

Where is this all leading, regards to DM's comment? Well, I totally agree that it is a mistake for that postdoc to think that one paper will change everything. It will not, and for a person with his experience (two postdocs!), he really should know better.
If you were a student, you might think that one paper will change everything - and it might, especially if it is your first paper. But a postdoc on his second contract? Uh-oh. People might question having a paper "submitted" on your CV, but is it worth stalling an application for?
Stalling anything for the sake of one paper, is not productive. And especially nowadays, when it might take (gasp) a year for the final manuscript to get accepted (from the initial idea), it is not efficient use of your time to wait for that one paper.


BTW, I didn't learn this all by myself. I was watching how my two postdoc supervisors dealt with things, and that is what I noticed. You can't wait until you know for sure, or get the correct info, or get that last result. You just start it rolling, do as much as you can, and if things change, you change your plan with it. I think it is far more productive and less stressful for you.
Personally, I get set in my ways. I need to remind myself to keep the flow going, and that nothing is concrete. It goes against me sometimes, but it is for the better if I flow with it.

To go with that, is another rule - never say "I'll do that in more detail later". That's a cardinal sin. Seeing my ex-boss, who is a very busy man with his finger in more pies than you can imagine, every moment is important and has to count for something. So when he has a chance to read, edit, write a paper, he gives it his full concentration.
That is also something I have had to learn too, as I've often not had that kind of pressure on my time. There was always "later". But doing things later, is such a waste of time. Why do it twice when you can do it once?

In other news...

I hold a morbid curiousity about major, mutli-billion dollar frauds carried out by (supposedly) one person. FT.com has kindly written a timeline of corporate fraud scandals (not all done by one person).

I remember the "Mr. Five Percent" - I really could not imagine what it was like to actually garner that much power single-handedly in the market. Anyway, follow the Wikipedia link for a more detailed look at what went on behind the scenes.
And the Mizuho bank "incident" in 2005 was the funniest one I read. I couldn't believe it when I saw it in the news. I know it's not funny, but if you think about it, and for an outsider like me, it is.

In fact, my morbid curiousity does serve its purpose for me - it did make me interested in the financial markets and economics. Actually, I f%&king hated any human sciences in school, and out of principle never took classes in economics or business studies. I always held the idea that natural sciences are better, because there are no fluctuation in rules and laws due to human nature, and there is always one answer.
As I got older, I have become a bit soft, and have begun to think that economics is like a science that man built. There are certain rules that the market follow, but is not exact, because it involves humans.

Same old, same old

Went in to (ex-)work again today, to work on the paper. This time, it's going somewhere else, and before X'mas I reformatted everything to go to that journal (Journal B). During X'mas, ex-boss read it through, thought about it, and actually re-edited bits so that it made a more coherent story. So I went back today, checked the text (edited long sentences to shorter ones, put bits in, checked spelling), re-did bits of the figure legends, jigged the figs a bit, and sent it back to him before his business trip tomorrow.

Also asked about my new job/contract, which now has to be checked by the Finance Minister. Anyways, all good news. Maybe I'll get a paycheck in the next two months.

Single word journal titles

I think I read about it in another blog somewhere, sometime ago, but can't remember. Well, I was wondering how ludicrous sounding a single word journal title is. Not including Nature or Science, which, if you were a 10-year old you would think that it was the thickness of Yellow Pages.

I have to admit, I always always always got confused between the Royal Society of Chemistry titles. You know, the Faraday, Dalton and Perkin Transactions (I see that the Perkin is now defunct).
Snickering at Anal. Biochem. didn't last long either. Neither did laughing at the Proc. Natl. Acad. Science USA, or P-NAS, for short.

I used to work in a medical school, and their library had quite an assortment of journal titles. You know, when browsing (yes, browsing, something people don't do anymore) around the "current titles" shelf, you can find some pretty interesting journal titles.

Now, the medical titles with medical names don't count. Things like Urology, or Ophthalmology, or even Cancer. I'm talking about the gungho, one-word, look-at-me and gape journal titles.

The Foot. (which I found by doing a Google search)
The Breast. (person working in breast cancer told me)
Blood. (found it in the medical library)

But my favourite is Gut.

There is no other journal titles out there that can remotely compete with the three letter, kick-ass ness of that journal title. I think it has a more than respectable impact factor too. It has history, since it was launched in 1960. I like that.

Um, thanks.

Re-reading my previous post (I do that to check that it reads okay, even after publishing. Maybe I'm narcissistic or something), I want to talk about something.

Google Searches.

I don't mind people finding my site through them, and if they read some of my ramblings before heading off to better written blogs, fine. But do you know how they get here? Half the time, they get here on searches which have to do with
(1) PhDs - are they worth it?
(2) stressed postdocs
(3) my boss sucks
(4) being a scientist sucks

(and say, 20% of the time on actual scientific topics, and 30% on random scientific stuff like barrycidal)

They somehow all radiate negative ideas about a being a scientist. Maybe my blog radiates scientific hate. I'm not sure how many of these people revisits my site.


Oh, and also....I have sorted out the outdated links on the right hand side. And on a side note, there is a reason for having baseball blogs at the top of the list for interesting blogs. All science and no play makes for a boring human being.

History of a plasmid

I once asked someone in the US for some plasmids. He dutifully sent me the (correct) plasmids, with full maps, plus the photo of the cut plasmids run out on an agarose gel.


My boss and I were amused and a little saddened when we read the accompanying email, which detailed how all these plasmids (which were published a few years ago when the person was in another lab) perished with Hurricane Katrina when he was working in New Orleans. And that in his new lab (not in Louisiana) he had to make everything from scratch. Including the inserts...

Bloggers anonymous

Taken from PropterDoc, I shall expand on my take on the blog, blogging, being a blogger, and pseudonyms. Not in that order.

The question of using your real name or a pseudonym is a perplexing one to me.

Firstly...I don't know whether this is a Japanese thing, but writing under pseudonyms is not an uncommon thing. Many Japanese writers do it. Dazai Osamu, Edogawa Ranpo and even Mishima Yukio did it. Probably not because they don't want to reveal their identity, but more that it was common (e.g.) in Haiku circles to have a "writer's name", or for painters to have a "painter's name". Maybe their real names didn't particularly sound catchy. Oh, and modern writers do it too, like Hase Seishuu and Kyougoku Natsuhiko.

In the net world, it is more common to use pseudonyms anyway.

I used to have a website, which I ran under a pseudonym. I used to have a diary on that site, which detailed things like movies I saw, random thoughts, what music was good etc. Then I closed the site.
When I decided to go for a more open type of diary, blogging, in a sense that you have no control of anyone who is watching, anonymity and using pseudonyms was a no-brainer. If it is a diary, it will be a personal recollection of your life - so to me, it doesn't make sense to advertise who you are. And for me, it is a way of building a boundary to what is accessible or allowed, and what is not.

I also made the decision then not to publish any photos or pictures. Again, this is to ensure anonymity. I have heard of people who were "stalked" because they were publishing photos of their environment, even if they used pseudonyms. Better to be safe than sorry.

This blog started out (and still is) a venting blog, primarily for myself, because when something or someone bugs me, I ruminate on it for ages unless I get it out of my system (by the way of this blog). It still is a venting blog (if and when I work!).
I don't have a high readership according to my site stats, and that's probably because I don't blog particularly about science, more on a scientist's life (exactly as it says on the tin!!). So a person who visits, and re-visits this blog, will be a person interested in a scientist's life, and not the science the scientist carry out. Or, according to Google Search terms, people who are unsure about a PhD, or are dissatisfied with their postdoc position.
And maybe you understand and appreciate my warped sense of the world and sarcastic sense of humour.


I think the only time when I mentioned what I do, was when I said I was going to a conference in Boston, and actually linked to the conference page.

Anyway, you'd be bored if I blogged about my science. My scientific life (when there was one) is really not that interesting. I do lots of westerns. I do a bit of molecular biology (i.e. use plasmids, cut them, etc). I culture cells. That's about it. People around the labs are far more interesting than what my cells get up to before being lysed.

I don't have a delusion that my life is interesting, but I think that I have a few interesting and/or controversial things to say. Like I support capital punishment.
It's nice to get hits. It's nice to know from the comments that some people find my posts funny and entertaining. But my science certainly isn't that interesting; it was in a niche corner. I certainly won't be making noises about curing cancer in a broadsheet.

Okey dokey, rant over.

Ring of fire, ring of death

I'm a (casual) gamer (whatever that means). And I hate Microsoft, or the idea that they ventured into the console world, so I will happily stick with my PlayStation3 and Wii, and just shrug at all the talk of MasterChef. Sorry, Chief.

So I was feeling smug when I saw this over at Kotaku, the source of all gossip and rumours weird and wonderful in the world of gaming, regarding the Red Ring of Death on the Xbox 360. And then went on to read the actual story.
Interesting reading.

One of my friends who owns a Xbox 360, bought a Sony laptop, and as soon as the laptop was delivered to his home, the Xbox died. Now that was funny.

To go or not to go - Part 2

I noticed that DrugMonkey has mentioned my previous post in his post, and I thought I'll update this little topic.

Recently I had a chance to catch up with the said postdoc.

Apparently the PI is going to try and come back part-time in the next month, although he might be feeling weak and not really worried too much about work (fair enough).
I asked the postdoc what he is up to lately, and he is happy with how the work is going. Results are coming through, and is interesting. He is also going to a week-long workshop soon, and that should be good - it would help him with his current project.
His contract is ending this summer. So I asked him whether he was planning on applying (or have applied already) for fellowships. His answer was that he really needed to concentrate on the paper (which would include the results that he is getting at the moment), and that he had no time.

Okaaaaay. I see a problem already.


I can understand that writing a paper is important.

But a person in his position, with his amount of experience (it is his second postdoc he is doing at the moment), should be able to set aside some time to at least think about a fellowship. I don't know whether he thinks he won't be eligible for the majority of fellowships because of his age, but still, I think he should be looking around for it.
His project centres around a particular protein - a protein that hasn't been studied in detail (e.g. like p53). He could easily write a grant proposal. I mean, I worked on my small niche corner of a particular protein X, and I could see that from the work I had done, I could write a grant proposal (even if it is only for an RA or a PhD student). You do two postdocs, and you will be able to come up with some interesting ideas. Hell, it doesn't even have to be a concrete idea. Just extending your own project enough, that the PI can suggest ways to extend it further.
And even if it doesn't get funded after application, at least you tried.
The little experience I have in writing manuscripts tell me that results are a fickle thing. They are like buses - the come all at once, or you wait ages for the next one. And also, that once you write it and submit, the reviewers will come back to you with more. There is always more work, and it always takes longer to finish off a paper and see it accepted.
So rather than focussing his mind 100% on the single manuscript, he could spend a little less time worrying about a single paper, and more on hedging bets for the future, especially with his end of contract looming close. Half a year is never a long time, especially when deadlines are concerned.

He also mentioned that he really needs this paper for his publication record. And that he needs the paper before he can apply for fellowships.
But is one paper going to make that much of a difference? He isn't a PhD student, whose publication record may be not-so-long, and who may be desperate for that first, first-author paper. To me, he doesn't have the luxury of time. If he waits until this paper is published, then apply for a fellowship, it can be months before he sees any grants for himself.


This postdoc wants to be a PI, and thinks he is intelligent and hard-working enough to be one.
If I was in his position, with that kind of ambition (i.e. be a PI), I think I would be working during the weekends to try and write a grant proposal or a fellowship. But I'm not, so I am sitting here blogging with a cup of coffee.

Back with a vengeance

Went in to (ex-) lab the other day, to remind my (ex-) boss "I'm still around, hey, what's happening" and to chat (i.e. gossip) with other people. Actually, I couldn't wait to get the gossip. You see, GorrillaGrrrl was back from her never-ending maternity leave. And I so wanted to hear what she was going to be like.

(To fill you in, GorrilaGrrrl is a female PI who has a history of treating male lab workers like shit, dumping all her problems on female PhD students, and whinging and whining about how terrible her life is. All this when she has a 6-figure house, a partner who is a Prof (and he only relocated because they gave her a position too), a baby she has been longing for (which apparently he wasn't so keen on, oh yeah, he isn't keen on marrying her either), and took a year of maternity leave. During which her email account was actually inactivated (so you can infer that she really was not doing any kind of work).)

I couldn't get hold of the BLT (Brilliant Lab Tech) so I settled for Mr.Strauss. And he did not disappoint me. Apparently, the first thing she did was to complain that she didn't have an office, and that no one moved her stuff from the old cold room (which is to be demolished) to the new cold room (down the corridor).
So predictable.
Anyway, you would think that she has no right to complain if she went AWOL. I know, for a fact, that she couldn't be reached, because I emailed her in a CC email once. And it bounced back, which means either (1) account was closed, or (2 - and more likely) account was full of crap mail.

Also, exactly who did she think was going to help her? She currently has NO ONE working for her. No student, no postdoc, no tech, and the lone bench space that was allocated to her student is now a storage space of all the things she didn't store away.
She even expected out BLT to do all the dirty work. And you know, our BLT is helpful if you are nice. But no one is going to help you if you send an arsey email demanding that they do the job. This is already sounding like the typical Type II PI over at YFS.

Ah, I am so looking forward to going back!

Things that make me think

I went for a drink with the Fly Boys (and the Poodle) the other day, and left feeling a little irritated by a few things. This is mainly because I am older and wiser, and know to let people who I don't get along, be themselves. They don't.

We ended up talking about the boyfriend of J.D. (ex-colleague). He is older - divorced with a kid, probably a bit bitter about life, definitely sarcastic. And they were telling me how he is such a depressing, bitter, irritating, guy. I said I can't agree, because all my dealings with him have been short, maybe not-so-sweet, but not bad enough to put him in the shit-pile.

The whole topic of conversation was how at a party, JD's boyfriend did not endear himself to anyone else.

Anyway, I was sitting there, trying to put light on things - he is older, and there are times when you don't feel like even putting in effort to try and talk to a naive 20-something, who are intelligent (and knows it), self-centred, self-righteous, blinkered people, who are not used to dealing with people who are not like them.

Hell, I sometimes feel like not talking to the Fly Boys, because I feel like that.

And the Fly Boys, especially the Bear, have a real problem with that.

Picture this. You are at a partner's party, all the 20-something as mentioned above. You are, say, mid-40's, seen it and heard it all, and you are only there because of your partner. If that was me, I will act differently - I would probably try and engage with them, to make myself less miserable. But that is me. Maybe this person doesn't need to do that.

And this was what I was trying to tell the Bear. And he just didn't get it.

His point was that, if he was the only person trying to talk to this guy, in a group of people who were ignoring him, he expects him to give back some of the courtesy.
I was telling him that, if it was you, you would have done that. But he is not you. He has a different personality. So you can't say that he "should" have treated you in such a way.

You have to understand that the Bear is a bit of a sports jock. He likes being part of a team, and he likes to think he is doing a service by being friends with even the most despicable human. So for him, this boyfriend dude giving him the shift was not acceptable (hence he had to brand him inhuman).

Anyway, the thing is - in a group of 5 people, all of them agreed with the Bear, and not one actually stopped to think about it.
This is a bullying mentality.
And I hate it.
These are people with (or studying for) a PhD. And they gang up on someone who has more experience, and probably a more interesting life than them? And they don't quesiton it?

I remember J said something like that a while ago, that these people are in a group, and they have this group mentality, that the Bear leads (subconsciously I think, because he is happy to lead, and the others are submissive). That's not bad, but can you not stop and think about it yourself, and come to your own conclustion, instead of worrying if you are outside of the group's way of thinking?
Sad.

Can we have one too?

I was reading this article about how the Red Sox treat their top prospects. Note especially about two-thirds down, they actually advise young athletes on how to treat clubhouse attendants and hotel workers. And that left me wondering if we could have something similar for new Ph.D. students.
You know, show them things like

(1) treat cleaners, technicians and store personnel with respect,
(2) do your rota without complaining. You can complain when you are a postdoc, not a student,
(3) how to mentally prepare for the upcoming year (concentrate, keep your head down, work hard),
(4) how to deal with criticism (a.k.a. Boston baseball equivalent of the media).

If only...

More on baseball...

The fabulous guys over at Surviving Grady has a 2007 version of the "Unused Audio Commentary". This series actually started in 2004, when it was between Tony LaRussa and Tito.

BTW, I don't really keep up to date with all the winter transactions that goes on.
But I did note that Oakland was having a garage sale (of sorts). Swisher, Kotsay, Scutaro, Haren are gone. All the name that became synonymous with the post-Zito era, have left. The last time such a big sweep happened was, I guess, when Zito, Hudson and Mulder left (okay, and Tejada too). I'm guessing they are or are to be free agents within the next year.
I've got no problem with Billy Beane doing that. I've read "Moneyball". But it hurts to see all the eye candies disappear so quickly. At least they still have Chavvy.

Another thing. I can't believe that Mirabelli is back with the Red Sox with his totally abysmal average. So, as long as Tim Wakefield can throw, it seems Mirabelli is going to get a paycheck. I hope he sent Wake a card or something. A masseur might be good, since Wakefield turns 42 this year.
From the Red Sox point of view, it makes sense. Rather than having a new catcher to collect 10 passed balls in the first handful of games, have a decent catcher with terrible batting averages. Only for Timmy.

Okay, baseball rant over. I feel happy now.

Will we remember you?

I was reading this over at the ESPN website, and was curious to see Rheal Cormier's name (it's about a third of the way down. It's alphabetical, so you'll get to him sooner rather than later).
Who he, you may ask. Well, I remember Cormier from his Red Sox days. Probably only because they (Joe Morgan and Jon Miller, ESPN Sunday Baseball broadcast team) kept on talking about how he chops wood during the off-season to keep fit. Don't ask.
I guess he was that typical southpaw one-batter reliever, durable because he was a lefty and a reliever. I hear it's his left shoulder is giving him problems, and judging from the stats and age (like, he's 41 this year) I think he will stay retired (unlike a certain Hebrew Hammer).

And I am a sucker for that French Canadian twang. Eric Gagne, anyone? (though apparently Cormier is Acadian while Gagne is Quebecois- but it is Wikipedia. And I thought Cormier had American citizenship now)

Anyway, I think I'll have to add Mike Philbrick's name on to my all-time favourite baseball journalists. BTW, I'm a fan of Rob Neyer, Jim Caple and Jayson Stark (or should I say, used to be. I am not going to pay subscription to ESPN just to fulfil my Neyeristic fantasies). I like to enjoy reading baseball columns. No, I am definitely no Bill James.

Kids will be kids

Reading a post over at PropterDoc made me think about the difference (or lack of) between the Universities here in the UK and across the pond. Please go and read the post, as well as the comments. It is interesting reading.

With regards to University life, I think uni life in the UK is becoming more and more Americanized, or similar to #3 over in PropterDoc's post. Students dress more to impress (rather than to study), fraternizing between students (something medics are especially good at) are more common even in non-medicine degrees. You know that universities have changed when every girl dresses like Nicole Richie.
Listening in to these student's conversations on the bus, they suffer from delusion of grandeur of their life. Seriously, people who are paying council tax to the city don't want to know that you "spent the weekend at the cottage my daddy has in xxx", or that your boyfriend is "soooo boring". They don't want to know how much money you are probably going to make in the first year out of Uni.
Every September and every open day we have, I see little brats walking around with their over-protective parents. Apparently, this helicopter parents are common nowadays. You can tell they are well off, middle-class kids, because of the number of Chelsea tractors that clog up our roads every start of the academic year. And they never speak with a local accent.

Okay, I'm ranting.

But the point is, all this probably wasn't that common 15 years ago. I used to see this kind of behaviour in University culture in Japan, sure. But I didn't see it as much when I came here to the UK to study for my Bachelor's.

I think it all changed over here when the government introduced new Universities, then tuition fees.

The whole idea behind introducing new University was stupid anyway - it was a cheap and easy way for the government to increase the number of graduates. I don't think increasing the number of Universities overnight is the way to do it. It's cheating.
And then, the introduction of fees came in. I don't think tuition fees is a bad idea per se (the execution of it could be better). It's just that the pervasive culture towards education in England does not make it easy for Universities to justify having tuition fees.
In a country where so many people are used to having higher education for free, having suddenly to pay for it makes it seem like it is a "service" or a "diploma" you are buying, especially in the recent climate (i.e. post-Thatcherite era). Parents and children want the best deal from the University. And that is the mentality nowadays - I'm paying, so I want xxx (certain services, value for money etc).
Students and their parents expect to be treated like customers, that they pay for certain goods. The pathetic thing, is that education at graduate level, is now like another A-level. There is no serious philosophical thought behind it.
The University isn't helping either by talking about "customer service" (that's student services to most people), and pretending that it is run like a company (but with no audit, and no share-holders to answer to). Personally, I don't believe in running higher education institutions as a public company. You can run to minimize waste (of money, resources), but that doesn't mean you have to buy into the corporate ideals, that the higher-ups are so keen to embrace.

The introduction of New Universities, I think, diluted the prestige of a University education (and also made it more available).
Then the introduction of fees, made a Bachelor's degree into something you can "buy".

Bah, I'm tired now. Rant over.
...And anyway, after writing all of that, I realised that when I did my degree (in Chemistry), I shared a course with a girl who failed her A-level Maths.
Yes, failed Maths.
For a Physical Sciences degree.
Maybe the slide was happening already.

It tastes good...part 2

I forgot in the previous post due to some late-night bloggage, but the reason I was wondering about de-ionized, double distilled, whateveryouwanttocallit very very pure water, is because I was wondering if the reduction in resistivity of pure water would have any effect on how the tongue recognizes the taste. What does an 18 megaohm-er taste like?
We all know that tap water tastes funny. London tap water is foul, the tap water from my house now is drinkable, my family home's tap water is yummy (it's in the countryside and the water is plentiful). So what does pure water taste like?

See, I don't write about random things all the time.
There is some scientific thought behind it.

It tastes good...

Reading this over at PropterDoc's, I was wondering. I was gonna comment, but thought it was off-topic over there, so here it is.

Has anyone drunk de-ionized water?
What does it taste like?
You know, that one that comes off the second still (it does go through a distillation step first, doesn't it, to get rid of most of the crap). You know, the one you use for enzymatic reactions. The one you can actually use for RNA work.

You know what? I have a 45ml aliquot of pure water I bought from Sigma (DNAse RNAse free) in my secret stash freezer at work. I might go get that one soon, so I can try it. It can't be that bad for you, right? I mean, it's water.

On a similar note, has anyone drunk/tasted PBS?
DMEM (that's Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium)?
RPMI?
(I'm assuming if it is okay for cells, it can't be that toxic for a human.)

What's so hard?

Reading the most recent entry in Pipeline, and combining with my thoughts from a career seminar, I was wondering - why do young people in academia show an allergic reaction to capitalism?

Okay, so I guess I am a little older and a little wiser than most PhD students. Money helps, and without it, you can't do much.
Students nowadays go through a PhD system that is a joke, three years of lab work and an instamatic PhD with no thought process required. Lecturers who are interested in coaxing as much money as possible from grant funders, usually who focus on a particular disease - but for projects which are hardly going to cure any disease. Universities pressurizing PIs to ask for more money for overhead costs, which the grant funder don't (and shouldn't) fund.

All this and you are still bullshitting me about how academia is "pure"?
That working in industry constraints your "freedom"?

See, that's funny. Surely if you have a clear aim, short-term and long-term, it makes for a more efficient worker. And if you are rewarded for achieving your objectives; if you are rewarded well, is there anything wrong with it?
It's not like you don't think creatively and innovatively if you work in a company - it might allow for more flexibility and freedom within certain constraints (time or money or both). What else could be easier than to work for someone whose goal is crystal clear (i.e. make money for the shareholders)?

And also, why criticize pharmaceuticals when they spend a lot of money on advertising? They are in it for the money. Why would they be doing what they are doing if they don't get anything out of it?

Questions, questions...

Unexpected

I was genuinely surprised that Mick Huckabee won the Republican Iowa caucuses.
I don't have an even remotely good grasp of American politics, but I thought he was, like, low-ish in popularity. I only noticed him because he sounds like a movie, and he lost a lot of weight.

Okay, this is Iowa (whatever that means), but still.
And Fred Thompson came in third. Okaaaay........

Fruit fly video

Thanks to the Fly Boys, who introduced me to this video. I saw them watching it, and it kinda looked like they were looking at porn. At work. Anyway, that's them Fly Boys for you. Getting kicks outta science, and flies at that. But I never knew you could use a yellow tip as a straight jacket.

On a note, here is the site where you can watch experimental videos. I think this site, SciVee, is more famous, but it ain't got the Drosophila straight jacket vid...

To go or not to go

It got me thinking the other day, about an acquaintance of mine...who is a postdoc working for a PI who is on extensive medical leave. The PI's story is a tragic one, and the extended medical leave is due to a few surgical operations. I don't think the PI will be back anytime soon - so soon that PhD students who were advised by him, have been transferred onto another PI to look after.

Now, he has a PhD student of his own, as well as a postdoc. The PhD student, I think, will be okay - he has collaborators who will help her, and I think the PI will try and take care of her (and I mean, let's face it, it's a legal requirement nowadays to NOT leave a student in a lurch). The problem for me, is the position of the postdoc.
The postdoc needs to have a good publication in this position, if he wants to be a PI in a good institute. He needs to apply for fellowships and stuff. And I don't see how he can do that without the PI being there. I know you can do without it, but I think it is very helpful for the PI to give you ideas, to read stuff, suggest ways of writing a fellowship that will get you what you want. I think, if the PI was around, he would help his postdoc write a good fellowship and maybe even keep him there.

But the problem is that now, the postdoc is on a free reign. That shows the amount of trust the PI has in him, but is it good for the postdoc? I mean the PI has a more pressing stress on him; and he is already a PI. But for the person trying to make it as a lecturer?
Thinking about manipulation here now, if the postdoc stays and shows his solidarity, the PI might think about extending his contract. But he doesn't have any postdoc positions open - and won't be for a while, since he isn't writing any new grants at the moment.

So this opens up a question.
To leave or not to leave.

I am sure the PI will not hold anything against the postdoc for leaving - how can he? I know him to be a decent person, and as far as I know, he isn't vindictive.
As for the postdoc... I don't think he realises that this particular situation is not good for him. I don't think he has the capability of churning out decent work without his boss, and I certainly don't think he has enough work to publish.

Now, if he leaves, that means he has left a good year of work down the drain. He might leave with a reputation of being a quitter.


What would you do?
What would I do if I was in a similar position?
That would depend on my age, I think. If I was in my first postdoc, I think I might just jump ship. There is nothing to be gained as a postdoc from being in a lab alone (without much experience, I might add) without any supervision or help.
Now, if that had happened last year, I probably would have stayed on until the end of my contract. That means I would still get my hands on the statutory redundancy pay (which you get at the end of your contract, when you leave), keep a good relationship with PI, and also, my conscience would be clean.
I think personally, I would like to hang around and keep the PI's group together (however tenuous). I might even use the time to do some stuff on my own - no supervision means you can do whatever the hell you like with your time!

Happy New Year!

So the 12 days of holiday for normal people is over, and everyone is back to work. What were we doing on New Years Eve and all? Well, playing Portal of course! (For those of you not in the know, Portal is one of five games in the "Orange Box", a game for PS3 which includes Half-life 2, HL2 episode 1, HL2 episode 2 and Team Fortress 2. Portal and Team Fortress 2 has nothing to do with Half-Life 2).
And once you finish playing Portal, you have this nice little song, called "Still Alive", sung by the female voiced computer (GLaDOS) as the credits roll....and it's such a pretty song.

It was written by Jonathan Coulton, and is sung by Ellen McLain (the voice of GLaDOS). The lyrics are here in Coulton's blog. I guess I like the song, not just for the music but because of the lyrics too. Very geeky, and the science bit appeals to me. The cake, too.
From the website of people behind the game, Valve, you can buy the soundtrack. I'd actually like that poster of the cake they bake you.

Portal is a great game, and the Orange Box is highly recommended if only for that game. The geeks will like that, and online gamers will enjoy the daftness of Team Fortress 2. I haven't played Half-Life 2 so I can't comment yet.
But now, back to beating the shit out of amateurs in Warhawk for me. There is something so satisfying in knowing that my online opponents are mostly men, getting their asses whipped by moi, a lady. Mwahahahahaha!!!!!