Did it seriously rain like an reenactment of Noah's arc yesterday? Because the sky is very, very blue today.
The rose from a couple weeks ago appear to have finally recovered! There're new leaves and everything.
20100228
20100222
Whoa baby whaaa?
I found a lot of interesting things today and my mind was reeling to the point where I accidentally dumped a container of CDs on my head of all things, while in lab, before giving myself a paper cut that is currently making it hard for me to type. (Then again, it wouldn't be the first time I bled all over my keyboard. It's less damaging, at least, than getting coke all over the keyboard.)
On rare occasions I feel brilliant. Most of the days I still feel like an idiot.
I should start with the worry hovering over the entire lab all of last week: Wendy's fine! Actually she came in today and did two hours of mouse work in the vivarium. I spent some time explaining that most people in her condition would be home, resting. She pointed out that since her baby (boy, born late last Wednesday) has to stay in the hospital for a few months, she doesn't have to take her maternity leave until the baby comes home and so in the mean while she can try to get all her stuff down so she can graduate. I explained that people usually go from hospital rest to home rest before going to work. She pointed out that since the baby's early she recovered fairly quickly, that there's nothing she can do at home except sleep (which, isn't that the point of rest?), and that she has mouse embryos to dissect tomorrow, and genotyping to do. I...just.... Well, at least she seems fine, despite of the massive amount of bruising on her arm from the IV (she has small veins; I can sympathize). She showed me the tag they put on her. Apparently baby-stealing is a common enough problem that they tag the parent and tag the baby right after birth and if you take the baby outside of the door it'll beep -- the door, not the baby. Like an errant library book or, as Wendy pointed out, a shirt from the store.
I had an odd mental image of babies with barcodes stamped on them. (Why not? I've been tagged with something that DID have a barcode on it before.)
So right. Next up is something that I found out about the recruitment process of grad school! Our recruitment weekend ended Saturday evening, everyone flew out at different times Sunday (or really late Saturday night). Around late Sunday I got an email (which I didn't read until this morning) asking me to a) give some feedback on the weekend and what can be changed for the better, in terms of organization &c. and b) review / rate my recruit.
I felt very twitchy the entire time I was filling out the form, and not just because the name of my recruit happened to be "Anna". I was asked to rank the acceptance (from high priority to low priority to don't accept), as well as to describe the strength and weaknesses of the recruit (e.g. communication skills, interest in research &c.) along with anything exceptional (and I have no idea what's considered exceptional). Somehow I suspect all the PIs that had interviews are also asked to fill out these forms (which makes me wonder how they can fill it out, considering that most of them didn't give us the time to talk during interviews at all) ("quiet", "relatively quiet", "managed to squeeze in one question", "fell asleep"?). Right after this, we were asked to send a nice email to our recruits (after all, we are trying to "recruit" them) to conclude this entire thing. On one hand I'm pretty sure my classmates and I will not be putting anyone in the "don't accept" category (unless you really are psycho and talking to you has made us fear for our lives -- in that case we don't want you in SD, we want you as far away as possible). On the other hand, I do feel that since the job of the hosts are to take the recruits out, talk to them, and show them around in a nice, relaxed atmosphere, is it really fair to rate this interaction as one would an interview?
This bothers me.
Thirdly. The collaborator that I've just spent a month and a half waiting for and committing academic stalking via email for (yeah the one who never answers his email or if he does, never includes the information I need, such as his protocol index) gave me all the information I needed today, in under two minutes, because I got so fed up that I went and called him instead of sending him increasingly more frantic emails. He was very nice over the phone and even gave me his cell phone number (I called his lab, figuring that someone there must know where he is, and he picked up) in case I need to reach him again. And then the rest of the paperwork for animal transfer was submitted in under fifteen minutes, approved right after lunch, and ready to go by five pm.
I waited a month and a half for this.
People are truly complex and so very, very, annoying.
Though now this means I might have more behavioral data in a few months, finally, and that's kind of exciting.
I had "The War of 1812" by the Arrogant Worms stuck in my head today, for no apparently reason. It was a little disconcerting to keep catching myself singing the chorus part under my breath while I was cutting my cryostat sections (how is it that I use three different types of razors, two types of tweezers, and three types of surgical scissors regularly, and still manage to injure myself with a sheet of paper, by the way?). Considering the lyrics, I wonder if someone might mistake me for a terrorist at some point and try to report me. Well, if I suddenly disappear off of the face of the earth you guys will know what happened.
On rare occasions I feel brilliant. Most of the days I still feel like an idiot.
I should start with the worry hovering over the entire lab all of last week: Wendy's fine! Actually she came in today and did two hours of mouse work in the vivarium. I spent some time explaining that most people in her condition would be home, resting. She pointed out that since her baby (boy, born late last Wednesday) has to stay in the hospital for a few months, she doesn't have to take her maternity leave until the baby comes home and so in the mean while she can try to get all her stuff down so she can graduate. I explained that people usually go from hospital rest to home rest before going to work. She pointed out that since the baby's early she recovered fairly quickly, that there's nothing she can do at home except sleep (which, isn't that the point of rest?), and that she has mouse embryos to dissect tomorrow, and genotyping to do. I...just.... Well, at least she seems fine, despite of the massive amount of bruising on her arm from the IV (she has small veins; I can sympathize). She showed me the tag they put on her. Apparently baby-stealing is a common enough problem that they tag the parent and tag the baby right after birth and if you take the baby outside of the door it'll beep -- the door, not the baby. Like an errant library book or, as Wendy pointed out, a shirt from the store.
I had an odd mental image of babies with barcodes stamped on them. (Why not? I've been tagged with something that DID have a barcode on it before.)
So right. Next up is something that I found out about the recruitment process of grad school! Our recruitment weekend ended Saturday evening, everyone flew out at different times Sunday (or really late Saturday night). Around late Sunday I got an email (which I didn't read until this morning) asking me to a) give some feedback on the weekend and what can be changed for the better, in terms of organization &c. and b) review / rate my recruit.
I felt very twitchy the entire time I was filling out the form, and not just because the name of my recruit happened to be "Anna". I was asked to rank the acceptance (from high priority to low priority to don't accept), as well as to describe the strength and weaknesses of the recruit (e.g. communication skills, interest in research &c.) along with anything exceptional (and I have no idea what's considered exceptional). Somehow I suspect all the PIs that had interviews are also asked to fill out these forms (which makes me wonder how they can fill it out, considering that most of them didn't give us the time to talk during interviews at all) ("quiet", "relatively quiet", "managed to squeeze in one question", "fell asleep"?). Right after this, we were asked to send a nice email to our recruits (after all, we are trying to "recruit" them) to conclude this entire thing. On one hand I'm pretty sure my classmates and I will not be putting anyone in the "don't accept" category (unless you really are psycho and talking to you has made us fear for our lives -- in that case we don't want you in SD, we want you as far away as possible). On the other hand, I do feel that since the job of the hosts are to take the recruits out, talk to them, and show them around in a nice, relaxed atmosphere, is it really fair to rate this interaction as one would an interview?
This bothers me.
Thirdly. The collaborator that I've just spent a month and a half waiting for and committing academic stalking via email for (yeah the one who never answers his email or if he does, never includes the information I need, such as his protocol index) gave me all the information I needed today, in under two minutes, because I got so fed up that I went and called him instead of sending him increasingly more frantic emails. He was very nice over the phone and even gave me his cell phone number (I called his lab, figuring that someone there must know where he is, and he picked up) in case I need to reach him again. And then the rest of the paperwork for animal transfer was submitted in under fifteen minutes, approved right after lunch, and ready to go by five pm.
I waited a month and a half for this.
People are truly complex and so very, very, annoying.
Though now this means I might have more behavioral data in a few months, finally, and that's kind of exciting.
I had "The War of 1812" by the Arrogant Worms stuck in my head today, for no apparently reason. It was a little disconcerting to keep catching myself singing the chorus part under my breath while I was cutting my cryostat sections (how is it that I use three different types of razors, two types of tweezers, and three types of surgical scissors regularly, and still manage to injure myself with a sheet of paper, by the way?). Considering the lyrics, I wonder if someone might mistake me for a terrorist at some point and try to report me. Well, if I suddenly disappear off of the face of the earth you guys will know what happened.
20100220
Huh, there goes another week
The quality of food from Costco always surprises me because I'd think that it's, well, Costco. The giant stacks of boxes of socks and soap are not exactly what anyone would associate with gourmet. Yet somehow there're pretty good stuff there. My recent discovery is their Belgian chocolate cups, especially the dark chocolate ones. (Which reminds me to note that I finally remembered to try that chocolate soda that Lucy brought over the last weekend and it tastes like carbonated chocolate milk. It's...unsettling. I think I might just let it set out until all the CO2 goes so I can pretend it's chocolate milk.) (Yes it's still slightly carbonated, even after a week. Impressive, isn't it?)
The night with my recruit went well. We had, against all odds, things in common, such as being one of the few applicants of our year who hasn't obtained our bachelor's and liking Neil Gaiman's work. We went out for Thai food and I warned her that it might rain, because SD always rains on recruitment weekend. This turned out to be true, but at least the rain was this morning, and brief, so that most of the outdoor events that were planned for Friday and Saturday should've gone fine.
In fact, that evening went so well that when I got the desperate email asking for the hosts to volunteer a second time since we have over 40 people coming the second weekend, I agreed to host another student.
The interviews with the PIs were on Friday, so I got to see my PI as well as one of the neighboring PIs wander past with the recruits (recognizable by their red-bordered name tags). Afterwards when I asked my PI how the interviews went, he commented that all the students had potential, but since this is recruitment he couldn't really ask them any of the hard questions. (There you go, Anna, apparently the PIs have some sort of unspoken codes of conduct for recruitment weekends.) Of course immediately after this comment I had a moment of incriminating doubt about my PI, because somehow the comment made me recall with horror every single oral exam I've ever had to take and I didn't really expected that from him. Then I realized I couldn't actually remember him ever asking me really hard questions. Therefore it's possible that either he was really desperate for a grad student when I joined (Wendy's graduating, once a PI's lab has emptied of grad student it'll be harder for him/her to get another one -- admittedly not as hard as a PI who's never had a grad student), or that he was joking. The jury's still out on this one.
We still haven't heard anything from Wendy yet (and by "we" I'm referring to my labmates and I). I've talked to one of her friend on Wednesday and was informed that she was fine. However, then we got an email from her husband saying how the baby could be expected any day now. Six months is so much shorter than what it should be. Admittedly modern medicine has gotten very good with premature births and one month ahead of time is almost guaranteed to be problem free, but even so.... It's not even six, to be honest. It's five and some.
My labmates and I are currently in the habits of crossing our fingers at each other when we talk about this. I feel like I should be crossing my fingers now but that would impede typing.
Parents are coming today. I cannot stop them. It should be nice and awkward.
The night with my recruit went well. We had, against all odds, things in common, such as being one of the few applicants of our year who hasn't obtained our bachelor's and liking Neil Gaiman's work. We went out for Thai food and I warned her that it might rain, because SD always rains on recruitment weekend. This turned out to be true, but at least the rain was this morning, and brief, so that most of the outdoor events that were planned for Friday and Saturday should've gone fine.
In fact, that evening went so well that when I got the desperate email asking for the hosts to volunteer a second time since we have over 40 people coming the second weekend, I agreed to host another student.
The interviews with the PIs were on Friday, so I got to see my PI as well as one of the neighboring PIs wander past with the recruits (recognizable by their red-bordered name tags). Afterwards when I asked my PI how the interviews went, he commented that all the students had potential, but since this is recruitment he couldn't really ask them any of the hard questions. (There you go, Anna, apparently the PIs have some sort of unspoken codes of conduct for recruitment weekends.) Of course immediately after this comment I had a moment of incriminating doubt about my PI, because somehow the comment made me recall with horror every single oral exam I've ever had to take and I didn't really expected that from him. Then I realized I couldn't actually remember him ever asking me really hard questions. Therefore it's possible that either he was really desperate for a grad student when I joined (Wendy's graduating, once a PI's lab has emptied of grad student it'll be harder for him/her to get another one -- admittedly not as hard as a PI who's never had a grad student), or that he was joking. The jury's still out on this one.
We still haven't heard anything from Wendy yet (and by "we" I'm referring to my labmates and I). I've talked to one of her friend on Wednesday and was informed that she was fine. However, then we got an email from her husband saying how the baby could be expected any day now. Six months is so much shorter than what it should be. Admittedly modern medicine has gotten very good with premature births and one month ahead of time is almost guaranteed to be problem free, but even so.... It's not even six, to be honest. It's five and some.
My labmates and I are currently in the habits of crossing our fingers at each other when we talk about this. I feel like I should be crossing my fingers now but that would impede typing.
Parents are coming today. I cannot stop them. It should be nice and awkward.
20100218
...what happened?
This week has been fairly insane so far, despite of the fact that it's a short week. Well, short week by the standards of anyone not involved in graduate school. I spent Monday in lab, after all, as did many of my lab mates. Experiments to run, etc.
Wendy, my labmate, ended up in the hospital on Saturday. I found this out on Monday, when she called the lab while I was down in the vivarium. She went into contractions two and half months early and now they've got her on IV and enforced bed rest. Meanwhile the rest of us have taken to sending her massive amounts of email and plotting when will be a plausible time to sneak in to see her without causing her unnecessary stress. Oh and taking care of her mice. She has a lot of mice (currently I think almost half of the cages in our vivarium are hers). There's a collective air of "omigod I hope everything will be okay" going on at the lab right now. Add in the fact that Dorothy's taking the week off and we've just had a post-doc who'd left a few weeks ago, the lab seems very quiet and subdued this week.
I am picking up my recruit from the airport tonight. At some point I will blog about this, in the aftermath. Meanwhile I just want to note that some of my classmates tend to group together for these sort of thing (i.e. a couple hosts go out together with their recruit as a group), while I'm doing this one-on-one tonight. It is probably a good thing. One-on-one people tend to think that I'm weird, but can be fun to talk to. In a group setting all that people get from me is weird and quiet.
My parents still want to come this weekend. I should probably call them at some point.
I am WAY behind in updating my lab notebook.
And cryostat sectioning.
My life needs more tea at the moment.
Sunday was fine though. Sunday was FUN. Lucy and I went to the Wild Animal Park in SD, as I'm sure many of you have seen the photos for already. We tracked down flamingos, were wowed by the crazy creations of mother nature in the animal world, and fed birds. There was also a balloon safari that resembled a giant float grapefruit in the sky, which I've taken to use as my landmark for pinpointing directions while in the park. The native plants section of the park was a slight disappointment but, as Lusine had pointed out, the fact that they HAD a plant section is impressive (their conifer arboretum was quite good though, with streams and ferns and everything). And they had bonsai. I have no idea why but ...bonsai.
We also got to see the baby elephant that was born at 3am the day that we were there. Lucy claimed that she was going to "die from the cute". (He was a very large baby. Then again, she was a very large mother.) There was also a theatre proclaiming 4-D shows, which after much debate, we were forced to conclude that no time traveling was involved (such shame). I think they meant 3-D plus motion which okay, is 3-D plus an extra sensory so I guess they thought 3+1 = 4? Except this is like adding things on the Cartesian coordinates to imaginary numbers -- that's NOT how it works. If they're doing motion as one of the experiences, then the 3-D is purely visual effects which is ONE sensory input so it's really 1+1 =2. ...but anyway, much lolz was had.
We also saw a kid who reminded us of Zach, at the age of ...what? 7? 8? Despite of the fact that he was blond (oh so very irredeemably blond). At least the skinny pale boy in glasses part still fits, leading me to conclude that whatever people thought of Zach post-puberty, he was very cute as a kid.
Okay classes now.
Wendy, my labmate, ended up in the hospital on Saturday. I found this out on Monday, when she called the lab while I was down in the vivarium. She went into contractions two and half months early and now they've got her on IV and enforced bed rest. Meanwhile the rest of us have taken to sending her massive amounts of email and plotting when will be a plausible time to sneak in to see her without causing her unnecessary stress. Oh and taking care of her mice. She has a lot of mice (currently I think almost half of the cages in our vivarium are hers). There's a collective air of "omigod I hope everything will be okay" going on at the lab right now. Add in the fact that Dorothy's taking the week off and we've just had a post-doc who'd left a few weeks ago, the lab seems very quiet and subdued this week.
I am picking up my recruit from the airport tonight. At some point I will blog about this, in the aftermath. Meanwhile I just want to note that some of my classmates tend to group together for these sort of thing (i.e. a couple hosts go out together with their recruit as a group), while I'm doing this one-on-one tonight. It is probably a good thing. One-on-one people tend to think that I'm weird, but can be fun to talk to. In a group setting all that people get from me is weird and quiet.
My parents still want to come this weekend. I should probably call them at some point.
I am WAY behind in updating my lab notebook.
And cryostat sectioning.
My life needs more tea at the moment.
Sunday was fine though. Sunday was FUN. Lucy and I went to the Wild Animal Park in SD, as I'm sure many of you have seen the photos for already. We tracked down flamingos, were wowed by the crazy creations of mother nature in the animal world, and fed birds. There was also a balloon safari that resembled a giant float grapefruit in the sky, which I've taken to use as my landmark for pinpointing directions while in the park. The native plants section of the park was a slight disappointment but, as Lusine had pointed out, the fact that they HAD a plant section is impressive (their conifer arboretum was quite good though, with streams and ferns and everything). And they had bonsai. I have no idea why but ...bonsai.
We also got to see the baby elephant that was born at 3am the day that we were there. Lucy claimed that she was going to "die from the cute". (He was a very large baby. Then again, she was a very large mother.) There was also a theatre proclaiming 4-D shows, which after much debate, we were forced to conclude that no time traveling was involved (such shame). I think they meant 3-D plus motion which okay, is 3-D plus an extra sensory so I guess they thought 3+1 = 4? Except this is like adding things on the Cartesian coordinates to imaginary numbers -- that's NOT how it works. If they're doing motion as one of the experiences, then the 3-D is purely visual effects which is ONE sensory input so it's really 1+1 =2. ...but anyway, much lolz was had.
We also saw a kid who reminded us of Zach, at the age of ...what? 7? 8? Despite of the fact that he was blond (oh so very irredeemably blond). At least the skinny pale boy in glasses part still fits, leading me to conclude that whatever people thought of Zach post-puberty, he was very cute as a kid.
Okay classes now.
20100214
20100206
Don't make the apocalypse in a test tube, kids
Dude. Dude. I cannot believe that the word "biohacker" is currently being used. It is oddly applicable and all the more scary for it.
Before I denounce all and sundry I should point out that I am, in principle, not against the biohackers. I can see where they are coming from. The fact that you practically need a PhD and massive amounts of funding (millions of dollars, and I have no idea what the current ROR grant award rate is, so don't even ask)to do any kind of research in biology does bother me. I am all for a cheaper way of doing things and the fact that you can buy the same blender (Warring) from your local store that would costs something like ten times more to buy from a biology research tool&appliances catalogue is utterly ridiculous. It is a blender. It chops things. It's even made by the same company and has no differences in settings and motor voltage so why, people? Why?
(Our lab's microwave that we use for experiments probably comes from Fry's or something. It's cheaper.)
That's not even taken into account the PhD thing. Do you really need a doctorate in your field in order to do good science? Clearly not. Plenty of important discoveries were made by people who have never worked in a field that their knowledge contributed to. Dendrochronology is an example of someone contributing from a different field of science altogether. Lorenzo's Oil and, slightly less so, Something the Lord Made are both good stories (in movie format, even!) about people who are not PhDs who have made significant contribution. Having all that scientific knowledge wrapped up and kept under seal, away from the public, is in fact dangerous. It is the public, after all, who makes the decisions about policies. It is the public's voice, the collective "We" (no dystopia jokes please) whose voice is heard. Therefore isn't a little scary to think that about a third of America still doesn't believe in evolution? Uninformed public is dangerous, but what is more dangerous is a public that has been misinformed. In an age of internet and too much information, both accurate and inaccurate, floating around, is it really a good idea to keep what has been scientifically proven restricted to journals that only scientists would probably ever pay to subscribe to? I have somewhat more faith in humanity than Hobbes, but even so, considering what we are capable of doing right now in the field of biology, I think the imbalance of flow of information is getting to be too great. Something's gotta give. (Greener Than You Think is a satirical account of what could, in theory, happen when the scientific knowledge, for whatever reason, just failed to make it across to people -- a salesman in this case. I always wondered if it might've gone better of the biologist in that story managed to appeal to the salesman better and explained why he had to do things a certain way.)
(Which reminds me to mention again how wonderful PLoS is. Really. I love it. If I had more time I'd read more articles from it besides the ones the PI keeps on forwarding to me.)
Now my issue with biohackers (aha, you say, here it comes, but hear me out) is this. As with the original use of the word hackers in the field of computational sciences, the general public tends to lump the word "hacker" and "cracker" together when the two groups of people are in totally different camps. Similarly, with the ease of ordering and shipping (we get our DNAs Fedex'ed, I think people's worked out how to ship all kinds of things via Fedex now) I worry about the possibility of "biocrackers". I feel like I should remind people that unlike comp sci stuff, bio sci things can literally grow and multiply and take over the world. Anyone who's paid any attention at all to news must know of the possible issues people have with antibiotic resistance in bacteria, GMO, as well as the use of animal in research. All these issues arise from a time when the biologists can pretty much just do whatever they wanted, without having to go through protocol approval and acquisition paperwork. (The original discovery of allergy shots? The MD just went out there and injected volunteers. No prior testing on animals or approval of procedure by an elected committee.) Although these have resulted in a lot of awesome discoveries, they also lead to a lot of abuse and environmental dangers in the future. Who could've predicted the frequency that bacteria swap DNA with? The rapid rate that antibiotic resistance can be passed through all different strains? Who could've predicted that increasing yield in crops can also lead to out breeding and "superweeds?". Or those issues with pesticide? For all that I will grumble and complain about the song and dance we have to go through to get anything new done, I also agree that, to an extend, those procedures are necessary. Therefore, your local backyard biohacker, who does not have a protocol approved by a committee who will ask in detail about what happens in case of cross contamination, spills, and a plethora of possibly dangerous things that can go wrong, can in fact get into some serious trouble, not only for the biohacker but for everyone.
There is only one planet earth, people. (Maybe if I repeat this enough time some of the more recalcitrant folks out there will finally realize that their net income each year matters slightly less than the end of the world?)
So my issue is this: not the hacking, nor the backyard, but the fact that we have no way of knowing whether or not the hackers have had any training at all in dealing with research biology. Whether or not, for instance, they know the differences between biohazards level 0 to 3 and that you can't pour biological waste down the drain or into the trash -- there are rules with 10% bleach and 70% ethanol (now a controlled substance that we have to get our PI to sign in order to buy -- sometimes the safety committee can get overly zealous, yes), depending on what you've used, that apply. We don't know whether or not these hackers know that when you mix certain reagents, a small percentage of it can get aerosolized so the area that you work has to be contained -- all our labs have constant air filtering and are at a negative pressure so whenever we open the door, air is sucked into the lab, never out. We don't know even if these hackers know the basic protocols of what to do in case they spill acid or base and let's face it, theory is very different from reality. Back when I did my safety training the people used to tell stories of this poor guy from physics, who'd never done any lab work, and how he spilled acid on himself and how he then poured base on himself to try to neutralize it on his skin. (For the record, people: do not do that; go stand the affected area under the DI water immediately for 15 minutes instead, that way you might actually avoid third degree chemical burn.) What we need, in addition to possible background checks to make sure the person is a hacker and not a cracker, is this: some sort of system (I suspect it will have to be volunteer based because I cannot foresee a lot of the university committee people voluntarily going out to do this) to make sure that everyone can attend a standard safety training session the first time they order stuff to do biological research. It'll be fairly simple, containing information that can probably fit onto a small packet, but it will have to be a training session because people are more likely to pay some attention that way than if they were handed a packet that easily fits into a recycling bin. You don't need to be a professor to give that kind of training sessions -- anyone who's had any sort of lab experience at all can do it. They can get the packet. Or the powerpoint. Whatever. It will have to contain information such as what to do if you spill things on something / someone and why you must make sure you don't carry whatever critters you've made on your bench with you when you leave and accidentally unleash the apocalypse upon the world.
I'm exaggerating a little, of course. Organisms are surprisingly resilient. Even a doomsday scenario like the one in Oryx and Crake a few humans still made it through, and that was for something that's targeted against humans. So in reality a doomsday scenario will probably only result in decimation of humanity and lots of general difficulties such as lack of clean food, water, and hazmat suits.
So the second half of my title for today's entry is, in reality, "...but if you must, makes sure the tube is capped and you know what to do with it afterwards."
End rant.
Yeah, can you tell this has bothering me a lot since yesterday?
Before I denounce all and sundry I should point out that I am, in principle, not against the biohackers. I can see where they are coming from. The fact that you practically need a PhD and massive amounts of funding (millions of dollars, and I have no idea what the current ROR grant award rate is, so don't even ask)to do any kind of research in biology does bother me. I am all for a cheaper way of doing things and the fact that you can buy the same blender (Warring) from your local store that would costs something like ten times more to buy from a biology research tool&appliances catalogue is utterly ridiculous. It is a blender. It chops things. It's even made by the same company and has no differences in settings and motor voltage so why, people? Why?
(Our lab's microwave that we use for experiments probably comes from Fry's or something. It's cheaper.)
That's not even taken into account the PhD thing. Do you really need a doctorate in your field in order to do good science? Clearly not. Plenty of important discoveries were made by people who have never worked in a field that their knowledge contributed to. Dendrochronology is an example of someone contributing from a different field of science altogether. Lorenzo's Oil and, slightly less so, Something the Lord Made are both good stories (in movie format, even!) about people who are not PhDs who have made significant contribution. Having all that scientific knowledge wrapped up and kept under seal, away from the public, is in fact dangerous. It is the public, after all, who makes the decisions about policies. It is the public's voice, the collective "We" (no dystopia jokes please) whose voice is heard. Therefore isn't a little scary to think that about a third of America still doesn't believe in evolution? Uninformed public is dangerous, but what is more dangerous is a public that has been misinformed. In an age of internet and too much information, both accurate and inaccurate, floating around, is it really a good idea to keep what has been scientifically proven restricted to journals that only scientists would probably ever pay to subscribe to? I have somewhat more faith in humanity than Hobbes, but even so, considering what we are capable of doing right now in the field of biology, I think the imbalance of flow of information is getting to be too great. Something's gotta give. (Greener Than You Think is a satirical account of what could, in theory, happen when the scientific knowledge, for whatever reason, just failed to make it across to people -- a salesman in this case. I always wondered if it might've gone better of the biologist in that story managed to appeal to the salesman better and explained why he had to do things a certain way.)
(Which reminds me to mention again how wonderful PLoS is. Really. I love it. If I had more time I'd read more articles from it besides the ones the PI keeps on forwarding to me.)
Now my issue with biohackers (aha, you say, here it comes, but hear me out) is this. As with the original use of the word hackers in the field of computational sciences, the general public tends to lump the word "hacker" and "cracker" together when the two groups of people are in totally different camps. Similarly, with the ease of ordering and shipping (we get our DNAs Fedex'ed, I think people's worked out how to ship all kinds of things via Fedex now) I worry about the possibility of "biocrackers". I feel like I should remind people that unlike comp sci stuff, bio sci things can literally grow and multiply and take over the world. Anyone who's paid any attention at all to news must know of the possible issues people have with antibiotic resistance in bacteria, GMO, as well as the use of animal in research. All these issues arise from a time when the biologists can pretty much just do whatever they wanted, without having to go through protocol approval and acquisition paperwork. (The original discovery of allergy shots? The MD just went out there and injected volunteers. No prior testing on animals or approval of procedure by an elected committee.) Although these have resulted in a lot of awesome discoveries, they also lead to a lot of abuse and environmental dangers in the future. Who could've predicted the frequency that bacteria swap DNA with? The rapid rate that antibiotic resistance can be passed through all different strains? Who could've predicted that increasing yield in crops can also lead to out breeding and "superweeds?". Or those issues with pesticide? For all that I will grumble and complain about the song and dance we have to go through to get anything new done, I also agree that, to an extend, those procedures are necessary. Therefore, your local backyard biohacker, who does not have a protocol approved by a committee who will ask in detail about what happens in case of cross contamination, spills, and a plethora of possibly dangerous things that can go wrong, can in fact get into some serious trouble, not only for the biohacker but for everyone.
There is only one planet earth, people. (Maybe if I repeat this enough time some of the more recalcitrant folks out there will finally realize that their net income each year matters slightly less than the end of the world?)
So my issue is this: not the hacking, nor the backyard, but the fact that we have no way of knowing whether or not the hackers have had any training at all in dealing with research biology. Whether or not, for instance, they know the differences between biohazards level 0 to 3 and that you can't pour biological waste down the drain or into the trash -- there are rules with 10% bleach and 70% ethanol (now a controlled substance that we have to get our PI to sign in order to buy -- sometimes the safety committee can get overly zealous, yes), depending on what you've used, that apply. We don't know whether or not these hackers know that when you mix certain reagents, a small percentage of it can get aerosolized so the area that you work has to be contained -- all our labs have constant air filtering and are at a negative pressure so whenever we open the door, air is sucked into the lab, never out. We don't know even if these hackers know the basic protocols of what to do in case they spill acid or base and let's face it, theory is very different from reality. Back when I did my safety training the people used to tell stories of this poor guy from physics, who'd never done any lab work, and how he spilled acid on himself and how he then poured base on himself to try to neutralize it on his skin. (For the record, people: do not do that; go stand the affected area under the DI water immediately for 15 minutes instead, that way you might actually avoid third degree chemical burn.) What we need, in addition to possible background checks to make sure the person is a hacker and not a cracker, is this: some sort of system (I suspect it will have to be volunteer based because I cannot foresee a lot of the university committee people voluntarily going out to do this) to make sure that everyone can attend a standard safety training session the first time they order stuff to do biological research. It'll be fairly simple, containing information that can probably fit onto a small packet, but it will have to be a training session because people are more likely to pay some attention that way than if they were handed a packet that easily fits into a recycling bin. You don't need to be a professor to give that kind of training sessions -- anyone who's had any sort of lab experience at all can do it. They can get the packet. Or the powerpoint. Whatever. It will have to contain information such as what to do if you spill things on something / someone and why you must make sure you don't carry whatever critters you've made on your bench with you when you leave and accidentally unleash the apocalypse upon the world.
I'm exaggerating a little, of course. Organisms are surprisingly resilient. Even a doomsday scenario like the one in Oryx and Crake a few humans still made it through, and that was for something that's targeted against humans. So in reality a doomsday scenario will probably only result in decimation of humanity and lots of general difficulties such as lack of clean food, water, and hazmat suits.
So the second half of my title for today's entry is, in reality, "...but if you must, makes sure the tube is capped and you know what to do with it afterwards."
End rant.
Yeah, can you tell this has bothering me a lot since yesterday?
20100204
Genuinely flawed
Hosting a speaker for lunch today was surprisingly fun, despite of the fact that there was a moment of panic this morning when one of the students who had originally signed up came down sick and I had to swap in someone else in her place. The seminar speaker seems to like me too, which was strange, considering that I was much more myself than I perhaps should've been. Then again, coming back after New Year's I've broken almost every single rule I've ever made for myself, about the things I cannot say to other people and emotions I can't show. It had seemed simple enough at the beginning. Well-meaning enough. Doing and saying certain things will only bother people, be a burden to them, so I won't. I want to become a better person than I am, so the way to start, simply, was to pretend to be a better person. There is a difference. My thoughts are still my own, I just don't share them.
Yet somehow, despite of the fact that I have said, no, no more, if I want to be kind I must reach the state where I can feel kind and despite of the fact that I am showing people, co-workers and classmates who have never seen this side of me, that I can be petty, sarcastic, impatient, vindictive, whiny, and so much imperfections somehow people seem to like me the better for it. Is it because it makes me easier to relate to, despite of my relative strangeness? Does it make me seem more normal? Or is it that something genuine, even if it contains so much ugliness, is still attractive? Why is it that forcing others to cope with facets of personality that they do not like worthy of like? Somehow the math doesn't quite add up -- keep adding negative numbers will never give a positive result. Or at least it shouldn't. Perhaps I am only a foil of others, since we like to see faults that we can laugh at in others, many television programs being examples. It is all very confusing.
Still, all this serves to make me realize how much I appreciate honesty.
....
A post-doc from my lab left this Tuesday. She went back to northern China to a part that, after south Cal, will be like moving to Siberia. I am not a little awed by her courage. I also miss her. She was very nice to me.
Yet somehow, despite of the fact that I have said, no, no more, if I want to be kind I must reach the state where I can feel kind and despite of the fact that I am showing people, co-workers and classmates who have never seen this side of me, that I can be petty, sarcastic, impatient, vindictive, whiny, and so much imperfections somehow people seem to like me the better for it. Is it because it makes me easier to relate to, despite of my relative strangeness? Does it make me seem more normal? Or is it that something genuine, even if it contains so much ugliness, is still attractive? Why is it that forcing others to cope with facets of personality that they do not like worthy of like? Somehow the math doesn't quite add up -- keep adding negative numbers will never give a positive result. Or at least it shouldn't. Perhaps I am only a foil of others, since we like to see faults that we can laugh at in others, many television programs being examples. It is all very confusing.
Still, all this serves to make me realize how much I appreciate honesty.
....
A post-doc from my lab left this Tuesday. She went back to northern China to a part that, after south Cal, will be like moving to Siberia. I am not a little awed by her courage. I also miss her. She was very nice to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)