Dead bodies as entertainment. Not exactly a novel idea, but its something that has become pretty popular recently. You may have heard of it or, if the exhibit happens to be in a nearby city, perhaps you have had a chance to go and view Bodies: The Exhibit and/or Body Worlds. Basically, people have donated their bodies to be preserved by a process called plastination, whereby the body is filled with a plastic-based preservative. The effect is that the bones, muscles, and other tissues are are preserved almost completely. I'll leave alone the debate over whether or not an exhibit like this is ethical and why the general public finds corpses so captivating. However, when I went, I was surprised to see parents bringing their little kids along (less than 3 years old). I guess people like the opportunity to experience the mystery and intrigue surrounding anatomy class in medical school using cadavers.
As I mentioned before, the preservation methods are quite good. The exhibit is a mix of partially dissected bodies (showing an organ system) along with individual bones or organs in viewing cases for clarity. The complete bodies are positioned in some kind of active motion, like shooting a basketball or a runner in stride.
It was a cool prelude to actual anatomy class, which I'll get to experience next year. The up close view was a tease for someone like me. I will find it much more interesting in a hands-on environment (there were a number of times that I just wanted to pick something up and get a better look or know how it feels). The Nervous System section was a bit intimidating because I saw how fine and delicate the nerves are that permeate the body. Around your belly button, a number of nerves burst out of your spine and radiate outwards. I fully expect me and my fellow students to tear through a number of these while digging through muscle and fascia during dissection. I only hope we don't demolish too many of the ones we are supposed to identify! [Note: this is the reason why some med schools offer pro-sections, dissections done by a professional]
I was particularly interested in the examples of cancer. Their gross anatomy is highly reminiscent of the tumors I see in lab in our mice. I also liked the examples of developing fetuses with the different bone stains. You can really see how the bones (especially in the head and hands/feet) start out as separate entities and they grow together in place or can even fuse together. The developmental abnormalities, while tragic, were pretty cool to see (abdominal hernia and Siamese twins).
In all, I came away from the tour with even more anticipation for starting school. It was cool to know that while many people may get to see these preserved bodies, at some point I'll get to see things in real life, pulsing and breathing. If you get the chance, you should go.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Graduate School Survival Guide
Thanks to Ronald T. Azuma for putting together this informative and humorous survival guide for graduate school. I won't copy and paste his entire guide (not sure if thats even legal, much less ethical), but if his website ever goes down just let me know and I can post it here since I have a saved copy on my computer.
Graduate School Survival Guide
I think there are some points to garner from reading this. First, that you should be really sure about your decision to pursue a PhD (MD or not). Second, to know that academia is fraught with politics, so organization, communication, and planning are vital to your success. Take a tip from your business buddies and learn about networking early on in your career - those contacts will be useful in the long run! Third, be sure to show initiative.
Graduate School Survival Guide
I think there are some points to garner from reading this. First, that you should be really sure about your decision to pursue a PhD (MD or not). Second, to know that academia is fraught with politics, so organization, communication, and planning are vital to your success. Take a tip from your business buddies and learn about networking early on in your career - those contacts will be useful in the long run! Third, be sure to show initiative.
Lord of the Rings: An Allegory for a PhD
Its good to know that there are others out there struggling as much as you in the graduate years. I'll try to keep posting 'em as I find 'em.
Source: http://www.jacobite.org.uk/dave/odd/lotr.html
Source: http://www.jacobite.org.uk/dave/odd/lotr.html
The story starts with Frodo: a young hobbit, quite bright, a bit dissatisfied with what he's learnt so far and with his mates back home who just seem to want to get jobs and settle down and drink beer. He's also very much in awe of his tutor and mentor, the very senior professor Gandalf, so when Gandalf suggests he take on a short project for him (carrying the Ring to Rivendell), he agrees.
Frodo very quickly encounters the shadowy forces of fear and despair which will haunt the rest of his journey and leave permanent scars on his psyche, but he also makes some useful friends. In particular, he spends an evening down the pub with Aragorn, who has been wandering the world for many years as Gandalf's postdoc and becomes his adviser when Gandalf isn't around.
After Frodo has completed his first project, Gandalf (along with head of department Elrond) proposes that the work should be extended. He assembles a large research group, including visiting students Gimli and Legolas, the foreign postdoc Boromir, and several of Frodo's own friends from his undergraduate days. Frodo agrees to tackle this larger project, though he has mixed feelings about it. ("'I will take the Ring', he said, 'although I do not know the way.'")
Very rapidly, things go wrong. First, Gandalf disappears and has no more interaction with Frodo until everything is over. (Frodo assumes his supervisor is dead: in fact, he's simply found a more interesting topic and is working on that instead.) At his first international conference in Lorien, Frodo is cross-questioned terrifyingly by Galadriel, and betrayed by Boromir, who is anxious to get the credit for the work himself. Frodo cuts himself off from the rest of his team: from now on, he will only discuss his work with Sam, an old friend who doesn't really understand what it's all about, but in any case is prepared to give Frodo credit for being rather cleverer than he is. Then he sets out towards Mordor.
The last and darkest period of Frodo's journey clearly represents the writing-up stage, as he struggles towards Mount Doom (submission), finding his burden growing heavier and heavier yet more and more a part of himself; more and more terrified of failure; plagued by the figure of Gollum, the student who carried the Ring before him but never wrote up and still hangs around as a burnt-out, jealous shadow; talking less and less even to Sam. When he submits the Ring to the fire, it is in desperate confusion rather than with confidence, and for a while the world seems empty.
Eventually it is over: the Ring is gone, everyone congratulates him, and for a few days he can convince himself that his troubles are over. But there is one more obstacle to overcome: months later, back in the Shire, he must confront the external examiner Saruman, an old enemy of Gandalf, who seeks to humiliate and destroy his rival's protege. With the help of his friends and colleagues, Frodo passes through this ordeal, but discovers at the end that victory has no value left for him. While his friends return to settling down and finding jobs and starting families, Frodo remains in limbo; finally, along with Gandalf, Elrond and many others, he joins the brain drain across the Western ocean to the new land beyond.
Monday, December 18, 2006
Good Tidings
Man, after a crappy day in the lab its good to come home to some good news. My official letter of acceptance came in the mail. Unlike rejection letters, this is one small envelope I have been looking forward to receiving for a long time. I'm not going to open it though - I think I'll wrap it up and let my mom open it for Christmas (she's a big reason I decided to become a doctor, and even moreso to a physician-scientist).
I also made travel arrangements for another MD/PhD interview I have coming up in January. The nice thing is that they are paying for all my expenses on the trip. Like most schools, I was able to select a list of faculty members I would be interested in meeting. Although I originally found it a pain in the ass, I am now glad I took the time to do it. A large part of any MD/PhD experience will be decided by who you work for, so its important to identify some potential PI's beforehand. You don't want to wind up at a school and realize that there are few, if any, PI's that work in your field of interest. Luckily, this school had alot of successful PIs doing the kind of work I'm interested in (cancer biology/modeling) - more than I had known about before. Shows how a little research can be revealing.
I also got my GRE Subject Test score back from ETS. Yes, I was considering applying to graduate school this year, so I decided to take the tests in case I applied. I did pretty well overall considering I've been out of school for a while and my study preparation was erratic. I think I'm going to put my comments about the test, test prep, and what the results mean into a separate post because it deserves more attention.
I also made travel arrangements for another MD/PhD interview I have coming up in January. The nice thing is that they are paying for all my expenses on the trip. Like most schools, I was able to select a list of faculty members I would be interested in meeting. Although I originally found it a pain in the ass, I am now glad I took the time to do it. A large part of any MD/PhD experience will be decided by who you work for, so its important to identify some potential PI's beforehand. You don't want to wind up at a school and realize that there are few, if any, PI's that work in your field of interest. Luckily, this school had alot of successful PIs doing the kind of work I'm interested in (cancer biology/modeling) - more than I had known about before. Shows how a little research can be revealing.
I also got my GRE Subject Test score back from ETS. Yes, I was considering applying to graduate school this year, so I decided to take the tests in case I applied. I did pretty well overall considering I've been out of school for a while and my study preparation was erratic. I think I'm going to put my comments about the test, test prep, and what the results mean into a separate post because it deserves more attention.
Difference between MD and PhD
I found this good, although not entirely accurate post, over on the SDN forums.
Now, where does that leave us MD/PhDs??
By ScottishChap
M.D. - harder to get into, easier to get through, science classes just scratch the surface, can get by by memorizing like a parrot, not treated as a colleague, expensive, independent thought is dangerous, program lasts 4 years, instructors can't mess with the class mean without repercussions, students whine a lot more, students assume all Ph.D. students are unhappy med school rejects. Overall: subject matter is one inch deep and 10 miles wide.
Ph.D. - easier to get into, harder to get through, science classes take it as deep as current knowledge permits, will fail if all you do is memorize, treated more as a colleague, inexpensive, independent thought is rewarded, program lasts 3-7 years, instructors can make exams hard enough that the mean is 40% without repercussions, students whine much less, students assume all M.D. students are snooty and arrogant. Overall: subject matter is 10 miles deep and one inch wide.
Now, where does that leave us MD/PhDs??
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
In review
Good news today: my manuscript was approved by the journal's editors for peer-review. I'm crossing my fingers that the reviewers will like what I've written!
Getting Scooped
Success in academic medicine is largely measured by publications. In fact, we live by the code: Publish or Perish. This means that you either show your abilities in research by publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals or else you will be deemed unproductive, incompetent, and ultimately irrelevant in the eyes of your colleagues.
There is TREMENDOUS pressure to publish. Not only are you concerned that about showing some productivity (it can be years between publications), but you will also be intimately worried about the possibility of someone beating you to the punch and publishing the same findings first. Researchers call this "getting scooped." This is bad news because it means your research project has just gone from being cutting-edge to yesterday's news. Novelty is lost and it looks like the other guys thought of it first (regardless if you did or not), so they can then claim all the credit.
It may seem uncommon, given the immensity of science, that two or more groups would be working on the exact same research project at the exact same time. Heck, it might even seem counterproductive for research dollars to be spent investigating the same thing. [Note: I'll save the debate about competition in science for another post.] However, it actually happens all the time. Just think of Elisha Gray. Who is Elisha Gray? Exactly. He's the guy that got scooped by Alexander Graham Bell in inventing the telephone. Bell made it to the patent office only a few hours before Gray. Point of the story: Don't be like Gray, don't get scooped. Of course, this means living in perpetual fear whenever you start a project because you are worried about whether someone will have already started on it and thus have a head start on you. Or, there are always those people out there who work day and night, sacrificing body and soul, in pursuit of scooping other people (aka Gunners).
Although most academians claim to be collegial, I know few who are entirely open with their ideas and data, simply because of the possibility of being scooped. There will always be the eager grad student/post-doc/PI sniffing around for the latest great idea to steal and publish without recognizing the origin (unless of course she praises himself for her ingenuity). As an aspiring researcher, you should be mindful of this fact because you don't want to share more information than you want to, but you still want to maintain collaborations. I'll admit its a tricky balancing act that will take some time to learn and you'll probably get burned a few times before you know when to pipe-up.
There is TREMENDOUS pressure to publish. Not only are you concerned that about showing some productivity (it can be years between publications), but you will also be intimately worried about the possibility of someone beating you to the punch and publishing the same findings first. Researchers call this "getting scooped." This is bad news because it means your research project has just gone from being cutting-edge to yesterday's news. Novelty is lost and it looks like the other guys thought of it first (regardless if you did or not), so they can then claim all the credit.
It may seem uncommon, given the immensity of science, that two or more groups would be working on the exact same research project at the exact same time. Heck, it might even seem counterproductive for research dollars to be spent investigating the same thing. [Note: I'll save the debate about competition in science for another post.] However, it actually happens all the time. Just think of Elisha Gray. Who is Elisha Gray? Exactly. He's the guy that got scooped by Alexander Graham Bell in inventing the telephone. Bell made it to the patent office only a few hours before Gray. Point of the story: Don't be like Gray, don't get scooped. Of course, this means living in perpetual fear whenever you start a project because you are worried about whether someone will have already started on it and thus have a head start on you. Or, there are always those people out there who work day and night, sacrificing body and soul, in pursuit of scooping other people (aka Gunners).
Although most academians claim to be collegial, I know few who are entirely open with their ideas and data, simply because of the possibility of being scooped. There will always be the eager grad student/post-doc/PI sniffing around for the latest great idea to steal and publish without recognizing the origin (unless of course she praises himself for her ingenuity). As an aspiring researcher, you should be mindful of this fact because you don't want to share more information than you want to, but you still want to maintain collaborations. I'll admit its a tricky balancing act that will take some time to learn and you'll probably get burned a few times before you know when to pipe-up.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Interviews Coming Up
Two interview invites in one week! I was surprised by one of them since it was from a school that had rejected me from their MSTP program, I figured I was out of the running for that school (private). The invite was for a MD-only program. I have heard many good things about this school, including its skyrocketing amounts of NIH funding being brought in during the past few years. It is also a school that has a modified Pass/Fail and Problem-Based-Learning (PBL) curriculum, which are very big draws for a person like me. But since it was MD-only, it would mean I would have to pay my way through school - this I didn't like. However, we are talking a difference of 4 years vs. 7-8 years in a MSTP program - it could be argued that the post-graduation income during that 3-4 year difference would make up for the cost of paying for school. It was something worth spending a little bit of time thinking about. Whats more, the school offers a 5-year program (tuition paid during MD and a stipend during a research year) that is also an attractive potential alternative to an MD/PhD (the program was created to accelerate physician-scientists' training). I figure that I'll go and check it out.
The second school is a large and successful public university and the interview is for their MD/PhD program. I'll admit that I'm nervous about potentially being one of the few non-in-state students in the medical school class and I wonder if the school's emphasis on public health affects the research side of medicine (and education). They have offered to pay for all expenses during the interview, which is nice. I have a couple of weeks to decide to go or not and I think it is worth being sure before I take these nice peoples' money and time.
The second school is a large and successful public university and the interview is for their MD/PhD program. I'll admit that I'm nervous about potentially being one of the few non-in-state students in the medical school class and I wonder if the school's emphasis on public health affects the research side of medicine (and education). They have offered to pay for all expenses during the interview, which is nice. I have a couple of weeks to decide to go or not and I think it is worth being sure before I take these nice peoples' money and time.
Weird Dream
I had a dream last night that I was interviewing for medical school at a well-known university and surrounded by uber-competitive, Type A, overachieving, all ducks in a row, T's crossed, and i's dotted kind of students. I felt uncomfortable being around these strangers that were so gung-ho about everything they did in life. Somewhere between my staying with a student host and the actual interview, I ran away, confused and upset but then I woke up.
I'm having more of these kind of strange dreams lately in the lead up to medical school. Reading House of God probably got my psyche thinking about my return to school or it could be attributable to the stress involved in interviewing ( I have one coming up). Its definitely going to be a shock starting actual school again, given the different type of learning that is required in medical school compared to life in the lab. Its also going to be weird being around overzealous premeds-turned-med students, whose ilk I typically avoided as an undergrad. These gunner-types are at every medical school, utterly devoid of personality, but have managed to slip through the system and now are set on getting into the most competitive residency. Right now, it looks like I'll be going to a school that is Pass/Fail - so that is helping me alleviate my fears.
I'm having more of these kind of strange dreams lately in the lead up to medical school. Reading House of God probably got my psyche thinking about my return to school or it could be attributable to the stress involved in interviewing ( I have one coming up). Its definitely going to be a shock starting actual school again, given the different type of learning that is required in medical school compared to life in the lab. Its also going to be weird being around overzealous premeds-turned-med students, whose ilk I typically avoided as an undergrad. These gunner-types are at every medical school, utterly devoid of personality, but have managed to slip through the system and now are set on getting into the most competitive residency. Right now, it looks like I'll be going to a school that is Pass/Fail - so that is helping me alleviate my fears.
Book Report: House of God
There are a number of things that we do on the path to becoming physicians. Many of them, like taking the MCAT, passing organic chemistry, and submitting an AMCAS application can be considered "Rites of Passage." Among the litany of hoops that we jump through, reading the House of God by Samuel Shem is perhaps one of the most important things an aspiring doctor can do before starting medical school. Although a bit dated, the description of the realities doctors must face is essential for anyone considering the profession. Grey's Anatomy, ER, Scrubs, etc. really don't capture many of the horrors that real doctors must endure during their training. This includes dealing with incoherent patients, incompetent colleagues, and an endless stream of work that keeps you elbows deep in the body cavities of "gomers" (old people). Moreover, the stressful lifestyle begins to take a toll on your personality and relationships with others. The main character, Dr. Roy Basch, is a "red-hot" graduate of a prestigious medcial school and enters his first year of a internal medicine internship with all the best intentions. Through the relentless workload, overzealous and out-of-touch-with-reality Slurpers (kiss assess), and his own depression he loses himself and converts into a jaded and cynical doctor that hates himself and everyone else around him. The transformation is startling but understandable given the circumstances. The system just considers it "the way things are done" and doesn't take into account that times have changed and so have the demands of doctors. Something is definitely wrong with the way doctors are taught to take care of people.
I read the book because, like I mentioned above, it is a Rite of Passage that pre-meds go through - for good reason. The LAWS of the House of God are still quoted by practicing physicians and are worth knowing/thinking about. In particular, it is worth spending some time pondering the role of medicine in staving off death, but at what cost? Can treating a disease make things worse? What role do doctors play in death and controlling the autonomy of a patient over their own life? Although the book was written back in the 70's, we still don't have definitive answers to these questions, but more and more technologies are coming online that will let us prolong life without the necessary ethical considerations in place for administering end of life care.
I highly recommend that anyone considering a career as a doctor pick the book up, read it, and consider if you still want to be a physician. Like the Med School Hell blog, it will open your eyes to the career path that you are considering. Thankfully, there are now laws in place to prevent the insane workload imposed on recent intern/resident graduates - but these restrictions are not always followed.
Relevance Rating: 10/10.
I read the book because, like I mentioned above, it is a Rite of Passage that pre-meds go through - for good reason. The LAWS of the House of God are still quoted by practicing physicians and are worth knowing/thinking about. In particular, it is worth spending some time pondering the role of medicine in staving off death, but at what cost? Can treating a disease make things worse? What role do doctors play in death and controlling the autonomy of a patient over their own life? Although the book was written back in the 70's, we still don't have definitive answers to these questions, but more and more technologies are coming online that will let us prolong life without the necessary ethical considerations in place for administering end of life care.
I highly recommend that anyone considering a career as a doctor pick the book up, read it, and consider if you still want to be a physician. Like the Med School Hell blog, it will open your eyes to the career path that you are considering. Thankfully, there are now laws in place to prevent the insane workload imposed on recent intern/resident graduates - but these restrictions are not always followed.
Relevance Rating: 10/10.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Blog: Respectful Insolence
I'll admit that I'm new to this blogging thing and that there are a number of other, more experienced bloggers out there. One good one is written by Orac, an MD/PhD graduate now at the junior faculty level (finished grad school, postdoc, and has started a lab of his own) called "Respectful Insolence." He's got some great posts on the life of a physician-scientist and I'll link to some that overlap with the aim of this blog (no need reading the same thing twice, right?). A link to his blog is on the right.
Monday, December 4, 2006
Don't Smoke
If I ever need to be reminded of the world of medicine I'm about to enter, all I have to do is take the Patient elevators at work instead of the ones usually used by Staff. Today, I saw my first laryngectomy (I had to look it up) and it caught me off guard. Its not the kind of thing you see everyday. I didn't stare, but I did catch a good look. More than likely, it was due to some kind of esphogeal cancer - smoking is the likely culprit, but I cant be sure. I think that seeing the hole did more to dissuade me from smoking than all the Truth commercials I've ever seen.
Please don't smoke, it doesn't always kill you.
(Image source: www.microsurgeon.org)
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
91% Nerd - Need I Say More?
9% scored higher (more nerdy), and91% scored lower (less nerdy).
What does this mean? Your nerdiness is:
Supreme Nerd. Apply for a professorship at MIT now!!!.
Monday, November 27, 2006
The Mighty Mouse
In the lab, I've been involved in the generation and characterization of a number of mouse models. Long story short, I've been around literally hundreds, if not thousands of mice breeding them, injecting them with stuff, checking for tumors, and if sick, euthanizing (CO2 inhalation) and dissecting them for analysis. I've had mice bite, pee, and poop on my hands (with gloves). I've been fingers deep in mouse guts with my face inches away from the body cavity trying to spot some interesting feature. I do it so often that I hardly think about it anymore.
Why is it then that a veritable "mouse guy" would be so afraid of a mouse in my house? (Disclaimer: I live in a huge old house with a big backyard that is prime breeding grounds for vermin; I'm not a dirty person, in general.) They manage to elude my mouse traps better than Houdini himself. The peanut butter trick has not been working. Usually, I just find their remnants (droppings), but occasionally I have a show-down with one of the critters. This usually involves my voice going up a few octaves, some expletives, an increase in blood pressure and heart rate, and a quick exit in the opposite direction. Why these feral rodents elicit such a contrasting response than my domesticated mice is still a mystery. Maybe its the psychological impression that wild mice are "dirty" whereas lab mice are kept in sterile housing with their bedding changed regularly (they spend most of their day either grooming or sleeping). Maybe its because they show up when I least expect them. Maybe I should just become a mouse myself.
Why is it then that a veritable "mouse guy" would be so afraid of a mouse in my house? (Disclaimer: I live in a huge old house with a big backyard that is prime breeding grounds for vermin; I'm not a dirty person, in general.) They manage to elude my mouse traps better than Houdini himself. The peanut butter trick has not been working. Usually, I just find their remnants (droppings), but occasionally I have a show-down with one of the critters. This usually involves my voice going up a few octaves, some expletives, an increase in blood pressure and heart rate, and a quick exit in the opposite direction. Why these feral rodents elicit such a contrasting response than my domesticated mice is still a mystery. Maybe its the psychological impression that wild mice are "dirty" whereas lab mice are kept in sterile housing with their bedding changed regularly (they spend most of their day either grooming or sleeping). Maybe its because they show up when I least expect them. Maybe I should just become a mouse myself.
Q&A: Why do researchers use mice for experiments?
Q: Why do cancer researchers use mice for their experiments?
A: The reason we use mice is because they are (in order of importance) 1) much easier to do experiments on mice than with humans (Imagine: "You want to do what with my spleen?"), 2) closely related in their genome/anatomy/biology to humans (known as homology) - so the theory is "if it works in mice, it probably works the same way in humans", 3) inbred so that the genetic differences between individual mice are minor (its important to know the reason you see an effect is because of your experiment, not a a difference in the mouse itself), 4) small and we can fit multiple mice in a cage for efficiency, and 5) we can acquire them at relatively easily.
When we experimentally induce cancer in mice we call them "models" because they represent (although not exactly) a living system that we can use to find out some information about the disease. Much of the research going on now in the cancer field is to figure out what genes are altered when cancer forms and then to make those same DNA-level changes in mice (known as a transgenic mouse model). This strategy has had some moderately good success in generating mouse models of pancreatic, lung, colon, breast, and some hematologic (i.e. blood-related) cancers.
Cons:
- It goes without saying that there are still huge differences between mice and humans. This includes genetics, lifespan, lifestyle, etc. Not everything that works in mice works in humans.
- If left on their own, humans and mice develop a different spectrum of cancers. Humans most often develop solid tumors (prostate, colon, breast, pancreas, etc), whereas mice develop myeloid and lymphoid tumors (leukemias and lymphomas). No one is quite sure why this happens, but some people believe it has much to do with the length of telomeres (protective"caps" on the ends of chromosomes).
- The development of cancer is rarely as straightforward as a single/handful of genetic changes we create in the lab. Remember, people usually get cancer in the latter part of their lives - they have lived long enough that they have accumulated many mutations that normally are bearable until the straw that breaks the camel's back and cancer develops (smoking speeds up this process). Therefore, its very difficult to recreate ALL of these genetic events to get and EXACT recapitulation of what goes on in real life.
I'll try to find a good review article and post it on here when I get a chance.
A: The reason we use mice is because they are (in order of importance) 1) much easier to do experiments on mice than with humans (Imagine: "You want to do what with my spleen?"), 2) closely related in their genome/anatomy/biology to humans (known as homology) - so the theory is "if it works in mice, it probably works the same way in humans", 3) inbred so that the genetic differences between individual mice are minor (its important to know the reason you see an effect is because of your experiment, not a a difference in the mouse itself), 4) small and we can fit multiple mice in a cage for efficiency, and 5) we can acquire them at relatively easily.
When we experimentally induce cancer in mice we call them "models" because they represent (although not exactly) a living system that we can use to find out some information about the disease. Much of the research going on now in the cancer field is to figure out what genes are altered when cancer forms and then to make those same DNA-level changes in mice (known as a transgenic mouse model). This strategy has had some moderately good success in generating mouse models of pancreatic, lung, colon, breast, and some hematologic (i.e. blood-related) cancers.
Cons:
- It goes without saying that there are still huge differences between mice and humans. This includes genetics, lifespan, lifestyle, etc. Not everything that works in mice works in humans.
- If left on their own, humans and mice develop a different spectrum of cancers. Humans most often develop solid tumors (prostate, colon, breast, pancreas, etc), whereas mice develop myeloid and lymphoid tumors (leukemias and lymphomas). No one is quite sure why this happens, but some people believe it has much to do with the length of telomeres (protective"caps" on the ends of chromosomes).
- The development of cancer is rarely as straightforward as a single/handful of genetic changes we create in the lab. Remember, people usually get cancer in the latter part of their lives - they have lived long enough that they have accumulated many mutations that normally are bearable until the straw that breaks the camel's back and cancer develops (smoking speeds up this process). Therefore, its very difficult to recreate ALL of these genetic events to get and EXACT recapitulation of what goes on in real life.
I'll try to find a good review article and post it on here when I get a chance.
Book Report: Justification
Although a few of the more seasoned physicians (and scientists) might scoff at my excitement and anticipation at starting in a long, long MSTP program, I'll go ahead an admit that I'm riding a high at this point in my life. The great beyond on the horizon of my career beckons and all I can do now is look forward for things to actually start. As I wrote before, I have some time on my hands and like to take my mind off my research for a while. Among the things I plan on doing in the next six months before school starts is a great deal of reading. Right now, my mind is pretty interested in finding out more just what the hell I signed up for when I went around telling everyone I wanted to be a doctor. Obviously, I've had a lot of experience before applying to med school, but now that this sucker is actually going down, I want to know more about the road ahead.
So, I've picked up a number of books on what it means to be a doctor. Most of them are recommended reads for people interested in medicine. Every once in a while, when I actually finish reading one of these books, I'll write a brief description about it in posts titled "Book Report" (original, I know). If you're not interested, just skip these posts and continue to think I'm an idiot. We'll see how long this keeps up, or for that matter, how long I can keep at this blog without moving on to something else - as often happens with the wandering mind that god stuck me with. Here it goes...
So, I've picked up a number of books on what it means to be a doctor. Most of them are recommended reads for people interested in medicine. Every once in a while, when I actually finish reading one of these books, I'll write a brief description about it in posts titled "Book Report" (original, I know). If you're not interested, just skip these posts and continue to think I'm an idiot. We'll see how long this keeps up, or for that matter, how long I can keep at this blog without moving on to something else - as often happens with the wandering mind that god stuck me with. Here it goes...
Where I Stand
I figured it might be worth mentioning a little more background information about me. I think it has something to do with my scientific training - we are taught to be skeptics, to resist accepting information without knowing the source (unfortunately, a number of quack drug companies take advantage of the fact that not everyone follows this rule).
As I mentioned before I was recently accepted to medical school and, to boot, graduate school as well. More specifically, I was accepted into a Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP), which means that I will be going to medical school for a MD as well as graduate school for a PhD (also known as a MD/PhD program). I'll be starting school at the end of next summer (MSTP students typically start earlier than thier MD-only counterparts to begin exploring their research options before the onslaught of medical school). It typically takes 6-8 years to complete the program. Moreover, we are actually paid to go to school, that is, our tuition is paid for and we receive a stipend for living expenses. I'll comment more on the rationale behind this in a later post, but for now you'd be right to assume that I am becoming a professional student (somewhat of an oxymoron, I know).
Before I get talking about med/grad school, let me tell you a little bit about where I am coming from. Right now, I'm finishing up after spending some time out of school. Taking "time off" is a common strategy taken by pre-meds these days as it confers a number of benefits on the applicant and medical schools really like the maturity "non-traditional" (not straight from undergrad) incoming students have.
So, beginning about May of this year, I started getting my application ready for applying to medical schools through AMCAS (the centralized application service used by most medical schools). I'll post more later about the hellish process that it takes to get into medical school. For now, just keep in mind that applying in 2006 is for entry into school in 2007. I designated that I wanted to apply to MD/PhD programs, wrote the necessary essays, and hit Submit while praying that I hadn't overlooked a glaring mistake that would cause schools to laugh at my application before throwing it in the trash bin (there is NO going back once an application is submitted). Submitting that primary application with your personal statement is one of the many Rites of Passage for pre-meds. I happened to get an interview relatively early on (October) at an MSTP program and three weeks later, I got a phone call telling me that I had been unanimously decided on by the committee members (one of the happiest moments of my life).
After a deep sigh of relief and tears of joy being shed by a number of family members and friends (myself included), I realized that I was no longer a "pre-med" and could therefore abandon the incessant anxiety that has lingers at the back of the minds of premeds since the moment they decide on a career in medicine. This meant that I could stop religiously checking my email every 5 minutes for some kind of word from medical schools. This newfound time presents to me the opportunity to direct my efforts toward something like this blog.
During this time, I'll be posting on here alot about the things that got me up to this point, trying not to be repetitive with the wealth of information already available (of which I will refer to often), providing my personal perspective and insight on school, research, and health care/science. It is only natural for a scientist to be analytical and the methodology behind the process of becoming a doctor offers many areas for scrutiny. From then on, I'll keep the interested reason along for the ride hoping not to lose you or myself along the way.
As I mentioned before I was recently accepted to medical school and, to boot, graduate school as well. More specifically, I was accepted into a Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP), which means that I will be going to medical school for a MD as well as graduate school for a PhD (also known as a MD/PhD program). I'll be starting school at the end of next summer (MSTP students typically start earlier than thier MD-only counterparts to begin exploring their research options before the onslaught of medical school). It typically takes 6-8 years to complete the program. Moreover, we are actually paid to go to school, that is, our tuition is paid for and we receive a stipend for living expenses. I'll comment more on the rationale behind this in a later post, but for now you'd be right to assume that I am becoming a professional student (somewhat of an oxymoron, I know).
Before I get talking about med/grad school, let me tell you a little bit about where I am coming from. Right now, I'm finishing up after spending some time out of school. Taking "time off" is a common strategy taken by pre-meds these days as it confers a number of benefits on the applicant and medical schools really like the maturity "non-traditional" (not straight from undergrad) incoming students have.
So, beginning about May of this year, I started getting my application ready for applying to medical schools through AMCAS (the centralized application service used by most medical schools). I'll post more later about the hellish process that it takes to get into medical school. For now, just keep in mind that applying in 2006 is for entry into school in 2007. I designated that I wanted to apply to MD/PhD programs, wrote the necessary essays, and hit Submit while praying that I hadn't overlooked a glaring mistake that would cause schools to laugh at my application before throwing it in the trash bin (there is NO going back once an application is submitted). Submitting that primary application with your personal statement is one of the many Rites of Passage for pre-meds. I happened to get an interview relatively early on (October) at an MSTP program and three weeks later, I got a phone call telling me that I had been unanimously decided on by the committee members (one of the happiest moments of my life).
After a deep sigh of relief and tears of joy being shed by a number of family members and friends (myself included), I realized that I was no longer a "pre-med" and could therefore abandon the incessant anxiety that has lingers at the back of the minds of premeds since the moment they decide on a career in medicine. This meant that I could stop religiously checking my email every 5 minutes for some kind of word from medical schools. This newfound time presents to me the opportunity to direct my efforts toward something like this blog.
During this time, I'll be posting on here alot about the things that got me up to this point, trying not to be repetitive with the wealth of information already available (of which I will refer to often), providing my personal perspective and insight on school, research, and health care/science. It is only natural for a scientist to be analytical and the methodology behind the process of becoming a doctor offers many areas for scrutiny. From then on, I'll keep the interested reason along for the ride hoping not to lose you or myself along the way.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
The Addictive Personality of a Scientist
I expect to post a number of times about my decision to pursue a combined degree program (MD/PhD). Basically, I am interested in both science and medicine and I expect to use both in my career, so thats why I'm going to school for both. I'll talk about my interest in medicine later, but I wanted to post this great article from 1990 in Science, talking about the personality of a scientist. For me and most of my friends who like to be holed up in a lab somewhere at ungodly hours in the night, we fit the description pretty well.
Science
30 November 1990
Volume 250
Number 4985
The Addictive Personality
Science: Dr. Noitall, you are the world’s greatest authority on addition, the seer that everyone consults, the man who got Sherlock Homes to kick his cocaine habit.
Dr.Noitall: A vast understatement of my true worth.
Science: Could you describe the addictive personality?
Dr.Noitall: An addictive person is one who has a compulsion to behave in ways that his or her family members consider detrimental to their interest. An addictive person will frequently conceal the extent of his addiction, will lie to his family about it, is immune to logical arguments to correct the error of his ways, and foregoes income that would require abandoning their addiction.
Science: Are we talking about a dope addict or alcoholic?
Dr.Noitall: No, I am describing a scientist. It is well known that work habits of scientists are addictive, leaving their spouses in tears, their children pleading, “Come home, Mommy (or Daddy),” and involve long hours in hostile instrument laboratories or cold rooms, exposed to noxious gases and radioactivity-conditions that no sane person would choose.
Science: But surely these individuals are paid handsomely for undergoing these hazardous conditions.
Dr.Noitall: This is the peculiar paradox. The profession is poorly paid because there are hundreds of applicants for every good position. Because of the psychic income that is exploited by our oppressive society, a scientist will accept pay that would make a movie star weep.
Science: But many of these individuals are academics who have the advantages of long summers off and light teaching loads.
Dr.Noitall: Academic freedom is the freedom not to take a vacation. Far from taking summers off, these individuals would rather develop films in the darkroom than sit on the beaches of Waikiki.
Science: But surely these individuals have a record of stable homes, paying their bills and other behavior not typical of an addict.
Dr.Noitall: That depends on how you define good behavior. These individuals tend to curl up with a copy of the Physical Review Letters, Journal of the American Chemical Society, or Journal of Biological Chemistry, rather than doing household chores or acting like good Americans who stay glued to the television set.
Science: So far, however you merely described an individual who works to keep his job.
Dr.Noitall: No, these individuals are definitely masochistic. They volunteer to serve on review panels that send them hundreds of incredibly detailed project proposals which must be read and evaluated. They sit through endless thesis defenses, volunteer to edit journals and serve on visiting committees for other schools when they have too much to do at home. They then complain bitterly that they are too busy.
Science: Is it apparent that these individuals could do well in other occupations?
Dr.Noitall: They are addicted to scientific logic, which makes it impossible for them to act like a trial lawyer who sues the city of New York for negligence when a drunken man falls off a subway platform, or a politician who claims one can increase services and pay lower taxes, or a movie star who testifies before Congress on carcinogens but does not know the difference between valium and valine.
Science: Is there any behavioral characteristic that can explain this obsessive conduct?
Dr.Noitall: Basically scientists have failed to grow up. They are all children, eternally curious, eternally trying to find out how the pieces of the puzzle fit together, eternally asking Why, and then irritatingly asking Why again when they get the answer to the first question.
Science: But can’t this addiction be cured by some new program or drugs and therapy?
Dr.Noitall: There is no evidence of hereditary characteristics of family environment to produce a scientist; therefore we have few handles on the potential cures, but the most glaring fact is that society cannot afford to cure these individuals. Their obsession is responsible for most of the progress of mankind and therefore the last thing we need at this moment is to turn these addictive scientists into well-adjusted television watchers. It is well worth giving them the tiny bit more money they need to stay addicted to science and to attract new compulsive personalities to their work. Society is addicted to scientists as scientists are addicted to science. – Daniel E. Koshland, Jr.
The Inner Life of the Cell (Video)
A really cool (for nerds like myself) video of some of the cellular processes in the cell. I must have watched it 10 times. It reminds me of being a kid and going to Epcot center in Orlando, where they had a Body Worlds exhibit (not to be confused with the current Body Worlds dead body show) that showed a similar "microscopic eye" view of the body. It was one of the first events that I remember that made me want to be a doctor. Anyway, here is the video, check it out.
A blog primer
Writing has never been my strong point - one of the reasons I'm writing this blog is to get better at composing my thoughts and articulating the main points. Expect for there to be lots of spelling errors, cursing, repeated phrases, and lines of thought that seem to go nowhere. I'm hoping that the posts will eventually improve, but we'll see.
Some you will "get" my sense of humor, others won't. I can be pretty cynical at times, but I think its just being objective. I tend to look at things a little differently than most people, something that I'll talk more about later. I'm very opinionated and willing to speak my mind - expect more than a few posts on politics and policy. You should also note that everything on here is just an opinion and not fact. Feel free to disagree or share your own thoughts. If you have something that would be worth posting on this blog (experience or insight), send it to me. Of course, I would reference the source (like a good scientist).
I'm going to start off anonymous, just because its one of those things that I could change my mind later to no effect, whereas its hard to go back once I've gone public with my identity. I'm hoping that it will allow me to be a little more open with my comments and that I won't piss off anyone.
You can also thank me for not using a dark background on this blog with white text. After reading a half dozen other blogs and having my retinas feel like they are on fire, I promised myself that I wouldn't punish the reader by having to suffer though that. [Blog entries are created in a normal text box with black text on a white background, I think alot of bloggers forget that their end product comes out so hard to read].
Some you will "get" my sense of humor, others won't. I can be pretty cynical at times, but I think its just being objective. I tend to look at things a little differently than most people, something that I'll talk more about later. I'm very opinionated and willing to speak my mind - expect more than a few posts on politics and policy. You should also note that everything on here is just an opinion and not fact. Feel free to disagree or share your own thoughts. If you have something that would be worth posting on this blog (experience or insight), send it to me. Of course, I would reference the source (like a good scientist).
I'm going to start off anonymous, just because its one of those things that I could change my mind later to no effect, whereas its hard to go back once I've gone public with my identity. I'm hoping that it will allow me to be a little more open with my comments and that I won't piss off anyone.
You can also thank me for not using a dark background on this blog with white text. After reading a half dozen other blogs and having my retinas feel like they are on fire, I promised myself that I wouldn't punish the reader by having to suffer though that. [Blog entries are created in a normal text box with black text on a white background, I think alot of bloggers forget that their end product comes out so hard to read].
All these things start the same
I was accepted to medical school two weeks ago, so begins the rest of my life.
My mind is hardly absent of thoughts. I'll be using this blog to capture some of the finer and less than finer moments of the coming years, which I can only imagine to be exhilarating, frightening, challenging, and rewarding all at the same time. At some point, I know I'll look back at this time and laugh at everything I didn't know I was in for. For the time being, all I can do is look ahead at the path before me, know that others have been on this route (and survived), and that this is exactly what I want to do.
SP
My mind is hardly absent of thoughts. I'll be using this blog to capture some of the finer and less than finer moments of the coming years, which I can only imagine to be exhilarating, frightening, challenging, and rewarding all at the same time. At some point, I know I'll look back at this time and laugh at everything I didn't know I was in for. For the time being, all I can do is look ahead at the path before me, know that others have been on this route (and survived), and that this is exactly what I want to do.
SP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
