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!!!.
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)
