Happy Holidays folks...whichever, if any, you may be celebrating.
BH and I are off to my beautiful home state to spend some time with my family (Mom says there's snow!). Yay!
Since my parents live in the boonies, their internetz are agonizingly slow. Being that patience is not one my most prominent virtues it is unlikely that I will be online much, if at all.
So with that, I will see (blog) you next year.
Cheers!
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
In Which I Re-Apply to Graduate School...
No, I didn't get kicked out for causing trouble (yet). FSP has offered everyone an opportunity to revise the personal statement segment of their graduate school applications. And considering the embarrassingly earnest and eager state of mine (a state which no longer even remotely represents my current "personal statement" as an embattled and world-weary hoping-to-graduate-before-the-apocalypse student) I thought it appropriate to rewrite my personal statement to more accurately reflect my current "statement of purpose". Here goes:
I have a passing interest in joining the Chemistry Graduate Program at FSP University. Most of my previous scientific experience is centered around biomedical research, including 4.5 years working toward a Ph.D. in Sub-Sub-Field of Biology. I have quit that program, in part because I was inadequately compensated for the work I was putting in, but mostly because I have come the realization that there are far more interesting and important questions to be answered by science. Hence my interest in your program.
A wise man (don't ask me whom, you don't know him) once told me:
In addition, I propose to examine the effects of different concentrations of ethanol solvent on the rate of dissolution of different sized problems. I have extensive experimental plans for this proposal, including careful titration of the problems in question into specific ethanol solutions. Furthermore, I propose to examine the ethanol production mechanism as it relates to efficacy of problem dissoultion. Specifically, I am interested in whether distilled ethanol solutions are more or less effective than fermented-only ethanol solutions in dissolving problems both large and small.
I think that you will agree with me on the importance of this research. Think of how much humanity would benefit from a specifically defined set of parameters for dissolving problems! I have attached several references (including my previous Graduate Advisor for the Ph.D. program I have recently left), all of whom can vouch not only for my long-standing interest in this project, but also for the diligence with which I conducted preliminary research for this project, even while attempting to complete my thesis work in Sub-Sub-Field of Biology. My references and previous efforts in this research speak for my ability to continue to excel in this field. I am only in need of the appropriate environment in which to conduct this research.
Given the fine history of the FSPU Chemistry Department and it's reputation for beating graduate students senseless (both literally and figuratively), thereby providing them with myriad problems upon which I may conduct my studies, I cannot think of a better program in which to pursue my research.
Thank you for your consideration of this application - Cheers!
I have a passing interest in joining the Chemistry Graduate Program at FSP University. Most of my previous scientific experience is centered around biomedical research, including 4.5 years working toward a Ph.D. in Sub-Sub-Field of Biology. I have quit that program, in part because I was inadequately compensated for the work I was putting in, but mostly because I have come the realization that there are far more interesting and important questions to be answered by science. Hence my interest in your program.
A wise man (don't ask me whom, you don't know him) once told me:
"Most of the world's problems are ethanol-soluble...and those that are not you aren't likely to solve anyway, so the best course of action in either case is to go get pissed."This is really the crux of what scientific endeavors are all about. One could not do better than solving the world's problems, and that is precisely what I propose to do as a graduate student in FSPU's Chemistry Department. Or rather, I propose to dissolve the world's problems in ethanol. During the course of my preliminary work on this problem, I have discovered that the most efficient and effective means of dissolving problems in ethanol is to directly imbibe solutions of ethanol as soon as a problem presents itself. I have found that problems go into solution more rapidly at a timepoint just after their inception, with the rate of dissolution approaching a more constant value as the problem matures. This work is fairly preliminary at this point, but I am confident that further problems inherent to graduate studies will provide ample opportunity to expand this data set.
In addition, I propose to examine the effects of different concentrations of ethanol solvent on the rate of dissolution of different sized problems. I have extensive experimental plans for this proposal, including careful titration of the problems in question into specific ethanol solutions. Furthermore, I propose to examine the ethanol production mechanism as it relates to efficacy of problem dissoultion. Specifically, I am interested in whether distilled ethanol solutions are more or less effective than fermented-only ethanol solutions in dissolving problems both large and small.
I think that you will agree with me on the importance of this research. Think of how much humanity would benefit from a specifically defined set of parameters for dissolving problems! I have attached several references (including my previous Graduate Advisor for the Ph.D. program I have recently left), all of whom can vouch not only for my long-standing interest in this project, but also for the diligence with which I conducted preliminary research for this project, even while attempting to complete my thesis work in Sub-Sub-Field of Biology. My references and previous efforts in this research speak for my ability to continue to excel in this field. I am only in need of the appropriate environment in which to conduct this research.
Given the fine history of the FSPU Chemistry Department and it's reputation for beating graduate students senseless (both literally and figuratively), thereby providing them with myriad problems upon which I may conduct my studies, I cannot think of a better program in which to pursue my research.
Thank you for your consideration of this application - Cheers!
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Pros and Cons of Young PIs
Thanks to all of you who had nice things to say about my last post. I am actually kind of excited about looking at young PIs. (If the young PIs on my blogroll are any kind of representative sample, the odds are good that could find a mentor that I would really enjoy working with.)
Grad students are subjected to a lot of very generalized advice that gets repeated ad nauseum over the course of their dissertation studies. Much of that advice concerns choosing a mentor wisely...which is probably a good thing to keep in mind when choosing a graduate advisor as well as your postdoctoral mentor. Below I will bullet the arguments for and against working with young v. established PIs. The views listed below are not necessarily true, nor are they necessarily my opinion, except where noted. I just want to put this out there and see what teh internetz have to say about it.
The benefits of working with a young PI:
The benefits of working with an established PIs on the other hand:
Ideally, the solution is to screen potential mentors based on the individual rather than the generalizations. What I really want is someone who is enthusiastic and sometimes/often at the bench, but not over-bearing. Someone who is glad to see me in the lab, and with whom I enjoy interacting (which makes it fun for me to be at work) but who is not going to freak out if I work less than 80 hours/week. Someone with whom I can go the pub -- I've found that some of my best breakthroughs were originally recorded on coasters and bar napkins, and it would be great to have a mentor who realizes the value of this kind of unwound thinking and interaction. I want someone who loves my project as much as I do, but who can recognize that it is not the only thing I love in my life...also that we may not always have the same priorities on a given day and that this is OK. The trick is to find a happy medium. This is not as easy when looking for a post-doc as it is when you're a rotation student.
How do you decide who to put on your list? And once you've got your list, how do you decide who's the one?
*I think that the pressure to secure and renew grants is no longer skewed toward young PIs. This is increasingly obvious as lots of established PIs are having to let people go for lack of funding. What does still frighten me about the funding situation for many young PIs is the very short time in which they are expected to secure their first R01. The rumblings I'm hearing are to the effect of: start-up funds aren't going as far as they used to, and soft money institutions mean that once the start-up funds run out if there's no big grant the young PI is essentially forced out [ I've seen this happen at least three times to people I know at my home institution since starting grad school] -- so what happens to their students/post-docs? Is any of this true, or just nasty rumors?
Grad students are subjected to a lot of very generalized advice that gets repeated ad nauseum over the course of their dissertation studies. Much of that advice concerns choosing a mentor wisely...which is probably a good thing to keep in mind when choosing a graduate advisor as well as your postdoctoral mentor. Below I will bullet the arguments for and against working with young v. established PIs. The views listed below are not necessarily true, nor are they necessarily my opinion, except where noted. I just want to put this out there and see what teh internetz have to say about it.
The benefits of working with a young PI:
- They are more intimately/recently acquainted with the bench and will probably continue to be so for some time.
- They are motivated help their students/post-docs succeed because they need those papers too!
- They are often more enthusiastic about the projects that they are doing - they had to come up with GREAT ones to get the positions in the first place, so you know that the project has got to be pretty exciting.
The benefits of working with an established PIs on the other hand:
- Used to be assumed to have more stable finances (though I don't think that this is necessarily the case any more).*
- Their reputation is not riding on the backs of their current students'/post-docs' papers so there is (potentially) less pressure (I hate being pressured). [GrAdvisor told me when I joined the lab, "This lab already has a reputation. It will not be born or die with your dissertation. Therefore, your dissertation is yours to make of it what you will." This is a big part of the reason I joined this lab...did I mention that I hate being pressured? On the other hand, this attitude probably also contributes to his non-interest in my project.]
- Since they are more likely to be at the bench with you, they will likely know what you are doing all the time. [If you're anything like me, this has the potential to get a leeeeettle stifling.]
- They are also motivated to push their students/post-docs harder than an established PI because those early papers mean so much to grant applications and tenure.*
- Enthusiasm for the project is great so long as it doesn't translate to prioritizing lab work to the point of quashing quality-of-life/work-life-balance issues...which given the differential pressures on PIs (publish for grants! tenure! survival!) and post-docs/students (publish for CV/dissertation) can lead to some tension.
- In a large lab (unlikely with young PIs) it is easy to get lost in the crowd. When your project is producing, you're the star who gets all the attention. When your project is floundering, chances are there's someone else whose project is humming...guess who is more likely to catch the PI's attention? Who really needs the PI's attention?
- Established PIs are more likely to be involved with administrative tasks that take up a lot of their time = less direct access.
- Established PIs may have lost touch with the day-to-day of the bench. [Yes, I know we talked about that yesterday, but no, I don't have results yet - it takes a week to run the protocol that PI worked on for his dissertation.]
- With an established reputation, the PI is not depending on any particular student or post-doc. If your project isn't working out you're dispensable.
Ideally, the solution is to screen potential mentors based on the individual rather than the generalizations. What I really want is someone who is enthusiastic and sometimes/often at the bench, but not over-bearing. Someone who is glad to see me in the lab, and with whom I enjoy interacting (which makes it fun for me to be at work) but who is not going to freak out if I work less than 80 hours/week. Someone with whom I can go the pub -- I've found that some of my best breakthroughs were originally recorded on coasters and bar napkins, and it would be great to have a mentor who realizes the value of this kind of unwound thinking and interaction. I want someone who loves my project as much as I do, but who can recognize that it is not the only thing I love in my life...also that we may not always have the same priorities on a given day and that this is OK. The trick is to find a happy medium. This is not as easy when looking for a post-doc as it is when you're a rotation student.
How do you decide who to put on your list? And once you've got your list, how do you decide who's the one?
*I think that the pressure to secure and renew grants is no longer skewed toward young PIs. This is increasingly obvious as lots of established PIs are having to let people go for lack of funding. What does still frighten me about the funding situation for many young PIs is the very short time in which they are expected to secure their first R01. The rumblings I'm hearing are to the effect of: start-up funds aren't going as far as they used to, and soft money institutions mean that once the start-up funds run out if there's no big grant the young PI is essentially forced out [ I've seen this happen at least three times to people I know at my home institution since starting grad school] -- so what happens to their students/post-docs? Is any of this true, or just nasty rumors?
Friday, December 12, 2008
Uppers and Downers
I just had a really productive meeting with my Favorite Committee Member. I went through the progress and hang-ups of my "safe project" that I was hoping to finish up this month and push out a manuscript in January. Also my Shiny New Project, that you may recall was worrying me because it feels like we've been trying to come up with a question that will fit Shiny New Technique, rather than a technique that will help us answer the question (you know, like scientists do). FCM offered some really good suggestions on a low-tech approach to answer the interesting question that we can use while still developing Shiny New Technique, and also that we should consider Shiny New Technique to be the icing on the cake rather than the meat of my second paper which will make the whole thing a lot easier to work into something publishable. She even offered me the use of her equipment to do it and we scheduled a day for her to show me how it works herself. Hooray for that!
We also discussed some labs for me to look at for post-doc positions. I wrote a self-destructing post some time ago about my desire to do a post-doc with FCM...when I emailed to inquire about this possibility she sent me a really nice response:
I really respect FCM and appreciate her willingness to give me this info up front rather than dragging it out into a "let's wait and see" situation.
So today as we were discussing some options for me, she also said that I should consider applying to labs run by young faculty rather than established researchers (a category that FCM falls into) because she thinks that I would really benefit from working with a mentor who actually gets involved with my project, even at the bench. She's absolutely right. I would love to have a mentor that is invested in my project and shows some interest in what I'm doing. In my current situation, GrAdvisor is interested in Shiny New Data from Shiny New Technique...because it's Shiny. We don't have a project built around it just yet, but it looks really cool and sparkly when he gives talks. Which is great as long as Shiny New Data keeps coming in. But when I really need him to care, like when I'm stuck and nothing's working, he couldn't give a rodent's posterior about my project and so I am left feeling like I am the only one who actually cares about the question we are trying to answer with this project. This has made me an independently motivated and self-sufficient scientist (by necessity) which is a good thing I guess. Still, it's really disheartening to feel that it matters to no one but me after all the mental and physical and emotional energy I've invested in this project.
So yeah, I think that FCM's right about what sort of mentor I should be looking for at the next step. I'm pretty independent and I like that GrAdvisor isn't usually breathing down my neck, but it would be a really nice change of pace to have a mentor that is enthusiastic about the science that I'm doing rather than just the data that I'm producing. It would be nice to have interactions and *gasp* actual discussions in the lab about what I'm doing. It would be nice to be treated like a colleague rather than a wayward child when troubleshooting an experiment. It would be nice to have someone as invested in the process as they are in the outcome. All of these things sound great, and I'm so glad that FCM brought this up. I really appreciate the fact that she has given some thought to who I am and the most probable circumstances for my scientific success and happiness.
All the same, there is this part of me that interprets this as an easy let-down to take the place of "you're not good enough for my lab."
And it stings.
Rationally, I know that this is not what she's saying. But there is this part of me that is still a kid in grade school and I want everyone to love me for how smart I am. I don't want to hear that I might be more or less successful due to this or that variable. I want everyone to believe that I am excellent at everything no matter what. I don't want to hear that I'm "not quite right" for this lab or that person. I want everyone to want me because I'm super-intelligent and good-at-science and awesome. I know that this isn't very realistic. I have my own needs and wants and a personality so of course there are going to be some labs and PIs that are a better fit than others. But it hurts a little when the person you really want to work with doesn't want you quite as much.
We also discussed some labs for me to look at for post-doc positions. I wrote a self-destructing post some time ago about my desire to do a post-doc with FCM...when I emailed to inquire about this possibility she sent me a really nice response:
"While I think that you would be a good fit for the lab, it would financially irresponsible of me to offer you a position right now as we've been having trouble with grant renewals and I'm not sure I'll be able to continue to fund the people I have already."
I really respect FCM and appreciate her willingness to give me this info up front rather than dragging it out into a "let's wait and see" situation.
So today as we were discussing some options for me, she also said that I should consider applying to labs run by young faculty rather than established researchers (a category that FCM falls into) because she thinks that I would really benefit from working with a mentor who actually gets involved with my project, even at the bench. She's absolutely right. I would love to have a mentor that is invested in my project and shows some interest in what I'm doing. In my current situation, GrAdvisor is interested in Shiny New Data from Shiny New Technique...because it's Shiny. We don't have a project built around it just yet, but it looks really cool and sparkly when he gives talks. Which is great as long as Shiny New Data keeps coming in. But when I really need him to care, like when I'm stuck and nothing's working, he couldn't give a rodent's posterior about my project and so I am left feeling like I am the only one who actually cares about the question we are trying to answer with this project. This has made me an independently motivated and self-sufficient scientist (by necessity) which is a good thing I guess. Still, it's really disheartening to feel that it matters to no one but me after all the mental and physical and emotional energy I've invested in this project.
So yeah, I think that FCM's right about what sort of mentor I should be looking for at the next step. I'm pretty independent and I like that GrAdvisor isn't usually breathing down my neck, but it would be a really nice change of pace to have a mentor that is enthusiastic about the science that I'm doing rather than just the data that I'm producing. It would be nice to have interactions and *gasp* actual discussions in the lab about what I'm doing. It would be nice to be treated like a colleague rather than a wayward child when troubleshooting an experiment. It would be nice to have someone as invested in the process as they are in the outcome. All of these things sound great, and I'm so glad that FCM brought this up. I really appreciate the fact that she has given some thought to who I am and the most probable circumstances for my scientific success and happiness.
All the same, there is this part of me that interprets this as an easy let-down to take the place of "you're not good enough for my lab."
And it stings.
Rationally, I know that this is not what she's saying. But there is this part of me that is still a kid in grade school and I want everyone to love me for how smart I am. I don't want to hear that I might be more or less successful due to this or that variable. I want everyone to believe that I am excellent at everything no matter what. I don't want to hear that I'm "not quite right" for this lab or that person. I want everyone to want me because I'm super-intelligent and good-at-science and awesome. I know that this isn't very realistic. I have my own needs and wants and a personality so of course there are going to be some labs and PIs that are a better fit than others. But it hurts a little when the person you really want to work with doesn't want you quite as much.
Kick-Ass Paper
This is some smoking hot science. This kind of multi-disciplinary big-picture thinking makes me want to get up and dance...but people in my lab would think I was nuts.
I don't have time to write about why it's so freakin' cool right now, but check it out.
I don't have time to write about why it's so freakin' cool right now, but check it out.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
meme...because I just sent off my galley edits and now I'm feeling lazy.
This is a fun meme from Curiosity Killed the Cat.
"Tag" if you want to be "it".
(Bold are the ones I've done, Italics with some qualifiers)
1. Started my own blog - ummm, duh?
2. Slept under the stars - Mojave desert w00t!!11!!!
3. Played in a band - flute in the high school band! Supergeek! But I loved it.
4. Visited Hawaii - lots of family there
5. Watched a meteor shower
6. Given more than I can afford to charity...maybe, if you count my starving grad student self as a charity case. I sometimes do.
7. Been to Disneyland/world - anticlimactic, as the first (and last) time I went was as a college student.
8. Climbed a mountain
9. Held a praying mantis
10. Sung a solo - in elementary school
11. Bungee jumped (no, but it would be fun)
12. Visited Paris
13. Watched lightning at sea
14. Taught myself an art from scratch - I paint furniture with interesting designs
15. Adopted a child - only if sponsoring a kid in 3rd world country counts
16. Had food poisoning
17. Walked to the top of the Statue of Liberty
18. Grown my own vegetables - still do
19. Seen the Mona Lisa in France - it's wee!
20. Slept on an overnight train - many, many times
21. Had a pillow fight
22. Hitchhiked
23. Taken a sick day when you’re not ill - "mental health day"
24. Built a snow fort
25. Held a lamb - too many to count really
26. Gone skinny dipping ;)
27. Run a Marathon - more than one!
28. Ridden in a gondola in Venice
29. Seen a total eclipse
30. Watched a sunrise or sunset
31. Hit a home run - I suck at bat/ball sports
32. Been on a cruise
33. Seen Niagara Falls in person
34. Visited the birthplace of my ancestors - Sweden!
35. Seen an Amish community
36. Taught myself a new language...I speak some marginal Italian, but I didn't teach myself
37. Had enough money to be truly satisfied...it wouldn't take much for me, just enough not to stress out when the bills come in each month
38. Seen the Leaning Tower of Pisa in person
39. Gone rock climbing
40. Seen Michelangelo’s David - as cool as you'd expect
41. Sung karaoke - drunken karaoke, even better!
42. Seen Old Faithful geyser erupt
43. Bought a stranger a meal at a restaurant - burrito for homeless guy
44. Visited Africa
45. Walked on a beach by moonlight - to watch fish spawning in the sand!
46. Been transported in an ambulance
47. Had my portrait painted
48. Gone deep sea fishing
49. Seen the Sistine Chapel in person - cool but there was a lot of shushing from the guards
50. Been to the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris - kind of anticlimactic really
51. Gone scuba diving or snorkeling
52. Kissed in the rain
53. Played in the mud
54. Gone to a drive-in theater
55. Been in a movie...no, but I have been in a couple of TV shows
56. Visited the Great Wall of China
57. Started a business
58. Taken a martial arts class
59. Visited Russia
60. Served at a soup kitchen
61. Sold Girl Scout Cookies...I was in CampFire, not Girl Scouts. We sold candy. I hated it.
62. Gone whale watching
63. Got flowers for no reason - sunflowers...on a semi-regular basis when BH and I first started dating - thanks BH!
64. Donated blood, platelets or plasma
65. Gone sky diving...no, but I've been para-skiing in the Swiss Alps!
66. Visited a Nazi Concentration Camp
67. Bounced a check - not on purpose :(
68. Flown in a helicopter
69. Saved a favorite childhood toy
70. Visited the Lincoln Memorial...but I didn't go inside
71. Eaten caviar
72. Pieced a quilt - from college/running/study abroad t-shirts
73. Stood in Times Square - meh.
74. Toured the Everglades
75. Been fired from a job
76. Seen the Changing of the Guards in London
77. Broken a bone
78. Been on a speeding motorcycle...not an experience I'd like to repeat
79. Seen the Grand Canyon in person
80. Published a book
81. Visited the Vatican
82. Bought a brand new car - actually, a truck
83. Walked in Jerusalem
84. Had my picture in the newspaper
85. Read the entire Bible - not all in one sitting
86. Visited the White House...just the outside viewed from the Mall
87. Killed and prepared an animal for eating...only fish with my own hands, but I grew up on a farm so all of the meat in our freezer previously had a name
88. Had chickenpox
89. Saved someone’s life
90. Sat on a jury - Nope! I still vote (and therefore get jury summons) in the Blue State I grew up in - awesome current-home Red State loophole for full-time students means I don't have to declare residency here...whenever I get called by Blue State for jury duty I say, "Sure, my transportation cost will be a plane ticket half-way across the country"...so I've never sat on a jury
91. Met someone famous - Cher!! I bumped into her in the supermarket. She was wearing sweatpants and buying CoverGirl makeup. I kid you not.
92. Joined a book club
93. Lost a loved one
94. Had a baby
95. Seen the Alamo in person
96. Swam in the Great Salt Lake
97. Been involved in a law suit - just small claims court. Sold my 4H project flock of sheep to a neighbor before heading off to college...delivered the critters and then she just. didn't. pay me. How weird is that? She even goes to church with my parents. I won the claim and got full payment, which covered my books and fees freshman year.
98. Owned a cell phone
99. Been stung by a bee
100. Ridden an elephant...nope, but I have ridden a camel. Not a comfortable ride.
"Tag" if you want to be "it".
(Bold are the ones I've done, Italics with some qualifiers)
1. Started my own blog - ummm, duh?
2. Slept under the stars - Mojave desert w00t!!11!!!
3. Played in a band - flute in the high school band! Supergeek! But I loved it.
4. Visited Hawaii - lots of family there
5. Watched a meteor shower
6. Given more than I can afford to charity...maybe, if you count my starving grad student self as a charity case. I sometimes do.
7. Been to Disneyland/world - anticlimactic, as the first (and last) time I went was as a college student.
8. Climbed a mountain
9. Held a praying mantis
10. Sung a solo - in elementary school
11. Bungee jumped (no, but it would be fun)
12. Visited Paris
13. Watched lightning at sea
14. Taught myself an art from scratch - I paint furniture with interesting designs
15. Adopted a child - only if sponsoring a kid in 3rd world country counts
16. Had food poisoning
17. Walked to the top of the Statue of Liberty
18. Grown my own vegetables - still do
19. Seen the Mona Lisa in France - it's wee!
20. Slept on an overnight train - many, many times
21. Had a pillow fight
22. Hitchhiked
23. Taken a sick day when you’re not ill - "mental health day"
24. Built a snow fort
25. Held a lamb - too many to count really
26. Gone skinny dipping ;)
27. Run a Marathon - more than one!
28. Ridden in a gondola in Venice
29. Seen a total eclipse
30. Watched a sunrise or sunset
31. Hit a home run - I suck at bat/ball sports
32. Been on a cruise
33. Seen Niagara Falls in person
34. Visited the birthplace of my ancestors - Sweden!
35. Seen an Amish community
36. Taught myself a new language...I speak some marginal Italian, but I didn't teach myself
37. Had enough money to be truly satisfied...it wouldn't take much for me, just enough not to stress out when the bills come in each month
38. Seen the Leaning Tower of Pisa in person
39. Gone rock climbing
40. Seen Michelangelo’s David - as cool as you'd expect
41. Sung karaoke - drunken karaoke, even better!
42. Seen Old Faithful geyser erupt
43. Bought a stranger a meal at a restaurant - burrito for homeless guy
44. Visited Africa
45. Walked on a beach by moonlight - to watch fish spawning in the sand!
46. Been transported in an ambulance
47. Had my portrait painted
48. Gone deep sea fishing
49. Seen the Sistine Chapel in person - cool but there was a lot of shushing from the guards
50. Been to the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris - kind of anticlimactic really
51. Gone scuba diving or snorkeling
52. Kissed in the rain
53. Played in the mud
54. Gone to a drive-in theater
55. Been in a movie...no, but I have been in a couple of TV shows
56. Visited the Great Wall of China
57. Started a business
58. Taken a martial arts class
59. Visited Russia
60. Served at a soup kitchen
61. Sold Girl Scout Cookies...I was in CampFire, not Girl Scouts. We sold candy. I hated it.
62. Gone whale watching
63. Got flowers for no reason - sunflowers...on a semi-regular basis when BH and I first started dating - thanks BH!
64. Donated blood, platelets or plasma
65. Gone sky diving...no, but I've been para-skiing in the Swiss Alps!
66. Visited a Nazi Concentration Camp
67. Bounced a check - not on purpose :(
68. Flown in a helicopter
69. Saved a favorite childhood toy
70. Visited the Lincoln Memorial...but I didn't go inside
71. Eaten caviar
72. Pieced a quilt - from college/running/study abroad t-shirts
73. Stood in Times Square - meh.
74. Toured the Everglades
75. Been fired from a job
76. Seen the Changing of the Guards in London
77. Broken a bone
78. Been on a speeding motorcycle...not an experience I'd like to repeat
79. Seen the Grand Canyon in person
80. Published a book
81. Visited the Vatican
82. Bought a brand new car - actually, a truck
83. Walked in Jerusalem
84. Had my picture in the newspaper
85. Read the entire Bible - not all in one sitting
86. Visited the White House...just the outside viewed from the Mall
87. Killed and prepared an animal for eating...only fish with my own hands, but I grew up on a farm so all of the meat in our freezer previously had a name
88. Had chickenpox
89. Saved someone’s life
90. Sat on a jury - Nope! I still vote (and therefore get jury summons) in the Blue State I grew up in - awesome current-home Red State loophole for full-time students means I don't have to declare residency here...whenever I get called by Blue State for jury duty I say, "Sure, my transportation cost will be a plane ticket half-way across the country"...so I've never sat on a jury
91. Met someone famous - Cher!! I bumped into her in the supermarket. She was wearing sweatpants and buying CoverGirl makeup. I kid you not.
92. Joined a book club
93. Lost a loved one
94. Had a baby
95. Seen the Alamo in person
96. Swam in the Great Salt Lake
97. Been involved in a law suit - just small claims court. Sold my 4H project flock of sheep to a neighbor before heading off to college...delivered the critters and then she just. didn't. pay me. How weird is that? She even goes to church with my parents. I won the claim and got full payment, which covered my books and fees freshman year.
98. Owned a cell phone
99. Been stung by a bee
100. Ridden an elephant...nope, but I have ridden a camel. Not a comfortable ride.
I haven't been in grad school that long!
Just got the galleys back on my review paper...very few real edits because I am a kick-ass proof-reader. But strangely, tons of gene/protein nomenclature changes. Some of them were WTF?!? There is a standard accepted nomenclature for my model organism (OK, who am I kidding? For the mouse). It is published online and updated regularly, and specifically referred to by the publishers in the submission guideline. Some of the protein abbreviations that the editorial assistant is suggesting make no sense. They are not even accepted synonyms for the protein in question.
Weirder still is that they wanted all the protein symbols (even the mouse ones) in ALL CAPS. Conventionally, human genes and proteins are denoted like this: GENE and PROT...all caps all the time. Italics indicate a gene or transcript, non-italics are the protein product. Mouse genes and proteins are denoted Gene and Prot...the first letter only is capitalized (with rare exception), otherwise the same italicizing rules as humans. Or so I was taught, very explicitly, in my first year of grad school - I even have the table from my notes summarizing all these rules photocopied and hanging by my desk so I can refer to it as I write. Apparently, someone decided that mouse and human nomenclature should be identical in recent years. When I yelped about this as I looked through the galleys for the text of my article, the two other grad students at neighboring desks said that they found the same to be true when they submitted their first papers...and they also had a hard time accepting this.
It makes so much more sense to have distinct notation for mice and humans. Primarily because mouse and human genes and their products tend to be remarkably similar (in general)...but there are enough that are divergent in sequence or in function, that it is worth not introducing a mechanism for confusing the two of them. With the previous (better, in case my position on the matter isn't clear by now) nomenclature system, it is easy to distinguish in any given paper which species the authors are deriving their loci and molecules from...without having to add extra letter to an already alphabet soup. Instead of hGENE and mPROT you could just say GENE and Prot and everyone would know that you were talking about a human gene sequence and a mouse protein product. You wouldn't have to write into sentences reviewing previous work that "this study was conducted in mice" or "the gene sequence from human tumor X". The notation speaks for itself. Or at least it used to.
I think it's strange that it changed sometime in the last 4 years (since my class in the 1st year of grad school when it all made sense) and I had no idea. Since not all journals are particularly fussy about this you will see various publications that follow the rules and others that don't. I think it's strange that the official nomenclature website for the mouse makes no note of this change --presumably there are many more senior scientists who are much more entrenched in the previous system than I and they probably still need reminders about this. Was I taught to do it wrong 4 years ago? It's conceivable that the professor who taught us this wasn't up to date on the mouse nomenclature (she worked in C. elegans). Why didn't GrAdvisor catch all this in his proofreading? He's really anal about getting the italics right to accurately reflect whether you're talking about a gene or transcript rather than a protein, so I'm surprised that he didn't get fussy about capitalization if he knew that mouse and human nomenclature is now noted in precisely the same way.
I've now been in grad school long enough to witness (er...be ignorant of) a fairly major systematic change in a standing convention of my field. I can now say things like "I remember back in the day when... mouse genes were noted differently than human genes."
This makes me feel...old. Particularly since I am still a student.
Blergh.
Oh well, off to look over my manuscript (again!) with a magnifying glass and a fine-tooth typographic comb. Joy.
Weirder still is that they wanted all the protein symbols (even the mouse ones) in ALL CAPS. Conventionally, human genes and proteins are denoted like this: GENE and PROT...all caps all the time. Italics indicate a gene or transcript, non-italics are the protein product. Mouse genes and proteins are denoted Gene and Prot...the first letter only is capitalized (with rare exception), otherwise the same italicizing rules as humans. Or so I was taught, very explicitly, in my first year of grad school - I even have the table from my notes summarizing all these rules photocopied and hanging by my desk so I can refer to it as I write. Apparently, someone decided that mouse and human nomenclature should be identical in recent years. When I yelped about this as I looked through the galleys for the text of my article, the two other grad students at neighboring desks said that they found the same to be true when they submitted their first papers...and they also had a hard time accepting this.
It makes so much more sense to have distinct notation for mice and humans. Primarily because mouse and human genes and their products tend to be remarkably similar (in general)...but there are enough that are divergent in sequence or in function, that it is worth not introducing a mechanism for confusing the two of them. With the previous (better, in case my position on the matter isn't clear by now) nomenclature system, it is easy to distinguish in any given paper which species the authors are deriving their loci and molecules from...without having to add extra letter to an already alphabet soup. Instead of hGENE and mPROT you could just say GENE and Prot and everyone would know that you were talking about a human gene sequence and a mouse protein product. You wouldn't have to write into sentences reviewing previous work that "this study was conducted in mice" or "the gene sequence from human tumor X". The notation speaks for itself. Or at least it used to.
I think it's strange that it changed sometime in the last 4 years (since my class in the 1st year of grad school when it all made sense) and I had no idea. Since not all journals are particularly fussy about this you will see various publications that follow the rules and others that don't. I think it's strange that the official nomenclature website for the mouse makes no note of this change --presumably there are many more senior scientists who are much more entrenched in the previous system than I and they probably still need reminders about this. Was I taught to do it wrong 4 years ago? It's conceivable that the professor who taught us this wasn't up to date on the mouse nomenclature (she worked in C. elegans). Why didn't GrAdvisor catch all this in his proofreading? He's really anal about getting the italics right to accurately reflect whether you're talking about a gene or transcript rather than a protein, so I'm surprised that he didn't get fussy about capitalization if he knew that mouse and human nomenclature is now noted in precisely the same way.
I've now been in grad school long enough to witness (er...be ignorant of) a fairly major systematic change in a standing convention of my field. I can now say things like "I remember back in the day when... mouse genes were noted differently than human genes."
This makes me feel...old. Particularly since I am still a student.
Blergh.
Oh well, off to look over my manuscript (again!) with a magnifying glass and a fine-tooth typographic comb. Joy.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
I can haz chestnuts? I can haz chili?
M&M's firebowl was such a hit that we went out yesterday and acquired one of our own. And upon our return we received a phone call from M&M, who were at the one supermarket that BH had not hit in his quest for chestnuts...guess what they found there? Yep, chestnuts. So we are having M&M over to ours tonight for AA's Kick-Ass Chili and roasted chestnuts and more firebowling. This may become a weekly event as long as the weather remains cool enough to enjoy open flames, and I highly recommend that those of you who are able add this to your winter traditions.
You're on your own as far as getting yourself a firebowl and some chestnuts, but I'll help you out on the chili. Here's what you need for the Kick-Ass Chili recipe:
You're on your own as far as getting yourself a firebowl and some chestnuts, but I'll help you out on the chili. Here's what you need for the Kick-Ass Chili recipe:
- One large steak (preferably buffalo steak leftover from delicious steak dinner last night)...best when pan-fried to rare/medium-rare in bacon fat, but if you're worried about your arteries I will not begrudge you a different steak-cooking method.
- One pound bulk pork chorizo - this is a soft sausage of Spanish origins made with paprika as the primary seasoning for those of you not in the know. If you can't find it in bulk you may also buy links of chorizo and cut the casing to release the guts of the sausage. It sometimes found in "hot" and "mild" subspecies - the chorizo provides most of the spice for the chili so choose according to your heat tolerance.
- One large onion, diced.
- Four cloves garlic, minced.
- Some fresh jalapenos or canned chipotle peppers, finely chopped. I like my chili pretty spicy, so you may omit these if you're of milder inclinations.
- Two cans beans - I prefer black beans because they're pretty but the variety isn't really that critical.
- Two cans diced tomatoes - I like the garlic and oregano flavor but again, variety isn't important to overall success.
- One bottle beer - pick one with a lot of flavor. I've done this with anything from IPA to stout. Anything with some flavor will work, but don't wuss out and try to pull this off with Bud or Coors or Corona or similar pee-in-a-can...yuck!
- Cumin, salt, pepper, chili powder, cayenne to taste.
- Plain greek yogurt - this is an excellent sour cream substitute for those of you (or me) who are lactose intolerant...it's cultured so less of an issue for those lacking their own beta-galactosidase enzymes.
- High quality cheddar cheese, grated.
- Chopped green onions - green and white parts.
- Warm sourdough or naan bread for dipping in the chili.
- Slow-cooker for cooking it all up.
- Cook up the steak if you haven't already. Dice and dump into the slow cooker.
- Dump beer, beans, and tomatoes into the slow cooker. If you like your chili super thick, drain the beans and tomatoes first. I ordinarily just drain the beans, but it will be delicious however much liquid you decide to include.
- "Brown" the chorizo (pork actually goes from pink to white rather than pink to brown as it cooks so this is a misnomer)...it will actually be more of a scarlet or vermillion color because of the paprika, but what's important is that the meat is cooked through before including it in the chili. Dump into the slow cooker.
- In the same pan you used for the chorizo, fry up the onion, garlic and jalapenos until just transparent. Dump into the slow cooker.
- Stir up the stuff in the slow cooker. Season to taste with cumin, salt, pepper, chili powder and cayenne. Set slow cooker to "low", cover and let it do its thing for a few hours or until you can no longer resist the mouth-watering aroma that now pervades your home.
- Serve hot topped with cheddar, green onions, and greek yogurt, with bread for dipping.
- Enjoy.
Friday, December 5, 2008
...and now for some soup!
I probably shouldn't have come into the lab today...but I felt so much better this morning. Now I am so totally and utterly exhausted that I had to sit down in the middle of setting up my genotyping PCR. And my hands won't stop shaking. And I am perpetually cold. I guess I haven't seen the last of this bug yet. Nonetheless, I am very much looking forward to this evening. Good friends M&M have recently acquired a firebowl!
Figure 1: The firebowl around which this evening's hooray-it's-finally-cold-enough-to-light-a-fire festivities will occur.
They have enticed us to the firebowl inauguration with promises of homemade soup and sourdough bread and s'mores. BH is pretty excited because he has had a hankering? fixation? craving? for roasted chestnuts lately (if I didn't know better I might worry that he's pregnant with all this weird chestnut obsession) and a firebowl provides the perfect platform for optimally-roasted chestnuts. I hope he found some - apparently filberts won't cut it and that's the closest thing the supermarkets around here have been stocking - he's been getting increasingly concerned that there is a nation-wide chestnut shortage.
So I think I'll be off home now to make some mulled wine to bring to the firebowl party (so we'll have something to offer in case the chestnut-finding mission failed), dig out my gloves and a warm scarf, and head over to M&M's place for a warm and fuzzy evening, throughout which I must do nothing but sit and be warm and fill my tummy with delicious goodness. Wishing you all an equally lovely Friday night.
Figure 1: The firebowl around which this evening's hooray-it's-finally-cold-enough-to-light-a-fire festivities will occur.
They have enticed us to the firebowl inauguration with promises of homemade soup and sourdough bread and s'mores. BH is pretty excited because he has had a hankering? fixation? craving? for roasted chestnuts lately (if I didn't know better I might worry that he's pregnant with all this weird chestnut obsession) and a firebowl provides the perfect platform for optimally-roasted chestnuts. I hope he found some - apparently filberts won't cut it and that's the closest thing the supermarkets around here have been stocking - he's been getting increasingly concerned that there is a nation-wide chestnut shortage.
So I think I'll be off home now to make some mulled wine to bring to the firebowl party (so we'll have something to offer in case the chestnut-finding mission failed), dig out my gloves and a warm scarf, and head over to M&M's place for a warm and fuzzy evening, throughout which I must do nothing but sit and be warm and fill my tummy with delicious goodness. Wishing you all an equally lovely Friday night.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Snot in my Synapses
I apologize for my absence gentle readers. BH and I had a lovely Turkey Day in other state. It was a long drive, but very welcome since we haven't had very much time to just hang out with each other lately. DangerDog was an excellent traveler, content to sleep in the back of the car until we crossed each state line at which point he was ushered out to pee in each new state thus expanding his territory over 10% of the United States. He is feeling quite proud of this accomplishment.
BH's cousins are lovely people who can cook up a mean turkey and also have some adorable children...a.k.a. germ factories.
I was hoping to return to the lab this week refreshed and rested and ready to knock out some mad science...but alas, I have been home doing battle with the virus from Hades for the last two days. There is snot everywhere - we're talking major sinus infection, which has subsequently colonized my eustachian tubes (which incidentally, makes the room lean every time I stand up) and I swear it's in my brain now too. Thinking occurs veeeeery sloooooowly...too much snot in the synapses for optimal neurotransmitter reuptake. I think I'm winning this battle and hope to be back on board and online tomorrow. In the meantime, the war rages on.
BH's cousins are lovely people who can cook up a mean turkey and also have some adorable children...a.k.a. germ factories.
I was hoping to return to the lab this week refreshed and rested and ready to knock out some mad science...but alas, I have been home doing battle with the virus from Hades for the last two days. There is snot everywhere - we're talking major sinus infection, which has subsequently colonized my eustachian tubes (which incidentally, makes the room lean every time I stand up) and I swear it's in my brain now too. Thinking occurs veeeeery sloooooowly...too much snot in the synapses for optimal neurotransmitter reuptake. I think I'm winning this battle and hope to be back on board and online tomorrow. In the meantime, the war rages on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
