I Can’t Decide: How urgent is it to know what to do in life and in science

My cousin decided to study Biology just like I did (same university, hence same program). While she wants to go on a different research subject, so far she also wants to follow an academic pathway, and so she has asked me a lot of questions to subjects I wished I knew more about when I was starting. These will be a series of posts based on that premise. Please keep in mind all these posts will be based on personal experiences

How urgent is it to know what to do in science?

Maybe the key word here is urgent. It’s not urgent to know what you want to do, is not imperative that you decide on what branch of science you’re going to work from your first year of your undergrad and you might realize that you don’t really know until very late in your studies. But it does help to narrow down your options as you go.

In my case, I knew very early that I wanted to work in a lab. However, my undergrad program was very broad, which allowed me to experience other possibilities, such as field work and even in the lab, to work a bit in microbiology, biochemistry and cell biology.  

As you advance in your studies, you will encounter more and more options; if you want to work in biochemistry you might realize later that what you are really interested in is protein interactions, and then just the interactions of one single protein, and so on. Of the biochemistry group I was part of during the end of my undergrad studies, there is one person working on Aging, one working in Evolutionary Biology, someone working on patents and then there’s me who, as you know, works in Protein Interactions.

However, it does help to start questioning early on what do you really like and maybe even where do you see yourself in the future. Knowing this it would be easier for you to decided which elective classes to take (for example, I took extra classes of Cell and Molecular Biology), which labs/research groups to try to get in, heck even which languages to work on. The reason why I re started my French classes during my undergrad was that back I knew a lot of original work had and was being done in cell biology in French (French used to be the science language also) and so I wanted to be able to read those papers. Ultimately it was extra useful since I ended up doing my graduate studies in a francophone institution

Now, bear in mind that you knowing right now that you want to work on something might not mean that you will work on it. Projects can change a lot during your research life. It might be due to funding, someone scooping you, or simply that the project is not advancing. Do not despair if this happens, as a project is only a tiny part of a bigger subject (case in point, my project aims one single protein of thousands inside one type of cell) that you could still tackle, just from a slightly different angle. 

So don’t fret if you are starting your undergrad, or even half way through and you haven’t 100% decided what you want to do in science. If you have the opportunity to sample the different options that are attractive to you, go for it. Get informed and take your time. Good luck. 


I Can't Decide--Scissor Sisters

What listening to Undeniable made me think about Science Vulgarization

I was very exited about reading Undeniable. Since I didn’t grew up in the US, my first knowledge of Bill Nye and his show Bill Nye the Science Guy came after I was at least in my early 20s. Hence I did not get to experience his effect on science appreciation as a kid but that is not to say I didn’t get excited about science as I was listening to his book. The fact that the book is read by Nye himself was the cherry on top of the sundae; he can transmit all of this energy and love for science a way that made me feel like a child again, learning about what makes science great.

Did I learn about evolution with this book? A little. A lot of the facts that are presented in the book are facts that, working in science, I’ve been exposed to before, albeit in a more academic background. At the same time, since I do not work on evolution myself, there were a couple of items that I wasn’t aware off or that needed refreshing in my head.

However, what I take out of this book is how good a person can be making a subject accessible without dumbing the subject down. All the information and data Nye uses are accurate and well researched, but at the same time, the tone and terminology used makes it easy to understand, especially if this is the first time you are approaching evolution.

Bill Nye has known detractors in Creationism followers. But, as a lot of scientists working on vulgarization, he has detractors in the scientific community for making science “too accessible” or for his colorful persona. Often Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson are compared, unsurprisingly since both of them try to bring more scientific knowledge to the masses. But while de Grasse Tyson is often looked up as an astrophysicist who happens to become a spokesperson for vulgarization, people seem to forget the Nye himself is a mechanical engineer, with a big science background himself, and not just a quirky actor talking about science. The difference off course lies in their own delivery.

Because Nye’s character became famous as a children educator, people often think of him as “less of a scientist” than de Grasse Tyson. But actually, taking so many different topics and making them understandable to children takes a lot more energy and talent in vulgarization that some people might think.

We often assume that things explained to a children level are “dumb” or even too easy. Idioms such as “child play” imply that if a kid can understand it, so can an adult. But the truth of the matter is tat vulgarizing science for kids is much more complicated than it is for adults. First of all, think of the fact that a lot of notions we take for granted might not be obvious yet to kids. At the same time, treating the kid as ignorant or “not smart enough” can push him to be easily uninterested and move over to another thing. People who go for the vulgarisation level provided by someone like deGrasse Tyson are often the type of people who already have a basic knowledge of science and want to learn more, without reading a review on astrophysics. The beauty of what Nye does is that he takes the subject to the child in us, to the person who hasn’t been exposed as much to a certain topic and makes it fascinating, so much that we want to go up a next step.

So let’s give it up for all the people working on children science programs in museums, schools and TV. For those who light up the first sparks in our heads. And while we are at it, let me know who was that person for you. 

via GIPHY

"Science" news

Last week, while reading the local paper I saw this article about Sarah Brightman postponing her trip to space. The article goes on to say that she refers to "family reasons", how much she was supposed to pay for the trip and who was the last person to take such trip. But, why am I bringing this article to your attention? Because the article was (and still is 5 days after) in the Science section, more specifically under the Astronomy and space news of the newspaper. This is not the first time that I see this type of news being presented as science, but it's the first time I talk about it here.

You see, I have no problem with this being considered news, for they are after all, pieces of new information. I even understand the intention of (maybe) trying to use such subjects to lure readers with into a more science oriented article or even an article that gives a bit more info (in this case) about the International Space Station (ISS). But often all it ends up being is yet another gossip like article, with nothing to do with the section it has been placed on.

The increase of this type of articles is not due to the lack of scientific news. On the same day alone, there was news about 3 astronauts that will have to stay at the ISS for at least a month more. This article (on the website of the same local paper) was shared 2 times; Brightman's article was shared 98 times.

So it would look like the reason why articles such as Brightman's keeps spreading, not only in the science section, but others too is that people seem to be more interested by a soprano canceling a trip than news of people already there, with actual information on ISS. But then the next question would be: why not use her article to give people more information?

We or rather the newspaper assumes then, that people don't care about said information and hence gives them less actual science news. And so people see even less science news and more about people's vacations. It is a vicious circle. The general public is offered less and less scientific input and whit less offer there is no higher demand, or at least not yet. The problem becomes not just that the public seems to not be interested on science news, but the fact that the newspaper answers by offering even less science news.

This is one of the reasons why news with "stars" giving their personal opinions as scientific advice has so much momentum. We are putting this type of news to the same level, and then it's no wonder that the general public will take scientific studies and voices from "The View" as having the same weight. Once again, this problem doesn't only apply to science, also to politics and economy. People taking advice about very important subjects (vaccination, mortgages, laws passing) from others that have as much or even less knowledge than they do, but that somehow have become revered for their screen time.

We cannot just blame the general public being misguided on the voices of "famous people". We have to also consider, how much real information is being shared with the public, and more importantly, how this information is being presented. We need more real science news in the science section but we should also work on making them as appealing as vedette's news have become. This shouldn't be that hard, when you think how amazing and mind blowing science can be. Let's put more science out there people!, let's make it more accessible! Let's work on not letting real science news being drown by yet more celebrity news about their latest diet or vacation misshapen.

Today was a hard day: How to pick up your morale at the lab

Hello everybody,

Today's post is going up later than all the others because I didn't have time to scheduled it and today was a hard day at the lab. But it's ok, because it gave me the perfect subject to discuss.

Today was one of those days when none of my experiments worked, my cells actually died yesterday because of an incubator malfunction and my boss was in a fowl mood and unfortunately I was the one who ended up reprimanded.One of those days that I wished I could've just stayed home.

However, this can happen to anyone, and it is important to find a mechanism to bounce back as quickly as possible. So here are the 5 things I usually do, when I am having one of those days:

Revise you attack plan

Whether it is talking to your adviser to doing your experiment for the 5th time, take your time to plan and revise such plan. I find it very hard to discuss things when I am upset and I have also noticed that if I jump into action to repeat something that isn't working, most often then not, because I am still upset I forget something and things just get worst. Not great.

Find something to do at the lab, that let's your brain calm down

Rack tips, fill water bottles, etc. Something that keeps you busy (and helpful) but that let's your brain change gears. Doing this I have found a solution to an apparently unsolvable problem and if not, it makes me feel useful, which picks up my mood. 

Music!

 

I often listen to audiobooks or podcasts when I am at the lab. But when I am sad or just upset the best thing for me is to listen to some music. Put your headphones on let the music help you.

Revise the literature

I know you are going to tell me that the least you want to do when you are feeling down is to read articles, but heart me out. All of the things that I am suggesting are intended to take away of your mind the fact that today is not going your way. Then why not use it to your advantage. Read that review that you have been postponing for month, get immersed in it. Who knows? you might find an answer to the problem you are having.

Write it down

Write your results (the bad ones too) down, on your lab book, or in a fresh Word file. Doesn't matter, just put then down and try to make sense of them. You can also write a bit of your paper, thesis. This problem that you are dealing with might actually give you a nice piece of discussion!

There you have it, some productive things to do around the lab when trying to change your mood. I hope this helps a little. What about you guys? what is your tecnique when dealing with a very hard day? Leave me a comment!

In the meantime, keep working on good science ;)