Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

 On episode #7 of the podcast This Week in Microbiology, Vincent, Cliff, Elio, Margaret, and Michael discuss programmed cell death in E. coli, and the daily synthesis and degradation of enzymes needed for photosynthesis and nitrogen fixation by cyanobacteria.

Hosts: Vincent Racaniello, Margaret McFall-Ngai, Cliff Mintz, Elio Schaecter, and Michael Schmidt.

Right click to download TWiM #7 (44.5 MB, .mp3, 64 minutes).

Subscribe to TWiM (free) on iTunes, Zune Marketplace, via RSS feed, by email or listen on your mobile device with the Microbeworld app.

Links for this episode:

• E. coli extracelluar death factor EDF
• mRNA cleavage by MazF toxin
• Myxococcus programmed cell death
• Using toxins in antimicrobial bacteriophage
• Death as an option (Small Things Considered)
• Cycling of metalloenzyme inventories in Crocosphaera watsonii (PNAS)
• Growing a green future (Small Things Considered)
• Letters read on TWiM #7

Image of Cyanobacteria in Lake Littoistenjärvi by Stefe via flickr

Send your microbiology questions and comments (email or mp3 file) to twim@twiv.tv , or call them in to 908-312-0760. You can also post articles that you would like us to discuss at microbeworld.org and tag them with twim.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Science and medical conference season is in full swing and tens of thousands of persons are attending scientific and medical meeting all over the US. While social media is no longer a new “thing” only a few scientific and medical societies understand its power and ways in which it may be harnessed to improve the experiences of their members who attend their national meetings. 

At most of the scientific conferences that I attend (usually four to fiver per year), people still lug around and are tethered to printed program guides. Further there is no easily accessible electronic repository (aside from the conference website) or guide that conference attendees can use to optimize time management and see “everything” that they want to at the meeting. Unfortunately, most scientific and medical conferences are still being run the same way that they have been for the past 30 years despite improvements to internet access and bandwidth, the advent of social media and the recent explosion of mobile devices and apps.

Finally, and perhaps most egregiously, rather than publicly disseminating what is being reported at these meetings, conference attendees and the lay public must rely on carefully orchestrated press releases (chosen in advance by the organizing committees of the meetings) for information and late-breaking news from the events. This is so web 1.0 that it is almost laughable.

Until last week, I thought that I was the only person who felt this way about social media and medical and scientific congresses. Imagine my surprise when no fewer than three others social media enthusiasts including Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog, Brian Reid, author of the WCG Common Sense Blog and Sally Church, author of the Pharma Strategy Blog, last week authored posts on the topic! It is always refreshing to find like-minded individuals to confirm that you are not alone!

Unfortunately, many scientific and medical societies like to tightly control information flow, limit access to it and, not surprisingly, are quite suspicious of social media. This is because the use of social media decreases the ability of these societies and their journals to control their messaging and content dissemination. With this in mind, is it any wonder why American scientific and medical literacy is pretty much in the “toilet?”  While the lay public may not be able to understand peer-reviewed scientific and medical publications, they have grown accustomed to gathering information on Facebook, Twitter and most importantly blogs. Why not use these vehicles to better inform the public about scientific or medical breakthroughs that have been validated and generally regarded as authentic?

Like it or not, social media is here to stay. And if leveraged correctly, it can be an extremely effective educational tool. I think that it is time for scientific and medical societies to consider using social media at their annual meetings. A failure to do so may have negative consequences for future membership in these societies and also reduce their effectiveness as purveyors of timely and accurate scientific and medical information!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809. Many societies and institutions annually celebrate the anniversary of his birth by hosting a Darwin Day to celebrate his theory (dare I say it) of evolution. Typically, these celebrations are held at universities, museums and schools in parts of the US where evolution is embraced and taught. While laudable, these celebrations are akin to “preaching to the choir”—everybody involved already believes in evolution!

Jory P. Weintraub education director at the Evolutionary Synthesis Center in Durham North Carolina also realized this and decided to organize a scientific road trip—in name of scientific outreach and promoting science literacy—to bring Darwin’s theory of evolution to places where creation is alive, well and taught in many schools! Unlike many other scientists, Weintraub understood that safely sitting behind a desk in a science-friendly environment lamenting the lack of science literacy in the US isn’t going to cut it any longer. To that end, he convinced seven intrepid PhD scientists to take Darwin’s message on the road and present workshops on evolution in a variety of creationism-friendly, rural school districts in Virginia, Iowa, Montana, and Nebraska

Initially, some members of the team we worried about potential clashes between religious conservatives and themselves. Nevertheless, these team members overcame these fears and Darwin’s traveling road show became a reality. In the end, 19 schools agreed to host the scientists but negotiating the terms of the visits wasn’t always easy. For example, a Virginia High School principal sent out permission slips to parents to allow students to attend. Further, an Iowa museum director only publicized the workshop to teachers rather than the public to avoid raising the ire of its conservative Christian community. Generally speaking, the workshops appeared to be conflict free and surprisingly were well received by students and teachers who participated!

Sadly, despite incontrovertible proof that evolution is real, creationism is still taught in many schools throughout the US. Moreover, a new study found that few of the nation’s biology teachers tell students that evolution forms the foundation of modern biological sciences. In light of these findings, is it any wonder why the US may be lacking in global science competitiveness?

There is no question that Weintraub and his team ought to be lauded for their efforts “to boldly go where no scientists have gone before.” That said; if we truly want to promote science literacy and improve American science education, then more scientists ought to get out from behind their desks (and out of their laboratories) to literally take their science to the American public.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Educating!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is no question that DNA, genome sequencing and personalized medicine are on their way to becoming part of the American lexicon. While most Americans haven’t a clue as to what these words mean, many have jumped on the “DNA bandwagon” because of television shows like CSI and its derivatives and high profile genetic information companies like 23 and Me, which was co-founded by Anne Wojcicki a Yale undergraduate biology major and wife of Google founder Sergey Brin.

Countless numbers of Americans have sent DNA samples to be analyzed by 23 and Me and other genetic information companies to learn about their ancestry and possible health implications contained in their genetic codes. Although the technologies used by these companies may not be ready for prime time-use for personalized medicine purposes, they are scientifically sound and relevant. Imagine my surprise when I read about a company called DNA11 that promises to create customized art from a person’s DNA. Yup, you heard me correctly—a customized DNA portrait! 

Here is how it works. Customers send a cheek swab (DNA sample) to the company and they sequence it. Then, a personalized DNA portrait is constructed from the code. Clients get to choose the color and size of the portrait and can also elect to have up to four person’s DNA added to it! And the best part is that it only costs $199 (starting price)! Of course, DNA samples are marked with anonymous codes and are supposedly destroyed after portraits are rendered.

DNA 11 is the brain child of Nazim Ahmed a former DNA imaging salesperson and Adrian Salamunovic a web designer. I have to admit that I thought the idea was a cool one! But, then again, I am a geeky scientist and the transformation of science into art is an intriguing proposition! Also, if positioned correctly, DNA11 could help to promote scientific literacy in the US.

The company has been featured in the New York Times, Wired Magazine and others on “The View” CNBC and the Discovery Channel. Moreover, both Nazim and Adrian have reportedly made millions and their products were recently featured on a recent CSI episode. Recently, the company announced that a portion of its revenue will be donated to charity. Nevertheless, I can’t imagine that, these days, most lay people have enough disposable income on hand to spend it on a less-than-useful DNA portrait. That said, I have been known to be wrong in the past. And, I have learned over the years that anything is possible in America--not that there is anything wrong with that!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Genetic Profiling!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In his State of the Union Address last week, President Obama acknowledged that US global competitiveness in science, technology engineering and math is at an all time low and that now may be America’s “sputnik moment” to turn this trend around. While I was pleased to hear the President say that we have a problem, neither political rhetoric nor turning the lack of science literacy into a challenge that resembles an arms race is going to solve the problem. What is needed are better trained science teachers who can engage science-minded students and a repeal of the No Child Left Behind Act that forces schools to focus limited financial resources on bolstering math and reading scores to maintain public funding. Sadly, neither of these things is going to happen any time soon. But I digress...

Historically, an option for science-minded students who wanted to be “engaged” was local, regional and national science fairs where students competed with one another for recognition of innovative scientific achievement. According to an article in the NY Times, science fairs grew in popularity after World War II and were intended for those who may not have considered themselves science fanatics but were interested in general science. Michele Glidden, director at the Society for Science & public, a nonprofit organization that administers 350 regional fairs contends that “Science fairs develop skills that reach down to everybody’s lives, whether you want to be a scientist or not. The point is to breed science-minded citizens.” Unfortunately, the number of high school students and high school participating in science fairs is waning. For example, in Indiana participation in the state’s science fairs plummeted 15 per cent in the last three years.

Experts contend that declining participation may be linked to competing demands placed on high school students for other extracurricular options like sports, music, and volunteering. Yet many science educators contend that meeting mandated state standards that usually require teaching fact-based knowledge rather than the scientific method leaves little time for them to stimulate students who may be interested in participating in science fairs. Further, many high school teachers lack the training or subject matter expertise to help students who want to enter science fear. Some have reached out to scientists in industry or local colleges and universities to help interested students but these types of connections are frequently difficult to make. 

Yet, despite these challenges, several hundred thousand American high school students will participate in over 350 science fairs during the next three months or so. If now is truly a “sputnik moment” for America, than President Obama and perhaps more importantly Congress ought to “put its money where its mouth is” and provide support to improve US science literacy.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In 2005, The National Academy of Sciences issued a worrisome report entitled “Rising above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future” that warned that America is slipping in competitiveness in all areas of science.

While this ought to have been a wake-up call for all Americans, in 2010, the Academy issued an update entitled “Rising above the Gathering Storm: Approaching Category 5." Not surprisingly, the findings in the update indicate that the US is still lagging in its capacity to innovate and compete and that the trend continues to move in a downward direction. For example, in 2006 (the most recent year for which data are available) 16 percent of American college students received undergraduate degrees in natural sciences or engineering as compared with 47 percent in China, 38 percent in Korea and 27 percent in France. Recommendations in the original report called for creation of 25, 000 undergraduate scholarships per year in math, science and engineering. Although the updated report indicated that Congress had taken some steps to implement the recommendation, progress has been severely lacking in this area.

Almost all US colleges and universities require that undergraduate students have some instruction in science. Unfortunately, most of these courses are lecture driven and lack a laboratory component (mainly because laboratory instruction is costly and time intensive). This is problematic because science is a laboratory driven discipline that requires data collection and analysis; neither of which is taught in most lecture settings. Recognizing the growing lack of science literacy among American undergraduate students, Leon Botstein—music director and conductor of the American Symphony Orchestra and President of Bard College an artsy liberal arts college in NY—decided to do something about it. To that end, he created a program at Bard called Citizen Science; a mandatory science course conducted during winter break that all Bard freshmen are required to take for graduation.

Citizen Science is a two and a half week long program in which students spend six hours per day immersed in laboratory science. The 2011 program taken by 480 students focused on the molecular biology of infectious diseases. Using laboratory equipment, computer modeling and classroom discussions, student explored various aspects of infectious disease research including bacterial and viral detection, creation of vaccines and techniques that can be used to manage global disease outbreaks. The students were taught by two dozen scientists who were recruited from all over the country. There are no grades or credits received by program participants. This was done to promote learning for learning sake according to Brooke Jude an assistant professor of biology and the director of Citizen Science.

Botstein, who incidentally is the brother of David Botstein a world renowned geneticist at Princeton University, has been an outspoken critic about deficiencies in American education. He previously has taken many of his colleagues to task for “shirking their responsibility to create a well-rounded citizenry.” Botstein, with help from his brother, decided to “put his money where is mouth is” by creating Citizen Science. 

According to Botstein, “The most terrifying problem in American university education is the profound lack of scientific literacy for the people we give diplomas to who are not scientists or engineers.” He added, “The hidden Achilles’ heel is that while we’ve found ways to educate scientists in the humanities, the reverse has never really happened. Everybody knows this, but nobody wants to do anything about it.”

Not surprisingly, the Citizen Science Program has received mixed reviews from the 480 Bard freshmen who participated in the inaugural program. After all, a majority of the students who chose to attend Bard have a decided bent toward music and the arts, not science. Nevertheless, many students suggested that their two and half week scientific sojourn has taught them to think more critically about science. Next year’s theme for the Citizen Science program may be energy or climate change.

While Bard’s Citizen Science program is a fantastic idea, not all colleges or universities have the financial largess or scientific connections necessary to create similar programs at their institutions. Perhaps Congress ought to establish funding mechanisms (in addition to the 25,000 math and science scholarships each year) for post secondary institutions interested in replicating the Bard program.

Government officials can no longer deny what the data are showing them; science literacy in the US is plummeting and we are REALLY at risk of losing our competitive and innovative edges in math, engineering and science. Put simply, it is no longer a question of “if” but “when.”

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Politicians, educators and business leaders love to complain about the America’s dwindling competitiveness in math and science and the growing lack of innovation that seems to be pervasive among many American high school and college-aged students. This is the same mantra that I have been hearing for the past 20 years. Unfortunately, while the powers at be like to complain about these things, no government agencies, educational groups or private sector businesses seem to be able to come up with approaches or solutions to these problems (talk about lack of innovation!). 

Luckily, as Thomas Friedman pointed out in an Op-ED in this past Sunday’s New York Times, there are individuals and not-for-profit entities that have come up with two possible approaches to improve science and math preparedness and American innovation. 

The first of these novel ideas is called National Lab Day (NLD). It was introduced last November by a coalition of educators and scientific and engineering associations. NLD’s goal is to inspire future scientists, engineers and innovators by pairing experienced scientists and engineers with students in grades K-12 to work on hands-on science project around the US. Participating organizations that have pledged support for NLB include pledged support for National Lab Day are the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the National Science Teachers Association, the National Science Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Jack D. Hidary Foundation, the American Chemistry Society, the National Institutes of Health; and the Business Roundtable.

Conspicuously absent from the list are large organizations like the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Medicine, the American Society of Microbiology and others. Moreover, no academic institutions or research foundations or life sciences companies have offered to participate. See what I mean about lots of complaining and no action? To learn more about the program or offer support visit NationalLabDay.org. 

Another program that Friedman mentioned was the Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship or NFTE. NFTE works with middle and high school teachers to help them teach entrepreneurship. The centerpiece of the program is a national contest for start-ups with 24,000 low-income students participating. Each student has to invent a product or service, write up a business plan and then implement it.

While the scope of NFTE is limited to only low income students, I learned first hand what an important skill entrepreneurship is on the world stage. In the early 2000s while working as a management consultant, I was invited to dinner by the CEO of an Australian life sciences company. During dinner, I candidly asked her why an Australian biotech company was interested in hiring an American as a management consultant. She told me that while Australians do great science they are awful when it comes to translating the science into a viable business. “We simply don’t have the entrepreneurial understanding and spirit that most of you Americans seem to have. Our society doesn’t focus on individualism and innovation, we like to maintain the status quo” she said. After the meeting, I realized that we Americans take our entrepreneurial skills for granted and if we can no longer excel in this area than the US is truly doomed.

Finally, since this post is about science literacy and improving the public understanding of science, I wanted to mention a cool website called Sense About Science that you ought to check out. Although it is a UK-based organization, what it is trying to promote has global relevance. According to the website:

“Sense About Science is an independent charitable trust promoting good science and evidence in public debates. We do this by promoting respect for evidence and by urging scientists to engage actively with a wide range of groups, particularly when debates are controversial or difficult.

We work with scientists to

• respond to inaccuracies in public claims about science, medicine, and technology
• promote the benefits of scientific research to the public
• help those who need expert help contact scientists about issues of importance
• brief non-specialists on scientific developments and practices

Sense About Science is governed by a Board of Trustees and run by a small office staff. We are supported by an Advisory Council and over 2,000 scientists and other specialists, ranging from Nobel Laureates to postdoctoral fellows, who are signed up to our database, Evidence Base. We also work with younger scientists in our VoYS (Voice of Young Science) programme, which you can read more about here.”

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Learning!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Alan Alda, a well known actor and science enthusiast, is doing his share to improve the science literacy of Americans. His was the host of the Science Frontiers (which ran for 15 seasons on PBS until it was cancelled in 2005) and more recently the host of Wired Science which failed to catch on and was also canceled. Alda’s approach to science education is asking questions that nonscientists could understand while throwing in a bit of humor as well. In a recent interview he stressed that he always tries to “keep it a conversation.” Sometimes, he added, scientists and researchers would “lapse into lecture mode, and I’d have to bring them back into a conversation. This isn’t surprising because many scientists are unfamiliar or lack the necessary training to engage in conversational science. For the most part, scientists are trained didactically and exchange information via formal traditional channels which include: seminars, oral and written presentations at scientific meetings and congresses and publication of research findings in peer reviewed journals. In other words, science education has historically resembled a one way conversation rather than a dialog. Unfortunately, web 2.0 and social media is all about conversations and one way conversations are becoming less acceptable, even in science circles! To that end, Alda just finished teaching a six-week course of workshops at Stony Brook University on Long Island instructing scientists how to use improvisational acting techniques to express themselves more clearly. “The idea is you can’t really communicate ideas unless you know what’s going on in the other person’s mind,” he said. 

Despite many incredible scientific advances in the past decade, the science gap in America continues to widen. Science is becoming increasingly complex and fewer Americans are capable of understanding it. Therefore, it is incumbent upon scientists to begin to understand that they have a critical role to play in improving the public understanding of science. This responsibility can no longer be relegated to primary and secondary school teachers nor should nonscientists like Alda,Ira Flato of NPR’s Science Friday, Robert Krulwich and Jad Abumrad of RadioLab (a great show), be expected to carry the banner and lead the charge! 

Interestingly, while listening to this week’s Science Friday, I learned of educational initiatives being sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundations that are aimed at bringing more science into the entertainment fields. The computer systems institute also offers flexible programs as well.  While this is an important first step, it may be too little; too late. Throwing money at the problem won’t solve it: scientists need to step out of their comfort zones and learn how to better communicate and interact with the lay public. To that end, by way of a sport’s analogy “we scientists control our own destiny” We can choose to collectively learn how to better inform the American public about what we do and how we do it or allow the science literacy gap to ultimately become a chasm in the 21^st century.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Learning and Listening!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Professor Vincent Racaniello, a BioCrowd co-founder, blogger and host of the increasingly popular This Week in Virology (TWIV) podcast series made an anguished plea in a recent post on his Virology Blog to help promote American science literacy. “If you are writing a book, article, toy label, or anything having to do with viruses, and you are not sure of the science, feel free to contact me for advice. I will check the facts for free, because my goal is for everyone to get the science right” said Professor Racaniello.

Vincent expressed his sentiments in a post entitled “Even Toy Makers Should Get it Right” which takes a company to task (Giant Microbes) for manufacturing  “an influenza virus toy” (yes you heard it correctly) and mistakenly presented incorrect information about the influenza virus in the toy’s promotional materials and on its label (an image of the incorrect materials is displayed in the upper left hand corner of this post) . 

While only a toy, I agree with Vincent that it is imperative that all relevant facts about an infectious agent ought to be correct to insure that lay people, many of whom will never read another thing about viruses in their lives, get scientifically correct information. That is the essence of science literacy!

I have known Vincent for over 35 years and I think he is one of the brightest and most unassuming world class scientists that I know (yeah I know a few). One of the things I like most about Vincent is that he is a stickler for detail and (for as long as I have known him), never draws a scientific conclusion unless it there is incontrovertible proof that it is the correct conclusion.  While I routinely rail against self-focused and uncaring academics, Vincent is exactly the opposite. His unwavering commitment to teaching and increasing the public awareness of viruses, and science in general, is second to none. And when he says, please feel free to contact him for help he truly means it and will do everything possible to help you find what you need. Having said that (yes, I know you hate that phrase Vincent; btw so does Larry David), if any of you aspiring young scientists out there need a role model, I highly recommend that you keep Vincent in mind. And, if you need virology help or want to chat with him you can find him on twitter @profvrr or of course, at the BioCrowd!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As you all know, the brackets for this year’s NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament were revealed Sunday evening. As I have done for the past 20 years, I waited until this morning to find a detailed, printed version of the brackets to use for my office pool. That said, I was pleasantly surprised this morning to see that the sports editor of the NY Times decided to arrange the teams that did (and didn’t) make the tournament in a “basketball version” of the periodic table of the elements!

I want it on record that I am not a big fan of inorganic chemistry. However, I must admit that the New York Times rendering of team participation in this year’s tournament was innovative, creative and refreshing. Why, I bet that even Mendeleev – the guy who is credited with creating the first periodic table in 1869– would have been very pleased and proud of the NY Times’ effort! Does anybody know whether basketball was invented by 1869?

I say BRAVO to the NY Times for divining a creative way to make a connection between sports and science. I think that similar efforts ought to be attempted to convince American children (and possibly “grown ups”) that science can be “cool” and as much fun as sports! American science literacy is trending to an all time low. This trend must be reversed so that America can regain a  global competitive edge in science and engineering.

Again, kudos to the NY Times!

Until next time…

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link