Scientists

It’s that time of the month again — the third (usually) Wednesday, when I do my Virtually Speaking Science gig. This afternoon at 6 p.m. eastern time I’ll be talking again to Naomi Oreskes, historian of science and co-author of Merchants of Doubt,an account of how a small(ish) cadre of cold-war scientists became hired guns for Big Tobacco and the anti-climate change brigade. Naomi and I spoke in 2011 about the threats posed by the spread of “scientistic” argument — the use of a science-like language, couched in the rhetoric of disinterested skepticism, to obscure critical knowledge for public audiences. Well, flash forward a year and a half, and we come to an America in which we have experienced years of devastating drought, superstorm Sandy, this week’s tornado, and the breaching of the 400 ppm atmospheric carbon threshold, and it’s time to talk again about the cost of denialism and the misuse of perceived authority by our still-thriving doubt peddlars. The tornado provides a great touchstone in fact — as Naomi and I have been emailing back and forth on the question.  What’s happening is that there is a growing body of increasingly firm research on the impact of climate change on all kinds of circumstances.  Changing and possibly deepening patterns of drought are pretty clearly on the table.  A boost in the number of severe hurricanes too.  Significant ice melt and sea level rise too. But what will happen to tornado patterns as climate change proceeds is still unclear.  So what to make of that lacuna? Here’s my take (not to put any words in Naomi’s mouth):  If you are a rational person, you say we need more research on that particular concern, but the broad pattern is clear:  human-driven climate change is in progress and it is causing a host of changes that directly conflict with the way we’ve rely on our built environment and on all the things we do (grow cereals in the midwest, e.g.) needed to keep our societies going.  And we’ll get back to you on the twisters, asking you to bear this thought in mind:  if you are a betting person, how much do you want to wager on the possibility that increasing the amount of heat trapped in the lower atmosphere won’t kick up some extra nasty storms? We won’t confine ourselves to climate and the weather, by the way.  Merchants of Doubt has given me a frame for looking at a lot of news, and I see the same desire to conceal useful knowledge the doubtists serve in the somewhat different technique of simply blocking research that might be used to produce inconvenient truths.  See, e.g. the NRA – led ban on research on gun violence and the  the recent Republican proposal to forbid the US Census from doing anything but a decennial count, thus eliminating, among other things, our ability to measure unemployment. So come on down.  Listen live or later here.  Y’all can head over to the Exploratorium’s Second Life stage as well if you do that virtual world thing. Image:  Pieter Brueghel the Younger, Christ in the Storm on the Sea of Galilee, c. 1596.

How’s this for a catch 22: A judge has ruled that a North Texas lesbian couple can’t live together because of a morality clause in one of the women’s divorce papers. The clause is common in divorce cases in Texas and other states. It prevents a divorced parent from having a romantic partner spend the night while children are in the home. If the couple marries, they can get out from under the legal provision — but that is not an option for gay couples in Texas, where such marriages aren’t recognized. This is another one of those laws in which both rich and poor are enjoined from sleeping under bridges: [Texas District Court Judge] Roach said the clause doesn’t target same-sex couples, adding that the language is gender neutral. “It’s a general provision for the benefit of the children,” the judge said. And, of course, the husband’s attorney talks the same line — we’re only in it for the kids: Paul Key said his client, Joshua Compton, wanted the clause enforced for his kids’ benefit. “The fact that they can’t get married in Texas is a legislative issue,” Key said. “It’s not really our issue.” Just remember:  the state can’t touch our guns (or require tornado shelters) because of freedom…but adults’ private decisions about whom to love must suffer the full brunt of state power. Feh. Image: Mary Cassat, Jules Being Dried by His Mother, 1900.

Imagine reading an article on private spaceflight in New York magazine and coming across this interesting tidbit (emphasis mine):Virgin Galactic’s CEO is a 39-year-old American named George Whitesides, who I met one evening after ISPCS. The son of a legendary chemist, he is himself a nonscientist who decided to devote his life to space one night in Tunisia, while studying women’s rights in the Islamic world on a Fulbright scholarship, when he found himself walking on the shore of the Mediterranean beneath an impossibly starry sky. He’s worked for Virgin for three years—recruited by Branson from NASA, where he served as the administrator’s chief of staff—but has been a customer for almost a decade: He and his wife, self-described “space geeks,” were among the first to set down a combined $400,000 for Virgin’s then-rather-speculative flights. It was meant, even at the time, to be a delayed honeymoon. George Whitesides (the senior?) is known to all as a character -- somehow not a surprise that his son would be radically different as well.[The article is worth a read -- sounds like private spaceflight will be interesting and off-beat. I am, for the most part, a techno-optimist; I think that trends have always been towards popularizing technology that was initially only accessible to the very wealthy. All of that to say that I think that more people will be able to experience spaceflight than we ever imagined.]

Good morning! Between May 16 and May 20, there were 51 new positions posted to the C&EN Jobs website. Of these, 2 (4%) were academically connected and 44 (86%) were from Kelly Scientific Resources.Athens, GA: Noramco (a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary) is looking for a B.S./M.S./Ph.D. senior analytical chemist; 6+ years experience desired.Aurora, Illinois: Aurora Specialty Textiles Group is looking for a M.S. chemist to be a senior coatings chemist. 10+ years experience desired.Classic Kelly: "Bustling Lab Technician." (Crockett, ?)

Good morning! Between May 14 and May 20, there were 4 academic positions posted on the C&EN Jobs website. The numbers:Total number of ads: 4- Postdocs: 0- Tenure-track faculty: 1- Temporary faculty: 0- Lecturer positions: 2- Staff positions: 1- US/non-US: 3/1Abu Dhabi: New York University Abu Dhabi is looking for an assistant instructor for general and organic chemistry:New York University has established a campus in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, and invites applications for several Assistant Instructor positions. We encourage applicants with experience in teaching, preferably at the undergraduate level, and in planning and conducting laboratory experiments in organic, physical and analytical chemistry. An M.S., B.S. or PhD with teaching and research experience in chemistry is preferred.So what you're really saying is: we'll take anyone. (For those intrigued by this Abu Dhabi position, here's a recent write-up of the campus by New York magazine.)Jupiter, FL: Scripps Florida is looking for a Ph.D. NMR core facility manager; why do they prefer local residents?Memphis, TN: The University of Tennessee Health Science Center is looking for an assistant/associate/full professor of pharmaceutics:The successful candidate is expected to have a strong research program in the areas of pharmaceutics, physical pharmacy, drug delivery, gene therapy, nanotechnology, nanomedicine, regenerative medicine, bio-imaging, biosensors, biomedical engineering, or other related discipline with focus on drug discovery and development. Casting a broad net, I see.

My short answer: no.

3 true things and one awesome inconsistency that I was glad to see in Beth Halford's article on the current state of the chemistry postdoctoral fellow in this week's C&EN:It's the job market: From Kelly O. Sullivan, a very, very good point:“The challenge that postdocs are facing is probably the same that everyone is facing: a weak job market,” says Kelly O. Sullivan, who manages the Linus Pauling Distinguished Postdoctoral Fellowships at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and is the current president of Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society.I wonder if the senior industrial executives quoted in the article would be willing to admit that they were (or at least "the industry" or "the economy" was) part of the problem.Hey, these salaries aren't so great: It's great to see a look at how inflation affects postdoc salaries:Salaries reflect another disturbing development: Postdoc chemists seem to be making less money than they used to. According to the ACS survey, in 2005 the median salary for postdocs was $36,000. In 2012 it was $40,000. Although those numbers suggest that salaries are edging upward, they’re not when adjusted for inflation, says Gareth S. Edwards, senior research associate with the Department of Research & Member Insights at ACS. “Unfortunately, real dollar value—what that salary will buy you—is slowly decreasing, meaning that postdocs are earning less each year,” he says. From 2005 to 2012, salaries increased 11.1%, while the Consumer Price Index rose 16.1%.I'll put my cards on the table and say that I am not one of the people who really buys into the "inflation is killing us!!!" theory of the post-recession economy and the Federal Reserve's activities. That said, inflation is still there, and it is interesting to note that like senior citizens, postdocs and other folks who rely on a stipend (that's not tied to merit, or subject to regular raises) are basically on a fixed income. Huh.Life milestone opportunity costs: I found Jessica Breen's comments about her twin very interesting and true:Because of the transient nature of the position, many postdocs end up putting off major life decisions, such as getting married and having children, until after they’ve finished their studies. “I have a twin sister, who I think is a good example of a normal person my age who is exactly like me but who isn’t a postdoc,” says Jessica Breen, a second-year postdoc at the University of Leeds, in England. “My sister is married. She’s got a mortgage and a house. She’s just had her first baby. I haven’t even thought about buying a house. I can’t even think about getting married because I don’t have money to do so.”I wonder what would happen if people said, "if you do this postdoc, you're going to delay getting married or buying a house for another couple of years?" (For the most part, the answer would be, "beats starving, or continuing to be a graduate student.")Check out this massive disagreement between Dow's Banholzer, DuPont and Vertex: Remember the Banholzer Award, where Dow's William Banholzer said this?:But you'll notice that a history of postdocing is not among the characteristics that appear in Banholzer's description. "I don't think I need to hire postdocs," he told PCAST. A Ph.D. earned under an excellent professor is sufficient education, he says, because Dow provides newly hired scientists its own training for the work that they will be doing. "They sort of get their postdoc on the job," he notes. Here's what other industrial executives think:Industrial employers’ opinions are more variable, but they still give postdocs an edge. “It is a slight positive but by no means necessary for our jobs,” says Gary S. Calabrese, senior vice president at Corning. “If there is a particular technical need we have and someone has the right skills, it does not matter if it came through their Ph.D. or a postdoc. Having said this, of course those with postdoctoral experience are by definition broader and have a greater chance of being a

Also from this week's C&EN, a report by Jeff Johnson that the National Academy of Sciences is going to look into academic chemical safety:Safety in academic and other nonindustrial chemical research laboratories will be the focus of a yearlong investigation by a National Academy of Sciences committee, which held its first meeting last week in Washington, D.C. The study will consider how safe lab practices can be promoted in academic and government labs, explained H. Holden Thorp, committee chairman, chemistry professor, and chancellor of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. The examination sprang from numerous chemistry-related lab accidents, particularly ones at the University of California, Los Angeles, in December 2008, and Texas Tech University in January 2010. Since the Texas Tech incident, 65 accidents have occurred at academic and government chemical research labs, according to Mary Beth Mulcahy, a Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) investigator who spoke at the meeting. Those accidents injured 136 and killed two. Several speakers stressed anecdotal evidence indicating that industrial labs are safer than nonindustry labs. But little hard data emerged to demonstrate or explain the proposed difference. The committee will investigate if such differences are real, and if so, whether industry safety measures can be applied to nonindustry labs.There have been two deaths in academic and government chemical research labs since TTU in January 2010. One of them is likely Michelle Dufault, the student who died in a Yale machine shop. The other? I am not sure. Anyone know which incident Dr. Mulcahy might be referring to?I'm looking forward to a statistical look by NAS on the differences between academic and industrial labs; I'm tired of the anecdotal evidence.

From this week's C&EN, an article on BASF by Alex Scott that might be good news for U.S. chemical-industry jobseekers over the next few years:The Americas and Asia will each get 25% of BASF’s research budget and scientists by 2020 under a plan being advanced by Andreas Kreimeyer, BASF’s board member responsible for research. The company now conducts most of its research in Europe, but to get closer to its customers and work with the world’s best scientists, it must venture outside the Continent, according to Kreimeyer. [snip]...BASF already increased its R&D spending outside Europe by 3% in 2012 with the opening of seven new labs and the extension of existing labs in Asia-Pacific and the U.S. For example, the firm launched its Innovation Campus Asia Pacific in Shanghai for up to 450 scientists. It’s also rolling out a research center for battery materials in Amagasaki, Japan, opening a mining R&D center in Perth, Australia, and has plans to introduce an R&D center in India. BASF has “substantially strengthened” its R&D efforts in the Americas, Kreimeyer said. Notable U.S. projects include a new lab in Wyandotte, Mich., for developing thermoplastic polyurethanes in cooperation with customers in the automotive, building, construction, and sports industries across North America. Also in the U.S., BASF, in association with Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the University of Massachusetts, recently inaugurated the American Center for Research on Advanced Materials. Over the next five years, the partners aim to develop microstructures and nanostructured polymers with new properties and come up with bioinspired materials.Well, that's certainly good news for Michigan, it seems. The academic/industrial collaboration model seems to be alive and well these days, no? It will be very interesting to see how it works out for the industry over the next 5 to 10 years.

I once went to the allergist because I'd had a very bad reaction to something I ate. I wrote down everything I'd eaten for the last week, then figured out which things I hadn't eaten in a while, and so on. "I think it must be the green papaya," I said, "because it's the only new thing." So they gave my my (other) allergy shots and a lab slip for an IgG test for papaya.While in the waiting room demonstrating that I was not going into anaphylactic shock, leafing through a book, and I happened to come across a description of something called "Birch-Celery syndrome..." (I am violently allergic to birch pollen. It is now known as oral allergy syndrome.) And, you see, the papaya salad? It had celery in it. My point is that, despite my careful and logical analysis, I was completely wrong. I had eaten celery the week before and I was fine; it was a sudden onset; biology is WEIRD. Food intolerances are even weirder.So when people go on new diets, do they feel better because they're eating lots of vegetables and lean protein rather than cookies, or snacking on nuts and carrots instead of potato chips, or do they actually have a problem with gluten/ dairy/ Zoroastrians? I don't know, and neither do they.(Unless they wait several hours, eat some fill-in-the-blank, and wait several hours to see what happens. Or eat it accidentally once or twice and feel mysteriously ill. Then the hypothesis has been tested and data has been collected, and my scientific soul is satisfied, thank you very much. Unless the 'something' was 'an entire package of Oreos, in which case... well, I'd feel ill too.)(This blog has been getting a lot of hits for things like "fake celiac disease", so, for the sake of the Internet: YES, celiac disease is a very real, very serious disorder. However, the only completely accurate test involves an intestinal biopsy. The blood tests have both a relatively high false-positive and a relatively high false-negative rate, i.e. they're not entirely specific. "I gave up gluten and now I feel better" is not a diagnosis. It is a noncausal association. Celiac disease is different from an intolerance; similarly, a true allergy and a food intolerance are not the same thing [though celiac has an autoimmune component because immune systems: WEIRD]. From a practical standpoint, they differ only in that people with celiac disease cannot - in general - have even a tiny little microgram of gluten, whereas people with an intolerance may or may not react to very tiny amounts. Thank you, this is our public service announcement for the day. Moving on!)