HELP.

Dear Readers:

I am extremely bad at people's names.  No, worse than that.  I can meet someone once and, six months later, tell you where they live, where their spouse went to college, and what their dog is named, but I cannot for the life of me remember their thrice-damned name.

I now live in a very, very small town.  I can only say so many times, "I'm sorry, I'm so bad with names, could you remind me of yours?" before people start to get offended.  Of course, I always try to link their name to a phrase ("Rose of Sharon") or to some descriptor ("Sammy's mom Alice") or to something about them ("Sara who's from Israel and whose spouse teaches history" - this one works the best but is impractical in many social settings where nobody is introduced as "My great-aunt Sophie who used to practice Wicca and who lives on a hippie commune in Kansas") but clearly it doesn't work.  I also repeat their name back to them, say it in my head several times right away, and promptly forget it.

Other suggestions?

Unsolicited Advice: Visiting Assistant Professor-ing

Here is a piece of advice that never occurred to me before the whole job-application mess this year:

If you are a visiting professor or instructor, and you are applying to academic jobs, and most especially if your present employer is hiring, make sure to call up all the department chairs/ heads of search committees and tell them how interested you are in their jobs (and why).  Because otherwise they might assume that your own employer will surely hire you (even though this is the dumbest assumption ever - maybe you don't want to work there any more!  maybe they need someone with a slightly different specialty!  maybe you're doing a great job professionally but there is 'personality conflict' and nobody wants you to stay!  maybe their search will be un-approved by the dean despite being approved in advance and they'll not hire anyone after all!*  maybe WHATEVER!) and not even bother to interview you.

(My advice in general about visiting jobs is DON'T DO IT!!!! RUN AWAY!!! but obviously it worked out for my spouse - though nobody hires their VAP to a TT job - and your mileage will surely vary.  And sometimes it probably is a good idea.  The uncertainty made me batshit, though, in case you couldn't tell.)

*This happened to someone in my grad lab.  He got an offer letter pending approval from the dean, and then he got a letter from the dean saying "Just kidding! No dice!"  He had to go back on the job market the next year.  It sucked.

Unsolicited Advice: Choosing a Postdoc (or Grad Student Lab)

Although I have not been a postdoc (you couldn't pay me enough... ha, ha) I did get to play along for five years while Dr. S enjoyed a passive-aggressive, backstabbing, lying advisor who liked to take people down in front of others.

He and I both got, and followed, lots of advice before choosing our various labs.  He talked to many people who knew this person (including his grad advisor, who had known her both personally and professionally for 30 years).  None of them told him the truth, which was: Run, don't walk.

So here's my unsolicited advice for anyone choosing a new lab: Do all the things people say - talk to the oldest grad student, talk to the postdocs, discuss possible projects and degrees of autonomy. Then find the last 5-10 people who have left the lab and gone elsewhere, and call them up on the phone and ask them what they really think of the lab.  "What were the five best things and the five worst things, and what advice would you give someone thinking of joining this lab?" is a nice neutral way to ask.  People with permanent jobs already (who no longer need the advisor's goodwill) have the least to lose by telling the unvarnished truth. Also, if there's rumors that someone left in a fit of bitterness, especially talk to that person.  Their reasons may or may not be good ones, but you should hear them.

And if you are a naive young grad student who thinks "But it will be different for me!  I will work extra-special-hard/ graduate in four years/ totally be the teacher's pet/ never be as bitter as that!"... well, don't say I didn't warn you.

Devil On Your Shoulder

Belle once told me that the voice of her conscience sometimes spoke to her in my voice, saying "And people in Hell want ice water!"

Dr. S is currently a postdoc. His boss is... well, unbalanced is a polite term for it- in a way that is not immediately apparent, but instead a joy saved for a few years' experience of her. The last experiment she suggested to him was something like this:

1) You are putting rubber balls in a bucket, punching holes, and adding water. The water comes out. Great!
2) For a control, you did not punch holes. The water stayed.
3) I want you to cut out shamrock shapes and leprechauns and see what happens to the water. It might not come out! YOU NEVER KNOW!

He is becoming increasingly disillusioned with academia and really, who can blame him?* So every so often he asks what I think about X, Y, and Z. After the last round, I have decided that 99% of all the advice I ever give people could be summarized like this:

Decide what you really want, what you're willing to sacrifice to get it, and what you're NOT willing to sacrifice. Example: I want to be faculty, but I will work no more than 40 hours a week, not 80-and-never-see-my-family.

Think about what happens if you don't get it, and will those sacrifices then leave you bitter, angry, and furious with the world? If so, don't make them. Example: My kid is five and I see him 30 minutes a day and those years are never coming back: FAIL.

Decide whether it's worth it to keep doing what you are doing. Example: I will give this one more year, apply for faculty jobs next fall, and then say, screw you all.

If it is, find something you can learn or get from the experience, and make it happen. Example: Hey! I will go learn to run, fix, and use mass spectrometers! That is marketable!

If it's not worth it to keep on... the classified ads are this way.

Tell your boss/ partner/ coworkers what your terms are. Firmly. Repeatedly. One more time, all together now. Example: I need this paper to be out the door in two months. I need you to choose which of these seventeen experiments are most experiment, because I can only do two. And I need you to actually READ THE DAMN PAPER, bitch. (The last part, maybe in the inside voice.)

If they don't like it, they can take a, repeat with me, long walk off a short pier. Example: Go to hell, I'm getting a job in industry. Take your grant and shove it.**

* Thanks, Amelie.
** I worked in industry; yes, I know what it's like. Also, someone in this lab walked away from a Damon Runyon fellowship to get away from the PI. Everyone together now: OUCH.

Pregnant Humans Who Actually Take Drugs

Part 1 (FDA Categories)

Part 2 (So What Do I Do, Then? Eh?? EH?)

So 2/3 of drugs are Category C and, according to the FDA, the average woman of childbearing age is taking 3 medications.

Say you're pregnant, or about to get pregnant. You go to your doctor to talk about meds. Chances are, your doctor will say, "Oh, well... just to be SAFE, you shouldn't take that! After all, you wouldn't want to hurt your baby!"

This frequently happens over antidepressants- most of which are very safe in pregnancy. Also, I am too lazy to find the articles, but 1) 80% of unmedicated women with a major depressive episode will have postpartum depression and 2) a recent, quite good, study shows that tapering off SSRIs a week or two before the due date does not, in fact, prevent infant respiratory distress. (A month or two is required, which is plenty of time to feel really, really nuts.) Therefore, "stop your meds" is stupid, dangerous, bad advice. For the mother.

This rant is, in fact, relevant. Liability has a lot to do with OB care. If you can convince your medical-professional-of-choice that you are making an informed decision, it reduces their fear that you will sue them.* Plus, they can write it down in your chart and all.

So how do you and your doctor know if something is safe? In order of ease-of-use:

1) Motherisk (pregnancy and breastfeeding): They run trials and write reviews. They also have a hotline. They have good, sensible information on drugs in pregnancy and breastfeeding. Unfortunately, they think one glass of wine MAY HURT YOUR BABY OMG. You can ignore that part if you want.

2) Dr. Jack Newman's book or website (breastfeeding:) Note: I recommend reading through this web page for a truly excellent general summary of when drugs are safe. Example: if they give it to newborns, it's probably safe in breastfeeding and maybe in pregnancy.

3) Common sense. I knew someone whose husband was worried about her taking Tums. They are made of calcium. Like in vitamins. Tylenol? Probably harmless. One glass of wine? Europe's rate of birth defects is no higher than it is here even though about 50% of women report drinking a little while pregnant.** Also, alcohol is proportionally present in breastmilk; if your BAC is 0.02, then 0.02% of your breastmilk is alcohol. If your kid drinks 100 mL of milk right after you drink, they'll get about 0.02 mL of alcohol, which is 0.4 mL of beer, or 8 drops. One cup of coffee in the morning while pregnant? Even March of Dimes, crazy fearmongers though they tend to be, thinks that's safe. Most drugs, about 1% ends up in breastmilk. Think before panicking, that's my motto!

4) The NHS publishes a clinical knowledge summary which is like the Cliff's Notes version of PubMed. (Registration required.) It tends to be conservative, but accurate.

5) There's always PubMed for the hard-core article-readers, (it's an index of all biology and medicine articles published). How do you tell if something's a good study? Well.... that's harder. Is it published in NEJM or Proceedings of the Royal Swedish Academy of Neurotoxicity in Cats? Do the error bars overlap, yet they claim P < 0.05?*** Is it the only article ever claiming that result? Is it a meta-analysis of twenty articles with widely differing methods, controls, and data? If you know a scientist or medical professional... ask them to read up on it for you. We're well practiced in spotting crappy data. Also we have academic-library access to all the darn articles. (Rot in hell, Else.vier.)


* One day, I should perhaps relate my not-very-amusing, three-days-before-Bug's-birth story of double vision, the ER, the MRI, the very cranky neurologist, the ex-military ex-OB specialty ophthalmologist, the lumbar puncture and C-section I didn't get, three most excellent midwives, and a partridge in a fricking pear tree, i.e., how to very firmly refuse treatment even while pregnant. It was, of course, idiopathic.

**Roughly four times the reported alcohol-in-pregnancy rate here, and yet the birth defect rate is no higher. Therefore, if there is an effect, it is lost in the noise. As another side note, one of the most-cited papers on drinking in pregnancy is a CDC study where they defined "moderate drinking" as 3 drinks. A DAY.

*** Mathematically, virtually impossible. I calculated it out once.

Pregnant Humans And Drug Trials

Part 1: FDA Pregnancy Categories: Who Made These UP, Anyhow?
Part 2: What to do, what to do?

Drugs in pregnancy! One of my favorite topics again.

There are currently five categories: A, B, C, D, and X. There is no standardized labeling for lactation. Categories D and X are pretty good: Proven, serious harm in humans. Category X includes retinol, DES, and thalidomide. Category D includes chemo drugs.

Category A is also pretty good, though fairly useless: Proven not to cause harm. They include folic acid and levothyroxine. Great! Folic acid doesn't cause fetal damage! Who knew??

However. B and C are exceedingly useless. What they say is, well, we don't think it'll do anything terrible, maybe, or maybe it will. The FDA states that 2/3 of currently on-the-market drugs are Category C. Tylenol is Category B.

The biggest problem with the system right now- in my opinion- is that it only looks at double-blind studies. In theory, this is an admirable scientific principle. In practice it doesn't work. At high doses, most drugs will harm animals or animal fetuses, and one purpose of animal studies is to determine the dose that causes harm; therefore, most animal studies will show harm. Many, if not most, Category B and C drugs with proven-harm have used a dosage 5-10x the maximum human dose. Try to get that past an IRB for a double-blind study in pregnant humans! In addition, some drugs cannot be double-blinded: insulin, for example, which is a Category B drug.

For functional purposes, these categories tell you almost nothing about whether the drug si safe. Albuterol is Category B. Fluconazole is Category C. Practically all SSRIs are Category C. Blood-pressure medications which are routinely used, as standard-of-care, to treat pregnant women, are Category C.

For many of these drugs, there is a great deal of data in pregnant women, including Drug X vs. Drug Y efficacy studies. There are large pregnancy registries for many, many drugs, which track adverse events, adverse outcomes, and birth defects. However, if it is not double-blind, the FDA will not consider it while assigning categories. If you or your doctor are interested in a drug, well, read through PubMed and look at the registries. Or trust someone's review.

The FDA, by the way, thinks that these categories are confusing and ineffective and wants to change them.

Next: So That Wasn't Helpful, How Do I Know What's Safe Then???

Research On The Cheap 3: Playing Nice With Others

How To Run A Lab (As) Cheaply (As Possible)

I encourage commentary; additional suggestions will be appended.

Part 1: Recycling and Repair
Part 2: DIY Lab Supplies

6. Shop around and negotiate.

• A lot of things can be bought elsewhere for less, and this place sells the weirdest stuff.
  
• Used equipment! (See here, e.g.) Really old things, especially, are worth it: they are unlikely to a) have circuit boards or b) break irreparably.
  
• Common household things- like tupperware containers- are useful. See also: Hardware stores.
  
• Ask for a samples, demos, and trials on equipment/ materials.
  
• Big companies (Sigma, IDT) will cut rates up to 25%. Negotiate long-term written agreements on consumables and services if possible, including sequencing/ analytical chemistry/ computer time. There is a lot of competition. If your college has any kind of support staff, try to negotiate for the college, and publicize: the more people will use it, the better deal you'll get. (Our stockroom gets 20% off, for example, and Dr. S's old lab negotiated a 3-for-price-of-2 deal with Qiagen. Of all places.)
• Ask for an academic price on equipment. Get two quotes and play them off each other; Sigma won't starve if you pay $500 less, and salespeople usually work on commission.
  
• Think hard about service contracts and how much the thingum breaks. Often, not worth it. (Except for: see #9.)
  

7. Share.

• Some places are set up so that large equipment can be used in common: centrifuges, -80 freezers, autoclaves, etc. Ask if anyone else has one, and offer to pay part of the service contract.
  
• There are grants for large equipment if it'll be used in common. (Though often not for maintenance.)
  
• Collaborate with someone who'll do your expensive experiment for an authorship!
  

8. No, really, avoid equipment with electronic parts. My lab has a Beckman ultra, bought seven years ago. It breaks every 3 months. Dr. S's lab has the very same ultra, bought 35 years ago. It has never broken. Old equipment that's still running.... works better. Beckman's parts used to be made by GE. Now they're made in China.

9. Know when it's dead. That centrifuge tube with a hairline crack? Toss it, it's dead. Don't push your equipment beyond its tolerances or you'll spend a lot of time fixing it.

10. Think twice and order once. I can't tell you how many wrong primers I've ordered, and I have a whole drawer of prematurely ordered things I can't use. It doesn't matter to my lab, but very important for the limited budget!

11. Try not to be depressed by how much everything costs. Yes, we're being ripped off. Oh well.

Research On The Cheap 2: DIY Lab Supplies

How To Run A Lab (As) Cheaply (As Possible)

I encourage commentary; additional suggestions will be appended. (Please only comment on the things listed in this post; more to follow.)

Part 1: Recycling and Repair

4. Learn to make things.

• If you've not bought many things for labs, you'll be amazed how much they cost. Gel tanks: $350 and up. A lot of equipment can be cobbled together, with creativity. It's worth it to make some things yourself, but do a cost/time analysis first. Check and see how complicated basic [thing] is before you buy or make one.
• Newark Electronics sells everything.
  
• Horizontal gel boxes: jigsaw, plexiglass, epoxy, some Pt wire, some long wires, a couple connectors, electrical tape. (Disassembled lamps and so on provide excellent recyclable wires and plugs. Scrap plexiglass can sometimes be had free from companies or the shop.)
  
• Miniprep columns: plastic spin filters (Sigma et al.) and a little silica gel (about $80 for 500 g; but a kit for 250 preps runs about $300).
• Find a machine shop and a glassblower if possible (some do work by mail). The machine shop can make you gel plates and the glassblower will repair that $200 flask for $20. Most expensive glassware is worth repairing.
• You can make your own gel-picture box with a cheap UV emitter, a cheap digital camera, a large box-like object, and ImageJ.
  
• If you feel really cheap, a hot plate, a pan, and some sand make a fine constant-temp 'heat block'. (But only one temperature at a time.)
  
• Someone in my lab made a plasma-cleaner from an old microwave, a vacuum pump, and some tubing.
  
• Rotation-only orbital shakers cost thousands of dollars. A few large springs, some flat stuff (plexiglass works well) and a rotary-shaft motor will also do the trick. Ugly... but effective. If you throw in a variable-speed switch in front of the motor, it's adjustable-speed.
  

5. Mixing it yourself is cheaper than a kit.

• Don't use a kit! There's another way, and it's much cheaper. They did it another way before the kit, of course.
• Most things in kits you can make, including silver stain, labeling reagents, and everything from Qiagen.
  
• DNA purification: PCA extraction, then glycogen and ethanol.
  
• Make your own media powders if possible. Not hard.
  
• Pour your own gels; buy dry acrylamide (but only if you have a fume hood!).
• Don't ever buy a protein purification kit. Just don't.
  
• High-processivity proofreading enzyme? 10:1 Pfu/Taq.
• You can make your own Taq. And it's even legal now. The prep is basically 'Boil, spin, run over column.' You can also make: specific proteases, size ladders (buy dry proteins from Sigma), and so on.
  
• Boil your own dialysis tubing.
• Ethidium bromide really is the cheapest option. Sorry.
  
• The quick ligation kits just have PEG (5000, 5%) and regular T4 in them.
• Mutagenize DNA with primers, not a kit.
• For most reagents, you can use much less than the instructions say. Colloidal coomassie: 7 ml/minigel. TOPO: 0.25 uL works too.
• Learn tricks. Like: 0.5 M salt in a blot reduces nonspecific bands dramatically. Or: there's no way to predict which PCR additive will work best, but start with DMSO. ('Additive Q' is 100% betaine. Someone put it through an NMR.) Some specialty journals, including Electrophoresis, have entire papers on tricks.
  

Next and Finally: Think, Then Haggle, Before You Buy

Research On The Cheap 1: Recycling and Repair

A while ago, Flicka Mawa posted about research at small colleges. (I respond to external stimuli with exquisite slowness.) Naturally, I thought back to my small undergrad institution, and also to the various tricks and dodges I've learned to save money. (In biology; I'm not so great at other disciplines, sorry.) Without further ado, I present:

How To Run A Lab (As) Cheaply (As Possible)

I encourage commentary; additional suggestions will be appended. (Please only comment on the things listed in this post; more to follow.)

1. Understand how things work. Because then you'll know what parts you can make yourself/ use less of/ get more cheaply. If you understand what that kit is doing, chances are you can make it yourself. (For biomed labs: Invest in Maniatis; likewise Methods in MolBio is your friend. I assume other fields have similar resources.)

2. Reuse and Recycle.

• You'd be amazed how many things are reusable when washed/ melted down/ sterilized. A selection: agarose from gels, test tubes, 0.22 um filters, disposable columns, miniprep columns, acid washes, even Petri dishes if you're desperate.
  
• Don't get throwaway regents when there's a reusable: not glass beads to spread cells, but a spreader. Use glass pipettes if possible. Glass test tubes can be washed in a base bath. (Glass beads and tips can be washed and re-used; use bleach (see comments); gloves can be re-used.)
  
• Antibodies and coomassie stain can both be re-used.
• Resins can be cleaned. Glutathione-sepharose costs $10/mL, and that's one of the less expensive ones. Clean your resins.
• Universities throw out an awful lot of equipment. Find a building manager or two, or a buddy, at the nearest big school, take them out for coffee, and ask them to let you know when stuff's going to be tossed. Chromatography sheets, microscopes, ancient power sources, vertical gel tanks needing only new gaskets... these are all usable, if you:

3. Learn to fix everything.

• Well-equipped labs need at least: a set of Allen wrenches, a few sizes of screwdriver, a hammer and a mallet, needlenose pliers, adjustable wrenches, regular (large) pliers, WD-40, a soldering iron, a voltmeter, thread tape, a small saw, nails, screws, etc. (Or access; a few labs could go in on these things, or the department could leave a toolbox in the stockroom.) The investment is worth it: repair companies typically charge $100-$200 per hour, plus a drop fee.
• If it's broken and dead, there's no harm in trying to fix it. It can't work any less well, after all.
• If there's a building manager or scientific support staff, they may know a great deal about fixing things.
  
• Basic electrical knowledge will help. If something's broken and out of warranty, it won't hurt to open it up and check the connections. This is where the voltmeter is handy.
  
• Try easy fixes first. I once fixed a -80 by blowing air through its electronics for 15 minutes.
• Call the company and ask for the real tech support people. Keep going until you get someone who doesn't ask 'A what connector?' They may be able to tell you what's wrong.
  
• Epoxy is your friend. Also heat-shrink tubing, electrical tape, thread tape, and duct tape.
  
• Soldering doesn't have to be pretty to work.
• Buy replacement parts for moving bits or whatever you use, and learn to put them in yourself. Incubator doors, for example, are not mechanically complicated but break a lot. A screwdriver, a pliers, and another set of hands usually does it. Vertical gel tanks can be fixed with wire and patience.
  
• If large numbers of screws feature anywhere in your equipment, a screw remover will prevent a lot of pain and swearing.
  
• Small-volume pipettes (you know, like Rainin), you can calibrate yourself with a balance, spare o-rings, and a tool that costs $5.
  
• If parts are cheap enough, it's worth it to replace them even if you don't know if that's the problem.
  
• Newark Electronics will sell you any electronic part you want.
• Circuit boards always die first. They are rarely worth replacing.
• If there's a Graduate Women in Science chapter, they may run a fix-it seminar! Or organize one yourself- there has to be a machine shop somewhere.
  

Coming up: So Make It Yourself; How Not to Play Nice

Ask A Scientist: Real, Crying Co-Workers

Edited: My expand-post script isn't working. Here's the whole thing.

A correspondent, Nice Post-Doc, writes (I summarize):

'I remember you wrote about women scientists needing to behave like "one of the boys" and not be too emotional at work. So, I thought you might have some advice for a well meaning post-doc... Today, a female student who's writing her thesis broke down crying. She's losing her stipend, her friends have left, her project didn't turn out well, etc. I'm helping with language in her thesis. We sat down to talk today, and she had come out of our boss's office, and she came unglued. I was pretty uncomfortable. She was clearly embarrassed about it, but she settled down and I managed to tell her about the tears I shed during the writing of my thesis, among other things and we agreed on a plan between the two of us, the kind of plan she should be making with my [male] adviser. So what is your advice? Should I never mention this ever again? Check on her a little since I know she doesn't have family close? I don't want to treat her like a little sister or some sort of emotional cripple either nor do I want to increase her embarrassment, but she is rather alone.' [In a later message:] 'She came over for dinner Sunday, and is clearly over most of the embarrassment.'

First, I applaud NPD for not only stepping in for the professionally absent advisor, but for also empathizing to put his colleague, Stressed Grad Student, at her ease! Would that everyone's colleagues were so nice, sensitive, and helpful. (Sigh.) Can you come re-train my colleagues?

I agree that checking up in a 'did you get through X, Y and Z on the plan yet?' way would be annoying. Since she's already asked for help with language, and presumably with organization as well, I think it's appropriate to check up in a professional way. It's nice to know that someone cares about one's work, and is willing to help. If you want to ask SGS how her thesis is going every several days or so, and if there's anything yo can do to help out at present, I think that would be great. She knows that she needs more guidance than she's getting, and that's what you've offered. In effect, you are her (surrogate) advisor, except without the pressuring-to-finish part that advisers generally supply.

I wouldn't bring up the crying in a 'Remember that time you had a nervous breakdown' kind of way (not that NPD would!), nor really go into her feelings unless she brings it up. The last thing I want in lab is someone to ask me if I'm less upset now.

Speaking of emotions, I'm all for work situations where one needn't pretend to be emotionless. The response to her tears- this is upsetting, I found it upsetting too, and I'll try to help you get through it- is the best one I could imagine. You acknowledged that SGS was upset, told her you had been upset in similar situations himself, and helped her to find her feet professionally. To me, the wrong response is to ignore that someone's upset. Usually there's a reason, and ignoring it is like pretending the terminally frustrating situation is all okay. Especially if it has to do with work frustration, the cryer doesn't want to feel they're crazy to be upset. When this happens to me, I want to know that I'm perceiving a difficult situation accurately, and that there's a way out. I don't want to be treated as less intelligent or able, which is the sometime downside of crying in lab. But that isn't happening here; you made it clear to SGS that she is legitimately upset at an upsetting situation.

The dinner invitation was also very nice, and I don't think condescending; more nice and sociable. Clearly you treated SGS with respect, which in my experience is sufficient to overcome the embarrassment of having cried in front of someone.

On a more personal note: Like NPD, I am also somewhat disconcerted when my own co-workers cry in front of me! (Rare though it is.) For some reason, if someone from the next lab over cries, it doesn't bother me. They work on nuclear submarine construction, which is nothing like bricklaying, so our interactions beyond 'Could I use your soldering iron' are mainly social. In fact, the last time I was sobbing in the bathroom, a submarine tech patted me on the shoulder for a half-hour. Maybe it's because there's no particular expectation of a purely professional relationship between us that crying is less alarming.

Good luck to SGS and her frustrating thesis. May it be over soon, because while 'done to perfection' is good, 'done' is usually better.

Thoughts, dear readers?

Friday Advice: Choosing a Lab: Personal Factors (3)

Choosing a Lab 3: Personal Factors

1) Advising

Availability. You will occasionally want to consult your advisor. Is the PI always off in Greece, California, and DC? Are there regular lab meetings? One-on-one meetings? Are there certain hours the PI is in lab?

Advisingness. You will also want advice. Good advice encourages you when you’re at a professional dead-end, suggests new avenues or resources, refers you to other people when your PI doesn’t know the answer. Good advising trusts that you are a competent scientist, but recognizes its own limitations (dated knowledge, ignorance of a technique, etc.). Needless to say, bad advice is the opposite.

Ability to give good advice. That is, you want an advisor who recognizes her/his own limits. Your PI should tell you when she/he doesn’t know the answer to something, and suggest how to find out: look here, ask so-and-so, write to my colleague in Ithaca. Similarly, the PI should accept undesired results rather than pushing for the 'right' answer. If you believe you’ve done an experiment correctly but it's not the answer your advisor wanted, she should accept it. A bad advisor will say you did it wrong. Most importantly for a grad student, your advisor should tell you when to cut your losses and move on. This is the most difficult thing for an inexperienced student to recognize, and so the most important in an advisor.

Clarity of expectations. A good advisor will tell you what she/he wants from you, and why. They will help you lay out reasonable goals and tell you when you are or are not meeting expectations. A bad advisor will be passive-aggressive, will tell someone else that she’s displeased with your hours, will refuse to read your manuscript because you were late to lab meeting.

Commitment to getting you out. Related to the previous one. You want an advisor who wants you to graduate in X years, and who will help you stay on track. How long does the average grad student take in this lab? Does the advisor lay out what’s necessary for a thesis? Likewise, commitment to YOUR goals, not to making you into an advisor-clone, is desirable. Do people go on to non-academic careers? Do they get support?

Opportunities for professional development. Ideally, you want to learn stuff in grad school. Do students ever help review papers? (Neutral to good.) Do students have to review papers alone? (Bad.) Does the advisor play favorites, and only the Golden Child gets to review papers? (Also bad.) Do grad students have opportunities to write reviews? Do they go to conferences? Which ones, and how often? Does the advisor think conferences are for your own networking and professional development (good), or a prize for being a good little girl, or a reward for publishable data? (Not so good.)

Atmosphere. What kind of atmosphere does the advisor foster? Does he/she allow people to be derisive or attacking towards each other in public meetings? Does she/he ask mean, awful questions of seminar speakers? Are people afraid to talk to each other or the advisor? Do people make fun of the advisor behind his/her back?

2) Co-workers: Generally, a PI controls what kind of people are in his/her lab. (Sometimes, there is merely no selection.) The tenor of a lab will tell you something about what kind of people the PI tolerates and/or encourages.

Helpfulness. Good labmates are a knowledge base. They answer your questions, give you protocols, and help diagnose what’s wrong. Bad labmates tell you what to do all the time, refuse to share their reagents, and take you down in public.

Aggressiveness. Some people like the stags-in-mating-season lab style. However, if you prefer not to spar in public all the time, avoid labs that are full of people who may bite at any time.

Knowledge. Your co-workers should be like a miniature library of papers they’ve read and negative results. There should be fruitful scientific interactions. If it seems like everyone in a lab is brain-dead, don’t work there. If no-one there has heard of the Biggest Paper In The Field, run.

Optional: Selection for Bathing. Self-explanatory.

3) Everybody hates grad school. (Except the rare person like my darling spouse, who is a mostly happy grad student.) There are always awful parts, and science is 99% negative results. Steel yourself for personal disappointment, find some fun hobbies and distractions, and don’t take your work too seriously. You can always leave, after all.

4) Deal with your depression (if any). Some reports say 50% of all grad students become nonfunctionally depressed during grad school. Depression is a real illness, just like having the flu- for years on end. It will make your life miserable, your work worse, and your PhD take forever. If exercise, extracurriculars, and friendships don’t help enough, please seek treatment. Some of grad-school depression is situational, and having a life often helps, but it's still a real biochemical problem. SSRIs and other antidepressants can make the difference between crying on the couch every day and actually writing your thesis.

Friday Advice: Choosing a Lab: Professional Factors (2)

(Since I regularly repeat this whole thing to new students- sometimes without being asked.)

Choosing a Lab: The Personal and the Professional.

So you get to grad school and they hand you a 300-page booklet, one PI per page. But say you don't have any research experience. How do you know what kind of science you want to do? Well, I can't help you with that one. But how do you know what kind of lab to join? What should you look for?

Professional:

A good lab is well organized: things are put away when they arrive, there’s a chore list and people do chores, there’s an ordering system such that you’re not running out of reagents all the time. Ask: How does ordering work? How are chores assigned?

A good lab has adequate funding and support: A lab of more than five people should have a dish-washer. A lab of more than ten needs a support tech. A lab of more than fifteen should have a lab manager. There should be a secretary, an organizational structure to handle ordering, possibly a stockroom. There should be enough funding for all the people there. Check: how many grant apps has the PI submitted in the last three years? How many were funded? How many of the postdocs have outside fellowships? Do grad students have to apply for fellowships?* Who guarantees the funding, and for how long? How much longer and how much money is left on the current grant? Is money, even tight for essential reagents? Is there a good variety of equipment available?

[Note: I know there are plenty of wonderful labs- and entire fields- with inadequate funding. I'm not saying you should never go there, just you should know it'll make your life harder. Money is nice. Helpful, even. And a good lab manager is worth his or her weight in SDS.]

A good (biology) lab is scientifically diverse: People should be working on substantially different things, not all in one little corner. People should NOT, EVER, NEVER be competing within the same lab to publish first. In most cases, there should be a range of experience (cell biologists, biochemists, etc.). Ask: Where did people come from? What did they work on before?

A good lab has research with possibilities:The research should be headed somewhere, and not towards a dead-end. There should be branching possibilities. The model should support more than one assay. This is hard to define specifically, but if the research premise sounds like a narrow bad idea, you're probably right. Ask people in the lab, or the PI: where is this research headed? Where is this field headed? Where do you see this lab going in five years?

A good lab publishes regularly: Check how many publications per year for the last X years. Did they all go to Science? (Bad.) Did they go to a range of journals? (Good.) Did they all go to Journal of Molecular Catalysis B: Enzymatic? (Bad.) Will you have to churn out a Science paper to get out? Do all the papers have a bazillion authors? (Bad.) Do grad students get first-author papers? (They should).

Next week: Advisors and Colleagues and Depression, Oh My!

*In biology, it’s relatively uncommon for grad students to have their own fellowships- for example, I am funded entirely off my PI's RO1s- however, in other STEM fields it happens more often.

Friday Advice: Choosing a Lab: Intro (1)

I write this not in the expectation that any of my dear readers need my unsolicited advice, but from the need to get it off my chest. Besides, maybe someday, advice will surpass plastic wrap as my most-searched topic!

******
In the beginning, there was the delusion.

New grad students often think that only the professional climate matters, that interpersonal relationships will have nothing to do with their success. It's all about the science, and nothing else matters! Ha ha ha. WRONG.

A bad lab will suck out your life and energy. Your motivation and mental health will go to hell, which will wreck your thesis, health, and everything in between.

A good advisor will give the advice you need, when you need it. He will be tolerant when you are sick, or getting married, or taking a three-day vacation. She will read your manuscript even if you're late to lab meeting.

A sexist lab will treat you like an idiot if you don't fit into the alpha-whatever mold. You will be condescended to and dismissed. You will feel you can never wear a skirt again. A bad lab will leave you depressed and hopeless.

In a good lab, your co-workers will help you. When experimental disasters befall, there will be support. They will encourage you to keep going.

You think it won't happen to you

But it will. Bad labs don't make an exception because you're nice. And you think I'm making this up; no one lab could be that bad! But these things ALL happen in my lab.

Why yes, if I had known this five years ago...

One scream if by land?

The best way I know to discover a lab’s personal atmosphere is: ask a senior grad student. Not someone who’s been there a year or two and is full of bushy-tailed enthusiasm, no. A nice cynical fifth-year (or third if you're in Europe). If there aren’t any, try to find someone who’s left (check the lab’s webpage or the publication record for departed members).

The postdocs know some of the ups and downs, but they are both more experienced and less vulnerable than grad students. For one, they usually have their own funding. And they have enough experience that bad advising is less harmful; for example, a better handle on when an experiment will never work.

If you want the real dish, ask your informant to speak to you privately, and tell her/him you won’t repeat it. And don’t.

Bribery by coffee or chocolate won't hurt, either.

Next week: So Do Good Labs Smell Like Dead Chicken? (No.)

Assertiveness Training (2)

Public Speaking, Or: How to be an assertive bitch and make people listen.

Stand up for yourself verbally. If you're talking, you're the only one talking. When you’re giving a presentation, draw attention to yourself. Nail people who’re being rude: side conversations are not acceptable. People talking over you is not acceptable. If people interrupt, interrupt them back. Some sample responses: That's an interesting discussion. Perhaps you'd like to continue it after my talk. Next question.; Excuse me. Would you like to hear what I'm saying?; Pardon me, could I finish?

Stand up for yourself professionally. Cultivate useful replies to put-downs and dismissals. If you’re talking about something, make sure you have a theory about what’s happening: a wrong theory is better than not having a clue. If you work in a belligerent group, think about what questions you’ll get and prepare answers in advance. Learn to respond quickly and assertively to destructive criticism: I disagree because; On the contrary, this is an important finding because...; That's true, but also, X is true; That's an interesting point, but not relevant; I tried that and it is technically impossible... and so on.

Stand up for yourself personally. Own and acknowledge your accomplishments. The correct response to That was a good idea or You did a good job is Yes. Thank you. I've been working hard. Not: Oh, well, I don't know, I guess so. You worked hard. Someone is complimenting you. You deserve it. Now say thank you.

Speak with confidence. If you're going to be wrong, do it in a loud, clear voice. Imagine you say it in a whispery quaver. For one, nobody will hear you; for two, they won't listen. Acknowledge when you're wrong, but either believe you know what you're talking about, or pretend. In most settings, you'll get more respect for being wrong in a loud voice than for being right in a quiet voice.

Be as mean to people as they deserve (but as some function of what you can get away with). If the next postdoc over keeps interrupting you, tell her to please be quiet/ shut up. (Or if you're feeling nice, 'Excuse me, I'm talking.') If some professor you're never going to see again says your results are crap, say that you have complete confidence in them and he's never even done the experiment and too fireplacing bad. Don't let a fear of offending others make you lay down and take it. Talk back.

Once you've made your point, it's not up for discussion. If you have made a factual statement and you know it's right and there is no point in talking about it- and I don't mean scientific discussions of hypotheses, I mean useless conversations- don't discuss it. Walk away from pointless arguments and annoying or overbearing people who are wasting your time. You said it. They heard it. That's it.

Practice, practice, practice. If these things don't come naturally to you- and they don't to many people, including me- practice. Talk to your mirror. Mutter to yourself as you walk down the street. Think of ways people are going to criticize your research. (This is generally useful anyhow because it tells you which experiments you should be doing.) Have a friend pretend to be a mean co-worker. Say these things out loud to yourself, and you'll get better at saying them to others.

Find a mentor. If you can, find someone who’s been through the battlefield before and who can offer the occasional word of advice on how to get by. It always helps to have a sympathetic and experienced ear. They've been there; you can benefit from their bad experiences.

Overall: Stand up for yourself. Focus on your own work. Present yourself how you want to be seen: intelligent, competent, and assertive. Value your own achievements, and do your best to make sure others do.

Other advice? Add to the comments!

Part 1 here.
Intro here.

(scientiae-carnival)

Assertiveness Training (1)

Or: Not That You Asked (But Bad Experiences Are So Educational)

Personal Assertiveness: Common Traps to Avoid

Assert your professional competence. Total ignorance comes off as weakness. Say ‘I don't know’ and you will be steamrollered. Scientists are aggressive, type-A people, overall. Have ideas, and present them. Always have a response other than ‘I have no idea.’ Say: That's interesting, I'll have to think about it; I can't recall the exact number, but I know it's less than ten; I'll have to look that up; That's a good question; I think X is happening, can you explain your theory.

Don't let people put you down. If your advisor says something negative- 'You were really struggling your first year' say 'I've been working very hard and I'm pleased with the results I'm getting.' If someone doubts your data, explain concisely and without apology why the result is X. Don't put up with it. You're better than that. Tell them so.

Don't put yourself down. Women (and, yes, some men) put themselves down too much. Don't start sentences with 'I'm sorry'. Don't apologize for things that aren't your problem and don't say you're sorry unless you did something to be sorry for. (Setting the fume hood on fire, throwing out someone's tube by mistake, or breaking expensive equipment: that, you're sorry for.) Stand up for yourself and speak like YOU believe you're competent. Even if you don't. You're smart, hardworking, and analytical. Don't lower yourself in others' eyes. They don't need the help.

Never volunteer for anything, unless a) it’s your job, b) you get something out of it (recognition, brownie points, money), or c) it has inconvenienced you personally. You are not the lab manager, the lab mom, or a tech. Your time is for your research. If it’s not your job, it’s not your problem. You’re wasting your time.

If you do something extra, make sure you get credit for it. Ask your boss a needless question about the equipment you’re having fixed; email the lab or announce in lab meeting that the incubator is fixed.

Avoid and be aware of stereotypes. The secretary files things. The janitors clean. The lab mom bakes cookies. The lab manager nags people to put stuff away. Don't act like them unless you want to be them. Be aware that if you bake cookies all the time, or listen to Whiny Coworker's woes for more than fifteen seconds, it will have an effect on your professional persona. Work against falling into the nurturing-female stereotype; you risk assuming a role where people will dismiss you professionally. Again, it wastes your time and effort.

Think about what you wear and how you come off. Look around. How do your co-workers dress? In science, usually jeans/khakis, button-down shirts/polos/t-shirts. End of story. Dress to fit in, or be aware that if you don't, you will have to work harder to be taken seriously. Be aware that wearing overly fancy clothes to lab is seen as 'not serious about working.'

Anyone else? Helpful hints for the young and idealistic?

Intro here.
Next week, Part 2: Assertive Public Speaking!

(scientiae-carnival)

Assertiveness Training (A Story About Me)

Or: Years of Anger Are Converted to Advice
***
Now announcing a new feature: Friday Advice! My epic-proportioned frustration with students who let themselves be trodden upon- and with the years I wasted underfoot- requires an outlet.

***
There are lots of things I wish I'd known before I came to grad school. One of them is how to choose a good lab. (Upcoming in Friday Advice!) Another is how to be a respected participant rather than a doormat.

In the last several years, I've seen a lot of young women, and rather fewer young men, suffer from not being very assertive. They get talked over, ignored, harassed, pressured, interrupted. It's as much fun as you'd imagine.

My lab, as I have mentioned, is a tank of pirhanas. I tried to be nice and polite. I never interrupted. I never hit back when people said mean, disparaging things about my research. At lab meetings, I cowered in the corner, occasionally offering a meek comment, lest they bite me.

I got saddled with chores that weren't my job. I was lectured on what experiments to do, when all I'd asked was where's the Saran Wrap. I got tired and angry and sad.

And then one day... I snapped. I was sick of being ignored and interrupted. I was ready to deck the next person who dismissed my professional, scientific judgment as 'just being negative'. Someone was rude to me, and I interrupted him back and said "This is what my data say. This is the answer. I don't care if you don't like it. End of story."

Once I decided that I wasn't going to put up with it any more, my frustration quotient went way down, and my colleagues stopped treating me like a punching bag. It's still an enormous effort to be on guard all the time, ready to hit back, but it's better than being put down all the time.

How did I learn these things? I don't quite know. A big part of it was I went and cried all over an acquaintance four years ahead of me, and asked her what to do, because she didn't take any nonsense. She gave me thoughtful advice, and I took notes. I watched other people. I practiced good responses in my head. I learned to take a deep breath before answering, so I wouldn't get flustered by attacks. I made up a set of stock responses and drilled out loud until I could say "That's an interesting idea, but I've already shown it's incorrect" without even thinking. I learned to trust my own judgment.

I still see people get run over. It especially frustrates me when young women do it. I want to shake them and cry "Don't put up with it! Grow a spine!" But I remember I was once like that, and they must learn. They must want to be assertive more than they want to be nice.

Nonetheless, when I get my dream job at the Women in Science and Engineering Leadership Institute, I will teach a yearly course on assertiveness for young women, in hopes of forestalling some of the agony. (A coworker of Mr. S is coming over soon for drinks and a preview course!) And what will I say? Tune in next week!

(scientiae-carnival)