Idea Spill-over

2012 French Open Women Predicition

Azarenka——— Azarenka——— Azarenka———- Azarenka

Cibulkova

Lisicki

Stosur———— Stosur

Kuznetsova—- Kuznetsova—— Kuznetsova

Ivanovic

Kerber———- Kerber

Bartoli

Li—————— Li———————- Li

Suarez Navarro

Schiavone——- Schiavone

Kvitova

S. Williams——- S. Williams———— S. Williams——— S. Williams—— S. Williams

Kanepi

Kirilenko

Sharapova——- Sharapova

2012 French Open Men Predicition

Djokovic——— Djokovic——— Djokovic

Verdasco

Wawrinka

Tsonga——— Tsonga

Federer——— Federer———- Federer————— Federer

F. Lopez

Del Potro——- Del Potro

Berdych

Ferrer———- Ferrer———- Ferrer

Isner

Gasquet

Murray——— Murray

Chardy

Kohlschreiber— Kohlschreiber

Raonic

Nadal———— Nadal———— Nadal—————— Nadal———— Nadal

Phrase That I Love

If you experience blindness, go see a doctor

WHEN IM IN THE FIRST ONE IN MY CLASS TO PUBLISH

whatshouldwecallgradschool:

DON’T HATE!

Give Credit Where Credit Is Due

On Friday, after numerous emails to my old lab where I was an associate research specialist for 2 years, I finally got a response from the post-doc, “Barbara,” about the status of a 3-year study examining the outcomes of stem cell treatments in rats that have ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease). I was excited to hear how the submissions were going and so glad that after 10 months of squaring away all the data and double-checking numbers, the project was complete & the manuscript was finally ready.

Part of Barbara’s email, however, was really upsetting & disappointing; the two PIs that ran the study, “George” & “Alan,” had “decided to move you to acknowledgments because you provided technical assistance for the project.” I was livid and quite upset when I saw this for a few reasons:

A)   Give credit where credit is due. Being recognized in acknowledgements is for other labs that gift you cell lines or reagents, not for a research assistant who ran a rat colony for 3 PIs for 2 years & performed a large majority of the surgeries that moved the study along.

B)   I was put on the abstract when it was presented at a joint meeting almost a year ago without ever asking to be an author for the project. Not only was that the correct move by the big-wigs, I assumed that my authorship was never in jeopardy because of the nature in which it was assigned.

C)   I left UW-Madison to pursue my dream of studying cancer biology & making the world a better place for people & families affected by this terrible set of diseases. Had I gone to a rival lab and not showed any interest in the progress of the paper, that situation would warrant me being removed from the authors list, not me continuing my science education.

D)   The fact that the people who made the decision to remove me didn’t have the courage or enough respect for me to tell me what was happening really pisses me off. Be an adult & treat people how you would want to be treated.

The bottom line of my piece is that lab hierarchy mentalities are destructive and wrong, and labs function like well-oiled machines. Each piece, no matter what the contribution, is important. I’ve heard people in my class at Vanderbilt discuss this idea that techs are below post-docs and that they don’t know as much as other people in the lab.  Think about it this way, ladies & gentlemen, how good is that wheel going to turn if the axle is rusty and loose and the body of your car is made of some Grade-D material?

A little respect goes a long way,

Patrick L. Mulcrone