I am totally bummed out - my experiment did not work. Again it is where a group that previously gave one result now was totally crap. I had an idea that this would happen (even noted the problem in my lab book) but do not have a clue as to why it should have happened.

Last week we had a reception for a member of our faculty who is moving into a top position with the administration for the University. It is so important for us to be involved with the governance of our University. Too often we cite our busy schedule and the importance of our research as reasons for not becoming involved with the governance. But when we do not participate we get people in these positions who may not understand our needs or indeed what is needed to be successful. This person is to be commended for moving on with her career in a way that will benefit many.

Comments on Michael Crichton's "Next"

I have started reading Next by Michael Crichton. I hated State of Fear and would not have read this one if someone had not given it to me to read. In the part I have just finished he paints the review process of failed because of the few cases of fraud such as the one by the the Korean group. A lot of his comments reflect the views of someone who does not understand the review process. One of the assumptions that must be made when you receive a paper for review is that the data is honestly presented. A person who would be reviewing a person is an active scientist and would not have the time to review the primary data in each case - for micrographs this means standing over the scope with the person. If one says why not use people who only review papers then you have to look at those who would be in these groups - people who could not sustain a research program. The one thing about science is that it does self correct. If something is published that is of interest others will try to replicate the work and extend it. Word gets out fast if work cannot be repeated. If one publishes fraudulent work in an obscure field where replication is less likely the question is why - no one cares about the work.

Today is going to be a long day in the lab. A problem with multi day experiments is the timing - started too late in the week means you either spend the weekend in the lab or spend some long days getting it done. Since my cells were only ready a day late it means today will be a 13 hour day in the lab.

Found out my latest grant application did not get funded. In fact it was a resubmission and did worse than last time. I thought I had addressed all the criticisms. I will have to wait until the comments are posted to see what the problems were.

This is one of the problems with research. You cannot do the work unless you have funding. To get the preliminary data to show that the work is feasible and you can do everything proposed you need money. It is chasing ones own tail.