So we've had a lab from really huge famous university that has sort of been pestering us about collaborating on a project.  Their angle is they want to use a mouse model that we have developed in the lab and need our technical assistance as they are neophytes when it comes to our field and what we do.  To generate some data they sent out a senior research scientist (SRS) from their lab to do some preliminary work.  What did it require from us?  A ton of mice and a lot of initial prep work from two of our technicians to get this off the ground.  So end result the SRS was here for two days and used our technicians, mice, and supplies to do their work.  Today before leaving the SRS gave us a brief seminar to our lab and others on what exactly they are doing and why they need us.  

The seminar was pretty interesting, the lab's work is quite interesting and novel.  At one point during the seminar she is talking about previously presenting at a conference where a room full of experts suggested for her to look at a particular protein in her samples.  She had the audacity to tell us that her boss said if they are all saying to do this, then they all must be wrong!  Really?  You have a panel full of greybeards far more versed in this field than either you or your boss and you are going to discount what they say?  The sad fact was that my PI was in that room when this point was raised and was in the room and brought up the importance of doing that work again today.  To make matters worse she would actually not answer direct questions and move on.  Someone had to stop her and actually mention that she did not answer their question and raise their point again.

She showed off some immunofluorescence data using an antibody from a company who I won't name but will let you know is located in Santa Cruz, CA.  This particular antibody, like some of the others that they peddle is not particularly good.  How do we know you ask?  Simple we expressed recombinant protein and it recognizes everything but the protein.  She and her boss had been informed about this lackluster antibody previously, yet you show the data and present it as if its gospel.  To her chagrin, when she showed this slide the room filled with laughter as all but one of us could recollect that this antibody was crap.  When suggested to stain her cells with other proteins of interest, she became argumentative and downright defensive.  I surmise that she would rather waste time staining her precious samples with unreliable antibodies, when she could also quickly stain them with readily available antibodies that are well established and can provide some nice quick data.  But she would have none of this.  She thought that she wouldn't see anything when looking for our suggested proteins, which would actually be a big scientific finding.  And I guess there is some push back as her lab is non-mechanistic and we are definitely a mechanistic lab, with some serious in-depth knowledge of what they have yet to learn.  I don't know if they have tunnel vision and just can't see outside their blinders but they need are making leaps from pedestal to pedestal with no clear transition as to why.  They would rather not pick off the low hanging fruit to build their story but instead leave those quick and easy experiments (they are just slight modification to what they are already doing) for dead on the side of the road.  These are deep scientific waters and fast flowing at that, best to listen to us when we throw you a lifeline.  After the seminar but before she left, my boss and the postdoc who works on this project took SRS into his office for a meeting to iron out the deficiencies in their work.  You will not be able to ignore a question or a suggestion that is coming from the person sitting one foot in front of you making eye contact with you.  I'm kind of hoping they drilled some common sense into her and eventually her boss's thick skull.

What chaps my ass is you come my institution and to my lab.  You plead for our help with experiments and our expertise.  Yet you are defiant and discount any suggestion or critique that we make to your work.  This is not how scientific relationships are initiated or nurtured.  You may be from Big Name Institution, but you are eschewing the generous advice of those that could be potentially reviewing not only your publications but your grants as well.  And you can't even get this project funded, nor has your PI had a good funding track record as of late.  Your lab is subsisting off of endowment money and cash from a pharmaceutical company.  So please don't swan into our lab and try to tell us how the big boys do it because compared to you we do it bigger, better, with more money, and we got fucking style baby!   Did you think I could go a whole blog post without profanity.

And quite frankly, we have no interest in what you are doing.  We have other more immediate collaborations that we are working on with better scientists (and better people at that) that will pay off faster and with more dividends than working with you guys.  You guys came here to get us on board to give you our models, reagents, and credibility so you can get your shaky work published (SRS even alluded to this) and possibly funded.

Oh and dear Senior Research Scientist, do not make a presentation wearing a darker colored bra that we can see through your sheer shirt.  I try to be professional but at some point I'm going to stop staring at your boring data and bad conclusion and glance at your boobs in a moment of weakness.  Hey, all men are pigs!