You are not using a standards compliant browser. Because of this you may notice minor glitches in the rendering of this page. Please upgrade to a compliant browser for optimal viewing:
Internet Explorer 7
Safari (Mac and PC)
Post Archive
2020 (0)2010 (36)
December (1)

Wednesday, December 8, 2010
November (2)

Payoffs of wasting time
Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Monday, November 1, 2010
October (12)

"Lessons from a Recovering Postdoc" on Benchfly
Thursday, October 28, 2010

Question about the Void: Guidelines for postdocs
Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Question about the Void: What *is* a postdoc?
Monday, October 18, 2010

Blown away!
Monday, October 18, 2010

Living in the Void: How much is a postdoc worth?
Sunday, October 17, 2010

The Tale of Mrs. T and the Rats
Wednesday, October 13, 2010

DonorsChoose: The Rat Race Is On!!!
Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Shock Week
Sunday, October 10, 2010

Science Bloggers for Students: The Prelaunch
Friday, October 8, 2010

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Repost: What's in a name?
Saturday, October 2, 2010

Method Madness
Friday, October 1, 2010
September (8)

A friendly warning
Friday, September 24, 2010

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Lighting fires
Monday, September 20, 2010

Learning without teaching: A repost and addendum
Monday, September 20, 2010

The Changeup
Tuesday, September 7, 2010

I wish that I knew what I know now...
Tuesday, September 7, 2010

For Science's Sake, Pay Attention
Saturday, September 4, 2010

Saturday Morning Silliness: A Speech to Remember
Saturday, September 4, 2010
August (11)

#ACS_Boston: In my PJs
Sunday, August 22, 2010

Turning the Spotlight on Women in Science
Saturday, August 21, 2010

Give us something to talk about
Thursday, August 19, 2010

Roundup! Aug. 8-15
Sunday, August 15, 2010

Roundup! Work-life balance
Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Roundup! July 31-Aug. 7
Sunday, August 8, 2010

Blogging with substance-which substance, we won't say
Saturday, August 7, 2010

Living in The Void: Healthcare
Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Give and take
Tuesday, August 3, 2010

What some smart women have to say about balance
Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Viewpoints on Mega-Science
Monday, August 2, 2010
July (2)

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Surviving the game
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Rate This Post
Total votes: 6
Blogger Profile

biochem belle

Research-and careers therein-rarely follows a linear path. Instead, it is often a long and winding road. These are stories about science and my personal experiences on this road.

My posts are presented as opinion and commentary and do not represent the views of LabSpaces Productions, LLC, my employer, or my educational institution.

Blog RSS Feed
RSS Add to My Yahoo Add to Google
Recent Comments

Before I get the AHA grant, they definitely have been using that excuse (money is tight) to reject me. But now I have the AHA grant, which means they will have extra money once the fellowship start. . .Read More
May 31, 2012, 12:52pm
Comment by Brian Krueger, PhD in Living in the Void: How much is a postdoc worth?

A good start is to look at the NIH's recommended guidelines.  I'm in the same boat as you.  I've been working here for almost 3 years with no pay raise and that's real. . .Read More
May 31, 2012, 11:52am

I just got the American heart association postdoctoral fellowship, in which I'll be receiving my salary from AHA (not much, just 39K). I do think that I have been under-valued, and my institution i. . .Read More
May 31, 2012, 10:25am

Nashsaid: Fine, the most important issue with industry is that you don't have the complete freedom to r. . .Read More
May 06, 2012, 4:53am

Hi. I am living in Indonesia. Perhaps, scientist  would be a little bit suprise to know the truth, but yes this is the truth. Having givin. . .Read More
Jul 09, 2011, 7:54am
Awesome Stuff

Banner photo adapted from image by Alexander Baxevanis under Creative Commons license.

Avatar created at SP Studio.

Locations of visitors to this page

Nov 07, 2010, 4:50pm
Sunday, October 10, 2010

NobelAs you're probably aware (unless you've been living under a rock), the Nobel Prize announcements were made last week, with the Prize in Economic Sciences being revealed tomorrow. Of course, it seems we can't make it through Nobel Week without some amount of controversy, and this year was no exception. Please note that given the inflammatory nature of some comments, respondents only agreed to be quoted anonymously. Also be sure to check out the fine coverage by other bloggers by clicking through the links here.

Bob O'H of This Scientific Life provides excellent synopses of the dissension created by the first two Prize announcements.  Confidence in the Committees' decisions was shaken from the start, as the Nobel Prize in Molecular Biology was awarded to Robert Edwards for a medical breakthrough, in vitro fertilization.

The controversy continued on Tuesday as the Nobel Prize in Physics recognized chemistry, for the isolation and characterization of graphene. Adding to spectators' dismay over the prize, Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov isolated graphene only 6 years ago during their 'Friday evening experiments' using pencil lead and ordinary sticky tape. "It's the bloody Nobel Prize, not MacGyver," one anonymous scientist proclaimed. "What's the point of all the late nights in the lab and the millions in grant monies spent, if it doesn't buy you a medal?" Some felt that it was unfair that Geim should receive a second high profile award, after being honored with an Ig Nobel prize for levitating frogs a mere 10 years ago. In the words of one spectator, "The committee has set a dreadful precedent." Others have expressed concern about one of Geim's previous co-authors, H. A. M. S. ter Tisha. One physicist commented, "There's something about his beady little eyes that unsettles me. I wouldn't trust Tisha further than I could throw him. Admittedly, I might be able to toss him quite far given his rather small stature... Well, anyway, if I don't trust one co-author, it casts a shadow on the other."

After two questionable Prizes, many hoped the ruckus would end there, but they were doomed for disappointment as the Prize in Biochemistry also went to chemistry, in this case Richard Heck, Ei-Ichi Negishi, and Akira Suzuki for their work on palladium-catalyzed carbon cross couplings. "Sure, the title read Prize in Chemistry, but everyone knows that they mean Chemistry in Biology," responded one professor of chemical biological chemistry and biochemistry. "I don't know what the Committee was thinking, awarding it to organic synthetic chemists." Casting a further pall over the Prize in Chemistry was the revelation that Lisa Simpson's prediction for the Prize--Kenkichi Sonogashiri who also developed a palladium-catalyzed coupling reaction--fell disturbingly close to reality. This has led to claims that Fox Broadcasting Corporation might have unduly influenced this year's award. One analyst remarked, "Of course, Lisa's pick and the Committee's selection were not identical. That would be too obvious. However, the same class of reactions were chosen by both. Coincidence? I think not. I cannot imagine what hidden agenda Fox and the writers of the show are trying to push, but I think we should assume it's not good."

With all the hostility surrounding this year's prizes, the Committees may indeed fare better next year by adopting the reality show selection model, as reported by Jonathan Eisen. At the very least, they should get higher TV ratings and might even bring in enough advertising revenue to swell the size of the prize.

This post has been viewed: 877 time(s)

Blog Comments

Prabodh Kandala
Texas Tech University Health Science Center
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

That reality show is definitely a good idea.

How about voting system. Voters would be elite scientists all over the world.


Dr Becca, Ph.D.
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Best. Wrap-up. Ever.

Jason Goldman
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Hilarious. I, personally, would love a reality show model. Make the finalists do ridiculous things on TV and have the world text in their votes.

biochem belle
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

You know, I think a reality TV comp for the Nobel prizes might just be what science needs. Let the committees select finalists, then the public decides from there with incorporation of ridiculous challenges. Then the public might actually pay attention and learn some science Tongue out


Guest Comment

Very, very nice.

Dr. O
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Love it.

Washington University School of Medicine
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

An interesting year.

UC Davis
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Ha ha, brilliant, "it's the nobel prize, not MacGyver"! Definitely behind the reality TV idea, that's the way to go!

Bob O'H
Rate Post:

Like 1 Dislike

There are rumours circularting that the controversy surrounding this year's Nobels has been so bad that the Peace Prize winner was forced to go into hiding 10 years ago to hide from it.

(oh, and thanks for picking up the baton so well - I ran out of steam on this rather quickly)

Independence Science
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

This post is great! As it happens, I just got back from vacation under a rock.  Now, I'm all caught up. :-)

biochem belle
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Glad you guys were amused--have acheived one goal for this week :D

Welcome back from rockland, Mike ;)

Bob, my pleasure. I was initially just going to post the links, but then I got in the spirit of things. Thanks for the inspiration :)

Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

LMFAO, nice one Belle :)

Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

My brain is running wild with what sorts of fiendish things Fox might be up to with palladium-catalyzed coupling reactions.


Also a fan of the Reality show idea: I would like to nominate Alton Brown as the host.

Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Well, but if they are going to do it as a reality show...they have to start nominating younger participants. You imagine the poor 70s year old researcher trying to go up on a rope (being in the lab all the time is not that good for your fitness!). So if they start waiting less than 20 years to nominate people...

Add Comment?
Comments are closed 2 weeks after initial post.