scicop

Another problem with science communication is public williness to understand! No doubt that conceptually, science topics are often difficult to comprehend, however not un-attainable. Anyone can understand science, its just that understanding science means putting in a little work, and that is something the general public does not do. Science is now readly accessible to the general public in lay terms. Sure they may not understand a journal article, but there are magazines, websites, and public advocasy groups that help bring science to to general public. However, even when science is watered down into lay terms, it still needs certain amount of thinking to fully comprehend what is being communicated. Far too many times, people read a "lay" article with out thinking, which leads to misinterpretation, misunderstanding, and incorrect assertions. Most evident on this forum!!! I would say well over 90% of posts on this forum are not worth responding to since most of the posters here tend really not to get science. The burden of communicating science not only falls on science itself, but also the public. Understanding science is within anyone's grasp, its just putting the effort to understand..that's were the problem lies. and thats my opinion..so Pssstttt!!!

A good regimen should not only include effective and tolerable pharmacotherapy, but also a psychosocial therapy that aims to provide you with coping skills as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy. The aim of such combined therapy is to ween you off the drugs while allowing you to return to normal function. If you are being administered a drug without proper psychosocial intervention therapy, then your doctor is not doing his job properly. You may wish to discuss the psychosocial aspect with your insurance provider. In the past, such programs were often carved out from member benefits, but now as more drugs are being FDA approved pending an indication for a psychosocial component, providers are starting to include such benefits. Best of luck.

Seems you like you've had depression for quite a while, however depression is often a sympton of bipolar, at least depressive bipolar aka, bipolar II. Physicians often misdiagnosis bipolar disorder as some of its symtoms mimic depression symptoms, thus this is why the doctor may have put you on an atypical antipsychotic. Or you may have had a manic episode that you're not mentioning. I would not quit the pills without consulting the physician. Often, atypical antipsychotics need to be titrated when switching or stopping therapy. Rapid termination of some atypicals can cause some pretty bad adverse events. More over, failure to comply with treatment protocols may lead to your relapse or sub-symptomatic depression/mania which can lead to relapse as well. There are many atypicals outhere, whose diverse pharmacological profiles underlie their differing propensities to cause adverse events, so you should consult with your physician as to which one would be best for you. This is why there are so many!! Patients are heterogeneous with their response to therapy and it is up to the physician to design individualized treatment therapies. So, definately, until to talk to your physician, stay on your regimen!

I'm amazed that academic science has not tapped into the illegal immigrants as of yet to do "slave-labor" lab routines! We all know that a person does not need a college degree or even GED to do mini-preps, make buffers, split cells, or run a gel!! Hell with enough training, i'm sure you can get the illegals to do your restriction digests, and radioligand binding assays!!!! We don't need no stinking ph.d's no more!!!

Actually I have to correct you SkepticLance on your first answer. It should read... "If you can't measure it, it is un-quantifiable or un-detectable s of yet, until further technological developments/reagents are available".

Well, if you have standards and you can show that your adduct containing DNA elutes at a corresponding peak of your standards then it can be a possiblity, although you will have to determine a detection range using various concentrations of your standards. The key would be having sufficient controls. Make sure you have controls to support the validity of your approach. One quick way to do it is if you have standards or a purifed form of your adduct (chemically synthesized) you can make an antibody. Keep it simple and immunize a rat. You can get yourself a rather dirty poly-clonal ab within a couple months that will allow you to detect your adduct, although you'll need the appropriate controls as well. But, again, your ability to detect anything will depend on the concentration of your DNA adduct in the liver, that is, how much damage is your mutagen really causing.

Ok, I think you may be confused about gene therapy and a genetic councelor. Gene therapy is based on technology(s) that allows for delivery of exogenous genes to correct a genetic-based pathology. Although there a few clinical examples of this, it is not a mainstay clinical technique as of yet. To study gene therapy as of today, one can either obtain a career that would allow for participation in the research and development stages of gene therapy (i.e. retroviral construction, pluripotent cell based systems, DNA delivery systems such as liposome packaging) OR pursue translational research that utilizes an already developed gene delivery system, which may eventually yield clinically relevant outcomes. The prior path (R&D) would require indepth biomedical research studies, perhaps leading to an advanced degree whereas the latter, a degree that is clinically applicable may faciliate such career goals, such as medicine, pharmacy, or clinically relevant research doctorate. Genetic counciling on, the other hand, does not require intense study as above, but does require a strong working knowledge of genetics at the human level. A master's degree is often sufficient for this career and there are universities that tailor their master degree programs for this field. This field, you would advise couples on the potential genetic defects and assess propability of genetic pathology in their offspring. This is often more applicable for people (couples) who have had strong familial history of disease. Hope this helps.

HPLC UV is just a purification system. You would need a combination of NMR and (perhaps) a MS machine (for mass calculations) for any form of structure determination.

Although the exact causes are unknown (enviromental and genetic factors are said above) it is well accepted that the pathology is due to excessive dopamine/serotonin in the cortical part of the brain and possible reduced dopamine/serotonin in straital regions. The mainstay of treatment tend to be atypical antipsychotics which predominantly block dopamine/serotonin activity, although there are new ones out there that exert differential activities on dopamine systems. These agents tend to reduce the symtoms of psychosis, but usually patients have to be maintained on these therapies in order to remain in remission.

Good luck! I finished my PhD 2 years ago, and I was in your shoes! Two weeks before the postdoc and still had to get my thesis approved by the librarian (very anal about formatting). take it easy there "doctor"

I traced my geneology and learned my ancestors were nothing more than a bunch of monkeys. Not much has changed.

what is morphology? If you mean anatomy, then I would say I think they run hand in hand, not really a difference. For example: Organism need: Food seeking/Predator evade/and procreation. Anatomy Requirment: Locomotion, thus anatomical adaptation for locomotion. Behavior: Control of anatomy, in order to seek food, evade predators, and procreate. I went to a lecture (actually many of his) where this was elegantly discussed by Rodolfo Llinas, MD, PhD, chair dept. of Neurosci at NYU School of Med. In an introduction to one his amazing lectures, he discussed (or philosophised..which he can do because he is a renouned neuroscientist in field of conscienous) the need for "a brain" to a general non-physician, non-scientist audience (fund raiser with multimillioners). As example he discussed a type of marine animal, that when it is first born, that has eyes and a rather simple central nervous system (of which eye are apart of by the way) so that it can move its appendages and seek food, and find a location where it will "morph" or change into a creature that does not move and gathers its food from the surrounding enviroment (the adult stage). The adult stage does not resemble its young since its eyes and more complex CNS are substituted for a more simpler nervous system, no need for locomotion anymore. I don't do justice to the elegance of his talk, but the point is there can be a link, and obviously with that organism (i can't remember what its called) between anatomy and behavior within its own life cycle. You can apply the same for fruit flys! When they are young they are larva with the their locomotion coming from the muscles bound to the inner walls of its exoskeleton (P.S. this larva nervous system is model system used by scientist to study neurodevelopment). Although, when they morph into flys, they have complex eys, and wing structures, and legs, the help them perform their new way of locomotion...flying! So, their nervous system has to adapt to provide the "behavior" for the wings and legs and eyes and brain to coordinate activity. I won't go into mechanism here, suffice to say there is a complex interaction between spatially and temporally controlled gene expression underlie the life cycle transitions. For the more curious, type "imaginal discs" into google along with dpp, hedgehog, notch, delta, serrate, wingless, toll, dishevled, smoothen, and the like..... and have fun!

Hmm..after a Ph.D., an NIH grant, and publications in peer-reviewed journals, I still don't consider myself a scientist. No reason. Just my own view.

To who-knows...what do you thing stress and enviromental factors do to your brain? It is well known that environmental stressors can change brain neurochemistry over time(pioneering this field today is Bruce McEwen at Rockefeller U), and as someone eluded to before, impact the serotonergic and norepienergic transmission in various areas of the brain. Sometimes the stressors are hard for the patient to pick up on, although somatically, the stressor is making a physiologically differents. Luckly we have drugs available that can treat the symptoms of depression, and there is NOTHING wrong with taking a drug to help you feel better. Sure, physicians often misdiagnois, or may miss subsymptomatic signs of depression. A multicenter clincal trial study is assessing real-world efficasy anti-depressants (STAR-D trial), and their first report revealed only 25% patients achieved full remission from depression where as nearly 50% responded to therapy. Now, not all patients repond the same to same drugs (patient heterogenity), however the study authors did note that physcians often don't know how to properlly measure patient recovery from depression! This is something that pharmaceutical companies are spending alot of money on to fix (through CME initiatives). So the point is that drugs are not bad, and yes, physicians need to know how to measure reponses and treat patients more effectively. So sometimes its the physician that needs changing..not the drug but that is hard to gage, and the only way to assess this is to get a 2nd opinion (or 3rd). Patient awarness is also a big deal. To blindly take a drug without knowing its effects is dumb. Furthermore, its is the patients responsibility to know of their treatment options. So for, if patients don't respond to one drug, their be 2nd line drug (such as Wellbutrin, a SNRI). So the patient should actively participate in thier treatment. So for the 16yo, be supportive of your friend, and let the doctor do what he has to do, until 2nd or 3rd opinions are obtained.

Psychology is definately a science. And in the clinic it is an extremely important tool for improving patient respones. Psychology the study of human behavior, and in the clinical setting, pyschologist have various tools at their disposal to measure human behavior and make the correct assessment and determine if patients are resonding to therapy. As briefly mentioned in a post above, human behavior is hard to measure/quantify since humans are individuals! Everyone has a different response to certain stimuli (stress, work, family, ...experimental paradigms), and therefore much of the quantification of human behavior in psychology is done through established scales. For example, in measuring depression, there is the HAM-D scale, as well as guidelines from certain authorities, such as the APA, or the DSM-IV. So in a sense a psycologist has a way of measuring patient behavior by the use of scales that allow for a diagnosis/assessment/ data point gathering. So, for example, psychology is especially important in clinical trials. So staying with the depression idea, if you want to assess the effectiveness of an anti-depression drug or a therapy (Cognitive Behvioral, CBT, let say), you turn to the field of psychology, and use their scales to measure patient outcomes. Of course, now its extremely important to mention statistics. Statistics is an extremely important tool for psychology. This way they can differentiate between patients who are in different experimental groups as well as assess if drug effect (or CBT) is significant to lets say a placebo group (or another form of therapy...i.e. quick-inteventions). So this is one way psychology, is a science and is of clinical relevance. One other way psychology is important is through pyschosocial interventions that increase patient compliance to treatment therapy. Among the top reasons for patient non-responsiveness to drugs is patient non-adherence to treatment protocol (the don't take their medication). Today, more and more, drugs for mental disorders (depression, anxiety, alcohol dependence, bipolar etc) are being approved by the FDA under the condition that there is psychosocial therapy program that given concurrently and following drug adminstration, to ensure patients are adherent to pharmacotherapy (see the recently approved drugs for alcohol dependence). Few clinical trials are published today without psychosocial programs, or board certified pyschologist..yes..psychologist....AND psychiatrist...at the clinical trial site(s). So, in summary, psychology is a science, and is clinically relavant, and its attempt to understand and quantify human behavior is a necessary componant of not only drug-development/therapy, but also ensuring patient outcomes through improving patient adherence to medication. There are other ways psychology is a science, but I'll let others put in their two cents. One more thing: Even though a psychologist may not know biochemistry, or neuropharmcology at the molecular level as a natural scientist would, it doesn't mean they don't know science! They know the science of their field! They practice their science and probably have more mathematical skill sets and abilities (statistics) than most laboratory scientist (I'm a former PhD lab scientist..and worked with a PhD pyschologist..everyone went to that pyschologist for their statistics..even physician department chairmans and PIs of pharma/govt funded clincal trials!!).

as the poster above mentioned, any job can have its boring, tedious moments, and science is notorious for that. If you can't handle that, then move along to another career. Following graduate school, I entered law enforcement. You would think that would be an excitinig career, the reality is that there are alot of boring tedious jobs that I handle, with few periods of excitement (blowing through red lights with the sirens and lights blaring is fun). But those times are few and far in between..and like science, its those few moments that should be inspiring to you!!! if they are not..then time for a career change..and no matter what career you choose there will be ...boring and tedious times to get over!!

Rapidly place a package of Menthos into a bottle of your favorite carbonated soft-drink. Stand back if you dont want to get soaked. Demonstrates catalysis of gas formation as the porous surface of menthos are a site of action for gas formation. (see at home experiments by Bill Nie...science guy). Poster above...ARE YOU A HAM RADIO OP? I am...have an old 1950's VLF receiver, its cool..can listen to lightnen stricks, some airplane beacons, and i've been told brain waves..but never pursued it.

I grew up in a house that had a lake in the back yard, so I was curious about the enviroment and wildlife. I guess that fueled my interest in biology and when my parents bought me a microscope, I guess I was hooked!! I spent many days of my summers looking at pond water under my microscope. Once, i took a fish (a very small one) and placed it's fin under my microscope. I was able to see the blood cells flowing through its vacular system!!!! Well, that fondness with microscopes and biology eventually took me to graduate school where I had the opporunity to play with microscopes that worked with lasers!! (confocal, dual photon) Then..in my post-doctoral studies, I used a microscope that allowed me to visualize synapses in the brain! (transmission electron scanning). So, my little summer microscope adventures..turned into a big part of my life!!

At the atomic level there are individual atoms are reponsible for memory, although their participation is dependent on thier macromolecule cognates. It is at the molecular/macromolecule actually level where "memory" may find its origin, as structure does dictate function! In the context of macromolecules, such as proteins and RNA, there are complex protein interactions that lead to memory formation. Experimentally, this phenomna is associated with an electrophysiological phenomena, refered to as Long Term Potentiation (LTP), and Long Term Depression (LTD). Basically LTP (or LTD) refers to experiments that show if you give an electric field stimulation (HFS at certain frequence and amplitude) you can record an enhanced response (LTP) to the same stimulus at distal time points. Through elegant studies that combine electrophysiology, pharmacology, biochemistry, and molecular biology, it has been shown that glutamate receptors, (ionotropic..and yes..metabotrobic!!..but we'll keep it to ionotropic for simplicity) AMPA and NMDA subtypes, play a pivotal role in LTP. Magnisium, Mg2+, (an atom) plays an important role in mediating glutamate NMDA receptor function, and consequently LTP (thus memory formation). But the role of Mg2+ is dependant on coordinating amino acids of the NMDA receptor and, more importantly, synaptic summation of AMPA receptor activation. Furthermore, at the atomic level, Ca2+, plays an important role in glutamate (presynatpic neurotransmitter release) release and Na+ and K+, as well as Cl- also particpate (axon potentials..remember..Nernst equasions and neuroscience 101) in eventual neurotransmitter release and synaptic activation. So yeah..atoms to play a role, but there is an interdependant relationship between proteins (macromolecules and the atoms). If you want to explore memory (at the molecular level) I suggest readings by, Paul Adams (SUNY Stony Brook), Rodrick McKinnon (Rockefeller U), Eric Kandel (Columbia U), and Edward Ziff (NYU Sch of Med).

you're a moron. Please do us all a favor an stop pretending to be authority with science. When you demonstrate some real understanding of biomedicine and become an accomplished scientist, then we will listen to your giberish. Until then, silence! Ask questions! Learn...your rantings are moronic. as for me..I've already obtained NIH grants and published in peer review journals..and gained acceptance with my peers (i.e. the Ph.D. degree) i've proven myself in the scientific community such that I CAN engage in philosophical thought with science-based insight and experimentally-based reason. So knock it off, you just look like an idiot.

Hmm...exercise is important. I do have another suggestion...but i'll leave that for the neuroscientist/neuropharmacologist to debate so..... ... for neuropharmacologist only..what do you think about the MOA for a "certain autoreceptor antagonist class" as per "Hen" and as it relates to long-term modification of coginitive function? No studies directly address this..expecially the implications of enhancing a certain "SGZ phenomena".. as most show reduction in this activity as a symptom/response to pathology (i know this is boarding on unethical here.and don't wanna give any ideas..so please be audience sensitive with responses.... just curious to hear other opinions)

I used to feel the same way! Back then I hated the fact that I had to take sociology, and psychology, and history as I was a science major and those other subjects we beneath me! Now..I REGRET that I didn't enjoy those course more! I was a solid science major and when ever need credits to fill up a semester, I took science courses! HOW DUMB I WAS. Since college I've gone on to obtain my Ph.D. (Molecular Pharmacology) and pursued postdoctoral studies for a short period. I do something a litte unrelated to science now (see my screen name/avitar) but during graduate school I learned to appreciate how important its is to be aware of the world we live in and to have an open mind and a broad education! In part my view was influenced and changed by my dislike of the narrow scope of my PhD studies and the fact that I was pursing studies in the best city in the world, New York City!! Its impossible to live here without desiring to go to museums, lecturers, taking in all the cultures of the city and to LEARN about all...OUTSIDE of SCIENCE!! I WISH I could be in your shoes and really appreciate those courses..and take more of them!! Later on, it becomes difficult to take such courses as time is hard to come by, but don't take my word for it, you will see. The world is a beautiful place, take advantage and the opportunityto learn as much as you can about it, cause one day, you'll be in a lab watching your gel run, and discussing the politics of China with your chinese colleagues..and you'll say to yourself..."gee I wish I took/paid attention that Chinese History course back undergrad" You're in college, you have front row tickets to the greatest show on earth...take it!!!

I majored in Pharmacology, NOT to be confused with Pharmacy. Pharmacology, loosly defined, is the study of how chemicals interact with biological systems. I was interested in the life sciences as a kid and often wondered how drugs worked so I choose pharmacology. I could have choosen, biochem, or microbio, or molecular biology, or chemistry. But what attracted me to pharmacology was its interdiciplinary nature. It combined all of the above. So as an undergrad I was exposed to the fundamentals of receptor pharmacology, rational drug design, signal transduction etc. and during my Ph.D. studies, I was able to do experiements that allowed me to measure how a drug bound to its receptor, or how it activated the receptor an so on. I felt the knowledge obtained from the study of pharmacology would be more vaulable and so far, it has been working out for me! Good luck with whatever field you choose!