Tag Archives: communication

Twitter, Scientists, and Arbitrary Lists

Posted on by

Fairly often some website produces a list of people you should follow on Twitter. Yesterday it was Science with their The top 50 science stars of Twitter. This list, like so many before, is arbitrary, lacks diversity, and is based on, in my opinion, stupid metrics. Many people on Twitter have noted that this list is overwhelmingly white and male. They based the star status on follower count and a completely ridiculous metric called the Kardashian Index,” or K-index, which is about as ridiculous as the people for which it is named. The list also lacks diversity from a field of study standpoint. Also, some people have noted that other “star” Twitter scientists were left off, which according to the article’s author was because they restricted the list to Ph.D.s. I think that is a stupid restriction, and I am a Ph.D. Furthermore, someone noted that one of the accounts on the list is a bot, and another one are simply tweets by the person’s PR person. 

I follow a few people on the list, so obviously I think some of them worth following. However, if you are trying to be more active on Twitter and interact with people, most (but not all) of these people are not the people to follow. The more followers you have, the more difficult it is to interact with them, assuming you are even trying. Don’t get me wrong, some of the people on this and other lists do tweet great information. However, if your goal on Twitter is to network, make friends, learn things, and sometimes get help or advice, then “stars” are not to the people to follow. I have made friends on Twitter, including friends I have later met in person. I have also networked and gotten great advice on work and personal projects. I see tweets on an almost daily basis of scientists helping each other out via tweets. Someone will tweet out asking for advice on some lab protocol or best manner to collect a certain type of sample, and others will reply with advice. Many people, including myself, tweet out a photo of something we are trying to identify. If I know people who know things in that field, I’ll tag them, and via crowdsourcing, we can normally identify the life form or object. That sort of fun learning experience is through interactions with us non Twitter stars.

If you want to use Twitter for things like that, you need to seek out people in your field or fields you are interested in, or just people who tweet out interesting things. Ignore the number of followers they have, and look at what they tweet. The less followers they have, the more likely they will follow you and interact with you. There are wonderful people with tons of followers that are worth following on Twitter, and some of them do a good job of interacting, and there are some worth following even if they don’t interact. I just mean that you can get a lot more out of Twitter if you interact with people. That leads to the obvious question, how do you find these people? Look for Twitter lists such Women Tweet Science Too which was created to in reaction to the lack of women on the above mentioned Nature list. Many people have already created tons of great public lists like this for people in various fields. Follow people on these, and then once you find people you really like on Twitter, see who they follow and with whom they interact.

Furthermore, if you want my personal opinion on how to get people to follow you, which you can take or leave, then see below.

1. Tweet. That may seem obvious, but it you don’t tweet, people are not going to follow you. Tweet links to articles you find interesting. Tweet things you find funny. Tweet about what you are working on, even if you think it is uninteresting or no one will understand what you are doing. Your fellow nerds and geeks will understand and be interested. Even if no one if following you, you have to get started somehow.

2. Have a avatar photo. Having one that represents something about you, even if it is not a photo of you. I rarely follow Twitter eggs.

3. Have a Twitter bio. When someone follows me, I look at their bio. Do they work in a field interesting to me? Do they say something funny? Do they have interests similar to me?

4. Interact with people. Even if a person doesn’t follow you, if they ask a question you can help with, reply to them. Give your input.

Decipher This Warning Sign

Posted on by

I saw this warning sign today by creek near my office. I know what the sign is trying to warn people against, but the drawings struck me as a little weird. I tweeted the photo out with my interpretation of two of the drawings, and then got some more hilarious interpretations. I have listed them below. Submit a comment with your interpretation if you can do better.

Water warning sign

Water warning sign

1. Person standing above water drinking from glass:

Me: Humans, no standing on top of water.

@Ilovebraaains: No standing on top of bacon

@marginfades: and yet, no admonition for walking on water.

2. Person leaning over water with huge water droplets.

@MGhydro: No crying in the water.

@MGhydro: No crying over bacon! Unless they’re tears of joy!

@fMRI_guy: Caution: Windy. While you are washing your face, your towel may just fly away & you’ll be naked

3. Person swimming

@Swansontea: No punching water while in the prone position

4. Person washing car

@MGhydro: No throwing dog poop over cars.

@fMRI_guy: Don’t use your car as a barrier in a snowball fight. That’s just rude.

5. Dog running above water

Me: Dogs, no swimming on top of the water

6. Hand above water with bottle and banana peel (why is it always a banana peel?)

@MGhydro: No picking up trash from the water.

@fMRI_guy: Also, don’t pick up bottle messages.

Me: No sending messages in bottles

@lockwooddewitt: Garbage and bacon: Gotta keep’em separated

 

Totes McGotes, Too

Posted on by

In December 2013, I wrote a very silly blog post about the phrase Totes McGotes that I heard in a Sprint commercial with James Earl Jones and Malcolm McDowell. Amazingly, the writer of the commercial commented on my very silly blog post, or perhaps I should say my Totes McGotes silly blog post. Totes McGotes has continued to be a favorite phrase with my friends and I, and as far as I can tell with many other people. Then again, I continue to be unhip, so it is possible everyone else has moved on to a new more hip phrase. When I Google search the phrase Totes McGotes, my blog post is on the first page of results, but I admit I can’t be completely positive that it would be if any other person ran the search, or if it is tied to my Google account. However I continue to see the phrase used in memes and on photos with goats.

BeJ0WSGCQAA4vAK totes-magotes

Seriously, how can you not love the phrase especially when paired with photos of cute goats? Then again, these photos make me wonder if goats are particularly portable in totes. Are they just the perfect combination of size, docility, and shape that make them so popular to tote in a tote bag? How long has goat toting been a thing? Do goats just not mind being toted? Are goats in tote bags the new small dog in a designer purse? Anyway, my wonderful friends are always happy to tag me when sharing one of these wonderful photos. Another friend has now shared with me this wonderful shirt, which now I must have. No doubt in ten years, I will be laughing at this phrase as so silly and stupid, well I already think it is both, but still I enjoy using it now. Please friends, don’t stop sending me links to the goofy Totes McGotes stuff, especially with the cute goats.

Photo Texting a Wrong Phone Number?

Posted on by

This evening someone texted me a photo that caused me to contact the police. I didn’t recognize the phone number, but according to a quick internet search, it is a Richmond, Virginia phone number. I have an iPhone, and the text says iMessage, so I am fairly sure the sender had to have been using an iPhone. There was no message, only a photo. The photo appears to be a child, maybe age 10. I am not sure if it is girl or boy. The photo appears to have been taken at a slight angle and shows the child’s face laying sideways on a (possibly) bed. There is an adult’s hand pressing down on the top of the child’s head with the thumb between the eyebrows pressing down hard enough to cause the forehead skin to bunch down below the thumb. The child is not smiling. The child’s mouth is slightly open, and while the child doesn’t exactly appear to be in pain, the child doesn’t look comfortable. The photo appears to have been taken in a house as I can see a bookshelf with framed photos in the background.

I didn’t know what to do when I got it, other than to take to Twitter to ask for advice. I finally decided to call my local police’s non-emergency phone number. The woman I spoke to asked what I wanted to do. I learned they have no way to receive a text message, so if I wanted someone to look at it, then an officer would have to come to my house. After deliberating, I finally asked to have them send someone. A very nice officer came fairly quickly, remarkably fast actually considering this was a non-emergency call. I showed him the photo apologized for making him come if he disagreed that it was somewhat disturbing. While he never actually stated what he thought of the photo, I think he agreed the photo was at best weird. Also he never gave me an impression that he thought I was a lunatic for being concerned about this photo. Unfortunately I learned there was very little, in fact nothing he could do. He said since the photo was not pornographic and did not show a child in imminent danger, cell phone companies would give them very little information without a court order. He also stated what I knew, which is that even the phone number appears to be Richmond, Virginia, the phone could be anywhere. He said with Google voice numbers, it might not even be a cell phone exactly. [It was not until after he left, I realized the text said iMessage, hence must be an iPhone.] I told him that I didn’t contact the phone number at all, partially because I didn’t know if this was a weird scam or what the proper response was. He essentially said there was nothing they could do now, but if I keep getting photos from this number, and they get weirder, to contact them again. For now, I will keep the photo and hope I don’t get anymore, that the child is in no danger, and that it was just a weird joke or something perfectly reasonable that got sent to the wrong number.

The incident brings up so many questions though. First, I live in a fairly affluent municipality that is not exactly desperate for money. Also, as a suburb of Washington, DC, public safety is generally not skimped on fiscally. So how is it in 2014, my police department can’t receive a text? Forget about how much easier it would have been for me to forward this photo to them, what about if someone is in danger? It might be easier and safer to send a text than to have to possibly reveal themselves by speaking on the phone to a police operator. Is this some sort of technological issue or what?

Second, I’m curious what other people would have done in my place. What other options are there? The police don’t seem to have many options in this case. I don’t want to over blow this photo because again, it’s not pornographic, and the child doesn’t appear to be in imminent danger, but still, it would at least be nice to track down a name or something to allow the police or someone just to phone them. I don’t know what I would even like to occur if anything was possible. I am not a fan of Big Brother, but I don’t like this feeling of helplessness.

Advice, opinions, comments, ideas, want to tell me I worry too much (yes I know that)? Please leave a comment.

Edited to add: Someone informed me how to get location data out of a photo. According the metadata on photo, it was taken in outskirts of Richmond, Virginia. I can narrow it down to a couple of blocks based on the way it is mapping. I think I will start paying attention to news from that area for a bit or possibly look to see if there are missing child cases or anything like that. At least I will feel like I did something.

Formaldehyde in Baby Shampoo: Cancer or Sensitivity Issue?

Posted on by

An article was recently published in Slate about Johnson & Johnson reformulating its baby shampoo to remove formaldehyde. The article discussed how some people’s somewhat misguided fears about a known carcinogen, formaldehyde, caused its removal from baby shampoo, when in reality if you are worried about carcinogenic exposure to formaldehyde, baby shampoo should be the least of your concern. As the article’s author, Tara Haelle, correctly points out, formaldehyde is a naturally occurring substance. It is produced in normal atmospheric reactions and when wood burns, both during natural forest fires and human caused fires. It is also produced during anthropogenic activity from numerous industrial processes and petroleum fueled combustion, i.e. cars, ships, airplanes (Salthammer et at. 2010).

I have a few issues with this article, however. First, it states “high enough doses of inhaled formaldehyde can cause cancer, leading OSHA and the EPA to set limits for safe exposures.” Second, it quotes two chemists who say in different ways that the toxicity of a chemical is related to its dose or the amount of exposure, and it essentially states that formaldehyde only causes cancer in high doses. Finally, it completely fails to mention another reason why formaldehyde may have been removed that has nothing to do with cancer.

The problem I have with the second point, is that formaldehyde is a carcinogen, and the toxicological theory with carcinogens, is that exposure to one molecule of a carcinogen can theoretically cause cancer, depending on the carcinogen’s mode of action. With non-carcinogens, it is appropriate and scientifically accurate to say that the dose makes the poison. There are substances that to be healthy you need in some dose, but exposure to too high of doses can lead to detrimental health effects, for example iron and a whole bunch of metals. There are others that you don’t need at all, but you can be exposed to a certain dosage with no ill effects. However, with carcinogens depending on the mode of action for the carcinogenicity, it is believed that there is no safe level of exposure. In theory, all it takes is one molecule to cause a cell to multiply out of control and cause cancer. This is where the carcinogenic mode of action is important. The carcinogenic mode of action refers to how a particular carcinogen actually causes cancer to be initiated. If, for example, a carcinogen’s mode of action is mutagenicity, like radiation, then exposure of any dose can potentially cause the effect that leads to cancer. Thus, there is considered to be absolutely no safe level of exposure to that carcinogen. Each additional exposure increases your risk of getting cancer. However, there are other carcinogenic modes of action, and carcinogens with certain other modes of action would be considered to have a exposure threshold below which no cancer would occur.

So what about formaldehyde? What is its mode of action for carcinogenicity? Is there a safe level of exposure below which there is no risk of cancer? In the US, that appears to be in debate. This brings me to my next point. It is misleading, and in my opinion just plain legally and scientifically incorrect, to state that OSHA and EPA set limits for safe levels of exposure. The EPA has calculated formaldehyde’s Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR) for cancer to be 1.3 x10-5 per µg/m3. “EPA estimates that, if an individual were to continuously breathe air containing formaldehyde at an average of 0.08 µg/m3 (8.0 x 10-5 mg/m3) over his or her entire lifetime, that person would theoretically have no more than a one-in-a-million increased chance of developing cancer as a direct result of breathing air containing this chemical.” The word “increased” is important. It means that it is already assumed that there will be a certain number of cancer cases, and this concentration would cause additional cases above background. Furthermore, EPA states that for calculation of cancer risk from formaldehyde exposure, a linear approach with a multistage procedure due to additional risk at higher concentrations should be used. A linear approach means that any exposure causes a cancer risk with each exposure increasing the risk, and the multistage procedure means that high concentration exposure causes risk to increase at a greater rate. A linear approach is the more conservative method with carcinogens and is normally used when there is not enough scientific evidence to devise a threshold or a different risk method. With that being said, EPA is currently reviewing its toxicity assessment for formaldehyde, and it is possible when that assessment if finalized, EPA will change it cancer risk approach. With respect to OSHA, they have set an permissible exposure limit (PEL) at 0.75 parts formaldehyde per million parts of air (ppm) as an 8-hour time weighted average. The reasoning behind this level is complex, but in part, they state “this PEL represents OSHA’s best judgment of the exposure limit, along with the ancillary provisions, necessary to eliminate a significant risk of harm to employees.” The phrase “significant risk” is in there because their calculations, like the EPA’s, involve uncertainty and probabilities. They are not stating that below the PEL there is no risk, it is just not as significant. Neither OSHA or EPA is stating that below some level of exposure, formaldehyde will not give you cancer. They are stating it unlikely or insignificant compared to a background cancer risk. Below the set levels, the risks are really low, but they still exist.

Back to the baby shampoo. I do, in fact, agree with the point of the article that formaldehyde in baby shampoo is not a concern for cancer. However, I would not state it will not cause cancer. I would state that possible formaldehyde exposure in baby shampoo is highly unlikely to cause cancer. An additional point, which is not in the article, is that formaldehyde is not readily absorbed through the skin, and the amount of volatilization of formaldehyde, which could then be inhaled, from baby shampoo is likely to negligible.

With all that being said, I don’t necessarily agree that removal of formaldehyde from baby shampoo is a case of chemophobia and an overblown reaction by a company. It is possible that Johnson & Johnson removed formaldehyde not because of cancer concerns but because formaldehyde is a known sensitizer and allergen. Many skin care products contain formaldehyde or formaldehyde-releasing preservatives, which include quaternium-15, diazolidinyl urea, DMDM hydantoin, imidazolidinyl urea, bronopol, and tris nitro. While only a small percentage of people have a sensitivity or allergy to formaldehyde, for those that do, it is safest to avoid any exposure. Whether or not baby shampoo containing formaldehyde could cause a person to actually develop a sensitivity or allergy is another subject.

I have no idea why Johnson & Johnson actually decided to remove formaldehyde from baby shampoo, other than that it was a business decision. However by removing formaldehyde, regardless of any cancer concerns, there is now a small but real percentage of potential consumers who can buy their baby shampoo without concern of skin reactions due to their formaldehyde sensitivity or allergy. Thus assuming there is another safer preservative that can be used in place of formaldehyde, its removal would seem, to me at least, to be a good business decision, as they have increased their customer base to people with certain skin sensitivity and allergies.

For My Safety

Posted on by

Like probably many health insurers, my health insurance company encourages me to use a mail order pharmacy for my maintenance drugs. As encouragement to use it, with the mail order pharmacy, I can order a 90 day supply, but only pay a co-pay for 60 days. Most of my maintenance drugs are actually generic, and I get generic drugs for free, so the only real advantage to me using the mail order pharmacy is laziness. I admit it is kind of nice just to log onto the website, hit refill, and have the drugs sent to me. At the beginning of the year, my insurance company switched to a different mail order pharmacy, so for most of my prescriptions, I have had to submit requests to my doctors for new prescriptions. Annoying, but no big deal, until I started getting them filled. I have rosacea, and I take one oral medication for it as well as using two face creams and one face wash, all prescriptions for it. I had my dermatologist call in a new prescription for the oral medication, and when it came from the mail order pharmacy, they only sent 34 pills with a note saying they had reduced the amount for my safety. The pill (Oracea) is designed and approved by the FDA as a maintenance drug for rosacea. It is supposed to be taken everyday. It is a low dose antibiotic taken for its anti-inflammatory properties. I don’t know of any way to get high off of it, not that I have tried. After a long conversation with the pharmacy trying to ascertain why they deemed this not safe enough to send me more than 34 pills, even though I have been taking this pill for well over a year, or for that matter why they sent me the strange amount of 34 pills, as opposed to 30, the pharmacy stated it was my insurer who decided this was not a maintenance drug. A call to my insurer resulted in me being told I would essentially need to petition them to recognize what the FDA calls a maintenance drug, as a maintenance drug. They also said I could go to my retail pharmacy and get the same deal they offer through the mail order pharmacy of a 90 day supply for the cost of 60. Why they offer this deal through the retail and thus what is the point of trying to get me to use the mail order pharmacy is not something I could understand, and if I continued to try to talk to them, I was going to need a drink. I gave up.

Now, however, my health insurer’s and the mail order pharmacy’s concern for my safety has gone to comical levels. As I said above, I also use a prescription face wash for my rosacea. It is a cleanser with sodium sulfacetamide and sulfur in it. It is an old formula and has been used by rosacea sufferers and people with other skin issues for decades. I have used it for at least two years, and I think it helps a bit. Because it is such an old formula, there are of course generics, to which my insurer automatically switches my prescription. I don’t care, and I get the face wash for free because it is generic. I had my dermatologist send in a new prescription to the mail order pharmacy, and it arrived today. Just in case you can’t guess, enclosed with the 12 oz bottle of face wash, was a note that reads as follows.

“Enclosed is a reduced quantity of your prescription drug. Your prescription drug coverage has quantity limits for certain drugs. This is a type of drug coverage review that limits how many doses you can receive. The goal is to make sure you get a safe amount of your drug.”

That’s right, they sent me a reduced quantity of my sulfur face wash for my safety. Thank goodness because otherwise I might wash my face too many times. It’s true. Washing your face with sulfur can get quite addictive. I love the smell of sulfur. (It actually does have a slight smell of sulfur but nothing repulsive.) I get in the shower and just keep washing my face knowing that the wash is free. Of course, it bears pointing out that they sent me a 12 oz bottle. The earliest I can refill it according to the label is in three weeks. This 12 oz bottle will probably last me three months or more. I don’t really count. I just reorder when I need it. I really don’t know what my pharmacy and insurer thinks I do with this stuff. Maybe they think I have a really dirty face. I have no idea. I can’t fantom how someone misuses sulfur face wash. I don’t think I want to know. Maybe they are afraid I am going to drink the stuff. All I know is that if my health insurer and mail order pharmacy think they have to protect me from too large an order of sulfur face wash then there probably is no hope for humanity. As an engineer, I have stated on many occasions, I have to design for the stupid. Not even I thought people were this stupid. I guess I overestimate people.

About Those Rail Ties, WMATA

Posted on by
WMATA's new rail ties ad

WMATA’s new rail ties ad

Dear WMATA,

I saw your new ad while I walking into the Metro the other day. That is, the new ad where you tell your riders that your installing new rail ties to give us a more comfortable rise. Considering the purpose that rail ties serve, I am hopeful this type of maintenance will also give us customers a safer ride, but I’m not going to quibble on that. First, I would like to thank you for at least not insulting your customers, making an incredibly sexist stereotype, or presenting a vague statistic with absolutely no context that really conveys nothing in this ad, like you did in a certain ad from this new series of ads. I would also like to commend you on doing actual maintenance on your rail system. As an engineer, I am more aware than many of how important and needed regular maintenance is, and from what I have heard in the news, you weren’t actually aware of this fact until several years ago.

However, I do have a question for you about these new rail ties that you admit that we, the customers, might not notice. Exactly how would you like to your customers to notice these fantastic new rail ties? I mean this in all seriousness. After I saw this poster, I made a point of looking at the rail ties while I was standing on the platform waiting for my train. Both my originating and destination stations on this particular day were underground, and what I noticed is that there were no rail ties underneath the track in front of the platform. The rails were held in place by metal bracing of some sort that was attached directly to the concrete beneath the tracks and did not tie the two tracks together. As my name Geeky Girl Engineer might suggest, I am in fact a geeky engineer, and thus I became intrigued by this metal bracing holding the tracks at the platform. Thus far my internet searches have not led me to information as to what these braces are called, but since the braces only hold one track, they don’t seem to actually be rail ties. However, I could be wrong, and if you would like to educate me on what they are called, I would be happy to learn about it (in all seriousness).

The other thing I noticed about the track in the station, is that it is really hard to notice the rail ties or braces. To begin with, the station is dark. Second, the area where the track is, is mainly different shades of black as it’s rather dirty. I wouldn’t expect it to be clean, but the darkness makes it difficult to see any level of detail. Also, the platform tile closest to the edge is rather textured, and this makes it uncomfortable to stand there for very long to examine the tracks. I realize the textured tile is a safety design to make people realize how close to the edge they are and to keep people from standing there while waiting for the train and thus potentially falling onto the track. I think this is a good safety, and I am certainly not arguing against it. I am just pointing out that between the textured tile and simply not wanting to get too close to the edge, conditions are not really conducive to a person examining or admiring your new rail ties.

As for the rail ties that are under track between stations, well, those are kind of hard to see also. The Metro, as you are of course aware, is underground a significant portion of the time. There is no way to view rail ties at all while the train is underground. There is no way to view anything outside the train while the train is in motion underground. Quite frankly, you should be aware of this. I also looked at the track while the train was in motion above ground. I was able to view the track and see that there are wood ties holding the track in place, but that honestly was about it. Again, the train was in motion making it difficult to really examine details of the ties. I couldn’t say whether the ties I viewed were new or old. I’m not actually sure how I would be able to tell the difference. I’m fairly sure that old ties would be dirtier and probably darker than new ties, but I am not sure to what degree. Presumably if I saw an old and a new one side by side, I could tell the difference, but except for that case, I am not sure how I would. Thus, it would be nice if your ad touting your new rail ties would have educated me on how to tell the difference.

Again, I commend you for your maintenance work. I thank you for not insulting me or stereotyping me. However, I think you might want to rethink your ad. For safety reasons, I think it would be best if you did not encourage your customers to examine your rail ties.

Your observant and educated customer,

Geeky Girl Engineer

Book Review: “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”

Posted on by

I finished reading The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot today. In 1951 when Henrietta Lacks was 30, she developed extremely aggressive cervical cancer. When she went in for surgery for cancer treatment, the doctor took a sample of the tumor. The cells from the tumor were cultured in a lab that had been trying unsuccessfully to find a way to keep human cells alive in culture. Ms. Lacks’s tumor cells, named HeLa by the lab, were the first cells they were able to keep alive in culture. Because they were able to keep them alive and growing, the cells would later become a vital tool for medical science. The scientist who first kept HeLa alive in culture gave the cells away for free to numerous other scientists who used them for various research. The cells helped in part to develop drugs for herpes, leukemia, influenza, hemophilia, and Parkinson’s. They helped develop the polio vaccine and in gene research, including most fittingly genes that cause and suppress cancer. Companies were created to use and produce the cells. Ms. Lacks’s family, however, did not know that the cells had been taken nor that they were being used for so much research. They did not know they existed until 20 years later and received no benefit from all this research. Sadly and ironically, they were so poor they couldn’t afford health insurance, and most were not educated enough to really understand how part of Ms. Lacks could still be alive or what it meant. To make matters worse, shortly after learning about the research on her cells, researchers asked family members to give a sample of their blood to them to aid them in their research. The researchers didn’t explain to the family what the samples would be used for, or at least they did not explain it in a way that the family members could understand.

Anyone who does research involving humans should read this book. Actually, everyone should read this book. It is incredibly interesting and well written. I loved learning some science from it, but it was also nice to learn about the people involved, both the Lacks family and the scientists involved with HaLa. The book gives recognition and a voice to Ms. Lacks and her family who for far too long had none. It is simply horrible how they had been treated in the past, and it is an important lesson to researchers on how not to treat research subjects and their loved ones. The book discusses a little bit of the history of human medical research and the ethics and techniques involved. The introduction of informed consent in medical research is discussed to a great degree. The concept of when a person loses ownership of their own tissue or fluid once the tissue or fluid is no longer a part of their body is discussed.

I, personally, am conflicted about the issue of ownership of body tissue once it it removed from the body. For my dissertation I did research that involved humans. Our research plan was reviewed by an Institutional Review Board as all human research studies are now. Our subjects gave informed consent. They willingly participated, allowed themselves to be outfitted with an air sampling device and to have medical tape placed on and then removed from their skin, and gave urine and blood samples. They knew the risks of participating, which really was only a possible reaction to the medical tape (which none had) and the prick of a needle if they gave blood. We explained what we were doing and why and hopefully they all understood in general what we were doing, even if they did not fully understand the details of the research. We took various steps to protect their identity and information. We made no money off of the research, but my advisor applied for grants based on it, and several of us obtained Master’s and Doctorate’s based on it.

Years ago I had two dental implants put in my mouth. The dentist who implanted them was a professor at the local school of dentistry, and because of certain characteristics of my dental history, I made an interesting case for her to operate on and later teach about. I was awake the whole time, and the surgery took much longer than it needed to because every 15 minutes or, she stopped what she was doing to take photos of the current status of my mouth. I get amused thinking about her students sitting in class viewing photos of my mouth while she discusses my case. However, I am confident my identity is protected, and furthermore I gave informed consent. I was awake. I knew full well she was taking photos and planning to use me as a case study, and I am rather pleased that I might be able to help some dentist and their dental patient in the future.

However as someone, who like the vast majority of people, who has ever given a sample of my body fluids analyzed for medical reasons, the idea that I don’t know what happens to the sample after it leaves me and who can run tests on it, makes me concerned. I once had an infected sebaceous cyst removed by a surgeon. I know it went to pathology to confirm the diagnosis that it was just a sebaceous cyst, but after that I have no idea. From what I have read in the book, it could have then gone on to an academic or commercial research lab. As a scientist, I certainly want scientists to have access to samples that can further science, but it bothers me a great deal that someone could potentially make money off of something found in my cells or fluids. If something unique is found in my tissue that can lead to the cure or treatment for a disease, I can support that, but the idea that a commercial research facility could use it to make money seems wrong to me. At the very least, I would like to know what ultimately happens to any of my tissue or fluid samples. Are they simply destroyed after analysis or are they stored somewhere or transferred somewhere? Who can analyze them and for what? I think that is another reason to read the book, so more people will talk about this subject.

Totes McGotes

Posted on by

There is a series of Sprint commercials that have been running recently that I really enjoy. They star James Earl Jones and Malcolm McDowell, and they are essentially acting out completely ridiculous telephone or texting conversations or social media interactions. I think they are completely hilarious, partially due to the gravitas these two skilled actors bring to the goofiest of scripts. Then again, I would probably watch either of them, but in particular James Earl Jones, whom I adore, read my grocery list.

Anyway one of the commercial has them acting out the telephone conversation of what can only be teenage girls using language that probably only teenage girls can understand. I was once a teenage girl, but I honestly don’t think I ever talked like that, and I certainly don’t understand fully what the conversation means now that I am older. The conversation revolves around them talking about a particular boy and how hot he is. He being the “hottest hottie that ever hottied.” He evidently is that hot. It is not clear if they achieved statistical significance on verifying just how hot he is. They further agree that he is Totes McGotes, which is let’s be honest, a completely ridiculous but very fun to say phrase. Now while I have never been hip, I know that men are sometimes referred to as McDreamy, McSteamy, and such, all of which I think originated with the tv show Grey’s Anatomy. However what exactly is a McGotes? In Gaelic, the Mc or Mac prefix of a family name means “son of”, so McGotes would seem to mean that he is the son of a goat, with goat spelled incorrectly (although the only way I know that is how it is spelled is because that is the name of the commercial). This honestly doesn’t seem like much of a compliment to me, although I personally think goats are cute. I have never seen a goat that I would call hot. Now on a few occasion I have used the word totes in jest of sorts, and I think it is always used as a slang for totally. Thus it would seem that both of these girls agree that the “hottest hottie that ever hottied” is totally the son of a goat. Again, is that a compliment? They seem to believe it is. Is being Totes McGotes only a compliment if you are a teenager? Or do you simply have to be hip to know that being Totes McGotes is a compliment? I’m curious how far spread this phrase is.

The scientist in me now wants to flirt with a guy and call him Totes McGotes and see how he reacts. Call it a social science experiment of sorts. Is calling a girl Totes McGotes a compliment, or is it only for guys? Is it only appropriate to use the phrase if you are young? To any guys reading this, how would you react if a girl called you Totes McGotes? Ladies, would you call a guy Totes McGotes? If I find a guy to call Totes McGotes at a bar or wherever, I shall run my experiment and see what happens. We will have to see if he buys me a drink or throws a drink at me.

Let’s Talk Stats, WMATA

Posted on by

The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) has problems. Lots and lots of problems. They’ve had an ad campaign called “Metro Forward” for a while now trying to let people know how they are using the money that customers pay to improve the system and do much needed upgrades and renovations. The customers, including myself, want a reliable safe system, not a PR campaign though. Recently they have unveiled a few new ads that in most people’s opinions are sexist, stupid, and somewhat confusing. The ads consist of posters with either two men or two women talking. A few examples that I have been able to find:

Woman 1: “A Metrobus travels 8,260 miles between breakdowns. Didn’t know that, did you?” Woman 2: “Can we just talk about shoes?”

Man 1: “A Metrobus travels 8,260 miles between breakdowns. Didn’t know that, did you?” Man 2: “Can we just talk about sports?”

Man 1: “When we take Metrobus, do you think we’ll get to ride the new 32-foot Orion model, or the latest Xcelsior model?” Man 2: “Dude, it’s a bus.”

Woman 1: “I love the way the tamping process aligns and elevates the rails for Metro, don’t you?” Woman 2: “I have no idea what you just said.”

Man 1: “So Bobby, did you catch all those new rail fasteners on Metro today?” Man 2: “No Billy, not so much.”

So WMATA, I’d like to speak to you as a woman and as an engineer. First, the last two ads that I have listed, about the tamping process and rail fasteners, I don’t even understand these. I have a vague understanding what these mean, and if I bothered to spend time on the internet researching, I have no doubt I would understand it better. However the average customer is not going to know what this means, and quite frankly, nor should they be expected to know. Furthermore, these posters seem to insinuate that there is something wrong with them because they don’t know. If things work properly in engineering and technology, people never know how things work, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is only when people’s ignorance of how things work can mess up a system, that engineers really care that they are ignorant. [Example, people who pour grease down the drain and not understanding the problems in the wastewater pipes to which this can lead.]

As for the ad where Man 1 asks which type of bus they will be on, Man 1 is clearly a bus geek, and Man 2 clearly is not. I respect Man 1’s geekitude, even though I don’t share it about buses. Man 2 does not respect the geekitude. How are they friends?

Now, let’s address the ad that is causing the most trouble for you WMATA. The one about the average bus breakdown rate. Most women think this is sexist because Woman 2 just wants to talk about shoes. So let me be clear, it IS a sexist ad. However, in your defense, the male version makes Man 2 look shallow also, so I guess that’s a win-win at making both sexes look stupid. I mean I like shoes. Most women like shoes. I like sports, not as much as many men and women, but I can have a conversation about it. Here’s the thing though. Shoes are not my sole interest. I am I nerd, and I would love to talk about the breakdown rate of your buses. That’s what you say you want, to get people to talk about the system’s reliability. So let’s talk about it.

You claim that “a Metrobus travels 8,260 miles between breakdowns.” Is that the mean or the median? What is the standard deviation? Can you give me a plot of the data? Are the data normally distributed? What is the skewness and kurtosis of the data? I would be willing to bet that your bus breakdown data has some really nice skewness. I bet your new buses work rather nicely, and your old buses don’t. Hence, your new buses probably can go much longer than 8,260 miles between breakdowns, but your old buses probably can go much less. Is one or the other skewing the mean and by how much? How does this lovely statistic that you are presenting to us compare with other DC area buses like those of ART, CUE, DASH, etc.? How does it compare with the breakdown statistics of other large metropolitan bus systems like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, etc.? You are presenting a statistic in a vacuum, and it is almost meaningless.

To get past that breakdown statistic, what are your on-time statistics, you know those statistics your customers actually care about? Most WMATA riders really don’t care what kind of bus they are on. They just want a bus runs on time, and actually picks them up at their bus stop, instead of leaving them because either the bus is too full or for reasons the customer never finds out, the bus just doesn’t show or stop. [Yes, this has happened to me several times.]

Speaking as a customer, I don’t want a PR campaign at all. I most definitely don’t want a PR campaign that makes my fellow riders look like fools. I want a system that works. I want a transit authority that actually responds to customer complaints. I want a transit authority that does more than send a automatic form response when I submit a complaint about a driver running a red light. I want to know that things will actually change and improve, and right now WMATA, you just keep failing at that, and this PR campaign does nothing to improve things. In fact, it makes things worse.