Science – Page 4 – Geeky Girl Engineer

Twitter, Scientists, and Arbitrary Lists

Posted on September 18, 2014 by geek

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.

NMNH Cetacean Collection

Posted on August 25, 2014 by geek

Friday I got the incredible opportunity to take a behind the scenes tour of Smithsonian Institute’s National Museum of Natural History. They let a small group of people take a tour of the cetacean collection stored in an offsite location. NMNH has the largest marine mammal collection in the world, and it is awesome. [More properly said, the people of the USA have this amazing collection, and NMNH has been endowed to take care of it.] Most of their specimens are not on display to the public but are stored offsite and in a manner where they can easily be studied. Charley Potter and Nick Pyenson, scientists at NMNH, showed us many of the cetacean specimens, talked about what they do, and answered our questions. I want to thank NMNH and their staff, especially Hilary-Morgan Watt, Katie Sabella, and Trish Mace, for letting us take this amazing tour. Also, thank you to Steve Thornton, a visiting researcher, who gave us a detailed description of how dolphins use their nasal passages to make noises, which at least in my humble opinion is fascinatingly and amazingly complicated. Also, I would like to thank them for having their specimen collection online. I missed some of the species names of specimens we looked at, but because the specimen number was visible in some of my photos, I was able to look up information about the specimen through their website. This is an incredible resource.

They had two bottlenose dolphin skulls out sitting side by side. One was from a coastal bottlenose dolphin, and one was from an offshore one. When sitting side by side, it was easy to see how much smaller the coastal one was than the offshore one. The morphological differences relate to their different eating habits, as the offshore ones feed on larger animals.

Bottlenose dolphin skulls, on left is coastal one, on right is offshore one

Coastal bottlenose dolphin skull

They had part of a forelimb bone from a right whale. The fungal like growth on it was bone that had grown around something on which it had been entangled.

Right whale forelimb bone with entanglement growth

Right whale forelimb bone with entanglement growth (zoomed in)

There was a drawer filled with narwhal tusks. Only males have the tusks, and most twist in the same direction. Most have a polished end. Up close they really pretty and have interesting texturing. They are hollow with varying diameters.

Narwhal tusks

Narwhal tusk

In the same cabinet as the narwhal tusks are pieces of baleen. Baleen can be used to distinguish different types of whales and is fast growing like hair. Examining the baleen can give information about the trophic feeding level of the whale and can give up to 40 years worth of information on the whale and water conditions, by analyzing it along different points along its length. Before plastics and fiberglass was invented, baleen was split into rods and used in such things as umbrella skeletons, of which they have one.

Baleen, Charley Potter is holding one piece. In box in drawer is an umbrella skeleton made from baleen.

Baleen

Baleen, zoomed into hairy edge

They have an amazing collection of skulls. There are skulls upon skulls filling up shelves. The skulls are placed side by side by species and thus can compared easily. There were numerous Baird’s beaked whale skulls that had various shades of white and off white depending on the conditions in which they were found.

Baird’s beaked whale skulls

Baird’s beaked whale skull

Baird’s beaked whale skull, zoomed in

The Blainville’s beaked whale skulls were really interesting. The males have two giant, erupted, modified teeth on their jaw, which are used for combat. The beaked whale skulls are the only skulls which can be sexed. The males have very dense skulls and thus are quite heavy when compared to the female skulls that were approximately the same size. They let us life each one by the beak, and the difference was really obvious.

Blainville’s beaked whale skulls, female on left, male on right

Blainville’s beaked whale jaw

Male Blainville’s beaked whale teeth

They were still processing some specimens. There was a pilot whale skull out that had a lot dried soft tissue attached to it.

Pilot whale skull

Pilot whale skull, zoomed in on soft tissue

There was another skull sitting next to the pilot whale skull that was some type of beaked whale. I was completely fascinated by the porousness of the bone.

Beaked whale skull

Beaked whale skull, zoomed in

There was also a bag full of vertebrae. I don’t know what species it was from, but the pattern on the vertebrae was really interesting.

vertebrae

In an adjoining building they had the bones from the really large whales. The building was complete with a giant garage type door through which to bring the specimens. There were shelves filled entire vertebral columns from various whales. On the floor was the skeleton of a right whale.

Right whale bones

All the skulls were propped up on metal carts. They were placed vertical for easy study. Because of the way a Sei whale skull was placed vertical, the radiating lines on the palette could be easily seen. All baleen whales have these lines, and the lines house blood vessels and nerves that feed the baleen.

Sei whale skull

Sei whale skull baleen marks

There were several gray whale skulls all sitting next to each other. The skulls were collected from various years and includes one from pre-1850s. The genetic makeup of the whales before and after the whaling industry can be compared, and it will give information about the genetic bottleneck that occurred due to whaling and the diminished population.

Gray whale skulls

They also had a blue whale jaw bone that is not only the largest blue whale jaw bone ever collected, it is also the largest single bone ever collected from any creature that has lived on Earth.

Blue whale jaw bone

Finally there was a North Atlantic blue whale skull, which was just amazing to view. It completed dwarfed us when we gathered for a group photo in front of it.

North Atlantic blue whale skull

#SIWhales participants with the North Atlantic blue whale skull

SAS Macro to Validate CAS Registry Numbers

Posted on June 25, 2014 by geek

*updated 7/20/15 after finding more ways people write CASRN or create fake CASRN that will sneak through my original macro*

I wrote a simple and fairly short SAS macro to validate CAS Registry Numbers. I have gotten enough free SAS advice and a few macros from various internet sources, so I thought it only fair to share this if it of use to anyone. Hopefully the comments give ample information about what input is needed and what the output is. The macro will catch an invalid CAS RN if it is

too long
too short
has all 0’s
does not return the correct check digit based on CAS calculation

Information about proper CAS RNs can be found from ACS who produce CAS RNs. Contact me if you have questions about the macro or find an error with it.

*macro to determine if a CAS number is a valid CAS number;
*input is name of dataset to be examined where CAS numbers have variable name CAS_number;
*returns valid = 1 if CAS is valid and valid = 0 if invalid CAS;
*returns character variable CAS which will be CAS number with hyphens and no leading 0s;
%macro CASnumber_check(CAS_dataset);
data &CAS_dataset (drop = CAS_num CASlength R N1-N9 QR Q Rcheck j);
length CAS_num $ 10;
set &CAS_dataset;
*give CAS numbers with alphabet characters or that are blank a 00-00 CAS number;
if CAS_number = “” then CAS_number = “00-00”;
if anyalpha(CAS_number) ne 0 then CAS_number = “00-00”;
*determine if CAS is numeric or character variable;
CAS_vartype = vtype(CAS_number);
*if CAS is numeric, converts it to character;
if CAS_vartype = “N” then CAS_num = STRIP(PUT(CAS_number, 8.));
*if CAS is character, removes all non-numeric characters;
if CAS_vartype = “C” then CAS_num = compress(CAS_number,,”kd”);
*breaks CAS number apart into digits;
CASlength = length(CAS_num);
R = input(substr(CAS_num,length(CAS_num)),8.);
QR = 0;
array N_(9) N1 – N9;
do j = 1 to 9;
if CASlength > j then N_(j) = input(substr(CAS_num,CASlength-j,1),8.);
else N_(j) = 0;
QR = QR + N_(j)*j;
end;
Q = int(QR/10);
Rcheck = QR – Q*10;
*checks on validity of CAS based on check digit and length;
if Rcheck = R then valid = 1; else valid = 0;
if N9 = 0
then if N8 = 0
then if N7 = 0
then if N6 = 0
then if N5 = 0
then if N4 = 0 then valid = 0;
if CASlength < 5 then valid = 0;
if CASlength > 10 then valid = 0;
*builds character variable called CAS with no leading 0s;
if N9 ~= 0 then CAS = cats(N9,N8,N7,N6,N5,N4,N3,”-“,N2,N1,”-“,R);
else if N8 ~= 0 then CAS = cats(N8,N7,N6,N5,N4,N3,”-“,N2,N1,”-“,R);
else if N7 ~= 0 then CAS = cats(N7,N6,N5,N4,N3,”-“,N2,N1,”-“,R);
else if N6 ~= 0 then CAS = cats(N6,N5,N4,N3,”-“,N2,N1,”-“,R);
else if N5 ~= 0 then CAS = cats(N5,N4,N3,”-“,N2,N1,”-“,R);
else CAS = cats(N4,N3,”-“,N2,N1,”-“,R);
run;
%mend CASnumber_check;

Formaldehyde in Baby Shampoo: Cancer or Sensitivity Issue?

Posted on March 14, 2014 by geek

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.

Very Model of a Modern Engineer-Scientist

Posted on February 12, 2014 by geek

This is one of those times, where I have a very silly conversation, and then I take it even farther than it really should go. I can’t exactly explain how it started, other than Biochem Belle from Twitter, noted she was waiting for the song Modern Major Scientist from Chemjobber. I chimed in with a few lines from “I Am the Very Model of a Modern Major-General” only one of which did I manipulate for a scientist. I realized that about half the lines of the song would not have to be altered for a scientist as opposed to a military person. So here is where I take it too far, with apologies and great respect to Gilbert and Sullivan.

I am the very model of a modern Engineer-Scientist,
I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kingdoms taxonomy, and I quote the sci papers historical
From The Lancet to Ecology, in order categorical;
I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem I’m teeming with a lot o’ news,
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.
I’m very good at integral and differential calculus;
I know the scientific names of beings animalculous:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Engineer-Scientist.
I know our engineering history, Imhotep and al-Jazari;
I understand acoustics, I know all types of VOCs,
I quote in equations all the laws thermodynamical,
In conics I can graph ellipses, hyperbolas, and parabolas;
I can tell undoubted amethyst from fluorite and lepidolite,
I know the croaking chorus of the Xenopus laevis!
Then I can name a chemical after I’ve seen its mass spectrum chromatograph,
And calculate its concentration with an internal standard added.
Then I can design a incinerator for hazardous waste destruction,
And tell you ev’ry detail of exposure risk reduction
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Engineer-Scientist.
In fact, when I know what is meant by leukotriene and histomine,
When I can tell at sight a purine from a pyrimidine,
When such units as furlong and stones I’m more wary at,
And when I know precisely what is meant by ANSI hard hat,
When I have learnt what progress has been made in modern technology,
When I know more of statistics, microbiology, and toxicology –
In short, when I’ve a smattering of hydrogeology –
You’ll say a better Engineer-Scientist has never sat a gee.
For my science knowledge, because I’m nerdy and geeky,
Is never enough and I must always satisfy my curiosity;
But still, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Engineer-Scientist.

Book Review: “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”

Posted on January 9, 2014 by geek

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 December 17, 2013 by geek

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.

#StandingwithDNLee

Posted on October 12, 2013 by geek

I’m privileged. I know I am. I have been my whole life. I’m a white woman who grew up in middle class suburbia. I went to good public schools through high school, and I went to very good public colleges and universities for my Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctorate. I grew up in the South, which I know many associate with racism, but I went to school with plenty of minorities. My one and only “disadvantage” is that I am female, in particular a female engineer and scientist. I do not consider being female a disadvantage, but females tend to get discriminated against as if we are less then males somehow.

This morning much of my Twitter timeline was filled with fellow scientists and then many other people getting very mad at Scientific American over its treatment of one of its bloggers, Dr. Danielle N. Lee. I encourage anyone who reads this post first to go read Isis the Scientist’s blog post about what happened to Dr. Lee, which includes Dr. Lee’s original post. The original post was on Scientific American but now is no longer there, which you can read about in Isis the Scientist’s follow up post. The extremely short version of all this is that an editor a scientific blogging website asked Dr. Lee to write some articles for free and Dr. Lee said no, the editor called her a whore. [Seriously, go read Isis’s blog posts.] My first thought upon reading about all this was, so you think calling a woman a whore is the way to persuade her to do what you want? Really? Does that work for you normally?

Somewhere is the incredulous, anger, and sympathy and respect for Dr. Lee upon learning all the details of these events, I thought how lucky I am. I spent the better part of my childhood in Texas, which has more than its share of racist, sexist pigs, yet I can’t actually remember a time I truly had to deal with one on a personal basis. Last year, I wrote about how lonely it can be to be a female engineer, both in school and in the workplace. I’ve been surrounded by men in the classroom and workplace, since pretty much my freshman year of college. Truthfully though, with one glaring exception, all the men I’ve studied or worked with have for the most part treated me as an equal. Maybe they didn’t, and I was just too oblivious to notice.

The one glaring exception was at the company where I had my first full time job after finishing my Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees. My manager, a senior engineer, would occasionally make some remarks that made 26-year-old me rather uncomfortable, but I didn’t think were truly sexual harassment, and it has been so long ago, I don’t even remember what they were. Then shortly before my birthday, the other female engineer in the office and the female secretary happen to be in the copy room with him when upon the female engineer exclaiming “oh, it’s [GGE]’s birthday next week,” he said, “does that mean we get to spank her?” I was not in the room at the time, but this was a tiny office of about nine people. There are no secrets in an office that small, and I was good friends with the secretary. I heard about this comment pretty quick. To say this comment made me uncomfortable would be putting it mildly. I went to one of the other senior engineers, who happen to have previously been my manager, and I told him what was going on. I told him I didn’t want to make a big deal out of any of it, but I really wanted the comments to stop both for my and every other female’s sake. He assured me he understand, thanked me for coming to him, and promised to take care of it. Within a week or so, a human resources person from the company’s corporate office was in the office, and everyone was taking mandatory sexual harassment training. My former manager had my back. He took care of it, or really he made sure the company took care of it. Whether this engineering company that was definitely dominated by men took care of it because they seriously won’t take this kind of behavior, or if they were more motivated by fear of a sexual harassment lawsuit, I don’t know. What mattered was, they took me seriously, and they reacted exactly the way they should have.

So to return to Dr. Lee, I was thinking how lucky I have been to only have had one bad experience in my personal and professional life. Scientific American seems to not have her back, and the one time I had a problem, my company had my back. Then I stopped to think, why am I lucky to have only had to deal with one sexist idiot in my career? Why should a woman have to be lucky to not be called a whore? Why should I consider myself lucky for be treated like an equal in school and work? Why should I consider myself lucky for people respecting the career decisions I have made and for whom I would and wouldn’t work? Perhaps that is why I am a feminist because I am confident in the notion that I AM AN EQUAL. I have respect for myself. Calling me names will not induce me to do what you want. I will respect you if you respect me. Isn’t that what we learned in Kindergarten? Treat others the way you want to be treated? As for Scientific American, I cannot understand why they took down her post. I cannot understand why they are not supporting her. Their explanation makes no sense, especially to a regular reader of their blogs. They failed Dr. Lee, and they failed their readers by not supporting her. Their silence on her being called a very ugly name is deafening. People and companies who do not stand up against racism and sexism only allow it to continue. Until Scientific American apologizes publicly to Dr. Lee, I will be boycotting them. I am sure not going to go anywhere near the blog website whose editor called Dr. Lee a whore. I wish I could do more. I wish racism and sexism would end, but until they do, I intend to stand up for myself and anyone else who face them.

Mulching Plant Tour

Posted on August 17, 2013 by geek

About a month ago, I got a chance to tour a recycling plant. This Arlington County municipal recycling plant focuses on recycling yard waste. In the spring, Arlington County has curbside collection of yard waste in paper bags including invasive vines, leaves, dead plants, pine cones, etc. In the fall, Arlington County picks up leaves in paper bags from residents and also from curbside vacuum collection. All year long, Arlington County also picks up brush curbside. All of these waste streams are treated separately at the plant, and the plant also handles dirt and rock excavated during utility work.

The plant manager said he likes to think of the plant as a reutilization plant because something goes in, they process it, and then something goes out. Their operation is really quite impressive, especially when its 2.7 acres total yard size is considered. It is mainly this plant size that limits their ability to accept more waste for processing. Their biggest issue is dirt from pipe breaks etc. that is processed here. They reuse the processed dirt and rock for backfill, but if they can’t find a use for it, they have to dispose of it in a landfill.

The yard waste has to get to 140°F to kill any invasive weeds. Because the plant is located near a residential area, they do not accept food waste because of the odor it produces. They use lime on the yard waste solely for odor control. [Lime the inorganic material, which generally means calcium oxide (CaO) with some calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)₂) not lime the fruit.] With the leaf waste, they achieve a 66% volume reduction to the leaf mulch product. Leaf bag collection mulch is mixed with dirt for final product.

Tub grinder that processes leaf, brush, wood, and spring yard waste

Dirt processing machine that sorts material by size

Stone crusher machine

Material going into trommel screen for separation. The trommel screen sorts dirt and big aggregate.

Material coming out of trommel screen after separation

As is often the case, fixing a piece of equipment involves a guy standing on the bucket of a front loader using a pole to move things.

Rock and concrete after separation

Dirt for separation by size

Leaf mulch product

Wood mulch product

Yard waste mulch product

The plant uses the product dirt to create this vegetable garden. It had wonderful looking vegetables, and in the past, they have entered the vegetables in the county fair.

Luray Caverns

Posted on August 3, 2013 by geek

Unlike Skyline Caverns, which I visited yesterday, Luray Caverns let visitors take self guided tours through the caverns. This was very nice, as there were employees along the way to ask questions of if you had one, but I didn’t have to listen to a guide telling me what the various formations look like. Luray Caverns has fantastic stalactite, stalagmite, and column formations. It has a couple of small ponds that create perfect mirrors for the formations above, and it is absolutely beautiful and amazing to view. Luray Caverns also has the Stalacpipe Organ, which plays music by hammering stalactites instead of using pipes. It is rather interesting to hear.

Cavern formations

Flowstone with columns

Up close view of flowstone

Drapery stalactite

Mirrored lake

Two huge columns

Close up view of column in photo above

Even more up close view of column in two above photos

Flowstone cross section

Stalactite cross section

Below is a video of the Stalacpipe Organ. It has a few still photos of the organ’s parts, and then a video with audio of the Stalacpipe Organ playing. Turn the volume way up to hear it.