Writing time…

So the university has afforded me some free time for the next five days, which gives me the perfect opportunity to get caught up on some of the science blogging I’ve been planning. In the next few days I will be posting some pictures and video that fall into the broad category, ‘Life in the lab’. In this I will be discussing topics, in no particular order, such as:

‘I’m just running a gel…’, – what does this line, often used by lab scientists, actually mean?

‘Using biology as a scaffold for building nano-electronic circuits…’ – this is some of the research I am involved in.

‘Toy’s for science boys (and girls)…’ – Yes, there are geeky tool kits (I call them toys) that we use in molecular biology. Most people won’t know the point of using them, let alone that they exist; I’ll attempt to explain why they’re cool.

Finally, I will be doing a research blog on ‘Targeted antibiotics…’ – new approaches to make antibiotics more useful, and that take out the ‘bad’ bugs, but leave the ‘good’.

Attention to detail…


Some MOST people would describe me as being a little moderately anally retentive; I have a rather punishing attention to detail, particularly so with the way I approach experiments. Something that really annoys me is when fellow scientists display a degree of slapdashness that borders on being negligent.

Many of us are publicly funded, and one of my aims in life is to communicate science to the public. I love science, both as a system within which I do research, and as a philosophy. If I am to wax lyrical about the rationality and worth of science, and the scientific method, to the public, and use it as a basis in arguments against irrationality, pseudo-science quackery and superstition, then I damned well better practice what I preach. As such I employ the skills and techniques I have learnt in a manner that takes account of these values; I design experiments with good controls, I vary the experimental variable whilst controlling the others. I use evidence-based methodologies that have been tried and tested, thus use minimal materials to achieve my ends in the minimal possible time.

It is not always possible to do this, especially in my current area where there are no protocols for what I’m doing as it’s never been done before. None the less, I form testable hypotheses, design experiments to test them and based upon the result, either modify, scrap or move on.

In your average science lab, based upon the very large number of science labs I have been to, I would have to say that the idea of sitting down and developing a testable hypothesis that makes predictions about outcomes, then designing experiments to test these is probably not what many researchers are doing. What they are doing is ham-fisting their way through protocols given to them by more senior players, which they follow blindly, often without knowing what each step in the protocol is doing at a physical level.

Many of these protocols have been adapted, cut-down and streamlined, which is often another way of describing that short-cuts, often rather slapdash ones, have been introduced. Now there is nothing wrong with this, per se, as long as the protocol is in the hands of a capable person who knows why the protocol has been revised in this way. But, the fact is you cannot instruct a junior member of research staff with protocols that have been cut-down in this way; the full anally-retentive protocol should be provided, or sought, and the researcher allowed to refine it once they’ve identified for themselves the pros and cons of keeping each step.

Continue reading “Attention to detail…”