Sci’s over at Scientific American today, giving a guest post on the recent findings of reboxetine…the antidepressant that couldn’t.
Sci just got back from vacation and on to the internets, and, as they say in the internet world, my tubes are clogged.
BUT! I’ve been reading the advice of you all on how to blog basic science better (and more questions will be coming on that)! And to that end, I have created a new page! It’s up there on the top bar, below all the general contact and abouts and stuff. It’s called SCIENCE! 101, and is a comprehensive list of all the basic science posts seen at Neurotic Physiology. I have to say I was really stunned by the HUGE number of these things I’ve written. And there will be more. Oh yes, there will be more.
So check out SCIENCE! 101!!!
Sci got very interested in the responses to her last post asking educators (and others), if they used my blog in teaching and why.
I’d like to follow up more on this, and ask another question:
What are the signs of a good basic blog? Breadth of coverage? In depth? Cited sources? What makes a basic blog a GOOD basic blog? What do you value, and what would you like to see more of?
And don’t limit this to just the educators! Readers, if you aren’t a neuroscientist, what are the signs of a good blog outside your field? What would you like to see less or more of?
Let me know. Sci needs some ANECDOTES. And then we’ll come around to collecting some data. 🙂
Sci hasn’t had a lot of access to internets over the past few days, but others have!
Drugmonkey posts a lovely post thanking us all for blogging! Thank you for YOU, DM. 🙂
Zuska has a post on being thankful for neurologists.
And Leigh has a wonderful post up on Thankfulness.
Hope everyone who celebrates it had a wonderful Thanksgiving! Sci shall shortly return to the internets (otherwise she gets withdrawal).
So I tried to get access to this paper when everyone ELSE had access to the press release, because I totally wanted it, but Sci doesn’t get press releases (I did try to get press releases, but one publishing group cited what I feel is a totally justified potential conflict of interest due to Sci being a scientist who needs to publish in said journal, which I understand. The OTHER publishing group told me they don’t like “anonymity”. It’s PSEUDONYMITY, not ANONYMITY, and I don’t need you anyway. And I find that to be a somewhat kneejerk and reactionary position from people who clearly neither know nor care about what potential the science blogsphere has. Humph.), and the paper itself wasn’t available by the time all the press coverage hit.
BUT NOW. NOW SCI HAS THE PAPER. And I’m gonna blog it. Because it’s both good and bad. Good for the guys with laptops to know. And bad for the people who attempt to sit next to those guys on the subway.
(Sure his balls are comfy, but that’s three seats, dude, not one. Source)
I clearly need to find a way to put “scrotal hyperthermia” to use commonly in my daily speech.
Happy American Thanksgiving! Behold! My Favorite PIE!
I’m not the only one who’s thankful around here!
Heather Joseph never, ever, ever makes that mistake. She tells the straight story, don’t get me wrong, but she’s got the chops to tell it without leaving any holes in her professional armor for skeevy publishers or lazy libraries to evade her message. She never falters or admits defeat. (I do. Regularly.) She is smart, prepared, opportunistic, persistent, and unwavering.
Zuska is thankful for Botox. Read her post, and you will be too.
Christina is Thankful for Citation Linkers! No, she doesn’t mean a proper bibliography, she means a sweet text of science on your screen.
Pascale gives thanks for urine. And you can see why.
in other places around the blogsphere, the Abbot Lab is thankful for: their computers (aren’t we ALL), their boss (awww), and the theory of evolution. WORD.
What, Who, and what ideas are you thankful for in science?
Sci will admit she’s actually thankful for a LOT of people in science. Her mentors, official and unofficial, the greats in her field, her colleagues, LOTS of people. She is thankful for her parents for encouraging her to go into science once she expressed the desire (they always thought I’d be an English major).
But today, she wants to talk specifically about one man, without whom Sci’s research (and the research of lots of other people) simply wouldn’t exist.
Santiago Ramon y Cajal.
Well, ok, Sci’s thankful for lots of things. Having recently completed a rather difficult race, I’m very thankful right now for ice packs.
(Not Sci’s knees. But they might as well be. Source)
Also Gu. I <3 Gu.
(Source. Ok ok, most Gu tastes really crappy. But Chocolate Outrage is good. And when you’re more than 10 miles in and really feeling it, the flavor ceases to matter)
But this post is not about such material things. No. This post is about Pubmed.
As some of you might be aware, American Thanksgiving is coming up. Sci generally prefers to focus on the family aspect, and of course on the delicious and awesomely vast quantities of food. But she ALSO would like to focus on things that we are Thankful For. And to that end, she asked the talented bloggers of Scientopia: what are you thankful for?
Throughout the week, we’ll be posting what we are thankful for, in terms of three ideas:
1) AN ITEM: what item in your scientific career are you most thankful for, which has made your life immeasurably easier? Pubmed? The rapid cycling PCR machine?
2) A PERSON: Who in your field (or out of it) has really influenced your career as it is today, made you what you are and your career what it is?
3) AN IDEA: what idea are you especially thankful for? Did a big idea change your field entirely? Did it call into question everything you thought you knew?
And if you are a blogger, and want to participate, PLEASE DO!!! I’d love to see what other people around the blogsphere think of these questions. Send Sci a link and she’ll add it in!