Yevgeniy Grigoryev

Nice post, Graham.
I think the hardest thing to do is to decide you no longer want to be in the lab. But once you do that, you realize there is a whole world of opportunities out there and that during your PhD, you actually learned a lot more than just "pipetting indistinguishable clear liquids into illegibly labelled tubes".
Best of luck to you out there, the world is now your playground!

So my knowledge of how computer works is rather limited but I think processing power is a good comparison. While the genetic data stored can be compared to RAM (Random access memory, a form of computer data storage). The amount of data expressed can be compared to processing power or computing power. The epigenetics machinery and promoters can be compared to computer processors that handle massive calculations. Alternatively, they can probably also be compared to the CPU's electronic clock, that creates a series of electrical pulses at regular intervals. This allows the computer to synchronize all its components and determine the speed at which the computer can pull data from its memory and perform calculations. In a cell that would equate to all the active transcriptional states at any given time.

Dear Balaclava,

Your observation about the methylation and acetylation profile are very valid, such epigenetic factors make the coding capacity of our genome almost infinite! However, what I tried to calculate was mere data "stored", not expressed by the human genome. My calculations are oversimplified, of course. I doubt that currently there is a way to calculate the amount of data "expressed" in the genome, that also factors in all the genome-wide epigenetic modification events such as methylation and acetylation.

You are also absolutely right about the varying promoter states across different cells. However, the promoter expression does not affect the data stored. I think it would be virtually impossible to calculate the data actually expressed at any moment, taking into account any all the possible promoter states and epigenetic events. Of course, all attempts at such daring tasks are more than welcomed here, this is the point of this post, after all.

Great post, Farida. Jode brings up some very interesting points. It is important to realize that the the experiences of PhDs from 20 or 30 years ago were very different from what we are facing now. For one, Academia was one of the main objectives for the majority of PhDs 20-30 years back. Now it only can accommodate 20-30 % of all PhD graduates. There seems to be a lot more uncertainty in terms of career path for the current PhDs. Nowadays people face post-docs (note: multiple pot-docs!) that could last as long, if not longer, as the time it took to get the PhD degree.

I am sure once you have move past that point and have that tenure, you can happily reminisce about the days of yore when one was a graduate student earning their stripes. However, the current PhDs can have a hard time relating to such experiences because we are still in the crucible.

Hi Vicki, it is indeed a very interesting topic and you bring up some very valid points. A lot of people misunderstand what it means to have a PhD. One can probably draw a little cartoon titled "PhD through the eyes of ______" and you fill the blank. In some circles it tends to intimidate people. In others, like you said, it is understood and expected. It is the "I'm not that kind of a doctor" phrase that gets a lot of people confused.

In the end, the person who holds the title knows exactly what it was worth for them, people who work and interact with that person can learn to appreciate the skills and initiative that the person with PhD can demonstrate. Yet, it is just a degree, and like any other degree, it provides no guarantees. It is how one applies their skills and knowledge that would determine whether that person succeeds or not. I think as PhDs, we are just more accustomed to living on that fringe (experiments not working, having to troubleshoot, think on the spot, and most importantly, adapt to become successful).

Thank you for addressing this topic, and for keeping the discussion going.

Excellent topic. These are interesting statistics you are mentioning, although maybe a little dated. I would say that these trends may be changing as more and more PhDs find themselves struggling to get a competitive job offer in the US economy and more and more R&D positions from private pharma/biotech companies being outsources elsewhere.

In regards to feeling uneasy about your PhD,you have worked hard, really hard to earn it, why be ashamed of it now? Has one learned nothing useful from this experience? Both as a scientist and as a person? Those who believe that having a PhD would hinder you from being a productive and forward thinking individual obviously do not know what it is like to be a PhD. However, as you noted, once a person with PhD in sciences decides to move away from strict wetlab research, you have to highlight other skills you have developed while working on your PhD, such as trouble-shooting, management, presenting complex data and ideas to audience of varied background (conferences, meetings, etc), the list goes on! Do not sell yourself short by feeling ashamed or uneasy about a very valuable learning experience,since most likely you only get one chance in your lifetime to earn a PhD.

Thank you all for your feedback and encouragement.

John, I agree with you that dance is only one medium of expression that allows us to create a mind-body balance. I myself stumbled into tango after 14 years of doing various martial arts, including kendo, so I totally see your reference to the tea pouring ceremony. There are quite a lot of parallels between martial arts and dance, such as the awareness of movement, rhythm, time, of your partner/opponent and other cues. Both require concentration and letting go of "active control" with the mind.

However, I think one clear distinction for any type of dance is the external cue provided by music, the medium that creates and drives the movement behind the dance. Without music, dancing would be a random sequence of beautifully executed steps... with the music dancing becomes organic, it flows, and that flow of movement is what is so extraordinary for the dancer, the ability to feel the music through our bodies by dancing it. Not everyone is a dancer, but everyone can dance, that is feel the music and respond to it by moving, be it just stepping in place, changing weight, or leading another person... it is neither inferior nor superior to any other forms or arts, it is just another medium, an organic medium that incorporates various senses that we posses.

Good list. Any bacterial culture will pretty much smell like sewage. Culturing yeast, on the other hand, might smell like a visit to a pub if you close your eyes and try to imagine a dive bar. But in all honesty, anything that has sulfur in an organic chem lab will have your non-science friends wondering what unnatural foul smell you kindly decided to share with them after work today.

Great post, Suzanne,

I would also say that developing people skills is a good idea while in Grad school. I guess in falls under networking, but networking might not be an intuitive skill for some people, especially if they spend 12-14 hours a day, 7 days a week in a lab. Participate in volunteering, get involved with Grad school activities, try to develop leadership and other relevant skills, such as management and being a team player. This will pay off when you are finishing Grad school and looking for a job. And finally, try to balance your life. Your graduate research is important but it should not be everything that your life is based on (what, there are other things besides science?). Yes, explore your hobbies, it's healthy, especially when things don't go well in the lab.

I think the best thing to do is have someone proof read your manuscript. What tends to happen during the writing process is that while writing, we tend to overlook grammar sometimes to get the content out first. On revising my manuscript many times, I would find ways to correct grammar and sentence structure, find more efficient ways to say things. However, there might be some things that your own eye will not catch. That's when it is really useful to have a friend who is a stickler for grammar and who would not mind proof-reading your work. Ask your labmates, your PI, even your non-science friends who are good with written English. The process of writing a scientific manuscript is like chiseling a statue from a solid piece of rock - first you are hacking away to state your science, then you work out all the finer details of the language, grammar and sentence structure. After you have written it, read it a few times, you will see that in some instances there are more elegant and straightforward ways to say what you want to say.

Hope this helps.