I have a PhD in molecular biology / stem cell biology. Ask me anything about the field and my non-existent career

I have a PhD in molecular biology / stem cell biology. Ask me anything about the field and my non-existent career.

Other urls found in this thread:

nature.com/articles/nature06293?error=cookies_not_supported&code=241b7eb0-0b7f-4173-a5af-bb433cb84e29
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>>/sci/

How much student loan debt do you have?

How long till self repairing bodies and why non existant?

What do molecules taste like?

None.

> non existant

Ever had a skin wound or a broken bone?

Carbony.

I meant repair as in grow a new severed limb and why is your career non existant?

is there any evidence that there is alien dna in our DNA?

is cloning unethical?

That's a pretty difficult developmental program which needs to be reproduced. There are quite a few people looking into salamander limb regeneration to find out how this shit works.

Isn't neanderthal DNA enough?

Cloning humans? I guess so.

Also, my career is nonexistent because my PhD was shit and I suck a networking.

You've posted this thread before. I asked you about your opinion of Sheldrake's morphic field model and his hypothesis -- soon to be tested -- that DNA alone will never be capable of creating a functioning lifeform from scratch, but you ignored me. Let's try again and see what happens.

Stem cell is cutting edge tho isn't it?
Maybe it's your networking. Sucks tbqh but it's true, maybe networking is more important than skills.

Of course DNA alone isn't capable of that. You need at least need some (usually protein or ribozyme) machinery which allows replication of DNA. Also, some kind of cell membrane would be nice.

Anyway, what would be experimental setup to test you hypothesis be?

>Stem cell is cutting edge tho isn't it?

Not really. There has been no good SC based clinical intervention yet.

The morphic field hypothesis is that data necessary for life is held in an informational field of some kind. Sheldrake notes that information is somehow able to communicate itself between lifeforms in a non-material manner (humans can sense when they are being looked at, for example, at a rate higher than simple chance), and acquired knowledge seems to radiate from animal to animal among a given species even when separated by physical barriers.

Sheldrake hypothesizes that the blueprints for creating life are not contained in DNA and RNA alone, and that no amount of manipulation of these will produce a living creature, as some of the required information is held in the morphic field.

>bioLOGy

>that data necessary for life

What kind of data?

>Sheldrake hypothesizes that the blueprints for creating life are not contained in DNA and RNA alone, and that no amount of manipulation of these will produce a living creature, as some of the required information is held in the morphic field.

And what kind of evidence does he have? Furthermore, that all sounds like ideas of some abstract vis vitalis which we find postulated since the 1700s.

Do you regret putting some much time, energy and money into a profession that will soon be dominated by computer learning / AI?

Doesn't even need an AI to replace me because I already can't find a job.

But the field in general, do you see AI taking over 90% of the manned work in the next 10 years and what does that mean to the field?

The fact that cells from different organisms -- or even different *species* -- somehow know how to cooperate to create a functional living creature in the form of a chimera is extremely mysterious, and a morphic field would help explain it. Sheldrake argues that DNA and RNA doesn't and can't contain all of the information required to assemble cells into a complete and working organism, and that the morphic field contains this missing data.

The evidence Sheldrake uses is controversial. For example, he's done double blind clinical trials with humans as to whether they can sense whether or not someone unsees is looking at them, and the data suggests they can. Others have tried to duplicate his tests and, while their results were not quite as striking as his, they too ended up with numbers which show there is a better-than-random-chance probability that a person can detect whether someone is looking at them.

There is also anecdotal observation of cases in which, for example, species of monkeys separated by ocean on different islands all began spontaneously altering the way they did certain tasks (such as washing their food in water) after monkeys on one island learned a new method of doing so. Sheldrake hypothesizes that this sort of information is communicated unconsciously through the morphic field.

If you're trying to preserve a cell line, and you don't have any liquid nitrogen, what would you use?

Genetically engineered monster girls when?

There is of course the circumstance that manual lab works gets more and more automated. But I have no idea how an AI should take over scientific work in itself. Of course, when analysing big datasets, we use machine learning but that it a highly curated process.

>I have a PhD in molecular biology / stem cell biology. Ask me anything about the field and my non-existent career.

Why do you post this same thread so often? The microbiologists I have known and/or fucked have all been a bit on the psycho side of things.

>he fact that cells from different organisms -- or even different *species* -- somehow know how to cooperate to create a functional living creature in the form of a chimera is extremely mysterious

It is not. These cells are genotypically and phenotypically similar enough to form the receptor-ligands networks which is the basis of any developmental and functional process in complex tissues. This is basic biology which I used to learn in high school.

>The evidence Sheldrake uses is controversial. For example, he's done double blind clinical trials with humans as to whether they can sense whether or not someone unsees is looking at them, and the data suggests they can. Others have tried to duplicate his tests and, while their results were not quite as striking as his, they too ended up with numbers which show there is a better-than-random-chance probability that a person can detect whether someone is looking at them.

You know about publication bias don't you?

cells can cooperate and form a complete and working organism because of billions of years of evolution, not because of some field.

Please explain the picture, its beautiful

It's the brain of a mouse which expresses the brainbow construct; a transgene which randomly expresses combinations of fluorescent proteins which color cells (in this case brain cells) in more than 60 different colors.

Here's the paper: nature.com/articles/nature06293?error=cookies_not_supported&code=241b7eb0-0b7f-4173-a5af-bb433cb84e29

At least the figures should be visible.

hey op, i have a phd as well and have been a neet for a few years after getting fired from my job... what are you doing for money? i live with relatives and hop from one minimum wage joke job to another, while hiding my real identity of course. what about you?

Go into computer science OP. There's a massive shortage of qualified workers, and you could do something relevant to your field. There are tonnes of free courses online. Harvard and MIT have both released their intro to CompSci courses for free.

Same here. Minimum wage jobs while writing job applications.

Most of what has been mentioned in this thread is far more advanced than you would believe. Too bad modern technology is now being hoarded and held in secret worse than ever before...

well, i entered year three of being a neet a few months ago. it's a weird limbo to be in. i'm so fucking insanely broke i can barely afford to feed myself. and on top of that i get to live in fatass america and watch everyone feed like hogs. it fucking disgusts me. the worst part is that because you have a doctorate, people expect you to turn some type of fucking trick to fix your life. i feel for you, op.

Why aren't you postdocing until you can find a job that's worth while?

Quickly freeze the cell in a solution of like 20% glycerol with your cells in a -80C freezer or to quickly freeze them put them in a bath of Dry ice and pure ethanol and then freeze at -80C

Biomedical/biochemical research will never be taken over by AI, it maybe some of our job but never all of it.

man the complexity always amazes me. i tell you, i never was a skeptic and never did i question the evolutionary theory of life until i took my first biology class. The magnitude of it, the determination of life and its complexity just cannot be the product of probability.

Actually considering the age of the universe/earth random chance make perfect sense
>be universe
>born about 14.5 billion years ago
>randomly combining elements since then
>about 4.5 billion years ago earth comes along
>after about 1.8 billion years of random combinations
>one or some creates basic life

My last Postdoc ran out a year ago. So I said to myself that I will fully focus on finding a job in industry now. Was thinking that it maybe takes up to half a year. Still without a job though.

You should be looking at jobs in Cali, biomedical research in industry is huge there

So you ran out of funding and you pi wouldn't support you? Why didnt you job hunt towards the end of your postdoc?

I did. But postdoc works takes lot of time. So after my postdoc ran out, I wanted to focus all of my time on job hunting.

You didn't try hard enough then and in research there is lots of down time when you could have been looking