JVL
One Nice Bug Per Day
oozey mess
titsay
Monterey Bay Aquarium
izzy's playlists!
Product Placement
Today's Document
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
taylor price
No title available
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
wallacepolsom
dirt enthusiast
AnasAbdin
Acquired Stardust
YOU ARE THE REASON
Keni
Not today Justin
art blog(derogatory)
seen from Slovakia
seen from Singapore
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from Brazil
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Belgium
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@infectiousmdphd
M3 Diary: Infernal Medicine pt 27
When the fuck did they switch from clostridium to clostridioides?
Also ffuuuccckkk when I started medical school C in C diff stood for clostrodium
LOOL as someone doing C. diff research this got me good during the initial literature search. Just started the Phd part of the MSTP and I never knew it went by anything other than Clostridium
CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS
CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS
CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS
CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS
And PETA is an anagram for TAPE. So why don’t they tape their mouths shut and shut the god damn hell up
Virus’ aint alive
That’s actually up for debate
It’s not. @keyhollow can back me up.
It’s not, they’re not alive
Ok but wait isn’t a virus still considered a form a life? They have genes, they metabolize, and they reproduce. If we found viruses on mars we would consider them alien life forms, right?
Nope.
They don’t meet the qualifications for life. Some call them androids.
They can’t keep any homeostasis, they don’t grow, they aren’t made of cells, and they can’t create their own energy.
They’re pretenders
If we’re getting symantic, they can’t be androids because they’re aren’t human shaped. I understand your meaning by use of the word, wrong though it may be, and I feel compelled to pick out this one insignificant part of your argument for my personal gratification. So hah!
Yeah android in literally ever other sense lololol
“Android” refers to a very specific thing. You may have been thinking of “automaton”.
Android is the common comparison we use in bio 🤷♀️
An example of its use, “Where does this leave us? Are viruses alive or dead? Well, we know they’re not dead. Death is what happens when a living organism stops performing biological functions, and for the moment we’re only interested in the active particles. So were they ever alive? Most biologists say no. Viruses are not made out of cells, they can’t keep themselves in a stable state, they don’t grow, and they can’t make their own energy. Even though they definitely replicate and adapt to their environment, viruses are more like androids than real living organisms. (Think Data from Star Trek, Arnold Schwarzenegger in Terminator, the Cylons in Battlestar Galactica or the robots in I, Robot). Just like crazy killer robots, viruses are created fully formed, and rely on host materials to build and power themselves.”
If viruses are not alive, why would they be studied in biology in the first place? They are parasites that co-opt the machinery of others to reproduce - but do is a wasp laying an egg in a spider.
Hell, it is entirely possible humans will go down that path, requiring technology to replace the womb.
Sure, we will keep both systems running for a while - but at some point, it is pretty easy to imagine future humans editing out biologically based reproduction as being redundant and distasteful.
Still, perhaps the emergence of artificial intelligence will make the question of “what is life” seem pointless.
Viruses reproduce by inserting genetic material into a host cell. Image by NIAID. Scientists are not sure whether viruses are living or non-
They’re studied due to how they affect living creatures, and because biology goes beyond the living. Proteins and fats aren’t alive either, but we study those as well. We study death, life, and what affects life.
If humans lose any of the criteria for being living we won’t be classified as living anymore. Easy peasy.
In which case we won’t technically meet the requirements for being living.
Listen here now, Mr. Technology Man. Humans aren’t the center of definitions. If we move outside of the definition, it no longer applies to us. Just like how we don’t consider infants sentient even though they’re human.
“They’re studied due to how they affect living creatures”
No, they are studied because life is a concept that predates biology and only vaguely corresponds to it.
Biologists don’t study fire, despite it affecting living creatures. Heck, it even reproduces.
If every virus disappeared, other life forms would continue. If the same happened with proteins, nothing we now regard as life would continue. So it is easy to see why proteins are included in biology classes.
But why virii? 😁
Why are viruses traditionally part of biology? Why do other biologists class them as life?
“If humans lose any of the criteria for being living we won’t be classified as living anymore.”
By whom? If we only reproduce by artificial means, we will be the ones writing definitions - and we will always see ourselves as being alive. Even without natural reproduction. Even if we not longer use cells or proteins.
“ we don’t consider infants sentient”
You mean sapient. But in this case, it would be a group of beings who can loudly and clearly dispute you. You can call them androids and they can call their lawyer. Or if a group fully embraces the transhumanist path, maybe they will be the ones defining you as non-sapient.
No that’s exactly why we study viruses, because they affect life directly and are a problem for humans.
Biologists do study fire, and again, how it affects life (burns, forest fires, house fires, smoke production, so on).
If viruses disappeared life would be heavily affected, and those effects would be studied and needed to be countered, and it could be catastrophic, because viruses target bacteria as well as our own cells.
Because of how they affect living things.
We used to see ourselves as the only sentient creatures, the only creatures to use tools, and superior in every way. Things change, yet the definitions stayed the same. It’s okay to be or not be something.
No no, I said what I meant, which is sentient. Sentience has criteria, one of which being self awareness, which infants do not have.
Viruses can share as much DNA as they want (mainly because they’re thieves probs) until they meet the other criteria, they aren’t alive
I don’t even understand why people are still arguing this. We learned viruses aren’t alive in 10th grade bio. I can’t believe people are this dumb.
Virus are zombie
Robot zombies
Surprised that everyone is completely misunderstanding this? First of all, the one saying “coronavirus is a living thing” is from an onion article and not even real. And the first quote is referring to how many viruses hop the species barrier when humans and other species are kept together. This is nothing new or controversial. This is how we got diseases by the name of swine flu and bird flu. Covid-19 is another that passed to us from animals because we want to eat their flesh. Animal agriculture is a literal breeding ground for new diseases. Peta always manages to suffer from foot in mouth disease, but I think what they’re saying here is supported by science and not really up for debate.
coronavirus has nothing to do with animal agriculture tho lol isnt the source thought to be bushmeat
Actually quite interesting, as a bio phd we repeat the dogma that viruses arent alive as obligate intercellular pathogens. But the more we learn about other organisms like obligate intracellular bacterial species, this defining trait of life vrs not alive is very unsatisfactory.
Another example where biologists question the dangers and benefits dogma in science. Where it usually boils down to convenience and abiding to traditional characterizations. My cohort certainly had several conversations about redefining life.
As a doctor, I am sure you've had your run in chemistry classes. I am a freshman student that just completed my first semester with an A in everything.... except Chemistry (managed a C). I feel like I was chasing the equations and memorizing functions more so than understanding the fundamentals of how it all comes together. Do you have any suggestions book wise, series wise, etc.? I signed up for tutoring for next semester but wanted to ask for further advice from anyone who has it. Thank you!
It’s been a hot minute since I took Gen Chem, but I feel you, buddy. That was my first ever B in school and I worked my tail off for it. I don’t know if any specific resources for you (readers please make suggestions!) but I would strongly recommend taking advantage of tutoring or TA sessions or office hours that your school offers. Going to my professor’s office hours for like 15 minutes once or twice a week tremendously improved my understanding because I felt more comfortable to ask the “stupid” questions I wouldn’t ask in class. Also prepare for class. That sounds obvious but lots of folks don’t do it. A quick 20 minute look over the concepts being covered in class before you get there can also give you a huge boost.
I’m not a doctor yet but I have a couple thoughts about this.
If you’re ever in a class and you feel like you are only getting through it through sheer memorization, most times it’s due to lack of time to digest material or the way the material is presented.
Unfortunately the rememedy is usually finding the time to digest things fully. Looking through additional material outside of those given in class. A favorite method of mine is going through the material and generating easy, intermediate, and harder questions to answer myself or ask in office hours.
Even classes like anatomy have a rythym and pattern if one looks past the stress of it all.
Inside of you there are two wolves. That's nowhere near enough wolves to sustain the population, so we're starting a reintroduction program. Open wide, please.
Wolves Georg, stop trying to make fetch happen.
https://xkcd.com/1471/
#I cannot tell you how often we quote this xkcd#wildly out of proportion with how often you would think it would be relevant
My gratitude for your relephants to this thread XKCD insert is significantly high.
when people ask where you see yourself in 10 years
JUMPING ON THIS OPPORTUNITY
MSTP feels
How do you generally address patients? Do you say "Hello, Mr/Mrs Patient," or do you just say "Hi Patient Name!" Is it considered rude to call patients by their first name instead of saying Mr/Mrs?
It depends on the patient. I’m in the South so I tend to default to a more formal title because I was raised that way and most of my older patients expect it. But patients who are my age-ish or younger I tend to call by their first names. If they’re slightly older it’s a toss up. Depends on the patient’s personality. But if they’re older than my parents I call them Mrs/Mr First Name usually.
Follow up, as there are a lot of interesting comments on the original post :
I never call an adult patient by their first name on my initial interaction with them. Everyone is Ms/Mr Last Name when we first meet. Once we get to know each other better I may switch to first names if they’re ok with it.
If a patient calls me by my first name, I don’t typically correct them (though my MA will sometimes), but if they ask what I want to be called, I tell them Dr. LastName. Likewise, I will call a patient by whatever name they prefer.
I saw that several people mentioned they would expect to call their doctor by their first name if the doc called them by their first name. Or that they wouldn’t see a doctor who asked to be called Dr. Lastname. I’ll go ahead and say I do prefer to be called Dr. LastName when I’m in the office. It’s not about authority or social status though. If I see you at the grocery store I probably don’t want you to know I’m a doctor. I’m certainly not going to tell you because it doesn’t make any difference to our interaction in the produce section. But for me as a young (I am still considered young, right? I’m Tumblr Old ™ but irl young) who doesn’t wear a white coat and who often is mistaken for a nurse, I feel it’s important that patients know my role in the office or hospital.
I also have never once heard a male colleague be addressed by his first name by a patient. Even in my hospital I commonly hear other doctors refer to male doctors as “Dr. LastName” and females docs as “FirstName”. In a recent meeting of all the primary care doctors in our system, the doc leading the meeting called one physician by their first name and called everyone else Doctor. That one exception was a female doctor who is Chief of Medical Staff and of anyone in that room she should have garnered the highest respect. I’m not trying to be argumentative or be an angry feminist here. I just would like to be afforded the same respect that my male colleagues are given automatically.
I’ve told patients before that if they see me at church or the grocery store feel free to call me by my first name because I’m not in my doctor role at church. The ladies in my spin class certainly don’t call me Doctor, nor do I expect them to. But when I’m doing your Pap smear I think it’s important to keep that title for the sake of professionalism. Additionally, I did earn the title with many years of training and though it doesn’t make me better than anyone I do appreciate the acknowledgement of my training in my field. Similarly I would call a preacher Pastor or Reverend and I’d call a cop Officer and a judge Your Honor out of respect for their training and position, even if they have no authority over me personally. Unfortunately English doesn’t have a lot of honorific titles for various jobs but other languages do, particularly for teachers and lawyers or even generally for elders. I wish there was a good title for PAs and NPs and PTs (the ones without doctorates) besides Ms./Mr. too.
Anyway, where was I?
There are cultural nuances here but I am curious about how one would challenge these norms to build relationships with nonbinary and queer identities.
hi! I’m planning to apply to med school in the spring of 2021. a lot of my peers who are planning the same thing are planning for their MCATs for summer 2020, but i’m not sure why. I was planning to take it in march 2020, and thought that would be enough time before applying. What is the advantage of a summer MCAT??
If you’re applying spring 2021, then taking the MCAT either march 2020 or summer 2020 shouldn’t be different by all that much. I did a very very quick search to see if there are pending changes to the MCAT from 2019-2021 that might make people change the date of their test and there don’t appear to be any. The only advantage I can think of would be to prolong their time to study for the MCAT.
Best,
md-a
If they are still in college then it would be a class-free time to take the mcat. Also if their score is bad, they would have time to retake it before the cycle.
I took mine in march but I was pretty determined that I wouldn’t take it again
I think every aspiring scientist in some point of their education should have to teach a college level class to elementary school children, while making it fun and understandable for said children. Being able to communicate complex ideas to all age ranges is extremely important for science literacy. It’s paramount that a scientist is able to explain their field to anyone who wants to learn. A lack of science communication in the past years has been a factor in many people choosing to ignore and reject science. Science is not exclusive to professionals. Science belongs to us all.
Why do medical schools do the white coat ceremony for new students? Wouldn't it make more sense to do it at the end for graduating students since they'd be MD/DOs?
Hi anon!
You ask an interesting question that led me to look into the history of the white coat ceremony, which I actually knew very little about!
-Apparently this is a relatively new fangled ceremony which started only in the 1990s
-No longer just for MD or DO students, this ceremony has been extended to other healthcare professions as well like pharmacy
You ask if it would make more sense to do it at the end. Based on what I am understanding from the original intention of the ceremony, it sounds like it would not. Arnold P Gold, the neurologist who originally came up with the idea, appears to have wanted to use this ceremony to highlight the start of the students’ journey in the medical profession by ceremonially giving out a medical student’s short white coat; to remind them of the responsibility and privilege of their positions as medical students about to undergo rigorous training.
Of course, we could then suggest various ‘start points’ of one’s medical career. One might argue that the start of the medical profession is when one interacts with patients; however, work with patients now also starts in the first year of medical school for many in US med schools. It could also be said that the start of one’s medical career begins with licensure; however, that would not occur for most physicians until after their intern year and by then you’re probably taking on more and more clinical duties during your third and fourth year as a medical student and feeling more and more likely a practicing physician of some type.
That all said, it depends on where one logically feels a medical career starts, to give the short medical student white coat. And I think most people do still feel that the start of medical school marks a huge life event. I would agree with Dr. Gold’s belief that your life changes dramatically with the start of medical school in a way that should be acknowledged. But hey, this is a relatively young ceremony. And it’s just a gesture. If it makes no sense to you, it’s cool.
Good question, I had fun learning more about this ceremony, thank you!
md-a
Techinically, administrators at the university of chicago med started handing out white coats to students as an effort to build professionalism in medical school.
Then, Dr Gold from Columbia Med heard through a conference and happened to have money to start the official white coat ceremony. His ceremony started stating the oath at the beginning rather than the end of medical school.
Could this be the end of superbugs?
A 25-year-old student has just come up with a way to fight drug-resistant superbugs without antibiotics.
The new approach has so far only been tested in the lab and on mice, but it could offer a potential solution to antibiotic resistance, which is now getting so bad that the United Nations recently declared it a “fundamental threat” to global health.
Antibiotic-resistant bacteria already kill around 700,000 people each year, but a recent study suggests that number could rise to around 10 million by 2050.
In addition to common hospital superbug, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), scientists are now also concerned that gonorrhoea is about tobecome resistant to all remaining drugs.
But Shu Lam, a 25-year-old PhD student at the University of Melbourne in Australia, has developed a star-shaped polymer that can kill six different superbug strains without antibiotics, simply by ripping apart their cell walls.
“We’ve discovered that [the polymers] actually target the bacteria and kill it in multiple ways,” Lam told Nicola Smith from The Telegraph. “One method is by physically disrupting or breaking apart the cell wall of the bacteria. This creates a lot of stress on the bacteria and causes it to start killing itself.”
The research has been published in Nature Microbiology, and according to Smith, it’s already being hailed by scientists in the field as “a breakthrough that could change the face of modern medicine”.
Before we get too carried away, it’s still very early days. So far, Lam has only tested her star-shaped polymers on six strains of drug-resistant bacteria in the lab, and on one superbug in live mice.
But in all experiments, they’ve been able to kill their targeted bacteria - and generation after generation don’t seem to develop resistance to the polymers.
Continue Reading.
Yes. All the yes. Women in STEM deserve ALLLLLLLL the applause. All of it. And cake. All the cake, too.
headcanon: klaus figures out that if he burns clothes in effigy in a certain way they reach the afterlife and he becomes ben's personal stylist. that's where ben got that bomb leather jacket.
That’s how he gets stuff to Ben all the time like books and stuff. Now I’m just imagining before they hijacked that ice cream truck Ben is like “aw I want a rocket pop” and Klaus is like say no more and Diego has to just stand there watching Klaus perform a sacrificial ritual and melt a popsicle with his lighter
Second Look!
Can’t believe I’m sitting in the hotel for MSTP second look at my top choice!
“Art is a discipline that is practiced with passion and science is a passion that is practiced with discipline”
— Dr. Keith Black
