Forum menu
Paradigm shifts!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031124918.htm
I attempted to do a project on something similar to this for my undergraduate but I ended up needing a lot more time than I had, so had to call it a day. Needless to say, I've now linked this article to a tutor of mine who firmly and rather condescendingly believed that aneuploidy was just a by product that didn't really need studying. I win bozo! 😈
Just kind of pissed that I didn't do well enough during my undergraduate to get a Phd proposal right off the bat for something like this! There's still time to get in on the action and make a strong contribution I hope, even if I do miss out on the Nobel Peace Prize. 😆
Gahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! 
A bit outside my field but very interesting
Oh and well done for your foresight. I hope you fins a route into research
The best bit about science for me was sitting next to Joanne Mitchell in Chemistry.
The rest of it was a bit of a let down.
I win bozo!
Well, probably not if you sent it in a similar manner to the confrontational approach the above implies. Instead, you've probably ruined any future chances of working with them should you find a need to do so, and will no doubt have had your email address added to their spam filter.
Academia is a very small world. Never piss off anyone unless you really know you'll never have to deal with them or any of their associates. That includes the possibility of them peer-reviewing papers or grant applications.
Don't worry. I just linked it to her and said I thought it would be of interest. The person was the "Dr Cox" of my university, I wouldn't care if the link grievously upset them though.
God zokes. Mr serious pants as ever.
Oh how I've missed you, bwaaaarp
I don't know who bwaaaarp is. The search function fails to find anyone by the name of bwaarp, bwaaarp or bwaaaarp?
I don't know who bwaaaarp is.
He was a university undergraduate student studying a topic very similar to yours, who also had an issue with a female lecturer who "marked him down" when he thought he knew best. This issue also seemed to extend to anyone else who had the temerity to suggest that he might be wrong about something.
He was banned/left from here a few months ago, but popped up as [url= http://singletrackworld.com/members/interfereswithbadgers/profile/ ]interfereswithbadgers[/url] only to be banned/leave again.
Funnily enough, his profile here lists him as being called [url= http://singletrackworld.com/members/bwaarp/ ]"Thomas"[/url]
🙂
The Tom_W1987 despite being registered in 2010 only became active after the other two stopped being used too. Odd.
😀
This is basically a press release which overstates what they have done. So often "break throughs" are press releases. People have been looking an aneuploidy for 60years of cancer cytogenetics. They have a new algorithm and a large amount of sequencing data which seems to work well but the the Mitelman database has much more data. Just not as trendy. It doesn't disprove the genomic instability theory of cancer development. Looking for aneuploidy is what my company does.
According to my colleague at work, cancer is caused by pH imbalance in the body. All this stuff about genes is nonsense.
[i] the genomic instability theory[/i]
leads to untold damage if they're designed top heavy;
[img] 
[/img]
That's a sad end to a good Gnome.
I spent 7years working for a genomics company with Gnome in the company name.
Even after saying the "Gnome"
Name every time to our German customers they never got the pun.
When I was about 13 or so, I used to wonder if reality was just a projection on a flat screen and "3d" was just our perception of things moving to the sides of the screen as we moved "forward". I told my parents and they thought I was mad.
Read this last week... HA!
http://www.nature.com/news/simulations-back-up-theory-that-universe-is-a-hologram-1.14328
I am a cancer researcher and I haven't noticed the world shifting on it's axis, but then it is Monday morning...
the Aneuploidy cancer relationship is a tough one, bit chicken and egg really and you can get aneuploidy without cancer but its definitely good research
woppit as I understood it, wasnt really a hologram projected onto gods living room wall as such, more a way of explaining it relative to the dimensions we can perceive
but yeah science is great Went to Brian and Robins Compendium of Reason on Saturday and it was epic, a random mix of scientists and comedians
including Alice Roberts (swoon)
and the awesome Chris Hadfield
If you think about it, true paradigm-shifting research cannot appear in the journal Cell. A paradigm shift in science is something that initially gets laughed at, not published in a journal with one of the highest IFs in the world.Tom_W1987 - MemberParadigm shifts!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031124918.htm
Just kind of pissed that I didn't do well enough during my undergraduate to get a Phd proposal right off the bat for something like this! There's still time to get in on the action and make a strong contribution I hope, even if I do miss out on the Nobel Peace Prize.
This would be true for Cell in particular, as it is the quintessential big science publication. The average funding per paper is huge. No one does an interesting experiment on a Friday afternoon and writes up a quick Cell communication. Massive grant support is needed and by definition this must represent (and produce) orthodox science.