[go: up one dir, main page]

  • 0 Posts
  • 107 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • That’s beautifully written. I like the idea that I receive cute lil interstellar photons. The stochastic nature of the universe means I am being irradiated by an interstellar object thousands of years away. They started a journey from a star thousands of years ago, crossed the vast expanse of space without hitting anything, pierced our planet’s atmosphere as our planet and system hurtle through space, and was then absorbed by a single cone cell in my eye. It almost feels unbelievable.



  • Great comment!

    I’m optimistic in the space of biology and biotechnology though. People are doing actual SciFi shit right now. We’ve got CAR-T tech, CRISPR that’s trivial to deploy, monoclonal antibodies, mRNA tech, microbiome science, DNA sequencing that is mind-blowingly good, large scale computational analysis and machine learning that’s decoding the noise of our genomes, rapid detection of pathogens with a MALDI-TOF, to just name a few.

    It’s an insane time in biology right now, and it’s the current frontier along with computer science/ML.





  • bananabenana@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzLab anxiety
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    3 months ago

    Na this is actual intrusive thoughts from someone who has spent a considerable amount of time in a lab. It’s legit. I felt seen reading this comic. The plastic waste makes me shudder. Also experiments actually just fail sometimes, not even giving a positive or negative result. The method went wrong or a reagent was cooked.




  • 💯 with you on this.

    We also do preprints 100% of the time, but academic incentives are baked AF. Not ‘publishing’ means a large proportion of other academics simply won’t read or cite your work as they don’t believe in preprints. Additionally, funding bodies care about prestige publishing in top ranked journals, so if you don’t do this, the grant pool you have access to will be smaller.

    The incentives need to change, where journal venue is irrelevant, or weighted far less than it is.










  • bananabenana@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzOn trees...
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Maybe…but I doubt many of these phylogenies use DNA, and if so, likely only a single or few genes. Nowhere near enough resolution to accurately determine genetic relatedness. Woody plants may actually be more related than we think.

    These sorts of phylogenies tend to use morphological characteristics which is an unreliable measure of genetic relatedness.

    I will stand corrected if wrong though