loosing the faith

I'm about to give up. The last couple of months, as well as last night's*, experience is pointing me towards a sort of unsettling thought. That maybe it's never going to be about what people tell you in "truth". Or honesty at all. Maybe you just need to ignore what they say but rather just go for other angles and what you see? (And that is what you get.)


I've been at these cross road before. (Anyone who's read this blog earlier know that I have wandered down the path before and pondering why I bother listening to people and what they say, when it is really all about what they do. Like you tell children; "they don't do what you say, but what you do". And then of course, I would be silly not to repeat it "actions speak louder than words".)


I guess I'm mainly tired of being played like the fool - or acting the fool believing what's said (the lies) when all is pointing towards something not being said but I stay the course since they stated something different?


My main problem probably, as always, is that I am too logical and too rational. I do a "cost vs benefit" ration on most of my behaviour and others'. (Probably why I tend not to lie since most of the times the benefit isn't worth it. Of course, that is because I feel bad when I hurt due to the lies of others, assuming others might do the same, and tend to think gangrene is worse than a clear amputation, if you know what I am referring to?)


My main problem then, is that when people do things to others, as well as to me, I tend to try and explain it. Logical. And rational. And I have a starting point of looking at "what do the gain" and, probably more important, "what does the easiest way out mean"... and easiest in my opinion would mean "less messy" and "least explanation to others".


In a simple example, at a work place; if you are working in a closed space - say a BSL3 suite - and you are using the (almost to) last equipment and you get out of there and know that someone is going in there the next day. What would you do? (You don't want to do much work...) Would you go back into the suite with all the stuff you know would be needed when the next person goes in there? Would you tell the person you know going in there what they'd need to make their work? Or, as a middle ground, would you tell someone (maybe someone who is in charge of the suite) that "these things are missing and need to be replaced?". Or would you do nothing at all?


I'm the first to say that the first would be a "sucker thing" to do, above what you might need to do. (in this example, I'm not saying I would do that... maybe put the things needed into the air lock so it's obvious for the next person to bring it in with them. Telling them since I know they are going in there - no brainer.) But, the second or third example would be in line of what I would call "needed to do in order to do a good job and being a group member"...


Although, if you do the last option... at least be a decent enough person to not assume that anyone would do anything different to you (if you were the person going into the suite). Let's just go with "do to others what you expect them to do to you", since for a rational person it at least makes sense (and I would think that is not a super-Christian thing to do... but maybe I am wrong?). Or, "actions speak louder than words" but in my opinions you don't get to bitch about it if you were to enter that suite and find out that what ever you needed in order to to your job is not there. See, as a rational and logical person (as myself) this behavour doesn't make sense.


And to be annoyed and hurt if you were called on this behaviour? And lie about why/what happened? (I didn't do that!) Yeah... you got it.. In my limited rational book, that doesn't make sense since it is... more foolish that being played.


Did I mention that I am currently out of patience and being the nice girl (or doctor... or human) when other people are trying to fuck me over? Yeah...


And here I thought I was trying to save my soul (or personality) and being the good person, even if it cost me some slaps in the face... but once you start thinking kicking me when it looks like I am falling, it's no game. There are limits to my foolishness and niceness. However, I really hope that I can keep coming back to the "not looking at people as if they are lies pieces of dirt who wants to get ahead no matter what". But I'm starting to really questioning why it's worth it? Maybe I should just look out for me, all the time and not care anything about others? After all, there are a lot of people in the world like that...


(I just feel like that means I am giving up on the good in people... It's maybe about a grey scale? I've never been good with mixing black and white that much - apart from in clothing, of course.)




*election night in Sweden. People get the government the deserve and want... right? ehh... we're in deep trouble now.

choices and re-evaluation

The last couple of weeks have been a bit of a "pondering time" for yours truly. Partly unbloggable things, partly things that are right on target to blog about. I've mentioned a few times that I find it interesting (if not down right hard) to re-evaluate your dreams and hopes when what you thought were your dreams turn out not to be the right ones... the TT track is one example. Realizing that you might not be as bad as you sort of thought (hey, never said I was on target with my self assessment) and redefining the goals might be good for you, but it is also hard.

At least if you are anything like me, who doesn't do change that well. Or I guess, in honesty, that I do changes fairly well - it's the uncertainty prior to the decision I am particularly having problems with. The time in limbo, when it is unclear what will happen and what to prepare for.

Anyhow, the last couple of weeks I have received two emails that made my mid boggle a bit. And then there were some things at work that made my mind almost explode. Let's start with the emails, since I have gotten to think about them. They are both similar, not "real job offers" but rather "hey, I remember you and we have an opening at this place and we thought of you and wanted to ask if you wanted to have your CV moved into 'the short track pile into HR with a special recommendation' since you have expertise we need and want". To say my ego feels stroked would be correct.

Main "problem"? That both these jobs are in a very different place than I currently reside. And both of them have been in major US cities with international big corporations/governmental ties, i.e. BIG cities.

For the first one, I wrote a very kind and flattered reply stating that at this time, it's not the right move but very happy you kept me in your thoughts. The second one is the one making things a tad bit more complicated. It would be a nice job (more into my field of expertise as well). Let me rephrase that, it'd be a really interesting and great job on the career ladder... but I am not really interested in moving where it is. Not really, but that could be just a flux right now.

I've mentioned some time ago that my main problem for turning offers down is that I have a problem realizing that there might be new offers around the corner and I don't need to move quickly and take that job right away. Especially since it is not my dream job, although a good one, and I currently have a job that fits my career ladder move/what-have-you.

Of course, unbloggable things make these decisions less clear cut. And making my mind a bit muddled, as in "why I should make the decision" or "base the decision on". I've always been a firm believer in "moving towards" rather than "moving away". It might lead to the same decision in the end, but they are vastly different inside. And I am tired of moving for right now. Or maybe I'm just tired in general?

that is Doctor "Girl-with-panties-in-a-twist" to you

Sometimes, just sometimes, I get so blasted tired of people. Certain people that is.

I mean, I know that I look sort of young and especially since there is no ring on the finger, nor kids in the family, and that I smile and giggle sometimes. But seriously, I need to go back to the more morose and "dressed up woman" rotiune in order to get some things that others get automatically.

I don't like flaunting my title. Especially not to people I work with, and who work for, me and personally I have a problem asking an older woman who cleans my office to call me "Dr LastName" when I call her her first name, and then she can call me "chall" (first name) and we are chatting away. It just doesn't sit right with me to ask someone (especially) older and nice to go with Title. So, we're in the clear.

It's other people who doesn't necessarily get that. You know the meetings when all the male doctors are referred to as "Dr X" and "Dr K" and then it goes to "chall", P and R - and you can see some notes from the meeting and see this. And when (if) you call it, some people will start mumbling "oh, she really thinks that's needed. Such a girl behaviour, getting her panties in a twist about something like that". Well, you know what? If the shoe fits.... and I worked darned hard for that title, therefore go with "Dr Panties-in-a-twist" if that makes it easier?!

And the funniest part - once it is out that I have this title  - it automatically makes me older and that gives me some more respect since apparently I am not "fresh out of high school"... (since that is something added onto the "experience account" and therefore gives me more respect... Dr G had something to say about this in a blog post a week ago but I won't go into that now).

Me? I always get surprised that the other part of the equation (the part I use to think matters more than anything almost) is forgotten and not taken into account. I moved across the bleeping world! You think that would count for something in the "experience" account and maybe indicate that I am not as young as they might think?

Ah well, now it is weekend and I will go do what Americans do best - shopping ;) And probably be called Maam all the time, which I sort of like since that is all women over 19 here in the Southern city I live in, and not the more "younger" Miss... (as I go on the West Coast when I was there on vacation last year).



Note: Part of this confusion or reluctance of being called "Dr Last Name" would be that in my country of origin, we are great fans of "first name" basis and not "paying too much attention to titles since we are, after all, equal"... this cultural difference (title calling in general) might be one of the biggest things I've tried to adapt to in post-doc city). I'm trying at least.

best,
Ms Chall, PhD ;)

rejection sigh...

Well, I got to be happy for a few days, but today all hope was squished. "Not clear of the kind of conceptual advance which would generate interest from our reader".... [paraphrasing] Ah, it's probably much better though, to get rejected without even getting sent out for review. At least it was very quick. Now the manuscript can get sent to another journal.... if I just can figure out a better [more appropriate] one.

Feeling a bit bummed though. Really wanted this to work. It would've been my best IF so far...

Then again, maybe that wouldn't mean too much ;)

Off to scout for a new vanue, and I think C/N/S style is out. (read: not general enough, nor conceptial apparently... duh) The hard choice is going to be which way we will have to rewrite it towards... huu....

I guess I can give it a night and grieve/feel bummed/mope before I pick it up and reformat the whole deal. Yack.

You make a huge mistake

…in the middle of the day, aka lunch time. I started reading a little thing about the swine flu debate… and realized (again) that I won’t be able to be quiet nor calm. Some people are just too scary for their own good.

Since I’m busy today I can’t write my piece right now, but I will have too soon. I can however jot down a few bullet points. All of them since it makes me cringe how little people really understand “causality” and “correlation” and what this “statistical significance” really means.

Let’s start with simple biology;
*Virus infections can not be treated with antibiotics

*Actually, apart from some anti-virals that work against some viral infections, we humans have nothing real good to fight a viral infection. Hence the interest and need for vaccines

..and then on to the more hard to argue about since they are so… taken out of thin air?!

* Pharma is not out to kill us all, really not.

* Even if Pharma is only around to make money, they don’t want to kill everyone (especially not their potential clients who will buy drugs)

There are some mix ups of all these arguments which makes it really hard to argue the case. Why? Because the whole discussion focuses on A,B and then logically D,E and G. If you are to point out that in fact, “B is wrong, C and F are missing, and D doesn’t follow B, but sure, G is a bit tough” then the focus will be “G is a bit tough, huh I TOLD you so!!!” and all other points are forgotten since one of the statements were sort of true….

* I agree completely that the WHO screwed up on the “non disclosure” factor of which affiliation the researchers who were involved in the reference group had. I thought it would lead to, as it has, the whole “if you’re hiding it, it’s because it’s fishy”. That was real stupidly done. (Doesn’t influence what I think about the reasoning though…)

* If the vaccine hadn’t been done, and the pandemic would’ve flooded us, and people died en masse… you think anyone would’ve been holding back? Nah. We call this the classical “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”.

*The link between side effects of the swine flu vaccine and people, compared to the “seasonal flu vaccine” and side effects is going to be real interesting to study. Why you might ask. Because the swine flu vaccine was made exactly like the seasonal one… with the same mixings… apart from [drum roll] the actual virus. I guess my fascination as a scientist is key here- imagine if it is something with these epitopes that trigger something. Or, as some of us fellow flu scientists hypothesized, it might be a “huge cohort” and “underlying factors” that aren’t obvious to start with. Sure, x sounds like a large number. Comparing x to 10000x makes it less… so… still going to be investigated of course.

And my main source of irritation right now.

WHY are people so prone to listen to some person who hasn’t gotten any relevant experience (never mind degree) in the subject at hand and believe in them?!?! I mean, seriously. Would you believe Person A on the street telling you that newer models of air planes are unsafe to fly in because they have heard one other person telling them that and they liked this other person?

If you wouldn’t, why trust some person stating “anyone with a degree is associated with pharma, and therefore trying to make money of you, and not caring about your life. Me however, with no knowledge in anything related to life sciences or body functions, I know the real deal here”.

Really!?!?!

Time to go work and hopefully I can let go of this childish “let them all have viruses next time and see what they say then” attitude. Got to save the children, even if their parents are trying their hardest not to, right?!