Showing posts with label genetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genetics. Show all posts

Thursday, October 08, 2009

National Medal of Science Winners

Yesterday President Barak Obama presented the National Medal of Science to nine "eminent researchers" and the National Medal of Technology and Innovation to four inventers, the "highest honors bestowed by the United States government on scientists, engineers, and inventors."

Three women were honored this year with the National Medal of Science.

Dr. Joanna Fowler, Senior Scientist at Brookhaven National Laboratory, New York

[. . . ] for her pioneering work in chemistry involving the synthesis of medical imaging compounds and her innovative applications of these compounds to human neuroscience, which have significantly advanced our understanding of the human brain and brain diseases, including drug addiction.



Dr. Elaine Fuchs
, Rebecca C. Lancefield Professor and Investigator, HHMI at the laboratory of Mammalian Cell Biology and Development, The Rockefeller University, New York
[. . .] for her pioneering use of cell biology and molecular genetics in mice to understand the basis of inherited diseases in humans and her outstanding contributions to our understandings of the biology of skin and its disorders, including her notable investigations of adult skin stem cells, cancers, and genetic syndromes.

Dr. JoAnne Stubbe, Novartis Professor of Chemistry and Professor of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
[. . . ] for her groundbreaking experiments establishing the mechanisms of ribonucleotide reductases, polyester synthases, and natural product DNA cleavers -- compelling demonstrations of the power of chemical investigations to solve problems in biology.

One woman was honored with the National Medal of Technology and Innovation:

Dr. Esther Sans Takeuchi, Greatbatch Professor of Advanced Power Sources in the Chemical and Biological Engineering Department, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York
[. . . ] for her seminal development of the silver vanadium oxide battery that powers the majority of the world's lifesaving implantable cardiac defibrillators, and her innovations in other medical battery technologies that improve the health and quality of life of millions of people.



Three women National Science Winners in a single year is a record high - and historically that number has frequently been zero. While that may seem like an encouraging upward trend, if you check the stats, more women were NMoS recipients in the 1990s (15) than in the 2000s (10). Hopefully, the 2010s will see an improvement in those numbers.

The National Medal of Technology and Innovation doesn't provide a way to search recipients by gender (and some winners are actually companies), but looking through the list it appears that Esther Sans Takeuchi is the first woman to win since Stephanie Kwolek in 1996.

Watch the awards ceremony on YouTube:


(President Obama also said some good things about supporting research and math and science education in his speech.)

Tags: ,, , , ,

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Women Scientists and Engineers on NOVA's scienceNOW

PBS has just made a bunch of their programs available online, including their science news show, NOVA scienceNOW. Each episode includes a profile of a scientist or engineer doing interesting research.

The segments are short and full of human interest, with "how we met" bits from the spouse, and emphasis on hobbies. There's some science too, of course, but the overall tone is light and breezy. The take home message is science is cool and so are scientists, which isn't a bad thing at all.

The women profiled in the full online episodes are:

Cynthia Breazeal, Associate Professor of Media Arts and Sciences and Director of the Robotic Life Group at the MIT Media Lab.

"A daring engineer designs robots to communicate and interact the way people do.
Watch the complete episode with the segment on Breazeal. Read the program's transcript.

More information:

Edith Widder, marine biologist and bioluminescence specialist, deep-sea explorer and founder of the Ocean Research & Conservation Association.
"Meet a marine biologist and explorer who has engineered new ways to spy on deep-sea creatures."
Watch the complete episode with the segment on Widder. Read the transcript.

More information:

Other ScienceNOW segments are available online too, but only as Quicktime movies:

Yoky Matsuoka, neuroboticist (robotics + neuroscience) at the University of Washington.
Profile page (with video). Transcript.

Pardis Sabeti, Harvard geneticist and genomics expert.
Profile page (with video). Transcript

Bonnie Basler, Princeton biologist who studies how bacteria "talk".
Profile page (with video). Transcript.

Naomi Halas, Rice University nanotech expert.
Profile page (with video). Transcript.

Julie Schablitsky, archaeologist studying the Donner Party site and other areas important to the history of the American West.
Profile page (with video). Transcript.

Watching the videos (or reading the transcripts) of a bunch of the profiles, it's striking how much more the women profiled talked about their personal lives than the men. I don't know if that is because of the questions they were asked or not, but I was pretty surprised that Naomi Halas was asked point blank whether the reason she and her husband didn't have children because of her work. The answer: no, they wanted children, but she couldn't have them, which seems like a very personal revelation. When most the men were interviewed we don't even find out whether they have children or not, let alone whether they wanted to have kids. I realize that's likely because there is a social expectation is that "normal" women want to be mothers and are more interested in having a life outside the lab then men, but it's disappointing that the show's questions went in that direction.

Tags: , ,

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Top Women Scientists of 2008

It's the end of the year and all the magazines are publishing their "best of" lists - including the top scientists. Here's a round-up of women scientists who have been profiled:

Anne Wojcicki and Linda Avey, co-founders of biotech startup 23andMe were among Popular Mechanics' "The Internet's Top 10 Most Controversial Figures of 2008"

Discover named Senator Barbara Mikulski, chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science as one of the "10 most influential people in science". No, she's not a scientist herself, but she regularly fights for federal science funding.

Discover named University of Alaska ecologist Katey Walter, Harvard stem cell biology Amy Wagers, UC Berkeley molecular biologist Nicole King, and MIT astrophysicist Sara Seager among the "20 best brains under 40"

Discover named Anastasia Roda, 19, and Isha Jain, 17, both of Pennsylvania, among their "Teen Genius: 5 Promising Scientists under 20"

Seed profiles physicist and systems biologist Aleksandra M. Walczak, virologist Ilaria Capua , geneticist Heejung Kim, user of "astronomical medicine" Michelle Borkin, and materials scientist Neri Oxman, in their feature on 2008's Revolutionary Minds

Popular Science profiled materials scientist Kristi Anseth, neuroscientist Rebecca Saxe, and chemist Melanie Sanford, in their Brilliant 10 Class of 2008

Tags:

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Women in Science Link Roundup: October 19 Edition

Here are some links I've been saving in my bookmarks, which explains why some are blog posts from a year ago. Yep, way behind in my reading.

About Women Scientists

The 2008 Benjamin Franklin Medal in Physics was awarded to Deborah S. Jin

There is a great post on MetaFilter about the women who worked as "computers" for Edward Pickering at the Havard Collge Observatory.

Martin Griffiths wrote for LabLit about 17th century natural philosopher Margaret Cavendish: The feminism, fiction, science and philosophy of Margaret Cavendish

Hsien-Hsien Lei at Eye on DNA lists the most powerful women in biotechnology and healthcare

Wired writes that South Korean astronaut Yi Soyeon is "crazy, sexy, cool"

As a counterpoint to Newsweek's "10 hottest nerds" - who all happen to be male and mostly in the field of genomics - Jonathan Eisen listed a bunch of women in genomics who they could have included on their list.

Life in College

Samia at 49 percent writes about networking as a science undergrad

Marina at Objectify This explained how the depiction of the female reproductive system in one of her classes helped her decide to stop being a biology major:
- I Was A Teenage Feminist
- Fly Sex... and I was a Twentysomething Feminist

ScienceWoman comments on an article by Linda Sax on how men and women experience college differently

The Gender Gap

Pat at Fairer Science has the scoop on the ultimate study on the effct of gender on wages: it looked at what happens to men who changes their gender to women and women who change their gender to men. They found "women who become men (known as FTMs) do significantly better than men who become women (MTFs). MTFs in the study earned, on average, 32% less after they transitioned from male to female, even after the authors controlled for factors like education levels. FTMs earned an average of 1.5% more."

At The Intersection Sheril Kirshenbaum talks about the gender gap in response to emailer "Gabe"

Geeky Mom writes about housework and the gender gap

The Boston Globe reports on a recent study that shows the effect of culture on girls' and womens' math achievement:

The study, to be published in next month's Notices of the American Mathematical Society, identifies women of extraordinary math ability by sifting through the winners of the world's most elite math competitions. It found that small nations that nurtured female mathematicians often produced more top competitors than far larger and wealthier nations.
Lise Eliot and Susan McGee Baily had an opinion piece in USA Today about the (lack of ) gender differences in kids' brains: "Gender segregation in schools isn't the answer" (via Fairer Science)

A study from UNM looked at why many girls avoid math:
Overall, however, parent support and expectations emerged as the top support in both subjects and genders for middle- and high-school students. Also powerful for younger girls were engaging teachers and positive experiences with them.

The study confirmed that old stereotypes die slowly. Both boys and girls perceived that teachers thought boys were stronger at math and science. For boys this represented a support, while for girls it acted as a barrier.

Cognitive Daily had an excellent three part post about recent studies from the journal Psychological Science in the Publish Interest on the "science of sex differences in science and mathematics"
Chris at Mixing Memory reviews a paper that looked at wstereotype threat and women in math, science and engineering

Last October Dr. Confused, who has a doctorate in aerospace engineering, had a series of guest posts on Feministe about her experiences in science, the leaky pipeline, gender roles, sexism in everyday professional lives, and being a mom.

Miscellaneous Other Posts

Life v. 3.0 hosted the September Praxis Carnival on "scientific life". The October carnival was hosted by The Other 95%.

Elle, PhD. spots more gendered science kits for kids.

Virginia Gewin writes for NatureJobs about a possible upside to the "two-body problem" of academic couples

Sylvia Ann Hewlett in the Harvard Business Publishing blog: The Glass Cliff : Are women leaders often set up to fail?

In the The Independent's Career Planning section: "Women in science and engineering: Two successful women in science give their views on how to best break the glass ceiling". The two women are Emma Sanderson, director of "value added services" at BT and Anne Miller, "one of the world's most successful female inventors"

The BDPA Foundation writes about a recent survey of Fortune 1000 STEM executives that found "women, African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields and that the result could hurt the nation as a whole." (via The Urban Scientist)

Omaha Science Examiner blogger Meg Marquardt writes about her own experience as a girl interested in science, and science communication.
A father was making a wild attempt to placate a gaggle of second grade girls. "What do you want to be when you grow up?" he asked. There was a litany of typical answers: a teacher, a mom, etc. But I stood up and proudly announced that I was going to be a scientist. The man gave me a stern look over his glasses and very firmly said, "Women ain't scientists." This was my first introduction to ignorance in science communication.


As part of the NatureJobs Podcast series:
The Source Event Part 7
Jan Bogg, Director of the Breaking Barriers Programme at the University of Liverpool, offers advice for women considering a career break, including how to stay in the loop while on maternity leave.
There's also an (old) discussion on the Naturejobs forum about the following questions:

1) Is the tendency for women to prefer people-oriented careers over science inherent or shaped by society?

2) Does anyone think “Title Nining” science is a good idea? Is it fair to punish research institutions if women just aren’t as interested in science as men are? Are there better ways of discouraging sexual discrimination, without discriminating against other successful scientists, both male and female?

Derek Low at In the Pipeline looks at a recent report in Science that followed up on the 1991 members of Yale's Molecular Biology and Biophysics PhD program. Out of 26 PhDs that year, only one of them currently has a tenured academic position.

DrugMonkey on self-perpetuating GoldOldBoys.

Green Gabbro hosted the Carnival of Feminists, and rounded up the science blog discussion about women, sexiness and the workplace.

And speaking of sexiness, Sociological Images posted a commercial featuring a woman scientist who makes a wonderful discovery - a fabulous bra!


Tags:

Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Science Careers: Why Did You Become a Scientist?

The journal Science has a "Science Careers" Facebook profile that has posted brief videos of scientists talking about why they went into science.

Molecular biologist Fan-Li Chou, PhD is currently an AAAS Diplomacy Fellow and Assistant Trade Director, Africa and the Middle East, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service for the USDA. She's also on the a board member of the San Diego chapter of AWIS. She talks about her research focused on the genetics of disease and her hope for the future of science. There is a bit of "rah rah join AAAS and subscribe to Science", but it doesn't dominate the interview.


Pamela Clark is a graduate student in molecular and cell biology at Howard University. She talks about how her interest in science developed and what she finds exciting about science. Both of her parents are life scientists so she "grew up in the lab".





Katherine Socha, PhD is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at St. Mary's College of Maryland. She talks about how she got interested in math and her research using "differential equations to describe the motion of water waves."





Note: You can also watch the videos at AAAS.org if you prefer to watch using RealPlayer rather than Flash.

(via The Urban Scientist's Science, Education and Society blog)
Tags: , ,

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Think Science Now and Supporting Science Education

Big Think: Think Science Now is a project by pharmaceutical company Pfizer and other research organizations that video profiles 10 outstanding scientists. Once you have watched the videos (or even if you haven't), you can vote for your favorite. Pfizer will donate $1 per vote to science projects for classrooms through DonorsChoose.org.

The women scientists profiled so far:

  • Sarah J. Schlesinger, associate professor at The Rockefeller University, who is working on an HIV vaccine
  • Pardis Sabeti, assistant professor at Harvard University, who studies the evolution of the human genome
  • Sonia Patel, pharmacologist at Pfizer
  • Bonnie Bassler, professor of molecular biology at Princeton University, who works on methods to create new antimicrobial drugs

Note that the Think Science Now is only on week 7, so be sure to come back in a couple of weeks.

See DonorsChoose.org for more information on the programs waiting to be funded. You can also donate to the programs directly to get a special thanks.

Every donor receives an email "thank-you" message from the teacher, which is sent about a week after the project is fully funded.

In addition, if you complete a project's funding or give $100 or more, you will receive a "thank-you" package in the mail with student photos and hand-written cards; this usually arrives within 3-6 months of your donation.

(via Sandra at Discovering Biology in a Digital World)
Tags: , ,

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Follow-up: Pardis Sabeti on ScienceNOW tomorrow

As a follow-up to my post on super cool geneticist Pardis Sabeti, you might want to check out the July 2nd episode of ScienceNOW on your local PBS station. If you miss it (or don't get PBS programming), you can watch the segment online, beginning July 3.

She's also got several videos up on Big Think, where she talks about being a woman in science and why she does what she does: because solving puzzles is fun.

Tags: , ,

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Vote for the "most celebrated female scientist of all time"

L'Oréal's For Women in Science Program is sponsoring a new UK website where you can vote for the most influential woman scientist. The candidates span more than a thousand years* and a wide range of scientific specialties:

  • Mary Anning (1799-1847), paleontologist and "the greatest fossilist the world ever knew"
  • Hertha Ayrton (1854-1923), mathematician, electrical engineer and suffragette
  • Jocelyn Bell Burnell (1943- ), astrophysicist who discovered the first radio pulsars
  • Elizabeth Blackwell (1821-1910), first woman to graduate from medical school
  • Linda Buck (1947-), biologist who helped figure out how the human olfactory (smell) system works
  • Annie Jump Cannon (1863-1941), astronomer who studied the spectra of the stars
  • Rachel Carson (1907-1964), biologist who campaigned for the environment
  • Gerty Cori (1896-1957), biochemist who studied energy metabolism in the human body
  • Marie Curie (1867-1934), physicist and chemist who studied radioactivity
  • Ann Dowling, professor of mechanical engineering who works on "boys stuff - aeroplanes, submarines and oil exploration"
  • Gertrude Elion (1918-1999), innovative pharmacologist who produced new drugs for leukemia, malaria, and herpes
  • Dian Fossey (1932-1985), expert of the great apes in Rwanda, who was murdered because by poachers
  • Rosalind Franklin (1920-1958), X-ray crystallographer whose work was important in determining the structure of DNA
  • Elizabeth Garrett Anderson (1836-1917), pioneering physician and campaigner for women's rights
  • Sophie Germain (1776-1831), mathematician who was forced to take on the identity of a man
  • Maria Goeppert Mayer (1906-1977), physicist who studied the structure of the atomic nucleus
  • Jane Goodall (1934- ), expert on chimpanzee behavior and advocate for wildlife conservation
  • Alice Hamilton (1969-1970), doctor and social reformer who founded the science of occupational medicine
  • Caroline Herschel (1750-1848), astronomer who discovered comets and stars, first woman (along with Mary Somerville) awarded membership in the Royal Society
  • Grace Hopper (1906-1992), pioneer computer scientist and Rear Admiral in the US Navy
  • Dorothy Hodgkin (1910-1994), one of the main founders of protein crystallography
  • Hypatia of Alexandria (370-415), mathematician and astronomer who was killed by a mob, who "felt threatened by her scholarship and scientific knowledge"
  • Irene Joliot-Curie (1897-1956), daughter of Pierre and Marie Curie who discovered artificially created radioactivity
  • Hedy Lamarr (1913-2000), actress and inventor of "frequency hopping" method that is used in modern communication technology
  • Rita Levi-Montalcini (1909 - ), biologist who first isolated nerve grown factor
  • Kathleen Lonsdale (1903-1971), crystallographer and first woman elected a Fellow of the Royal Society
  • Ada, Countess Lovelace (1915-1852), founder of scientific computing
  • Barbara McClintock (1902-1992), geneticist who discovered "jumping genes"
  • Anne McLaren (1927-2007), geneticist who "paved the way for development of in vitro fertilisation"
  • Lise Meitner (1878-1968), physicist who described nuclear fission
  • Maria Mitchell (1818-1889), pioneering astronomer
  • Christiane Nusslein Volhard (1942 - ), developmental biologist and Director of the Max Planck Institute for Experimental Biology
  • Florence Nightingale (1820-1910), nurse and noted statistician, who was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society
  • Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin (1900-1979), astronomer who showed the sun is mainly composed of hydrogen
  • Beatrix Potter (1866-1943), respected mycologist and children's book author
  • Emily Roebling (1844-1903), "silent engineer of the Brooklyn Bridge"
  • Nancy Rothwell (1957- ), neuroscientist who studies brain injury
  • Mary Somerville (1780-1872), "the first popular science writer"
  • Rosalyn Yalow (1921-), "medical physicist" who "won a Nobel prize for her work developing the radioimmunoassay technique"
I think it's hard to compare the Nobel Prize winners (Buck, Cori, Curie, Elion, Goeppert Mayer, Hodgkin, Joliet-Curie, Levi-Montalcini, McClintock, Nusslein Volhard, Yalow), to the 19th and 20th century women who were social activists as well as scientists. You can make your choice at www.womeninscience.co.uk**

* But mostly from the 19th and 20th centuries.

** I can't actually get the "Vote Now" button to work. Maybe the site doesn't like Macs? or maybe you have to be in the UK? I don't know.

(via The Telegraph)
Image: "Miss Mary Anning, the celebrated geologist of Lyme Regis"
Tags:

Monday, May 12, 2008

Sixteen Women Elected to National Academy of Sciences - Chronicle.com

On April 29, the National Academy of Science announced their newly elected members, and 16 of the 72 inductees were women. The Chronicle of Higher Education points out that this is a significant increase over last year, when only nine women were elected, but still lower than the 2005, when 19 women were elected. The women who were honored:


  • Frances H. Arnold: Dick and Barbara Dickinson Professor of Chemical Engineering and Biochemistry, department of chemistry and chemical engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena.
  • Emily A. Carter: Arthur W. Marks '19 Professor, department of mechanical and aerospace engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, N.J.
  • Maureen L. Cropper: professor of economics, University of Maryland, College Park
  • Margaret T. Fuller:Reed-Hodgson Professor in Human Biology and professor of genetics, department of developmental biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.


  • Gail Mandel: investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and senior scientist, Vollum Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland
  • Claire E. Max: professor, astronomer, and director, center for adaptive optics, University of California, Santa Cruz
  • Carol L. Prives: DaCosta Professor of Biology, department of biological sciences, Columbia University, New York City
  • Lisa J. Randall: professor of theoretical physics, department of physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

  • Anjana Rao: professor of pathology and senior investigator, Immune Disease Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
  • Johanna Schmitt: Stephen T. Olney Professor of Natural History, department of ecology and evolutionary biology, Brown University, Providence, R.I.
  • Theda Skocpol: Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
  • Elizabeth A. Thompson: professor, department of statistics, University of Washington, Seattle
Five of the 18 elected foreign associates were women:

  • Anny Cazenave: senior scientist, Laboratoire d'Etudes en Géophysique et Océanographie Spatiales, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES), Toulouse, France (France)
  • Anne E. Cutler: professor, Institute for Cognition and Information, University of Nijmegen, and director, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Heilig Landstichting, Netherlands (Australia)
  • Caroline Dean: associate research director, John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
  • B. Rosemary Grant: research scholar, department of ecology and evolutionary biology, Princeton University, Princeton, N.J. (United Kingdom)
  • Janet Rossant: chief of research and senior scientist, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario (Canada and United Kingdom)
While it's great to see talented female scientists gaining recognition, it's still appears that women are underrepresented. As Zuska points out, there are a number of arguments that keep getting trotted out in support of the status quo.

One of the favorite arguments seems to be that the percentage of women elected to the Academy is commensurate with the percentage of female science faculty members, so there must not be any discrimination. While it might seem reasonable, my biggest problem with that argument is that it assumes that if the percentage of women scientists elected to the Academy are representative this year, the numbers elected have always been representative. That simply hasn't been the case. According to the Membership Directory, in 1980 only a single women was elected, in 1985 there were only four, and in 1990 and 1995 only five*. In fact less than 10 years ago, in 2000, only 6% of the National Academy's members were women. Some of the recently elected women almost certainly were overlooked for membership in previous years. At the rate they are adding new members, they may never catch up.

* 1980: Eloise Giblett; 1985: Mary-Dell Chilton, Mildred Dresselhaus, Sandra Faber, Martha Vaughan; 1990: Gertrude Elion, Esther Conwell, Nina Federoff, Sarah Hrdy, Cathleen Morawetz, 1995: Clara Franzini-Armstrong, Lily Jan, Judith Kimble, Anne Krueger, Carla Shatz

Tags: ,

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Christiane Nusslein-Volhard, Sexism and Stereotypes

The March 11 issue of Current Biology has an article (pdf) by Nobel-prize winning geneticist and Director of the Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard about her experiences as woman scientist in Germany. She attended a girls' high school where she had good science teachers. She also does not recall any "gender problems" for most of her career as a graduate student.

Her first experience with discrimination came when she published the data from her thesis: even though she had generated the data and written the paper, the male graduate student who started the project was made first author because he had a family and "he needs his career". Her first experience with open prejudice was as a postdoc:

My supervisor had the attitude of giving women a chance, but at the same time was expecting them to fail. This made me very angry. It was no fun to work under a bosswho openly declared that women in principle cannot do great science - "there is no female Einstein" - but could excel in other professions, such as pottery.
This made Nüsslein-Volhard work hard to "show them" that she could be successful. I wonder how many of her female colleagues decided that it wasn't worth the misery to stay in science. After her postdoc, she was offered a group leader position at EMBL in Heidelberg, with the stipulation that she would have to share the lab with a younger male colleague. That actually turned out to be fortuitous, because that colleague was Eric Wieschaus. Their collaboration won them the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1995. However, it took years of hard work for her to gain the recognition and resources that her "male colleagues had received without special merits."

While open discrimination against women is much rarer today, Nüsslein-Volhard asks what the current aims for improving the position of women in science should be.
I confess that I do not thing that [aiming for 50% of all high level positions in all fields be filled with women] is reasonable. I have observed that while many women may admire me for my success, they admit that they "would not want my job". Men and women are different by nature, not only because of their education or the roles traditionally ascribed to them by society. Of course, I do not think that women are in any way less intelligent than men or do not have the capacity to do excellent science in principle. It is not a matter of skills or talent, but acocording to my observations the strengths, aims and interests of women differ from those of many of their male contemporaries, at least on average. I know many women who share my disgust for the personal pride, vanity and narrow focus of some successful male colleagues and in turn appreciate the more considerate, broad-minded way some female colleagues do their science. I understand women who hate to push themselves forward, or who are not willing to narrow down their spectrum of interests, including family and friends. I have often experienced that women in my family -- much more so than men -- have a hard time understanding my passion for science, while they are more interested in social issues, art and music.
I have to disagree with Nüsslein-Volhard that the fact that women in her family are less interested in science than the men necessarily shows that there is some inherent different in interests between the genders. If it is more socially acceptable for women to be interested in the arts than science, then it is not surprising that their energies are focused in that direction.

As for women not "pushing themselves forward", it's not just a matter of women being socialized to be less aggressive. Women who are "pushy" may suffer a social cost for their behavior.

Also, as PZ Myers points out, the idea that the stereotype that women are "more considerate" or "broad-minded" is not necessarily true and potentially as harmful as negative stereotypes.
An individual woman ought be able to be ambitious, pushy, vain, and focused and succeed in science without her approach being considered in conflict with her gender. It isn't. Similarly, an individual male researcher can be considerate and giving and helpful without betraying his sex. I want women to succeed in science because I don't want anyone to be hindered in their careers by the imposition of stereotypes, and let's not have women graduate students walk into a lab under the shadow of an expectation that they have to be the liberal nurturers of the research group, the ones who'll be interested in art and music more than the nerdy males. It's a nice reputation to have, I'm sure, but it's also an imposition of an unfair expectation on women that we don't place on men.
Nüsslein-Volhard goes on to talk about other difficulties that women often face, such as childbirth and a greater responsibility childcare and housework. Her solution is not greater flexibility in work schedules or any other changes in the culture of academic science. Instead she recommends day care and the hiring housekeepers. Towards that end, she has establish the Christiane Nüsslein-Voldhard-Foundation that provides grants to female graduate students and post-docs for childcare and household help.

While I'm sure the grants are very helpful, I'll admit the idea that the solution to improving the representation of women in science is to facilitate what amounts to hiring a housewife bothers me a bit. It seems based on the premise that to be a successful scientist, one must focus on science to the exclusion of other interests. Coincidently, Female Science Professor posted today about her disagreement with a colleague who wanted his female grad students to exhibit more "monomania" towards science.
You can work hard and be intensely interested in your research without being a monomaniac. I certainly don't expect monomaniacity (monomaniacness?) from my own students. Surely having a balanced life in grad school is a healthier way to be and better preparation for a happy life after grad school. I've said it before many times: It's not the women who should change, it's the culture. No one should have to be a monomaniac to succeed.
Simply hiring a housekeeper is only a partial solution for women (and men) who want to have a life outside of their scientific research.

Tags: ,

Friday, March 07, 2008

2008 L'OREAL-UNESCO For Women in Science Awards

Yesterday five women from around the world were presented with L'OREAL-UNESCO For Women in Science Awards at the Paris headquarters of UNESCO. The awards alternate between the life sciences and material sciences, with this year's awards going to leading life scientists.

Africa & Arab States: Professor Lihadh Al-Gazali

"For her contributions to the characterization of inherited disorders."
Dr. Al-Gazali is a professor in Clinical Genetics an Pediatrics at the Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences at United Arab Emirates University. Her research focuses on birth defects and genetic disorders, and established a registry for monitoring birth defects in the UAE.

She told L'Oreal that she believes the biggest obstacle for women in science was trying to balance professional and family life. They are also "generally excluded from the male-dominated 'networking' that is ever-prevalent in scientific circles." She believes the obstacles are similar the world over:
In my personal experience, I did not find any difference between my culture (Iraqi) and western culture regarding working as a woman in Science.
• Asia/Pacific: Assistant Professor V. Narry Kim
"For elucidating the formation of a new class of RNA molecules involved in gene regulation"
Dr. Narry Kim is one of the pioneers in the study of the biology of microRNAs (miRNAs) at Seoul National University in Korea. miRNA are relatively short RNA sequences that regulate gene expression. The field is rather new - miRNAs were first described in 1993. She is by far the youngest award winner this year, having only received her Ph.D. in 1998. In 2005 Kim was interviewed in Quest (an Invitrogen-sponsored magazine), where she talked about her research and running a lab. It's not surprising to me that she turns out to be passionate about her research and seems to do more than normal days could accommodate:
Science is always full of interesting inquiries, and I am thrilled when I'm challenged to seek out answers to new questions. I have a tendency to concentrate on what intrigues me most, which is both one of my strengths and weaknesses. I follow my intuition to lead me in the right direction on what to work on, and I naturally end up devoting all my energy to it. These days I try not to bury myself completely in research and instead attempt to gain a balance among the various roles I perform as a group leader and a teacher, as well as a mother and wife. It is sometimes a difficult challenge for me to carry so much responsibility, but I enjoy all of my roles and the diversity in my life. I realize that I am truly a lucky person.
As she told L'Oreal, however, it wasn't always easy:
[Working as a scientist in Korea] we were often tol that it might be difficult to get a decent permanent position as a woman, even when we excelled in terms of scientific capability. That was very discouraging. The working environment in the lab in Korea in the early 1990's was not very friendly to women students. But things have in many ways improved signficiantly over the last ten years. The difficulty still remains, however, esspecially with childcare - which needs changes not only in Korea but also worldwide.
In 2007 she was named one of three Korean Woman Scientists of the Year. Her web site links to additional interviews in Korean.

• Europe: Professor Ada Yonath
"For her structural studies of the protein biosynthesis system and its disruption by antibiotics."
Dr. Ada Yonath is a structural biologist at the Weizmann Institute in Israel. Her research focuses on determining the structure of ribosomes, a large complex of proteins and RNA that uses a messenger RNA template to assemble amino acids into polypeptide chains. According to the Jerusalem Post, her achievements are in spite of the fact her research was "scoffed at for years":
She was the first in the world to pioneer ribosomal crystallography against all odds and single handedly, when others couldn't even conceive its possibility.
In the course of her career, she developed new methods that have become standard in crystallography today.

In her interview on the L'Oreal web site, she talks about the encouragement she received to pursue a career in science:
My father died when I was 11 years old and left my mother with me and my sister but no income, so I was needed at home. Nevertheless, my mother realized my luust for science and provided me with massive emotional support. She did not object to my academic studies, although at the time this was not so common for females. When I became a scientist, my mother, sister, and later on my daughter and granddaughter always supported my scientific activies, in my presence as well as in my frequent absences.
Yonath has also won the Wolf Foundation Prize in Chemistry and the Israel Prize, and is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the Israel Academy of Sciences.

• Latin America: Professor Ana Belén Elgoyhen
"For her contributions to the understanding of the molecular basis of hearing."
Dr. Ana Belén Elgoyhen is an investigator at the Institute for Research on Genetic Engineering and Molecular Biology, National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET) in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Her research focuses on the physiology of hearing, particularly the transmission of signals in the cochlea.

In her interview with L'Oreal, she noted that the number of women in science and other professions has increased dramatically. She notes, however, that women have more outside responsibilities than men:
I think the opportunities are equal for men and women. However, in general women go slower in this frantic race because we have extra work compared to men; we are scientists, we have to help support our family, we give birth to our children and raise them, and we have to run the house and family.
I suspect that young scientists might find her recipe for success to be discouraging:
The key to success is hard work, intelligence, a huge cup of luck and being in the right place at the right time, surrounded by the right, good people.
• North America: Professor Elizabeth Blackburn
"For the discovery of the nature and maintenance of chromosome ends and their roles in cancer and aging."
University of California at San Francisco biochemistry professor Elizabeth Blackburn studies telomeres, the repetitive DNA sequences that protect the ends of chromosomes from destruction. In 2007 Time Magazine named her one of the "100 Most Influential People in the World".

Blackburn has received numerous awards, including the National Academy of Science Award in Molecular Biology, the Australia Prize, the American Cancer Society Medal of Honor, and the Albert Lasker Award for Basic Biomedical Research (called the "American Nobel"). She is a former president of the American Society for Cell Biology and was elected to the National Academy of Sciences. From 2002 to 2004 she served on the President's Council on Bioethics, on which she fought for a policy on human embryonic stem cell research that was based on science rather than politics. Not surprisingly, she was one of two committee member who were not appointed to a second term.

She told L'Oreal that growing up in Australia, she received encouragement from her mother - a physician - to pursue a career in science. She notes that women still encounter discrimination in the sciences:
Even when women are accomplished scientists, discriminatory remarks can have a devastating effect. The vulnerable early stage of being a scientist is one where a young woman can be especially impacted. What does a young person who does not have a career of achievements and recognition to fall back on do for reassurance?
Unfortunately, she didn't give an answer to that question.

As part of the awards festivities, there was a special gala celebration for the 10th anniversary of the awards, with 37 former Laureates in attendance. That must have been an amazing crowd. The current and former Laureates signed the Charter of Commitment "For Women in Science," committing themselves to:
- Act as a role model to inspire future generations
- Transmit passion for scientific research
- Encourage women scientists to act as agents of change
- Strengthen and support scientific research on all continents
- Foster creativity and innovation
- Advocate for diversity and gender equity
- Build sustainable networks for women scientists
- Participate as women scientists in public policy decision making
- Shape attitudes to change the face of science
- Promote science as a source of progress
Those goals sound like they could lead to positive change both for women interested in science careers, in in the public perception of science.

(And shock horror, four of the five winners are wearing pants in their group photo. Don't tell Erik Jensen.)

Tags: , , , ,

Monday, January 21, 2008

Interviews with Australian scientists

In 1993 the Australian Academy of Science started interviewing Australian scientists about "their early life, development of interest in science, mentors, research work, and other aspects of their careers." The resulting interviews are available (as transcripts) at Iinterviews with Australian scientists. Thirty-six women scientists are included, and their careers span most of the 20th century, from marine biologist Isobel Bennett (1909-2008) to biomedical scientist Sabine Piller (1970- ). The biological sciences are heavily represented, but there are also physicists, chemists, and geologists.

What I especially like about the interviews are the glimpses of growing up in Australia along with memories of studying science and working as a scientist. The interviews are ongoing, with Professor Dorothy Hill ("a career in geology and a trailblazer for women in science") scheduled to be added soon. The current list of interviews:

For biographical information, click the "Teachers Notes" link that accompanies each article.

Tags: ,

Monday, July 09, 2007

Anne McLaren, 1927-2007

ScienceNOW reports that 80-year-old geneticist Anne McLaren was killed in a car accident on July 7th. Also killed was her ex-husband Donald Michie, with whom she was still close.

Still active in the lab despite her age, McLaren's most recent research focused on mouse primordial germ cells, the embryonic cells that give rise to egg and sperm cells. "She could truly be considered one of the [pioneers] of modern mammalian germ cell genetics," says Renee Reijo Pera, a developmental biologist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.

McLaren's broad range of research-- including genetics, developmental biology, and reproductive biology--led her to tackle the social and ethical issues surrounding human embryology research. She was a member of the Warnock Committee, which helped shape the U.K.'s landmark 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, and for 10 years served on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which the Act established to regulate the use of human tissue. She believed that full disclosure of the potential risks and benefits associated with medical advances was the best way to gain public acceptance of stem cell and other controversial research.

McLaren was made a Fellow of the Royal Society of London in 1975 and was awarded a Royal Medal in 1990. In 2001 she received a L'Oreal Award for women in science, and earlier this year she received the March of Dimes Prize in Developmental Biology.

In a 2001 tribute from her research students published in the International Journal of Developmental Biology, she was lauded as a scientist, teacher and mentor. She sounds like a bit of a superwoman and expected no less from those who worked with her.
As John West writes "I was so impressed that Anne could find time to work at the bench, attend numerous meetings and spend time with her family, that I decided that there must be three of her." She expected us to do the same. Paul Burgoyne recalls "when later I was with Anne at the Medical Development Unit in London, and had by this time acquired three children, she would tell me off if I worked late into the evening and say I shoudl be at home with my family."
Jim Smith, Chairman of the Gurdon Institute at the University Cambridge where McLaren had her lab, also praised both her scientific and personal achievements:
"My colleagues and I will miss Anne enormously. Her scientific achievements speak for themselves, but in addition to these we will miss her enormous energy and enthusiasm - she outdid many younger scientists during late-night discussions - and her unfailing support for women scientists, for whom she was a wonderful role model. As Chairman of the Institute I shall also miss her great knowledge and wisdom and her unfailing ability to put matters into perspective. She was a great colleague and a great friend.”
Even after 80 years, it was a life cut short.

Related links:
Tags: ,

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Blogging Duke Biosci Undergrads

A group of 31 Duke University sophomores are working in the lab for the first time, and blogging about their experiences. The students are part of the Howard Hughes Research Fellows Program, and they are finding that working in a lab isn't always what they expected.

As you might expect, some of the participants have dived right into blogging, with interesting posts and photos of their experiences so far, while others, not so much. I think it's a great way for the students to practice communicating about their research and for other students interested in pursuing a career in science to get a glimpse of what it's really like to work in a lab.

You can read an overview of their blog entries, or read the individual blogs over the course of their eight week program. The young women in the program include:

  • Alaina Pleatman
  • Catherine Hartman
  • Jacquelyn Sink
    With no significant research experience under my belt, the complexity of lab life came as quite a surprise. I realized just how much I didn’t know about the basic techniques of science - how complicated dilutions, elecrophoresis, and even growing yeast plates could be if you have never been forced to perform it yourself before. I had to recall all of the things I learned in high school but thought I would never use. I guess it was good to realize that those things you learned oh-so-long-ago will definitely come in handy later in life!
  • Jessica Shuen
  • Julie Sogani
    So instead on Thursday I watched Liz (a fifth year graduate student) perform the final step-”detection”- of a Western Blot, i.e. incubation with a primary and secondary antibody and developing pictures of the gel. Unfortunately the results weren’t as good as Liz hoped. If I had worked nearly five days preparing and conducting such an experiment only to get so-so results I would expect to surely feel disappointed. Yet Liz didn’t appear to be too disappointed. As I have learned in the lab this past week, one shouldn’t expect to get great results his or her very first try (or even the third or fourth tries!) It takes time (and much tweaking) to get results that can even considered for publication.
  • Julie Stevenson
  • Kristin Knause
  • Lulit Price
  • Monica Hamilton
    This first week has been dedicated to simply handling the mice so that when we pick them up and place them in a maze, they don’t go berzerk from the anxiety of being touched by those darn nitrile gloves. You might imagine that the mice are cute. Well, they are at first, but after the hundredth time that your hands are used as a bathroom, the cuteness starts to wear off.
  • Priyanka Amin
    I’ve used the sectioning machine, which is -22 degree Celsius and therefore, as you can easily imagine, very, verrry cold. Cleaning it is probably my least favorite activity since the blade is very cold and my glove became mildly stuck to it. But what is research without a few sacrifices? The people in my lab are amusing, friendly, and helpful. I was glad to learn they all enjoy free things (like food) as much as I do, and I enjoyed some breakfast and ice cream in a day thanks to a vendor fair.
  • Racquel Quarless
    One great thing about my lab is how laidback it is. I enjoy working with my boss Melissa B. and I like how she treats me as if I was an equal and not a mere intern. I have learned /refreshed my knowledge of how to make media(I worked in a lab last summer also), plated cells, and counted them using a hemacytometer… Another great thing about my lab is how many women there are. Of the six of us in the lab, two are men, and four are women(including myself and a Pratt Fellow). It is really inspring to see how successful these women are and their dedication to their work.
  • Rebecca Liu
  • Samantha Pearlman

    I mentioned before that I had (still have?) a pretty skewed idea of what “lab life” is like…but today, I realized something monumental: scientists don’t work all the time, 24/7. There IS such a thing as “down time” (thank god!). No one is expected to survive 7 straight hours of micropipetting (unless you have ridiculous forearm muscles).

  • Sara Leiman
    [. . . ] knowing that I have produced consistent and expected results in the trial runs I have done this week has increased my excitement for the research I will begin on Monday.
  • Sarah Nam
  • Sarah Steele
    While I really like the lab because it’s interesting working with mutated worms and determining their genetic activity/makeup, etc., I love the lab because of my co-workers, who are amazingly hilarious and intelligent…it’s kind of like having my own version of NBC’s The Office, except that Alejandro is a great boss, unlike like Michael in the show.
  • Tessa Carducci
  • Trisha Saha
    I’m glad I finally found an area of research I’m really interested in. Don’t get me wrong, I do like finding out about new genes and obscure proteins but sometimes it’s refreshing to just look at the BIG picture, as well. What I love most is that my project encompasses many of my interests such as epidemiology, pediatric cardiology, environmental science, and cell biology.
  • Vanessa Kennedy
  • Vishnupriya Khatri
    Every lab has some sort of routine maintenance thing that is not fun, but just has to be done. For our lab, it is transferring those hundreds of vials of Drosophila into other hundreds of vials of fresh food. In my first week, I might have transferred about 500 vials (not bragging or anything). It took some time to get used to; especially since the first one was a fiasco. Have you ever seen a picture of a cute kid releasing a jar of butterflies, with a serene expression of his face? Mine still frame of my first vial would be me staring in terror at the fruit flies escaping to freedom (some bumping in my face, some meeting the wrath of my deadly hands). Don’t worry, the situation was under control in a few seconds—I stuffed cotton down the vial.
  • Wendy Liu
  • Yishan Cheng
    And we all thought we were home free after work. But instead of making this useless occupied webspace that I’d dread writing in, I want to approach it with a purpose in mind: a real account of all the activities occuring behind that incomprehensible science paper of which you only read the conclusion. Specifically, I hope (once Duke gets this science blog thing going) high school and other college students thinking about going in science/research will find my ramblings useful.
Tags: , ,