Category Archives: Community

articles, Community, May 2016, Mentoring & Outreach

Sackler students collaborate with Emerson College in science communication course

As graduate students, we all know what it is like to present our research to a scientific audience that is not familiar with our research topic and the accompanying task of making the research and larger implications relatable. Most likely, however, the majority of us are not familiar with presenting in detail our research topic to a general audience: those who don’t know what the difference between DNA and RNA is, or what ‘epithelial’ means, or how cell culture works.

This spring, a group of Sackler students were presented with the opportunity–or challenge–to do so through a collaboration with Emerson College. Seven graduate students from various programs were paired with undergraduate students–whose majors ranged from journalism, TV production, video production, and animation–enrolled in an upper-level science course focusing on science media/communication. The main goal was for the Sackler participants to serve as scientist contacts with whom the Emerson students would put together three science-centric media pieces. The first two were written, one being a profile piece on the graduate student scientist who the undergraduates were paired with and the second being an article reviewing, explaining, and reporting on the graduate student’s research topic and field. The information gleaned from both of these interview experiences also culminated in planning and executing a final project in video form. These videos ranged from animated science-explainer videos to mini-films profiling the scientist collaborator, showcasing the broad interests and talents of both student groups.

The course instructor, Dr. Amy Vashlishan Murray–who earned her PhD in genetics from Harvard University–is a strong advocate for comparing, contrasting, and combining science and media. Her passion for science communication started in college and grew deeper in graduate school where she participated in various outreach programs, including the Science in the News lecture series. When she started teaching at Emerson, she created this ‘Science in Translation’ course as a way for her–from the perspective as first a scientist and second a communicator–to make an impact on future contributors to media and communication fields. In particular she designed the course for depth, as it was one of the first upper-level science classes to be introduced to the curriculum at Emerson. She wanted to help art-focused students find “the place of science in their world” by facilitating a “peek behind the curtain” of scientific research.

In addition to teaching, Dr. Vashlishan Murray initiated Boston’s branch of the Ask for Evidence campaign. This program, which is sponsored by the organizations Voice of Young Science USA and Sense About Science, seeks to have members of the public investigate consumer-directed advertisements making science-based claims and test whether those claims are indeed accurate. This effort dually challenges the public to think critically about scientific claims while also challenges those who use scientific claims to do so more carefully and accurately. Her work related to Ask for Evidence helped  her win the 2014 Paul Shin award from the Washington, D.C.-based grassroots group Coalition for the Public Understanding of Science (COPUS), which honors trendsetters and pioneers in the science communication field.

Dr. Vashlishan Murray took a flexible and welcoming approach to the class, letting it serve the needs of her students and science collaborators in equal turn; she frequently took into account and implemented suggestions from both groups throughout the course. The Sackler students started off the semester by attending an improv class with the Emerson students to pull down any initial social barriers and to encourage critical thinking about how we communicate not just with words but with movement and facial expressions and how one-on-one versus group communication works. We also were invited to many of the course’s classes, some discussion-based and others in which guest lecturers spoke, including science communicators from Story Collider and Stat News. The tables turned when we were the ones presenting in the form of 8-minute research flash talks, which the Emerson students critiqued based on how well we communicated the science for a general audience.

The majority of our time for this collaboration, however, was spent working with the students themselves. The semester-long relationship of in-person interviews, email correspondence, planning and filming sessions for the final video project, and discussions following the completion of each media piece facilitated deeper understanding and engagement on both sides.

“I was pleasantly surprised by the enthusiasm (for the scientific content and for the cause of science communication) expressed by many, if not most, of the students in the class,” Melissa LaBonty, one of the program collaborators and a CMDB graduate student, commented when asked about her experience with the Emerson students. “I was also happy to learn that given the correct information and background, a lot of non-scientists can become just as passionate about our scientific interests as we are!”

Dr. Vashlishan Murray was able to share some of the Emerson students’ responses and noted that the majority of them mentioned the collaborative aspect of the course as the most impactful. In particular, she highlighted that many of them described their experience this semester as finding “the humanity in science.”

As for what future iterations of the course will be like, Dr. Vashlishan Murray mentioned she’d like to delve deeper into communication theory in relation to science for the Emerson students. For the scientist collaborators, more feedback about their communication skills and more involvement with the guest speakers are things she’d like to expand upon. Both additions would strengthen an already engaging and transformative experience that this course provided, enriching the knowledge gain for both the science-focused and communication-focused student groups.

articles, Community, Events for Students, May 2016, Mentoring & Outreach

Tufts “Meet The Scientist” event builds bridges with local community

Inspired by a conversation between post-docs at a science and education conference, the Tufts’ TEACRS (Training in Education and Critical Research Skills) and TII (Tufts Innovation Institute) worked together to host a community outreach event this May. The “Meet the Scientist” event took place on the Medford campus and consisted of a science faculty-hosted panel session and an activity session, with attendees including local families and students from all levels of schooling. The panel session allowed community members to ask insightful and probing questions of Tufts faculty that facilitated an open, honest, and engaging conversation about science and science research. Following this, the activity session consisted of six stations hosted by TEACRS post-doc trainees. Children, teens and adults alike had the opportunity to play with silk and DNA legos, to look at flies and talk about circadian rhythms, to isolate some of their own DNA, and to watch how music played from a mobile phone could make a cockroach’s leg muscles move.

With a strong turnout and enthusiastic hosts as well as attendees, this event succeeded in strengthening bridges between Tufts’ scientists and the local community. This type of connection is a significant component in narrowing the gap between the public and their understanding of science and strengthening trust in scientists and the work we do.

articles, Community, May 2016

Sackler Spotlight – Bina Julian, PPET and Jen Nwankwo, PPET

This spring, two outstanding Sackler students–Bina Julian (PPET) and Jen Nwankwo (PPET)–were awarded the Tufts Presidential Award for Citizenship and Public Service. Established in 1999 by former university president John DiBiaggio, this award honors both undergraduate and graduate students who have shown substantial commitment to and achievements in building community through service and leadership. To highlight these accomplishments, we interviewed Bina and Jen about the work that led to their nomination and eventual awarding as well as what they do at the bench as well (note: at the time of publishing, Jen was out of town, thus we will update this article once we get a chance to talk with her).

Can you tell us about the work that led to you being nominated for this award?

Bina: I have a really strong desire to help people achieve their goals by increasing their self-awareness and connecting them with opportunities. And a parallel desire to figure out how to scale that impact when something works well…probably because I’m an engineer. That’s what drew me to the Tufts Biomedical Business Club (TBBC).

Our TBBC team runs like a small startup. From the beginning, we all saw the potential to connect Tufts students with professional resources, the Boston biotech community and each other. So we each went out and made connections [see Collaborator List] and designed ways for our members to learn and practice the business of science [see About TBBC]. Soon opportunities started coming to us, external groups reached out to collaborate, and our members were being recruited for jobs. I’m really proud of what we’ve built and how many people we’ve helped over the years.

Receiving this award especially acknowledges the work past and present TBBC leaders have done to shape TBBC into a sustainable and engaging training ground.

 

Box 1: Tufts Biomedical Business Club

TBBC is a way for researchers to gain industry awareness and professional development.  Members get introduced to TBBC by attending our seminars featuring business leaders in several areas including venture capital (Bob Tepper, Third Rock), biotech startups (Sandra Glucksman, Editas), and consulting (Chris Von Seggern, ClearView).  Many take a step further and participate in one of our self-guided initiatives, like Case Study Group, Biotech Journal Club, Biotech Buzz or hosting a speaker.  Others gain critical business experience by competing in our Tufts New England Case Competition (TUNECC) or the Gordon Institute’s Tufts $100K New Ventures Competition.  Regardless of whether or not our members become PIs, entrepreneurs or consultants, we hope their time with TBBC empowers them with the network and perspective to pursue a successful career.

Recent TBBC Connections

Internal Connections: TUSM Advancement Office, Sackler Graduate Student Council, Sackler Dean’s Office, Gordon Institute, Tufts Entrepreneurial Leadership Program, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts Clinical & Translational Science Institute, Tufts Entrepreneurial Network (of student leaders), Tufts Entrepreneur Society (undergrad group), Tufts Institute for Innovation, Tufts MedStart, Tufts MD-MBA Program  , Tufts Office of the Vice Provost Office, Tufts Postdoctoral Association, Tufts Tech Transfer Office, TUSM Public Health and Professional Degree Programs

External Connections: Venture Café, Biotech Connection Boston, Boston Entrepreneurs and Advanced Degree Meetup Group, Northeastern Biotech Entrepreneurs, Boston University BEST Program, Hopkins Biotech Network, MIT Biotech Group, Harvard Graduate Consulting Club, Yale Graduate Consulting Club

Guest speakers from: Back Bay Life Science Advisors, Biologics Consulting Group, Biomille, Brean Capital, BrightMed, Campbell Alliance, Center for Integration of Science and Industry, Bentley University, ClearView Healthcare Partners,Cowen and Company, Cyta Therapeutics, Decision Resources Group, Dyax Corp., Edits, Flagship Ventures, Foundation Medicine, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Google, Health Advances, LLC, Johns Hopkins Technology Ventures, LEK Consulting, MPM Capital, Novartis, NYU Entrepreneurial Institute, Polaris Ventures, Propel Careers, RA Capital, Simon-Kucher & Partners, T2 Biosystems, The Isis Group, Third Rock Ventures, Thomas, McNerney & Partners, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts Gordon Institute, Tufts Institute for Innovation, Vaxess Technologies, Visterra, Inc.

How do you feel that your work connects to your current and future research/career goals?

Bina: I think it highlights the kind of impact I would like to have and scale up. I’d like my future career to bring together my skills as an engineer, a scientist, an educator and a “connector.”

What was the experience of being nominated like?

Bina: I actually had no idea I was being nominated. I have Jaclyn Dunphy and Julie Coleman to thank for going above and beyond to find this award and gather recommendation letters from current and former TBBC executives. When I got the award email and learned what they had done, I was incredibly moved and humbled.

[The Presidential Awards Ceremony took place on April 21st, 2016.  Awards were presented by Tufts University President Anthony Monaco, Tisch College of Civic Life Dean Alan Solomont and nominators.  Watch segments from the awards ceremony here.]

How would you like to see your work continued past your time at Tufts? How do you feel your efforts currently support that vision?

Bina: I hope that TBBC will continue to have an impact and that our connections within and outside of Tufts stay strong. It’s encouraging to meet engineering, policy, medical, dental, nutrition and even veterinary students at our events; they bring such different perspectives to our discussions and also connect Sackler students with opportunities happening at other institutions.

I hope future leaders extend TBBC’s mission with fresh ideas and diligently assess the needs of its members so TBBC stays relevant. Most of all I hope that future TBBC leaders make a conscious effort to not only hone their own leadership skills, but also invest in the professional development of their teammates.

The only way any of this vision will survive is if everyone gets involved – students, faculty, administration, alumni, and the biotech community at large.  We’re a completely student run organization with a multi-year, personal commitment to produce high quality events and initiatives for our members. Whether its volunteers, event ideas, business workshops, speaker connections, conference discounts, alumni mentorship, job/intern opportunities and of course financial support – the executive team welcomes donations in all forms!

Last but not least, can you tell us about the work that you do in the lab?

Bina: I’m a Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics grad student working with Dr. Alan Kopin, who directs the Molecular Pharmacology Research Center at Tufts Medical Center. The Kopin lab studies G Protein-Coupled Receptors (GPCRs), a superfamily of 7-transmembrane receptors known for modulating a wide array of intracellular signals in response to extracellular stimuli. These cell receptors are considered highly “druggable” as they are targeted by nearly 40% of FDA approved drugs.

Cells use GPCRs to sense cues in their environment and make decisions. I study a GPCR subfamily of chemokine receptors, whose primary function influences decisions surrounding cell migration. My thesis work characterizes a rather understudied chemokine receptor called CCR6. Notably, CCR6 is highly expressed on and influences the migration of Th17 cells – an immune cell type whose aberrant recruitment to inflamed tissue is associated with several chronic inflammatory diseases. Many are interested in the therapeutic potential of CCR6, yet few tools exist to tease apart and modulate CCR6 receptor signaling.

In the lab I’ve developed molecular tools and assays that can enable screens to identify and characterize CCR6 modulators.  Most recently I established a Bioluminescent Resonance Energy Transfer (BRET) assay to measure beta arrestin recruitment to CCR6.  Most people know that GPCRs signal through G proteins as their name suggests, but they have an alternative pathway mediated through beta arrestin.  The BRET assay allows me to observe dynamic protein-protein interactions with CCR6 and tagged signaling molecules.  We are also interested in how naturally occurring variations in CCR6 affect signaling and if these alterations could predispose individuals to disease.

CCR6 plays a complex role in inflammation at the level of individual cell types and the field needs tools to tease apart its influence. And unlike the reputation of its GPCR superfamily, chemokine receptors have had little drug development success (only one FDA approved compound modulates the migratory function of its chemokine receptor target). Overall I hope the insights from our study of CCR6 variants as well as the genetic constructs and assays we’ve developed can be used by both immunologists and pharmacologists to translate this work to help patients.

April 2016, articles, Community, GSC career events, Mentoring & Outreach

EDITORIAL: Career development resources for non-academic paths (Part I)

This two-part editorial by the Insight team seeks to open a discussion between faculty, students, postdocs and the school administration about whether the school is prepared for meeting the changes in the future of PhD holders. The first part will address the current available resources and the unmet needs of the students/postdocs, and will also explore some possible solutions. The second part, to be published in the next issue of the InSight, will carry the opinions of all parties involved collected through a survey and communication, which will serve as a stepping stone towards meaningful changes that will benefit us all.

Editors’ Note, 4/11/16, 1:30 pm – The article has been modified to include corrected information regarding the BEST award application by Sackler. Previously it had stated that Sackler had applied for the BEST award and was not awarded due to lack of proper infrastructure. However, after communicating with the Dean’s office, we have learned that Sackler had applied in conjunction with other Tufts graduate schools and it is speculated the application was not funded partly due to complex administrative structure and evaluation and dissemination plans. The changes are reflected in the article. 

The Doctorate in Philosophy (PhD) is a degree awarded to recognize original contributions to collective human knowledge. Thus, it is no surprise that the next step after getting a PhD is to join the bastions where such knowledge is curated and cultivated, i.e., to pursue an academic career. However, given the current structure of an academic job and the nature of academic tenure, a bottleneck in academic positions have taken firm root in the last years. According to Nature, the number of postdocs have jumped by 150% between 2000 and 2012 while the number of tenured or full time faculty positions in the US has either remained stagnant or fallen. While the debate on how to improve the lives of postdocs and other non-faculty PhD holders rages on and restructuring of federal funding for scientific research is ongoing, the increasing number of PhDs leaving the traditional path and venturing into other professions is readily apparent.

Postdoctoral appointees, by field
Adapted from Powell 2015 Nature
Employment of doctorates
Adapted from Cyransoki et al 2011 Nature

In recent years, the PhD degree has been developed as a marketable asset with a accompanied with a powerful skill set — the ability to think critically, solve problems and troubleshoot, be organized and detail-oriented. The idea that the skills required for obtaining a PhD are also recognized as required to be successful in any other profession, and is now being echoed by career counselors. While industry research positions were once spoken about in hushed voices before, these positions are now not only coveted, but other non-research jobs are also becoming more prominent in seminars and career advice panels for biomedical graduate students and postdocs.

This trend is also evident within the graduate student population here at Sackler School of Biomedical Graduate Sciences, where more than half the alumni have pursued non-academic careers. As the funding climate struggles to recover and academic positions become more scarce, the question arises of whether the existing model of career development for student and postdoctoral trainees is sufficient to ensure future success and achieving their goals. It is apparent that career development training outside of academia is required, but the support for this by the curriculum and administration at the Sackler School seems to lag behind our peer institutions, and even our colleagues on the Medford campus have access to the Tufts Career Center and the students in the Fletcher School have their own Career Services office.

Resources currently available for students at Sackler interested pursuing non-academic careers are mostly driven and organized by the students themselves. These student-led initiatives have produced a full roster of seminars and workshops focusing on such career options held nearly weekly between the Career Paths Committee of the Sackler Graduate Student Council (GSC) and the Tufts Biomedical Business Club (TBBC). These groups have become increasingly active over the past few years, with their efforts growing into independent events like the Tufts New England Case Competition (TUNECC), as well as collaborations with the Tufts Postdoctoral Association and student groups in the School of Medicine. Additionally, the Tufts Mentoring Circles group has provided students peer guidance and spaces to discuss such career options among themselves. Every student initiative listed here has sought more interactions with Sackler alumni, but the information to facilitate that exchange is not readily available. Student leaders at Sackler have expended great effort to build the career resources the student body needs, but these efforts are reaching the limit of what they can achieve and will only be short term and partial solutions without additional resources and support infrastructure. Some of this could be built by students, like shared repositories for maintaining records and thus institutional memory so energy is expended solving new problems instead of rehashing old ones. The most important piece, however, cannot be done by students alone: an accurate, current database of Sackler alumni and their occupations that is accessible and searchable.

We appreciate that the Dean’s Office has recently increased its support of these student efforts, but believe that more can be done. An increased contribution to co-sponsorship from partial funding of one or two events with the GSC annually to a series of three annual workshops and career panels over the past two academic years, and the interactions between a handful of students with Sackler alumni through the new “Day in the Life” program are good starting points. However, the student body and Sackler as an institution would derive greater benefit and return on an investment in career development and advising staff, similar to those available at the Fletcher School and the Medford campus, but scaled for Sackler. It would be mutually beneficial, as it works to the advantage of a school to have an engaged student body that will recognize and appreciate the school’s support in shaping their careers as alumni. Furthermore, this infrastructure could be a common point for alumni to rely upon and connect with students and each other.

The lack of formal career development resources at Sackler has been identified by peer reviewers as an area for improvement, and puts us at a competitive disadvantage for student recruitment and securing grant funding. Prospective students actively seek graduate programs that provide career development, and among the recommendations made by the review committee for the newly-merged CMDB program were formal non-academic career training options and an expansion of extramural internships through the alumni network and faculty connections. Funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) evaluate grant applications on this aspect of graduate training as well. For example, F31 grant applications to support graduate students require descriptions of career training and development; the proposed changes will essentially strengthen the Sackler students’ applications and may increase the number of extramurally funded students, alleviating the pressure on the school.  A more recent example includes the NIH Broadening Experience in Scientific Training (BEST) awards, a funding opportunity established in 2013 in response to the state of the biomedical workforce and to prepare trainees for diverse career paths that utilize their PhD training. Boston University received a BEST award in 2014 for its biomedical research programs in part because of its existing career development and support infrastructure. It should be noted that Sackler, along with other graduate schools at Tufts, had applied for the BEST award. While the reviewers had found the application to be strong in certain areas and to have “potential for high impact”, they also noted weaknesses that included “complex administrative structure and the evaluation and dissemination plans”, which could partly be responsible for the award not being funded (source – email communication with Sackler Dean’s office). These issues can be addressed with the establishment of the proposed infrastructure development and can further strengthen such grant applications in the future. 

The faculty mentor plays an important role in shaping a mentee’s future career — the mentor’s support and guidance are essential for the mentee’s career development. While Sackler faculty are generally supportive of students and postdocs, it is critical for them to come forward and actively support mentees’ who choose to pursue careers outside of academia and research. The Greater Boston area is known as a hub for biotechnology research and business, with companies specializing in everything from drug development to consulting. Many recent and local alumni maintain a connection to Tufts through their faculty mentors absent a career development office at Sackler, and both students and postdocs would greatly benefit if the faculty mentors shared these connections, and offered guidance and support on leaving academia.

The current funding climate and the stagnation of academic positions, along with the burgeoning postdoc crisis, amount to conditions favorable for a paradigm shift. We cannot just keep focusing on the academic jobs traditionally held by PhDs. In order to better adapt to this changing landscape of post-doctoral work, the students, postdocs, faculty, and administration need to work together to bring about improvements to the environment at Sackler, specifically:

  1. Developing an accessible, searchable, up-to-date database of Sackler alumni that can be used by students, postdocs and faculty looking for career advice and connections.
  1. Faculty support in the form of guidance and connections in developing non-academic careers.
  1. Career development support staff for students from the Tufts and Sackler administration, so as to cultivate an engaged alumni population.

Comments, suggestions, and other feedback on this editorial can be left on either the InSight blog or via this online form: Anonymous feedback form: http://goo.gl/forms/PXEfcLfgeX

A survey to collect more detailed data from the student body will be conducted by the Sackler GSC in the coming weeks.

 

April 2016, articles, Community

Sackler Spotlight – Wei-sheng Chen, CMDB

As part of a new endeavor to highlight exciting and groundbreaking work done at Sackler, we are now interviewing current students about their science and themselves.  

This month’s spotlight is on Wei-sheng Chen (CMDB) who earned his PhD from Sackler last year and whose dissertation work will be published in Nature Communications.  

 

What is your research focused on?

My research focused on the role of galectins, a family of carbohydrate binding proteins, in the ocular diseases. During my Ph.D., I investigated (i) the role of galectins in modulating angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis, (ii) effect of inhibiting galectin-3 and galectin-8 on corneal and choroidal neovascularization, and (iii) therapeutic opportunities of treating glaucoma.

What are some of your major findings?

My thesis project is to study the role of galectin-8 in modulating the process of lymphangiogenesis. Compared to blood vessels, lymphatic vessels were considered less important, invisible, and thus largely neglected by scientists and clinicians. Only in recent years, subsequent to the identification of lymphatic-specific markers (such as podoplanin), it is becoming increasingly clear that lymphatic vessels do not just serve as passive conduits for interstitial fluid and cells, but is actively involved in the pathogenesis of numerous diseases. In addition, the role of carbohydrate recognition system in the regulation of lymphangiogenesis is poorly understood. For my thesis project, using the avascular cornea as a canvas, I demonstrated that galectin-8 is a key mediator of crosstalk among VEGF-C (vascular endothelial growth factor-C), podoplanin and integrin lymphangiogenic pathways. Also, this is the first report demonstrating that podoplanin is a key player in VEGF-C-induced lymphangiogenesis.

What short- and long-term implications does your research have in your field?

In this study, we demonstrated that in the mouse model of corneal allogeneic transplantation, galectin-8-induced lymphangiogenesis is associated with an increased rate of corneal graft rejection. In addition, in the mouse model of herpes simplex virus keratitis, corneal pathology and lymphangiogenesis are ameliorated in galectin-8 knockout mice. Targeting galectin-8 can be a potential novel therapy for corneal graft rejection and herpes simplex virus keratitis. In addition, these results have broad implications for developing novel therapeutic agents to treat numerous diseases, including, but are not limited to, lymphedema, tumor metastasis, cardiovascular diseases (myocardial infarction, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension), inflammation and immunity, obesity, glaucoma, dry eye disease, and allergic eye disease.

What initially got you interested in science in general, as well as your current field, and this project(s)?

I began my scientific career as a part-time undergrad student in a cardiovascular lab in National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan. My job was to purify plasminogen from human plasma, and further process the protein enzymatically to generate different forms of anti-angiogenic angiostatins. I guess ever since then, I have been fascinated by vascular biology.

During my first year at Tufts, I was looking for a lab studying vascular biology and have done different projects related to the field. Fortunately, I joined Prof. Noorjahan Panjwani’s lab at Ophthalmology Department in 2011 to start my thesis project. During my Ph.D., I have learned a lot about the diverse functions of glycans and glycan binding proteins. In addition, I was encouraged to attend regional and international conferences and have developed great interests in pathogenesis of ocular diseases such as glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration.

Where do you see your career heading in the short or long term?

In the short term, I would like to learn more about the interaction between blood/lymphatic vessels and immune cells such as macrophages and T cells in the setting of eye diseases and/or cancers.

In the long term, I would like to become an independent scientist focusing on vascular biology in the hope to find new therapies for ocular and cardiovascular diseases.

Anything interesting that you do outside of lab or that is science-related but not connected to your research? 

I like to travel and try different cuisines. I especially like conferences that are held close to beaches. In my free time at home, I also like to watch food channel. Some of my favorite programs are “Chopped”, “Guy’s Grocery Games” and “Worst Cooks in America”.

April 2016, articles, Community

Implicit Bias: A Conscious Discussion of Unconscious Actions

It is no secret that unconscious biases penetrate various realms of society; from hiring decisions (Lebowitz, 2015) to medical care (Blair, Steiner, and Havranek, 2011) and even foul calls in the NBA (Schwarz, 2007).

But what about implicit bias in our everyday lives? Does it really play a role in who we form relationships with, or the way we interact with others, or even the way we perceive a stranger?

Implicit bias refers to attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions and decisions in an unconscious manner, according to the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, which publishes an annual Implicit Bias Review . Unlike explicit bias, which reflects the attitudes or beliefs that one endorses at a conscious level, implicit bias is judgment and/or behavior that results from subtle cognitive processes that often operate at a level below conscious awareness and without intentional control.

Recent claims of overt and covert discrimination on college campuses and in policing raise the question: How does someone’s unconscious reaction to people of a different race, religion or sexuality influence their judgment and behavior? Psychologists and social scientists working within this field do not have a concise answer to explain how implicit bias manifests in everyday life, as it is hard to rule out alternative explanations.
In other words, implicit bias can and does happen, but it is complicated to prove.

“Some biases seem obviously pilogowrong, like treating equally qualified people differently when hiring or promoting,” said Calvin Lai, director of research for Harvard’s Project Implicit. “Every day biases are hard to wrap our heads around because they’re so much more personal, and you can point to other reasons.”

Similarly, structural factors beyond your control might come into play. If most of your friends look like you, or you tend to date people of the same race as you, it could largely be just a reflection of the demographics in your community.

However, research shows that those relationships, along with the interactions and experiences that come from them, are key contributors of implicit biases. These biases begin forming at a young age and are easily reinforced into adulthood through social settings and mass media.

“When you think backwards, what you think is normal is really cultural pressure that pushes you into bias, implicit and conscious,” said sociologist Charles Gallagher, chairman of the Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice at LaSalle University in Philadelphia.

Hanging out with friends that look like you isn’t necessarily a bad thing, especially if they’re nice people! However, research suggests that implicit biases and stereotypes, both positive and negative, are maintained through persistent lack of contact with others beyond your “in-group,” that is people who share certain characteristics.

The good news? We are not helpless to combat implicit bias. It can be mitigated through intervention strategies, starting with recognizing where it might exist in your life and seeking exposure to people and experiences beyond your regular circles.
Psychologists and social scientist who study implicit bias are working to gather more data with the goal of making people more aware of their unconscious decision-making and its consequences.
Harvard’s Project Implicit features a battery of “implicit association tests” where participants can measure levels of implicit bias around certain topics based on the strength of associations between concepts and evaluations.

“The goal of the organization is to educate the public about hidden biases and to provide a ‘virtual laboratory’ for collecting data on the Internet.”

If you’re interested in measuring your levels of implicit bias (almost everyone displays bias in some way, according to the experts!), here are a few tests you can take:
Understanding Prejudice: Implicit Association

Test Look Different: Bias Cleanse

 

References
2015 State of the Science: Implicit Bias Review. (2015). Retrieved from; http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/my-product/2015-state-of-the-science-implicit-bias-review/
Blair, I. V., Steiner, J. F., & Havranek, E. P. (2011). Unconscious (Implicit) Bias and Health Disparities: Where Do We Go from Here? The Permanente Journal, 15(2), 71–78.
Grinberg, E. (2015). 4 ways you might display hidden bias every day – CNN.com. Retrieved from; http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/24/living/implicit-bias-tests-feat/
Lebowitz, S., Jul. 17, 2015, 9, 022, & 2. (2015). 3 unconscious biases that affect whether you get hired. Retrieved from; http://www.businessinsider.com/unconscious-biases-in-hiring-decisions-2015-7
Schwarz, A. (2007, May 2). Study of N.B.A. Sees Racial Bias in Calling Fouls. The New York Times. Retrieved from; http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/sports/basketball/02refs.html

articles, Community, Events for Students, March 2016

GSC holds first advertised open meeting in 3 years

2 Comments

On March 3, 2016, the Sackler Graduate Student Council (GSC) held an advertised open meeting and invited the Sackler student body to attend. While all GSC meetings are open, according to the bylaws, and club/organization leaders attend the first meeting of academic year, this was the first time in 3 years that the GSC meeting was publicly advertised. When asked about the motive behind this action, Michaela Tolman, current GSC President, stated “we serve the students, so we wanted to offer a way in which they could express their opinions while also giving them a flavor of what GSC does and how it is run.” While the turnout was modest, she did mention that it was more than what she had expected.

Traditionally, GSC meetings  mostly comprise of financial updates from the treasurer, different committees (career paths, social, newsletter, etc.) reporting on their previous events and discussing their future plans and setting up action items to be completed before the following meeting. This meeting  followed the same pattern and after the committee updates, the floor was opened up to the non-GSC attendees.

Most of the non-GSC attendees shared that they were curious about the inner workings of the GSC and had either been invited to the meeting by a GSC member to the meeting or attended on their own initiative; some of them were also interested in joining the council the next academic year. Almost all class years and programs were represented in the attendee group.

Given that a major focus of the GSC is to organize and hold events focusing on career building and networking, it was no surprise that most of the suggestions from attendees were focused on that topic. Suggestions were made for events to improve social media networking, seminars on data management and presentation skills and early stage career development, and most emphasis was placed on the interactive nature of the events and their diverse nature. Other suggestions included a consolidation of seminar schedule, especially student talks, across programs and departments, including the hospital seminars.

GSC’s commitment on serving students manifests itself in it’s quick response to the students’ feedback at the meeting. CMP rep Dan Wong, has already put together a google calendar program that allows consolidation of all seminars that are listed on the Sackler calendar and can be easily integrated with an individual’s calendar (here is how to do it).  When asked about the outcome of the meeting, Tolman mentioned “I had no idea what people would bring up – which shows that we always need to seek student input. Some things were helpful for directing our current efforts – career paths heard positive things about diversifying the type of events that they hold while also focusing more on skills. The coordination between programs was discussed, and I am really excited to put into action the student suggestions.” She also hoped that some of the attendees would join the GSC in the future, and that most, if not all, attendees would see GSC as “a fun and an exciting opportunity to take part in”.

Overall, the open meeting seemed to have served its purpose in getting student feedback. The necessity of such a meeting, at least once a year, was echoed by both the GSC President and the attendees; Tolman believes that a town hall style meeting will be more effective in increasing student engagement and getting more input from students as “it would help better direct what we do and better serve the students’ needs”. Attendees who were contacted as a followup of the GSC meeting agreed that this year the GSC has become more interactive and applauded the various efforts GSC has undertaken to integrate students better and become more interactive, such as through The Goods email format, the Instagram account and voting on the location for Relays.

The bylaws of the Sackler GSC clearly show that this organization is for the students and by the students, and therefore, there should be no doubt that increasing student engagement in not only its events, but also its governance should be made a priority. In the past, there have been GSC events where student attendance and engagement have fallen short of expectation, whether it be due to lack of advertising or a distancing of the GSC from the student body it represents. This publicly advertised open meeting is, in my opinion, a definite right step towards the actual fulfillment of this organization’s mission.

articles, arts & culture, Community, March 2016

Notes from the North – Reporting at the Molecular Level

March’s Notes from the North article is written by guest writer Spencer Scott, a current member of the Liaw Lab at MMCRI and recent transplant to the field of molecular medicine. He worked for seven years in New York as a producer for NPR, CNN, and ABC and is now a pre-med post-baccalaureate studying Biochemistry at the University of Southern Maine. Spencer will be applying to M.D. programs this spring.
Spencer CNN

CNN cameraman Spencer Scott reporting on the blackout in Manhattan following Hurricane Sandy in 2012.

Spencer Scott

Tom McCarthey’s brilliant film Spotlight took best picture at the Oscars this year. In an age when news has become synonymous with 24-hour cable networks plastered with pundits and steadily declining newspaper readerships, Spotlight is an important homage to the important role of real journalism in American society. For over seven years I worked as an aspiring producer for outlets including NPR, CNN, and ABC. While I would never dream of comparing my young career to the work of the incredible reporters at the Globe’s investigative unit, there is still a common aspiration amongst all those who enter the field. As their name, “Spotlight,” implies, we wish to shine light where there once was darkness, to illuminate the unknown for the betterment of our society.

A little more than a year ago, I left the craft to which I had thought I would devote my life. I spent the final four months of my career in television news shooting a medical documentary series for ABC in three of Boston’s Level I trauma centers. It was there in those halls that I finally decided to follow in the foot steps of my mother, father, and brother, and pursue medicine. I left my work in television and returned to my home state to begin a post-baccalaureate pre-medical program at University of Southern Maine, which I will finish in May.

It may seem odd that the child of an orthopedic surgeon and emergency room physician grew up shying, if not flat out running, away from the sciences. I still struggle to answer that for myself. But the only answer I can give is that I didn’t think my mind was wired in that way. I loved history and language and stories, and when I thought I could help people by telling their stories, I believed I’d found my calling. I sold my first story to NPR when I was seventeen, an interview with an Iraq war veteran, only three years older than I was. He had nearly lost his life in an IED explosion in Fallujah, the shrapnel of which had torn through his throat, rendering his voice a quiet rasp. Because of my reporting, millions of “All Things Considered” listeners heard Cpl. Chris Kotch tell his story. It was a feeling that inspired the pursuits of the next decade of my life.

In fact, after all of my years working in the field, I’m still proudest of the reporting I did when I was just a kid in high school. None of the stories I told in my professional career carried the weight that my earliest, self-directed work did. Working for big networks, the feeling that you had helped someone share something vital, that you had illuminated what was once shrouded in darkness, became rare, especially for a young producer. But in Boston, as I watched the doctors in my camera’s viewfinder treating their patients I saw something so exhilarating. It may sound cliché, or like a line from “We Are the World,” but I saw people helping people, through my lens and live before my eyes. I do not mean to discount the importance of journalism, I believe steadfastly in the critical role it plays in our society. But for me, witnessing those human connections made walking away from the field easy. I knew my place lay on the other side of the lens where the help was delivered every day directly and in real time.

Back in Maine, I threw myself headlong into my studies. When I walked into my first class at USM (BIO 105 Cell & Molecular Biology) I didn’t yet know if I had a mind for science, but I was willing to do whatever it took. Fortunately, I soon learned that in academia, you can do whatever you set your mind to, as long as you are willing to put in the work and the passion is genuine. Finding science has been the most fulfilling and gratifying experience of my life and I have been rewarded for the work I’ve put into it. When I started my program a little over a year ago, I never could have dreamed that I would be interning at a place like Maine Medical Center Research Institute, involved in the incredible work its investigators perform every day. In one sense, my work at the Institute is the farthest I have yet strayed from the newsroom. Whether it is furiously scribbling down names of promoters or genes or antibodies to google, or looking at slides of fluoresced cells and western blots, every Monday lab meeting reminds me that I am not in Kansas anymore. But in another sense, the work of the researchers at MMCRI is akin to that original creed of the aspirant journalist. Science and research, like journalism, work to shed light where there once was darkness. Both disciplines endeavor to peer into the unknown and learn what lies within. Whether it be learning the struggle of an American veteran who can no longer sleep through the night, or learning the process by which the notch signaling pathway impacts the function of endothelial cells in vasculature, science and journalism share the understanding that we are all better off for knowing.

articles, Community, March 2016

Zika: Coming This Summer to a Mosquito Near You

Guest Post by Ila Anand, Micro

A startling number of viral epidemics have made major media headlines in recent years. In 2014, the Middle Eastern Respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was quickly brought to America’s attention after two reported cases in Indiana and Florida. 2015 was the year the world went into Ebola frenzy and U.S. hospitals took extreme precautions to manage suspected infected patients. This year, the Zika virus has caught the CDC’s eye and for good reason. As Zika continues to spread from Brazil through the Americas, its arrival in the U.S. this summer is inevitable. Although no vector-borne cases have been reported inside the U.S. yet, over 150 travel-associated cases have been reported. Public health departments across the U.S. should brace for the next likely step: the moment when Zika passes from traveler-infected blood to a local mosquito and then to another person.

The Zika virus was first isolated in Uganda in 1947 from the Zika Forest, where researchers from the Rockefeller Foundation were studying yellow fever. These researchers experimentally used rhesus monkeys that were set out in cages in treetops as bait for mosquitos carrying yellow fever virus. Ironically, instead of yielding yellow fever virus from the blood of these monkeys, the researchers discovered Zika and speculated the virus had been lurking chronically in African monkeys for millennia. The virus was later isolated from mosquitoes of the Aedes genus in the same Zika forest and Aedes has since been identified as the vector of Zika. Eventually, Zika virus was discovered to infect humans across the African continent as well as in South Asia and Southeast Asia. More recently, circa April 2015, the virus has spread to the South America.

In humans, the virus manifests infection known as Zika fever, which often produces no symptoms to mild symptoms, such as headache, fever, rash, bloodshot eyes, and joint pain. Recently, the spread of Zika in South America has been linked to the growing number of infants born with microcephaly in Brazil. Microcephaly is a neurological condition in which the brain and skull fail to grow at a normal pace, resulting in a significantly smaller head size. At first the link to Zika was purely correlation, however, a recent report published in Cell Stem Cell directly demonstrated that Zika is able to infect and kill lab-cultured human neural progenitor cells. These neural progenitor cells were derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and scientists tested Zika’s “tropism” by comparing percent infection across four cell types: neural progenitor cells, immature neurons, embryonic stem cells, and human iPSCs. While less than 20% of iPSCs, embryonic stem cells and neurons became infected, up to 90% of neural progenitor cells contained the virus and Zika either killed these cells or slowed their proliferation significantly. These findings may begin to unearth some possible mechanisms to how Zika infects and damages fetal brain tissue. Since neural progenitor cells give rise to a larger population of neurons and glial cells in the brain, infection of these cells could impact the neurons they produce and possibly affect brain development. In addition to microcephaly, Zika has also been linked Guillain-Barré syndrome, a sickness in which the person’s own immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. However, clinical findings from Brazil are still preliminary and there’s a need for more compelling evidence.

Sources –

 

Community, Events for Students, GSC career events, March 2016

Tufts Innovation Spotlight – March 15, 2016

Guest Post by Michaela Tolman, Neuro, GSC President

Next week Tuesday night, over 50 people have already signed up for a first-ever event. Have you? 

Tufts Innovation Spotlight is bringing together 5 panelists who have brought innovation to the academic, clinical, and industry settings. Their achievements and wisdom will be celebrated with this classy event hosted by the Graduate Student Council at Abby Lane, which is right around the corner (literally a 6 minute walk).

The event will begin at 5pm with passed hors d’oeuvres on the upper floor of Abby Lane. The program will begin at 6pm with a panel discussion. There will be an opportunity for questions throughout as well as open networking from 7pm on. The goal of the event is to generate a discussion among students and panelists about the challenges they have faced bringing innovation to each of their respective fields and how they would advise our students as they strike out on their own careers.

Panelists –

 

Qiaobing Xu, PhD is an Assistant Professor at Tufts. He received his PhD from Harvard in Biochemistry, did a post doc at MIT, and now focuses on developing nanotechnology for the applications of drug delivery and tissue engineering. His lab has developed “lipidoids” for delivery of DNA, RNA, or protein for therapeutic applications. Their tissue engineering efforts have resulted in a scaffold built from decellurized tissue which is currently being used to guide tissue regeneration.

Richard T. Lee, MD is a Professor at Harvard University and Harvard Medical school, as well as an active clinician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, founder, and Chairman of the Board of ProteoThera, Inc. Dr. Lee received his medical degree from Cornell University and went on to study a broad range of medical issues. Their approach is to, “understand human problems and design solutions in the laboratory.”

Arnout Schepers, PhD is a post doc in the Bhatia Lab at MIT. He received his PhD from Hubrecht Institute in Utrecht in Hans Clevers laboratory. Previously, he has characterized intestinal stem cells in malignant conditions. Currently, he is working on making a 3D tissue model for cancer research.

Retsina Meyer, PhD is a senior scientist at Resilience Therapeutics. She received her PhD from MIT, where she won numerous fellowships and excelled in the entrepreneurial arena, winning the OneStart America’s competition. Resilience Therapeutics is currently developing a target for treating post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Luhan Yang, PhD is a Co-Founder of the biotech company, eGenesis. She received her PhD as well as a post doc position from Harvard. She was named on the list “30 under 30” in Forbes Magazine and helped develop the CRISPR/Cas9 system for use in mammalian cells.

We hope you join us on Tuesday, March 15th!