Science Cheerleader

Dr. John here… If you were to passively glance at the above photo, you may assume that I have a lot in common with today’s Science Cheerleader guest, Sami, a clinical research coordinator at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC)’s Eye Center.

Sami has a bachelor’s degree in biology (like me) from Washington & Jefferson College, and she is currently involved in scientific research investigating the retina (so was I). Even crazier is that her favorite team is the Pittsburgh Steelers, and my favorite team, the Arizona Cardinals, recently lost to those same Steelers on a devastating, unforgettable, and life-altering last-second play in the Super Bow!

What you wouldn’t know is that (unlike me) Sami is also an All-Star collegiate cheerleader with ten years of experience cheering for football, basketball, wrestling, and soccer teams  – pretty much every high school and college sport except quidditch. Best of all, she’s a high achiever who was named team captain at multiple levels of competition and will be pursing a Masters and PhD in genetics.

How did she manage the rigors of two challenging fields like science and cheerleading? You’ll find out in the interview below! Thanks to Sami for supporting our continuing effort to playfully challenge stereotypes and inspire young women to consider careers in science.

Sami, what type of scientist are you, and what is your current position?

I am responsible for all retina studies conducted at the UPMC Eye Center, which means checking study patients’ vision and eye pressure before the doctor examines them, recording data, prepping patients for injections when necessary, and maintaining the regulatory binders for each study. (A regulatory binder is a binder, or often set of binders, which has all of the essential documents required for a study. One major document in every “reg binder,” is the protocol, which details every aspect of the study such as who can participate, what is being researched and why, and how the data will be analyzed.) It’s a great fit for me because it combines my biology background with my interest in the biomedical field , my annoying over-organizational skills, and my love of working with people.

Which teams have you cheered for?

I began cheering for my community recreational squad, the Lil’ Macs, at the age of 12. After cheering for them my 7th and 8th grade years, I became a member of Canon-McMillan High School’s (Canonsburg, PA) Junior Varsity squad. I landed a spot on the Varsity squad my sophomore year, and continued cheering for the Big Macs through my senior year (2005-2006), when I was named one of the captains.

I pursued my love of cheering in college, cheering for the Washington &  Jefferson College (W&J) Presidents all four years of my undergraduate work. I had the pleasure and privilege of serving as co-captain of this squad my junior year (2008-2009) and captain my senior year (2009-2010). During my senior year, I was also selected as a UCA all-star. I have cheered for football, basketball, wrestling, soccer, as well as participated in a number of parades during my 10 years as a cheerleader, and I have performed all stunting positions. I competed at the local, regional, and national levels while in high school, and helped W&J’s squad compete for the first time ever in the spring of 2009.

Who or what experience turned you on to science?

This is a really interesting question for me, because I’ve never really considered myself a science person. I always did well in school, but tended to prefer subjects like English and history over science. Despite my preference for less systematic subjects, I have always found DNA really interesting (because I am, not-so-secretly, a HUGE nerd), but had no idea what people who studied science did besides work in a lab or become a doctor (neither of which I had any interest at the time).

I took general biology my freshman year to get my lab credit out of the way and complained the whole time about how silly it was for me to take a course that could not possibly assist me in my initial career choice, high school English teacher. My intrigue in the microscopic world of genes persisted, though, and I requested to bypass the second semester of general biology to take genetics as an elective in the spring of my freshman year. The department chair, a woman who ended up being one of my favorite professors and role models by my senior year, explained that I should take the requisite second semester of general biology before genetics. Sure, exceptions had been made, but it was only one more semester, I was a freshman, and what f I decided down the road I really wanted to major or minor in biology? Bypassing that second semester would eliminate that possibility.

So, grudgingly, I agreed to follow the curriculum. And by the fall of my sophomore year, I had declared my double major: English and Biology. It still took a little while getting used to, because I’d never expected to major in anything remotely related to the sciences, but my professors were all very encouraging and so interested in what they were teaching, that it made me want to learn more, too.

And I had discovered that my love of those little nucleotides (the building blocks of DNA) could translate into a career in genetic counseling, research (which I discovered I really enjoyed—there are so many things to learn!), and my ultimate goal, college professor.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dave here. Another Wednesday, another round of links from the science blogosphere and beyond…

The Fish That Walks on Stilts.  For real.   These fish live almost a mile below the surface.  Dr. Craig McClain from Deep Sea News brings you video.

The Science and Engineering Behind Baseball. Several years ago I had the chance to visit the University of Massachusetts – Lowell and see their technology-based business incubator and meet a number of their faculty.   I never forgot the great job they did making science relevant and engaging to me.   UMass-Lowell will have a group at the USA Science & Engineering Festival on the National Mall this October, and one of the things they’ll be talking about is Baseball.  (Lowell is also home to the Red Sox minor league affiliate, the Spinners.)

Mama, don’t let your babies grow up to be action heroes. Science Daily reports that the superheroes portrayed in popular movies today may not be the role models you want your young boy to have.  (Apparently some northeastern liberals aren’t appreciative of the chauvinist-by-day, butt-kicker-by-night motif.  Discuss.)

The science and art of whiskey making. This is from Andy Connelly at the Guardian in the UK.  I’d love to see someone in Kentucky walk us through the process of making bourbon…

Dr. John here… After a great interview with San Francisco 49ers Gold Rush cheerleader Erica, (and as part of our continuing effort to playfully challenge stereotypes and inspire young women to consider careers in science) I thought we’d make it an all-49ers week here on Science Cheerleader!

I’d like to introduce you to Christine, a biomedical engineer and a first-year member of the 49ers Gold Rush squad. Christine has a Masters in biomedical engineering from Arizona State and is currently pursing a PhD in the Joint Graduate Group in Bioengineering at UC Berkeley and UC San Francisco.

As you’ll discover in the interview below, Christine is a master at bridging the seemingly different worlds of cheerleading and engineering. Not only is she thrashing stereotypes en route to a career designing new, minimally invasive therapies for cancer patients, but she’s also managed to cheer for two rival NFL teams — the NFC West’s Arizona Cardinals and San Francisco 49ers — and the Phoenix Suns. Talk about someone who isn’t afraid to examine the world from different perspectives!

Thanks again to the San Francisco 49ers Gold Rush for giving us the opportunity to learn from Christine.

Who or what experience turned you on to science and engineering?

I can’t pinpoint one specific event that made me decide to study bioengineering. I think that there were many hints along the way. When I was little I had a set of children’s books with the biographies of people like Alexander Fleming, Marie Curie, and Helen Keller. I was really inspired by the ones about the famous scientists. I also loved the science museum and excelled more in mathematics and science subjects than other subjects.

For a very long time, I thought that I should be a physician because I wanted to help people and was very interested in medicine. Naturally, I did all the typical premed activities. I went to Tijuana to work in a clinic and volunteered in the pediatric emergency department in a county hospital. To my surprise, I was not thinking of how badly I wanted to be a physician like my friends that went on to medical school, but I was thinking scientist and engineers need to design more affordable, assessable medical therapies and devices.

The experience that finally changed my mind for good was when I volunteered in a Hospice. I saw the patients’ suffering in a new way. I realized that the technology for treatment and knowledge about these patients’ diseases were insufficient. Developing technology and innovation for this group of patients was something that I could spend the rest of my life working on. Bioengineering is a unique engineering discipline in that it is deeply altruistic with a genuine goal of improving the society by fighting disease and suffering making it was the perfect career path for me.

Do you have any advice for youngsters who might feel torn between following one dream associated with beauty or physique (like cheerleading) and pursuing a science and engineering career usually associated with, well, geeks?

First, I’d like to point out that true beauty is on the inside. External beauty fades, and it is important to nurture other aspects of ourselves outside of our appearance. Although, I do think it is very important to eat well and exercise regularly for our health. Who we are in on the inside is what is most important, and it always shines through. When you stop trying to be someone you are not that’s when life is really the most wonderful and people will see your real beauty.

Being a NFL cheerleader is about so much more than just physical appearance. I tried out for the 49ers because I wanted to contribute to my community, make lasting friendships, and dance on the best stage there is, the NFL. Gold Rush has given me all of those things plus more. Outside of that I just love dancing.  I’ll quote Vicki Baum when I say, “there are short-cuts to happiness, and dancing is one of them.” I might not be the best dancer but I certainly have heart. If something makes you happy you should just go for it.

In the real world, professionals in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers are by no means “geeks”. Doctors, engineers and scientists are well respected in our society and have very successful lives. I have never once been asked on a date or been invited to a party and then informed them that I was an engineer and had them decide I was too geeky to go. Actually it has been exactly the opposite. Plus I get to have twice as many friends, my dance friends and my engineering friends who push me in different ways to be my best self. I feel like it is a great balance.

My last point is that I think that everyone should find what makes them happy and pursue it, whether it is art, teaching or anything. Life is short and we only get one shot at it. So you might as well live it up. If by chance that something that makes you happy is science or engineering, you shouldn’t let something silly like a geeky stereotype that is not even true persuade you against it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dave here. Back for another round of weekly links.  And now these links can travel.  You can find them at the ScienceWednesdays page on Delicious and you can even add the links to your own blog by either grabbing the RSS feed or the Wednesdays on Science Cheerleader widget.  The picks this week offer some nice variety, I think…

Pompeii official site. 1900 years ago this week a volcano named Vesuvius erupted, spewing tons of ash and completely burying the city  Pompeii.  The town was rediscovered quite by accident in the 1590’s, revealing a remarkably preserved ancient city that had essentially been “frozen” in ash.  Millions of tourists visit Pompeii each year, where they get a chance to learn not only about the history of ancient Italy but also the science of volcanoes and of archeology.  (The Google Street View of Pompeii is pretty cool too.)

Crowd Viewing the Moon. Over at the Science for Citizens blog, Michael Gold shares news of the “worldwide moon-up” – also known as International Observe The Moon Night. It’s a great opportunity to talk about astronomy with your kids or just learn more about what NASA is doing these days.

Mother Tigers Pass Down Territory to Their Daughters. Brian Switek discusses a study conducted by American and Russian researchers that suggests a reason why mom Tigers defend more territory than they really need to live – it seems they reserve some of that territory for their female cubs to have a space of their own. (No, the study wasn’t sponsored by the National Association of Realtors.)   The study also shows how poachers who capture one female tiger have a negative impact on successive generations of tigers.

A new take on necking (in giraffes, that is). Delene Beeland examines the ever popular question,” why are giraffes’ necks so long?” A growing number of scientists are saying male giraffes have long necks to increase their chances at a little wow-chicka-WOW-WOW. C’mon, guys – size isn’t everything…

In our continuing effort to playfully challenge stereotypes–and inspire young women to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, math, and health–I, Dr. John, would like to introduce you to Erica, a San Francisco 49ers Gold Rush cheerleader and a software engineer with a masters in Instructional Technology.

In between nailing double pirouettes, Erica works as an Instructional Designer for online classes for graduate students. As distributed e-learning becomes more and more common, it’s great to know that multi-talented women like Erica are working hard to improve online education and training.

I recently had a chance to ask Erica a few questions about her passion for engineering, the challenges of balancing two different worlds, and her future ambitions. Thanks to Erika and the 49ers Gold Rush for spending some with ScienceCheerleader!

Erica, what experience turned you on to science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers?

I went to a Math, Science, and Technology High school where I could take programming and advanced math classes. Math was my favorite subject but wasn’t my best. I asked one of my teachers if I could be an engineer if math wasn’t my best subject — he said no. From then one I was determined to prove him wrong, which I did.

Do you have any advice for youngsters who might feel torn between following one dream associated with beauty or physique (like cheerleading) and pursuing a science and engineering career usually associated with, well, geeks?

I think you experience the best of both worlds when you pursue both STEM careers and beauty/physique-centered activities. I am constantly challenged by both, but one is a mental challenge and the other a physical challenge.

How did your fellow cheerleaders accept your interest in engineering?

My fellow cheerleaders accept my interest in engineering. I don’t think they know how much I’m into it. It’s funny because they find what I do to be amazing and challenging when I think of them as just as smart as me and able to do it just as easily. We all find qualities in each other that we wish we had.

Is there advice you would give your former 10-12-year-old self, now that you have the benefit of hindsight?

If there were advice I could give my former 10 year-old-self it would be to accept my talent and not follow the crowd. I was in advanced math and science class throughout elementary and middle school. When I entered middle school, I wanted to be in classes with my friends so I complained to my mom that I didn’t understand my teachers and the work was too hard. She eventually pulled me out of the advanced classes. I was taking Pre Calculus and Physics in 6th grade.

Can you describe a “typical day” at work?

I usually come in and check emails. After emails I work on the Xserve for about 3 hours. I have lunch and watch tourist out on the Pier for about an hour. The rest of my day is working with instructors to design online classes for graduate students.

What are your plans for the future?

In the future, I would like to get my PhD in Instructional Design and become a college professor.

Best cheerleading experience?

My second best cheerleading experience is when I made the Gold Rush finals. My best cheerleading experience is when I actually made Gold Rush. I couldn’t wait to tell my family and especially my Dad who was the most excited.

Favorite and least favorite courses you took to prepare for your work?

My favorite courses were Calculus, Physics, and Probability and Statistics. I liked these courses because I could teach myself. Also, these were the only courses where I could concentrate and listen to music at the same time.

My least favorite course was Differential Equations, hands down. Thinking of Laplace Transform of F(s) = f(t) just makes my skin crawl. I hated it because I wanted to get it so bad but instead I struggled with it.

More exhilarating: positive experimental results or nailing a cheer move?

I am always excited when I nail a double pirouette. Often times I sneak to the bathroom while at work and practice them. Actually, as I am responding to these questions, I took a break to go and practice, ha-ha.

Hi, it’s Dave again. Hope you liked my last weekly round up of links to interesting science blog posts!

I’m back for another week as a guest contributor to SciCheer. Soon I hope to be sharing news about some people who will help me share the best in science blogging, and a way to collect and share all the links you can find here.  There’s a little bit for everyone this week – I hope you enjoy the links.

The Great Gummy Bear Breakup.  Joanne Manaster proves that liquid nitrogen + gummy bears + hammers = great video.  If you’re looking for a blog that helps kids feed their interest in science, this is a great find.

NDM-1 – a new “superbug.” You know how public health experts keep telling us we should use antibiotics sparingly?  This is why. Maryn McKenna is the author of the book Superbug and knows how to talk about very sophisticated scientific issues in a way that doesn’t incite panic but makes sure you have the right level of concern.

On the Origin of Science Writers. Some people want careers in science, and the path toward a career in science is reasonably clear.  For those who write about science, the path is a bit murkier – until now.  Ed Yong invited science writers to share how they got started in their careers, and 130 responded.  Read the comments on this post – some really great stories here.

Scientists keeping BP – and the government – honest. Scientists from The University of Georgia have been doing some very important work in the Gulf of Mexico lately.  They’ve been debunking a lot of the claims that BP and the federal government have been making about the oil spill there.  Their latest work shows that up to 79 percent of the oil spilled into the gulf remains in the gulf, despite claims from the government that only 25 percent of the oil remains.   The big takeaway – “dispersed” oil is still oil, and it’s still toxic.

Participatory Technology Assessment: panel discussion follow ups and insights from one founding member of ECAST on how pTA can pass to pass the smell test.

Story Musgrave is a good friend and colleague. He’s also, hands-down, the smartest, straightest-talker I’ve ever met. We first worked together back when I ran the Discover Magazine Awards at Disney and Story was a (favorite) presenter. Since then, we’ve worked together in various capacities.

Earlier this year, the White House made several (at times contradictory) reports about the future of NASA. I needed clarity so I turned to Story who granted me this interview in late April. He’s a farm boy who went on to fix the Hubble Telescope and I knew he’d cut straight through the BS and deliver the facts framed by his years of experience and knowledge.

Story has 7 graduate degrees in math, computers, chemistry, medicine, physiology, literature and psychology. Story was an NASA astronaut for over 30 years, a portion of which he spent as a part-time trauma surgeon, and flew on six spaceflights. He performed the first shuttle spacewalk on Challenger’s first flight, was a pilot on an astronomy mission, conducted two classified DOD missions, was the lead spacewalker on the Hubble Telescope repair mission and on his last flight, he operated an electronic chip manufacturing satellite on Columbia.

He’s not shy about sharing his informed opinions when invited to do so. So I did so.
I asked him what he thought about President Obama’s space policies:

“We’re going nowhere, we’re going to launch nothing, we’re going to do nothing.
It takes us 15 years to do what we did in 5 years, 50 years ago.”

I pushed him to help explain why the public is no longer enthused about space. His response:

“Space holds a mirror up for what it means to be a human being. The public IS excited about space but we have to give them something. The Space Station was a massive strategic error. For the cost of that [...] the entire solar system would have been covered. Instead, we’re giving the public nothing.”

Here’s the full interview, the release of which coincides nicely with Story’s birthday on August 19th. Story’s willing to do a follow-up so let me know if you have additional questions you’d like me to ask him. (Special thanks to Mike Lucek for his technical assistance.)

I’ve invited a new friend, David Wescott, to contribute to Science Cheerleader.  David has a varied background – he’s managed a pediatrics department in a public hospital, he’s worked for a United States Senator, and now he works in public relations and social media. Whatever the job, David has built his career trying to bring people from different backgrounds together: doctors and patients, parents and policy makers, environmentalists and big companies, and so on.  He’s also been interested in science as long as he can remember.  David works with a lot of online communities and sometimes gets asked to contribute posts and podcasts to blogs that have nothing to do with public relations – sites like Earth & Industry and Global Voices Online.  You can find more of his writing at his own blog, It’s Not a Lecture.

We met earlier this year at ScienceOnline 2010 in North Carolina, when I was introducing everyone to Science For Citizens. He was very enthusiastic about it and we talked about ways to work together to promote citizen science and build bridges between scientists and everyone else.  David’s reading list is very diverse and includes a lot of science topics, so I asked him to share some links to what he’s reading, with us….every Wednesday. Hence the title: “Wescott’s Wednesday Wrap Up.”

Take it away, David!

I’m very grateful to Darlene for the opportunity to contribute here at Science Cheerleader. The people who read this blog knows she’s such an effective advocate and she’s done so much to promote the idea that science is for everyone.

There are so many great science writers providing so much great content that it’s very hard to catch it all.  I’m trying to find bits that don’t necessarily require a PhD to enjoy, but are interesting and engaging.  I hope you’ll enjoy this as much as I do – and I hope you’ll share it with your family and friends as well.

The inaugural links:

Amaurobius ferox Spiderlings: OK, don’t let the title throw you off. This is a story about motherhood at an Australian blog called “Save Your Breath For Running Ponies.”  You know how your mom did so much for you when you were a kid?  These eight-legged moms tell their kids to EAT THEM.  Plus cool stuff about how the spiders can make their web pulse and vibrate. ( I found this through a blog “carnival” called Scientia Pro Publica.)

Ask a ScienceBlogger (anything!) Seriously, anything.  ScienceBlogs is a large network of really smart scientists and science writers and now they’re taking questions.  So this is your opportunity to ask that question that for some reason always stumped Google.

Today’s Mystery Bird: Grrl Scientist has been doing this “guess this bird” thing for a while now.   She’s hopping a bit from blog to blog right now, but she posted this on Nature Network.  It’s great fun if birds are your thing.

Advice for Aspiring Young Scientists: A theoretical astrophysicist (say that five times fast) gets a letter from a young student in the UK who wants a career in science but begins to notice there aren’t many girls like her in the room.

Hooray! Our own Sarah–now Dr. Sarah–is back! Here she is with an update on what the heck she has been up to this past year. Welcome home, Sarah.

Hello fellow cheerleaders!  It has been awhile!  Over the last nine months or so, I have been going through all of the stages of finishing my thesis and graduating with my Ph.D. degree:  getting permission to write, finishing all manuscripts for publication, writing and defending my thesis, commencement, and applying for post-doctoral fellowships.  Those of you who have lived through this know that the completion of a thesis is nothing but stressful, so I am beyond excited to be finished.  In the picture, I am walking through Penn’s campus during the procession of graduates on May 17, 2010.

Now that my graduate work at Penn is behind me, I have moved up to beautiful upstate New York to begin a post-doctoral position at the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Cornell University.  My position at Cornell is fully funded through 2013 by a Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award, which is sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.  During my time at Cornell, I will be studying novel nitric oxide synthase proteins in the laboratory of Professor Brian Crane.

I am thrilled to return to blogging about scientific issues and the interesting people involved in them.  (I can assure you, this task will be much more fun than any of my other writing projects in the past year.)  Look for more posts from me over the next few months.

Last week, Nature Magazine’s Daniel Sarewitz, wrote this about a science policy initiative SciCheer helped to inspire:

“More and earlier public involvement is required to steer powerful new technologies wisely….Relative to the cost of research and development, increasing this capacity would be cheap. It could be paid for by a small tithe on the federal research budget, and coordinated by one or more loose networks of non-governmental groups, research universities, and government laboratories (for example, see www.ecastnetwork.org). New social networking technologies could permit such discussions on scales from local to international, in venues ranging from science museums and research laboratories to presidential commissions and nationwide virtual conferences. This is the momentum of democracy. In the long run, it will also be the best thing for science.”

His column,  “Not by experts alone” boldly and clearly states the case for participatory technology assessment. Readers of Science Cheerleader know this is something of an obsession of mine. This passion led to the incarnation of ECAST (which has been cited or endorsed by the White House, Nature Magazine, and dozens of other academic, professional, and mainstream publications): Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology. This network of universities, science centers, and policy makers, anchored by the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., will play ring-leader to several forthcoming pilot projects designed to integrate public participation into critical discussions of emerging technologies (synthetic biology to name one).

Why is this important? I’ll turn the mic back to Sarewitz:

We are an innovating species, engaged in a balancing act. In the decades after the Second World War, innovation fuelled an unprecedented era of wealth creation while keeping us on the brink of nuclear annihilation. The green revolution fed billions while poisoning soil and water and destroying agrarian cultures. Today, synthetic biology and geoengineering portend a future in which managing socio-technical complexity will be every bit as challenging, if not more so. Is there a better way forward?

Maybe — if we act fast, embrace our ignorance, and keep experts from taking over.

Once a complex technology is widely used — like the automobile or the coal-fired power plant — restricting, reorienting or replacing it becomes incredibly difficult. So the key to making better choices is to start early, when uncertainty about a technology’s future is high, by maximizing the diversity of perspectives and interests involved in the discussion.

The goal is not to convince the hoi polloi that they have nothing to fear, but to improve social outcomes of emerging technologies. Scientists may be inclined to ignore or dismiss the efforts of non-experts to influence complex technical discussions — for example, in discounting the views of English sheep farmers during the response to the Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster, or belittling the critiques of AIDS patients in early efforts to develop treatments. But when it comes to the future of an emerging technology, no one (or everyone) is an expert.

If you’d like to learn more or get involved, simply go to the  (beta) ECAST website and  sign up.  We’ll send you news and invitations as they become available.

Next up in the realm of science policy and public participation….The U.S. Government Accountability Office just made public one if its reports. I spoke with GAO’s Chief Scientist, Tim Persons, about this report and its implications. Stay tuned for more on that interview.