Science Cheerleader

We’re on a roll, team! Two years ago this month, ScienceCheerleader.com launched with three goals:

1) help increase adult science literacy (see Brain Makeover). [Check!]

2) raise the ranks of citizen scientists and create a shared space for researchers and the public to socialize and work together. (see ScienceForCitizens.net) [Check!]

3) open doors to public participation in science policy (see this breaking news item) [Check!]

Thursday’s ground-breaking announcement in Washington, D.C. marked an important milestone for us (we accomplished the third goal); but, more importantly, it has already started to alter thinking in Washington, D.C. and within the science community.

Two years ago, some folks thought I was “misguided,” “naive,” “nuts,” to push for this level of public participation in science. (It’s one thing to ask someone to help count fireflies or monitor water quality, but to suggest people might add value to critical science policy discussions sometimes drew reactions of shock and horror.)

In two short years, the reactions have changed considerably. On Thursday,  when we issued a report on how to build a 21st century technology assessment mechanism, and announced the formation of a network that will put the report into action, the response was incredible. From Beth Noveck at the White House, to representatives from the EPA and other government agencies as well as universities, museums–and, yes, even scientists–the reception was remarkably warm if not enthusiastic.

Here’s a virtual toast to everyone who helped make this happen. Now rest up because we’ve got a lot of work ahead of us.

Here’s a short piece I wrote for DiscoverMagazine.com, yesterday, about a promising new use for Pokeberry weeds. Their berries’  highly absorbent dye is being used to coat fiber solar cells. Turns out their dye can trap lots of the sun’s energy in these lightweight, plastic storage devices. This solar energy is then converted to power/electricity.  Check it out!

Our friends at NOVA ScienceNow spent the last year highlighting the human side of scientists and engineers through their successful Internet video series, The Secret Life of Scientists. It looks like the Internet was paying attention!

The Secret Life of Scientists has been nominated for Best Documentary Series in the 2010 Webby Awards, the ultimate showdown of the best websites on the Internet. This is a big deal — think the Emmy’s but for the web!

To win this battle for web supremacy, NOVA needs your support!  Visit the Webby Awards and cast your vote for Secret Life today.

If you need a refresher on the show, mouse on over to the Secret Life of Scientists and revisit some of these amazing men and women. Remember Nate Ball, the mechanical engineer, inventor, and award-winning TV host?  Or Erika Ebbel, Miss Massachusetts turned biochemist?

These are the dynamic living scientists and science stories that have made Secret Life of Scientists a success. Please cast your vote of support to help the show win the ultimate reward: a 2010 Webby Award!

In our ongoing effort to playfully challenge stereotypes by showcasing professional cheerleaders-turned-scientists, I’d like to introduce you to Ginger, a former Kansas City Chiefs cheerleader with a Masters Degree in Nursing.

SciCheer: Ginger, please tell us what turned you on to science.

Ginger: I entered Purdue University studying nursing because I wanted to work with–and help–people. After a year there, I decided  I wanted to go to medical school, so I moved back to Kansas City to go to KU for my pre-med requirements but decided to switch back to nursing.  I guess I just felt like the human aspect was sometimes missing from some of the doctor training programs.  I earned my Bachelor’s in Nursing and started working in an emergency room.  After a couple of years of this, I decided to go back to school and get my Master’s in Nursing.  I became a Nurse Practitioner so now I  diagnose, treat, prescribe, and do all sorts of procedures.  It is like the best of both worlds!  I love my job — I have autonomy to make decisions and treat patients, and I have the nursing background and caring touch that goes with it!

SciCheer: Do you find that your looks (or being a former cheerleader) helped or hindered your studies or professional experiences? (Were you taken seriously?) (more…)

Ever wanted to see what DNA looks like? Here’s a short video that teaches you how to (easily) extract DNA from fruit.

In January 2009, two Red-tailed Hawks built a nest on a window ledge at The Franklin Institute in Philadelphia. The nest sits just outside a window where a camera has been positioned to create this video stream. The camera looks through the glass window pane. No artificial lighting has been added, so the nest is only visible during daylight hours.

The nest was productive in 2009 and it is again now! Two hatchlings hatched already and one is about to! You can watch it live, here:

Free Webcam Chat at Ustream

Larry Bock, the unflappable founder of the USA Science and Engineering Festival, sent the following message to 40,000+ people this morning. Hope you can joins us!

“We are very pleased to announce our partnership with Science For Citizens, a brand new website co-founded by Darlene Cavalier (who blogs at the Science Cheerleader) and Michael Gold (a science editor and writer). This site aggregates citizen science projects (also known as amateur science projects or participatory research) and enlists volunteers to get their hands dirty with science. Discover Magazine calls it the Amazon.com of citizen science, Innocentive gives it two big thumbs up, and the National Science Foundation’s Science and Media Site says “Sci4Cits may by the solution to fragmentation, a serious issue for the informal science education community and its followers.”

Science For Citizens, in collaboration with the USA Science and Engineering Festival, the Coalition for the Public Understanding of Science(COPUS), and Science House, will have a major presence at the Festival playing host to numerous hands-on, citizen science activities.

Visitors at the Sci4Cits exhibit will have the opportunity to sort galaxies, test water quality, identify birds and fireflies, and participate in lots of other honest-to-goodness scientific research activities. Sci4Cits is now accepting applications from interested citizen science project leaders who wish to participate in this first-of-its-kind expo by demonstrating activities with thousands of festival goers-turned-scientists. If you lead a citizen science project and would like to participate in the Sci4Cits exhibit, please complete this brief surveybefore April 30 so we can better accommodate your goals and requirements. If you do not run a citizen science project, but would like to volunteer to help demonstrate one or more, that’s great, too! Just complete the contact information and make a note of your interest to be a volunteer in the final comments section (last question). Feel free to email Sci4Cits at info@scienceforcitizens.net with any questions or comments.”

Stay tuned for an announcement re: Science Cheerleader’s presence at this event. It includes a performance by a troop of pro cheerleaders-turned-scientists and engineers!

“Here’s an emerging opportunity for citizen-science,” wrote Richard Sclove, a mentor and colleague working with me on this effort.

Sclove attached this NYTimes article illustrating why “doctors, researchers, drug makers and regulators should pay more attention to patients’ firsthand reports of their symptoms while they take medicines, because their information could help to guide treatment and research, and uncover safety problems.”

The following particular quote in the article caught my attention, because it punctuates the importance of seeking direct input from the end-user (patients, in this case; consumers or citizens in situations involving stem cells, geoengineering, synthetic bio, etc.). It is attributed to Dr. Ethan Bash, an oncologist who published this report in the New England Journal of Medicine:

“Direct reports from patients are rarely used during drug approval or in clinical trials,” Dr. Basch says. “If patients’ comments are sought at all, they are usually filtered through doctors and nurses, who write their own impressions of what the patients are feeling.”

This type of second- or third-hand interpretation can be misleading. Take a look at the graph on the left, for example (courtesy of The New York Times). There are a host of possible and plausible explanations listed in the Times piece as to why doctors and nurses don’t do a better job of reporting what patients tell them. They’re not being deviant or trying to harm the patients when they substitute their own interpretations for what’s actually being reported by the patient. Nor are scientists and policy makers when they serve to speak on our behalf. But the sum result = misinformation and that’s not helpful to anyone.

Doctors, kindly listen more carefully to your patients; scientists and policymakers, consider taking citizen input seriously. If you think the U.S.A. does a good job doing so, I invite you to read this brief post on the differences between how we  view public participation here vs. how it’s viewed in the U.K.

David Guston–a colleague and collaborator on this science policy effort, highly regarded professor of science policy at Arizona State University, and a trailblazer in the realm of citizen engagement in science policy–is heading up a conference to spur some rethinking of the role of science in society: The Rightful Place of Science?

Seats are still available for this conference, May 16-19 in Tempe, Arizona. Check it out:

“The Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes at Arizona State University invites you to attend The Rightful Place of Science? Join your colleagues and friends to frame the future agenda for engaging and shaping science policy. Enjoy more of the things we like about getting together at conferences, and less of the predictable and orchestrated. You will be immersed in a world of rich and generative interaction aimed at fostering ideas, agendas and community at the interfaces of science, technology, politics, media and the arts.

The Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes (CSPO) at Arizona State University is an intellectual network aimed at enhancing the contribution of science and technology to society’s pursuit of equality, justice, freedom and overall quality of life. CSPO creates knowledge and methods, cultivates public discourse, and fosters policies to help decision makers and institutions grapple with the immense power and importance of science and technology as society charts a course for the future. “