Overheard at work: "No, no, no. The stuff you can look at on your computer is the Internet. But when you look at Google on your phone, that's the Intranet."
That is very scary. I hope they're alright, Lordyupa.
I'm glad things are getting better, Ro.
Fortunately, they are alright. No long-term or life-threatening injuries. Shane (my friend) is pumped with painkillers so he's okay. This goes to show that sick people (especially ones who are elderly) should NOT operate vehicles or heavy machinery under any circumstance or reason ever!
Fortunately, they are alright. No long-term or life-threatening injuries. Shane (my friend) is pumped with painkillers so he's okay.
That's really good to hear. Getting hit by a car is no joke. An ex-girlfriend of mine was hit by a pickup and sustained a shattered wrist, pelvis fractured on both sides, a compound fracture of the upper arm (her bone actually ripped through the sleeve of her shirt) and head trauma -- she was in ICU for two weeks. Fortunately, and amazingly, she made a full recovery.
So I've been struggling to isolate E. coli O157:H7 from this one unpasteurized milk sample for like a month now. The problem with O157 isolation is that it's typically present in low numbers, its growth can be masked by the presence of large numbers of competing microflora, and it's often difficult to separate from other non-O157 E. coli. The sample matrix also interferes with detection quite frequently. It just so happens that unpasteurized milk 1) contains large numbers of E. coli and other competing mircoflora, 2) interferes with pretty much any gene-detection assay you throw at it, and 3) frequently contains low numbers of the target organism.
So, after bashing my head against this bullshit for a month, I finally separated the O157 from everything else in the sample. Yay!
Unfortunately, one of my controls, good ol' reliable generic E. coli, a control strain from the ATCC, failed to give the expected results in my assay.
In other words, everything in my experimentation worked except for the one control organism that never ever ever ever ever fails.
Yeah. It's salvageable. It also successfully called into question (in my mind, at least) every single false-positive result I've ever had for our O157 assay. Typically, I would've called this one negative after about a week's worth of work, but a couple of aberrant results prompted further investigation that ultimately resulted in me isolating the organism when I had previously thought it wasn't there. Now I have to wonder if it's actually been there every other time something like this has happened.
Microbiology is fun.
EDIT: There are multiple kinds of "interesting" results in science. There are "interesting" results that prompt further research and lead to Nobel Prizes or patentable products, and then there are "interesting" results that lead you to drink yourself into a stupor to forget the pain. This is definitely one of the latter.
Most likely, the failure was a result of a contamination event. Our biochemical screening panel solidly identified our E. coli control strain as Serratia fonticola, an organism that is in the same family as E. coli but has a fairly different ecology. It's not part of the normal flora of unpasteurized milk. I've had this sample sitting in growth media in the fridge for a month, and I've gone back to that broth at least 4 times in as many weeks. Contamination is high on my list of likely causes.
Another possibility is that the cells are stressed and thus giving inconsistent phenotypic reactions. This is less likely, as I take the organism from liquid media through a couple of passages on solid media to generate isolated colonies. Generally, once you've got it in a different growth environment and passaged a couple of times, the cells are vigorous and lively, so your phenotypic reactions should fall in place nicely.
One last possibility is that our $100,000 identification instrument is fucked up. That would complete destroy my hopes of isolating this thing at all.
The tough thing, and this is especially true in the biological sciences, is that you have to pick and choose what to investigate. This is a field where the rules can change while you're still figuring them out. Organisms evolve in response to selection pressures that we apply in the lab, so something can literally mutate its way out of your hypothesis and ruin your work. You might have been right, but you can't figure it out. That's why it's the softest of the hard sciences; very often, the test subjects themselves introduce random variables that you simply cannot control.
Thus, we have to decide what's actually worth investigating. I could plan an entire Ph.D. around this single result. You could spend a lifetime investigating the data that I generated last week. The question becomes: what's worth investigating, and when do I drop it and move on? You could miss something huge if you drop it, but if you keep investigating, you necessarily stop investigating other possibilities.
It's exciting and challenging. I don't recommend it to the faint of heart. :P
Edit: Oh god, restarted Twitux and it's still there!
After further investigation: The reason for the massive picture is that, for some reason, Scott's twitter picture hasn't been scaled down on the twitter server.
I went out and bought the 2-disc version of Watchmen today only to come home and open the package to find a $10 dollar off coupon for the 5-disc release (that includes more special features, the Under the Hood film that was on the Black Freighter DVD, and the Motion Comic) coming out in December. I didn't see anything online about this double-dip release coming out, so my bad.
I went out and bought the 2-disc version of Watchmen today only to come home and open the package to find a $10 dollar off coupon for the 5-disc release coming out in December. I didn't see anything online about this double-dip release coming out, so my bad.
Oh, that sucks. Thanks for telling us, though. I was planning on buying the DVD soon, but I guess I'll just wait until December.
I didn't see anything online about this double-dip release coming out, so my bad.
They might have sort of intentionally done that, counting on people who really like the movie to go out and buy it as soon as it first comes out and then realizing there's a better set coming out later and them buying that set too. One of those things where they milk all the money they can out of the different DVD release times. That may just be me being cynical, though.
They might have sort of intentionally done that, counting on people who really like the movie to go out and buy it as soon as it first comes out and then realizing there's a better set coming out later and them buying that set too. One of those things where they milk all the money they can out of the different DVD release times. That may just be me being cynical, though.
This is most definitely the case, I acutally went searching for any news on the second release and all of the reports were using the leaflet I found as their source. God, I just realized that the Director's cut doesn't even include the Tales of the Black Freighter edited in, double fail.
This is a semi-fail. My friend showed me this awesome dice bag , and now I have to make the damn thing because it is awesome and a new challenge for me. I just honestly don't have the time to do so right now. It will more than likely be a Christmas present for him.
This is a semi-fail. My friend showed methis awesome dice bag, and now I have to make the damn thing because it is awesome and a new challenge for me. I just honestly don't have the time to do so right now. It will more than likely be a Christmas present for him.
I haven't used mine in ages, but at least when I do this project I will finally be able to learn how to attach zippers! I think my friend showed me this intentionally because he wants me to make him one. Damn him!
Comments
I'm glad things are getting better, Ro.
So, after bashing my head against this bullshit for a month, I finally separated the O157 from everything else in the sample. Yay!
Unfortunately, one of my controls, good ol' reliable generic E. coli, a control strain from the ATCC, failed to give the expected results in my assay.
In other words, everything in my experimentation worked except for the one control organism that never ever ever ever ever fails.
One test result just invalidated a month of work.
Retest?
Microbiology is fun.
EDIT: There are multiple kinds of "interesting" results in science. There are "interesting" results that prompt further research and lead to Nobel Prizes or patentable products, and then there are "interesting" results that lead you to drink yourself into a stupor to forget the pain. This is definitely one of the latter.
Most likely, the failure was a result of a contamination event. Our biochemical screening panel solidly identified our E. coli control strain as Serratia fonticola, an organism that is in the same family as E. coli but has a fairly different ecology. It's not part of the normal flora of unpasteurized milk. I've had this sample sitting in growth media in the fridge for a month, and I've gone back to that broth at least 4 times in as many weeks. Contamination is high on my list of likely causes.
Another possibility is that the cells are stressed and thus giving inconsistent phenotypic reactions. This is less likely, as I take the organism from liquid media through a couple of passages on solid media to generate isolated colonies. Generally, once you've got it in a different growth environment and passaged a couple of times, the cells are vigorous and lively, so your phenotypic reactions should fall in place nicely.
One last possibility is that our $100,000 identification instrument is fucked up. That would complete destroy my hopes of isolating this thing at all.
Thus, we have to decide what's actually worth investigating. I could plan an entire Ph.D. around this single result. You could spend a lifetime investigating the data that I generated last week. The question becomes: what's worth investigating, and when do I drop it and move on? You could miss something huge if you drop it, but if you keep investigating, you necessarily stop investigating other possibilities.
It's exciting and challenging. I don't recommend it to the faint of heart. :P
I was kind of surprised at the quality of image it pulled down.
Edit: Oh god, restarted Twitux and it's still there!
After further investigation: The reason for the massive picture is that, for some reason, Scott's twitter picture hasn't been scaled down on the twitter server.
That may just be me being cynical, though.
Seriously, what was the situation?