To the never ending amusement of my father, my mother raised 3 fiercely independent and "liberated" women. I lived much of my life feeling obligated to prove my equality and have relished the opportunity to be one of the few women among a roomful of men. It was so when I was 10 years old as much as it is today.
In the 5th or 6th grade, I went to sleep-away Girl Scout camp. Our camp leaders were high school or college aged women who took us hiking, led us in song, and tried their best to discipline unbridled girly giggles. My favorite counselor was a woman who went by the camp name of "Popcorn." (I don't know that I ever knew her real name. It strikes me as very odd, now that I think of it, that we all had camp pseudonyms. Why would we do that?) Popcorn had a beautiful singing voice and introduced me to Oriental arts: fans, kabuki, geisha, calligraphy. I have loved these things every since. She also surprised me in the degree of her zealous "liberation." I had only seen such fierce "girls are better than boys" in my peers and thought it unique. I didn't know other women, older women, might feel it, too. In fact, I can recall a conversation trying to one-up her with the list of accomplishments and occupations that I would hold as the first women ever.
It was that summer that Sally Ride became the first woman astronaut. (At least it was that same general time. My memory is not a reliable witness.) Honestly, I was a little crestfallen. In my selfish youthfulness, I did not celebrate her accomplishment as a leap forward for all women, but instead saw this as a First that I could no longer be. I felt this panic that I had to get older, had to start right now to be all those things because there were women older than me, women like Popcorn and Sally, who were going to get to it first and be The First.
I was an idiot.
Tonight I learned that brave Sally died after what I imagine was an excruciating battle with pancreatic cancer. (Pancreatic cancer, in particular, is seldom otherwise.) I hope she knew how adored and rivaled she was by little girls like me. Think of how she would have laughed to have heard my petulance that, thanks to women like her, there would be no Firsts for me left by the time I was a grown woman! I am [slightly] less of an idiot today, and thank heaven for women like her. Thank heaven for Sally Ride.
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Jul 23, 2012
Apr 23, 2012
I Thought It Would Be Different
 |
| This happened this weekend |
I think it was a challenge for the scientists manning the booths to constantly switch their presentation to be appropriate for the audience. There were really young kids, older kids, plus adults and older adults all milling about. We stepped up to an booth on energy that had a gizmo to show how much energy it takes to power an incandescent bulb vs. a fluorescent bulb. This little girl was having a blast with it, and the guy was really comprehensive in explaining what was going happening. Then, I and my 30-something girlfriends stepped up. As he started talking to us, I could see him try to shift scripts in his head, but could also hear the change in the pitch and tone of his voice. (Observing this at each station was a science experiment in itself!)
Walking around with all these scientists trying to promote their technology was exciting and filled me with geek camaraderie. Still, I thought we scientists would recognize each other some how. One presenter actually asked me if I know what DNA was. I just thought that on some intuitive level we would all know each other and give the silent chin thrust of acknowledgement.
(Booth presenter silently asking) "Yo, you a STEM geek?"
(Me answering with my eyes) "You know it! Nobody rocks polymerase chain reactions like I do. Word to Kary, bro!"
Jan 4, 2011
Big Pharma & Social Media
In my world, there has been much buzzing about the intersection of big pharma and social media. Everyone agrees social media, smartphones, etc., are an untapped market for pharma advertising, but it can be very treacherous waters to cross and there is a lot of risk at being the first one in. As a student of Communication, I am very interested to watch how companies manage the fair balance (term of art) language requirements. It is only permitted to state the proven outcomes and the proven risks. Is it a contradiction to advertise without promoting?
We're about to find out.
Courtesy of Pharmalot, I learned today that two companies have launched apps for smartphones: Novartis and Sanofi. Novartis actually has two apps: one is an information resource for oncology medical professionals, the other is a flu tracker for a broader audience (sponsored by Theraflu!). Sanofi's app is a calorie tracker.
I'd give my eye-teeth to be on the back end of this development. Did they test the interface with patients? Who did they talk with at the FDA? What is the download/hit rate? What other data are they collecting? I am simultaneously repelled and enthralled. Mark my words: this is a turning point for the industry. I see a paper in my future!
We're about to find out.
Courtesy of Pharmalot, I learned today that two companies have launched apps for smartphones: Novartis and Sanofi. Novartis actually has two apps: one is an information resource for oncology medical professionals, the other is a flu tracker for a broader audience (sponsored by Theraflu!). Sanofi's app is a calorie tracker.
I'd give my eye-teeth to be on the back end of this development. Did they test the interface with patients? Who did they talk with at the FDA? What is the download/hit rate? What other data are they collecting? I am simultaneously repelled and enthralled. Mark my words: this is a turning point for the industry. I see a paper in my future!
Nov 16, 2010
Informed Consent
This week in my ethics class, we'll be discussing informed consent forms (ICFs) and their use in trials involving emergency medicine (EM). Can someone in an emergency situation provide consent? Could their next of kin/caretaker? Personalizing from my recent adventure to the Emergency Room, I can tell you neither I nor My Beloved was in any state of mind to authorize an experimental procedure or to understand the risks associated with a research program that included placebo.
See, the deal with a placebo-controlled study is this: you might get the placebo. Imagine you have a disease, say toe fungus. Fungal infections are *very* hard to treat. There are no good medicines and those that do exist must be take for a looong time. Being the beneficent person that you are, when approached by your doctor with a request to participate in an experimental therapy, you generously agree to participate in the hopes that your efforts will further science, spare your fellow man, yada yada. And then you read the consent form which describes that this study includes a placebo. Which means there is a chance that you might get exactly ZERO drugs. Placebo effect (which is not insignificant and can be as high as 30% in some trials) and your humanitarian gesture aside, this sort of bums you out because it means your toe fungus has a change of remaining untreated for another X number of weeks.
Now, imagine you have a more serious disease, like Crohn's or cancer. You'll get the standard of care (whatever the feds/insurance agencies agree that is), but for as long as you're enrolled in the trial, you can't get any treatments or take any medicines beyond the standard of care plus whichever product (experimental drug or placebo) you were issued through the trial. Depending on the structure of the trial, your odds of getting the placebo vs. drug could be 50:50, or higher or lower. Of course, the trial is structured so those patients who worsen in symptoms and who were on placebo could be re-randomized (meaning they draw another lot to see if this time they get drug or placebo again). Patients, also, are free to drop out of the study at any time.
But is it ethical to include a placebo in such a population?
As a scientist, I come down on the side of research. To meet the FDA criteria for new drug approval and to clearly demonstrate effectiveness, a placebo-controlled arm may be essential. As someone who has been involved in such trials, I am comfortable with and confident in the patient enrollment and discontinuation process. One could argue for the use of placebo-controlled studies in smaller trials, only, or only in the animal-versions of such studies. In much the same way humans screw up the best laid plans in unpredictable ways, I believe there is no animal model or synthetic assay capable of imitating the complex human system, particularly on a large scale such as that involved in clinical trials. These carefully controlled studies are imperative.
As a citizen with a close family member with MS, I believe in placebo-controlled studies almost exclusively as an option of last resort. For a disease with many proven therapies, I have difficulty in consenting to a treatment plan that includes placebo unless all other options were exhausted. There are no guinea pigs in my family. Well, literally, there are, but not figuratively. You know what I mean.
See, the deal with a placebo-controlled study is this: you might get the placebo. Imagine you have a disease, say toe fungus. Fungal infections are *very* hard to treat. There are no good medicines and those that do exist must be take for a looong time. Being the beneficent person that you are, when approached by your doctor with a request to participate in an experimental therapy, you generously agree to participate in the hopes that your efforts will further science, spare your fellow man, yada yada. And then you read the consent form which describes that this study includes a placebo. Which means there is a chance that you might get exactly ZERO drugs. Placebo effect (which is not insignificant and can be as high as 30% in some trials) and your humanitarian gesture aside, this sort of bums you out because it means your toe fungus has a change of remaining untreated for another X number of weeks.
Now, imagine you have a more serious disease, like Crohn's or cancer. You'll get the standard of care (whatever the feds/insurance agencies agree that is), but for as long as you're enrolled in the trial, you can't get any treatments or take any medicines beyond the standard of care plus whichever product (experimental drug or placebo) you were issued through the trial. Depending on the structure of the trial, your odds of getting the placebo vs. drug could be 50:50, or higher or lower. Of course, the trial is structured so those patients who worsen in symptoms and who were on placebo could be re-randomized (meaning they draw another lot to see if this time they get drug or placebo again). Patients, also, are free to drop out of the study at any time.
But is it ethical to include a placebo in such a population?
As a scientist, I come down on the side of research. To meet the FDA criteria for new drug approval and to clearly demonstrate effectiveness, a placebo-controlled arm may be essential. As someone who has been involved in such trials, I am comfortable with and confident in the patient enrollment and discontinuation process. One could argue for the use of placebo-controlled studies in smaller trials, only, or only in the animal-versions of such studies. In much the same way humans screw up the best laid plans in unpredictable ways, I believe there is no animal model or synthetic assay capable of imitating the complex human system, particularly on a large scale such as that involved in clinical trials. These carefully controlled studies are imperative.
As a citizen with a close family member with MS, I believe in placebo-controlled studies almost exclusively as an option of last resort. For a disease with many proven therapies, I have difficulty in consenting to a treatment plan that includes placebo unless all other options were exhausted. There are no guinea pigs in my family. Well, literally, there are, but not figuratively. You know what I mean.
Nov 7, 2010
Jiggity Jig
Almost home safe (thank you Acela!)
Almost positive that I don't want to be a journalist, but could see myself as a science writer. Love getting into the weeds of it and massaging the data. Lecture on risk assessment and coursework in the same and on ethics has me spinning with paranoia about how I report the information. Am I inserting a bias? Have I inadvertently plagiarized or misquoted? Have I confused odds ration, relative risk, and statistically significant? Am I exhibiting deeply conserved risk aversion behavior? Have I not considered the opposing point of view objectively, but only exerted my confirmation bias? It's enough to make me sit on my hands and stare out the window at the inky blackness of sleeping New Jersey.
I definitely felt an apartness from the other attendees. In general, they are extroverted, congenial, gregarious, and fun-seeking. Some were quarrelsome, antagonistic, cynical. Yale campus was pretty and depressing like almost all city-based universities. I spoke with one student who wanted to be a journalist but the school did not offer it as a major. When I asked about that, she said they tried to avoid anything as plebeian as a trade degree. She should be careful with whom she shares that comment!
However, it is hard to be reflective and enjoy the intellectual afterglow. I've a big project due on Wednesday at work, and not the first clue how to resolve it. I'll be at another workshop in Philadelphia all day Monday, and have class Tuesday nights (so cannot stay late at work), so when, exactly, am I going to get this done? Plus, my boss is OOO on Monday, so she'll be no help. Am I catastrophizing again? Or right to be anxious?
Almost positive that I don't want to be a journalist, but could see myself as a science writer. Love getting into the weeds of it and massaging the data. Lecture on risk assessment and coursework in the same and on ethics has me spinning with paranoia about how I report the information. Am I inserting a bias? Have I inadvertently plagiarized or misquoted? Have I confused odds ration, relative risk, and statistically significant? Am I exhibiting deeply conserved risk aversion behavior? Have I not considered the opposing point of view objectively, but only exerted my confirmation bias? It's enough to make me sit on my hands and stare out the window at the inky blackness of sleeping New Jersey.
I definitely felt an apartness from the other attendees. In general, they are extroverted, congenial, gregarious, and fun-seeking. Some were quarrelsome, antagonistic, cynical. Yale campus was pretty and depressing like almost all city-based universities. I spoke with one student who wanted to be a journalist but the school did not offer it as a major. When I asked about that, she said they tried to avoid anything as plebeian as a trade degree. She should be careful with whom she shares that comment!
However, it is hard to be reflective and enjoy the intellectual afterglow. I've a big project due on Wednesday at work, and not the first clue how to resolve it. I'll be at another workshop in Philadelphia all day Monday, and have class Tuesday nights (so cannot stay late at work), so when, exactly, am I going to get this done? Plus, my boss is OOO on Monday, so she'll be no help. Am I catastrophizing again? Or right to be anxious?
Jun 14, 2010
Unknown Etiology
Earlier this year, my FIL had cardiac surgery. He's fine now and completely recovered from the surgery, but balancing all the new meds is, well, a balancing act.
Settling into the new reality can be a pain in the a**. Even very slight changes can feel like crippling disabilities to someone so used to enjoying fine health. My FIL is definitely not one to bemoan his condition and will be the first to count his blessings, but I know it is bewildering and insanely frustrating to him for things to not be what they used to be. And to not know why or to not have a name to describe this new condition? We all still see ourselves as the 20-somethings we once were (thank goodness!) but the reality is that we're not. And when doctors can't provide a rationale for why things aren't working they way they once did, well, that's hard for the brain to wrap around. They should be able to name it, diagnose it, not just throw more medications at it. WHAT IS IT?!? Yes, this pill may make me feel better, but what is wrong with me? Why don't I feel right in the first place? What is going on???!?!
Why is it that the act of naming something gives one a sense of authority over it, a sense of control?
Settling into the new reality can be a pain in the a**. Even very slight changes can feel like crippling disabilities to someone so used to enjoying fine health. My FIL is definitely not one to bemoan his condition and will be the first to count his blessings, but I know it is bewildering and insanely frustrating to him for things to not be what they used to be. And to not know why or to not have a name to describe this new condition? We all still see ourselves as the 20-somethings we once were (thank goodness!) but the reality is that we're not. And when doctors can't provide a rationale for why things aren't working they way they once did, well, that's hard for the brain to wrap around. They should be able to name it, diagnose it, not just throw more medications at it. WHAT IS IT?!? Yes, this pill may make me feel better, but what is wrong with me? Why don't I feel right in the first place? What is going on???!?!
Why is it that the act of naming something gives one a sense of authority over it, a sense of control?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)