Postdoctoral Training: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

(I wrote this article for The Postdoc Press, Issue-5 - an official publication from the MUSC Postdoctoral Association)

Prologue: It is widely believed that a PD training matters only to the incumbents. However, the transient nature of today’s economy, coupled with the highly competitive nature of science, continuously expands the “sphere of influence” of a PD training, and affects PIs and the institution, in addition to affecting a Postdoc. Only when the “chemistry” matches between these three parties can an effective PD training be envisioned. In the past, I highlighted how a Postdoc can avoid becoming a data-producing-humanoid (Issue 3) and delineated five  scenarios to caution both current and wannabe PDs (Issue 4). In this article, I offer my perspectives how these three parties impact PD training goals.

The Data Hunter aka The Postdoc

The Good: The single greatest thing about being a Postdoc is that the PD training presents an opportunity to reevaluate career choice in a “safe mode.” Other good things include, establishing a trademark for oneself as the training continues beyond 2 years, filling-in gaps in CV to obtain the next job, and routinely building communication and networking skills.

The Bad: Creating data is good, but a lot of Postdocs fall prey to the habit of “perennial data hunting,” and when this happens the PD training goals take heavy beating.

The Ugly: Almost every PD training comes with an element of “inexactitude” that only gets progressively ugly as the training year increases. A few elements include encumbrance to gain independence, slow publishing rate, unable to attend conferences, etc. Continuing as a PD beyond 5+ years must be dealt with extreme caution because this is a “double-edged” sword.  It kills the very purpose of PD training.

The Bounty Seeker aka The PI

The Good: Having a Postdoc in Lab is like having an in-house consultant for a PI. Not only the graduates and technicians are routinely helped to kick start or troubleshoot procedures, it also sets high standards to evolve a good laboratory practice.  Schmoozing with Postdocs helps lab save time, difficulty and MONEY!  

The Bad: Efficient mentorship is the bedrock of any PD training. Any lack of it will have a strong negative influence which not only affects a Postdoc (short term), but also affects how the lab is looked upon by others (long term). A PI must study the pulse of a Postdoc and help realize his/her career dream through open dialogue. A PI must not look at Postdocs only as a data producing machine in order to eternally renew grants.

The Ugly: The endpoint of any PD training is the birth of research independence for a Postdoc. This can be achieved through a transparent communication between the two parties not only about the goals of the Lab, but also about the future career of a Postdoc. If a PI knowingly keeps a >5-6 post-PhD years person as a Postdoc, then it is a “Labor’s lost” in visualizing the training needs!

The God Father aka The Institution

The Good: A strong PD training program helps institutions to signal the influx of bright scholars to campus. Its downstream effects include representation at science conferences,  obtaining grants, educating the local community including policymakers to invest more in science.

The Bad: Many institutions leave their Postdocs at the discretion of a PI. While it is true that a PI’s grant pays the Postdoc, none of the funding agencies give money to a PI who is not affiliated to an institution. Therefore, the institution must play the role of a God Father and discourage any “step-motherly” treatment of Postdocs to realize the fullest potential of a PD training.

The Ugly: Establishing a framework of accountability by an institution is what is expected by any Postdoc. Merely having a PD program without clear policies and regulations will only result in more victim Postdocs. Implementing myIDP, and enforcing salary and benefits set by NIH are areas most institutions can work on.

Epilogue: Dynamics between a Postdoc, corresponding Principal Investigator (PI) and the academic institution plays a stellar role in making any Postdoctoral training meaningful. It is not too late to realize that a PD training can make-or-break a good name of a PI or the institution. The traditional Postdoctoral training model that places the onus on the incumbents is no longer applicable to the current scenario. A “Good Postdoctoral Practice” is the need of the hour to envision the PD training goals. 

The Lost Treasure - J. C. Daniel

(This is not a movie review)

How far one can go to make the first motion picture in Kerala? How much toil and trouble does it take to cast the first actress ever in Malayalam, that too in 1930? Is making movies always pay you off? Watch the Tamil dubbed movie J. C. Daniel (Original movie title: "Celluloid" in Malayalam) and reboot your perceptions about quality cinema.

The movie begins when inquisitive Joseph Chellaiah Daniel Nadar travels to Bombay to learn the basics of film making. The initial hurdles he faced, in terms of finding cast (especially the heroine), crew and equipment, did not mellow down his ambitions. Despite the fact that it is considered taboo to act in films, the lower caste woman Rosie dared to act in  "The Lost Child"- aka Vigathakumaran - the first ever Malayalam film. When every things gets in place and the movie gets released, the so called upper caste men find it unacceptable to see a lower caste heroine. What comes after is a series of drastic scenes that eventually bankrupts J. C. Daniel who returns to Tamilnadu to become a Dentist.  His second attempt to storm into movie industry did not pay him off either, in fact he loses most of what he earned thus far. While a journalist Chelangatt Gopalakrishnan  painstakingly unearths and tells the world about the immense contributions of the real Father of Malayalam cinema, J. C. Daniel's health slowly deteriorates and he eventually dies.As always, the world suddenly begins to acknowledge the value of the lost treasure. Then, J. C. Daniel award was created to honor lifetime achievements in Malayalam cinema. In the end, it is shown that the film rolls of "The Lost Child"  has been playfully destroyed by J. C. Daniel's son and the world never found out how the first Malayalam movie looked like. Not only that, the first ever Malayalam actress was banned from watching her own movie and was driven out of Kerala!

J. C. Daniel is a Classic where two main actors (Prithiviraj & Chandni) make long-lasting impressions. The movie will be cherished by art lovers for years to come. 

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Parallel Universe

(I wrote this article for The Postdoc Press (Issue 4) - a proud publication from MUSC Postdoctoral Association)

In my view, reality, super reality and false reality is what constitutes a Postdoc period.  It is real that we have the highest degree in science and look like Einstein and Newton to undergrads. We are greatly “wowed upon” when we tell others we try to cure cancer, Alzheimer’s, or heart failure. This can pass for super reality because we are not likely going to accomplish these during our term. Now, the false reality. We work full time in a lab, yet we are not employees. Unfortunately, postdoctoral training has become more about learning and applying techniques and less about research independence (Yes, the NIH definition is pretentious or misleading). The institution owns our inventions, lab owns the data, and sadly, some of us do not even own our destinies. When I think deeply in what universe does this reality, super reality, and false reality co-exist as a “continuum”, I can come up with only one answer – The Parallel Universe!

Being a third-year Postdoc and the President of the PDA has provided me a great deal of opportunity to interact with many of you. This experience spurred me to write this article to caution both current and wannabe Postdocs.

Once a PD, be a PD for at least 2 years

When you enter the parallel universe, it is judicious to be a Data-Producing-Humanoid for 2 years. Being so is a win-win situation for both the PI and you. The new milieu exposes a fresh PD to a new project, new techniques that offer a lot of learning and new friends. Firmly setting the foot (which will likely take 6-9 months) and fulfilling the needs of the PI will likely move the project forward. While a PD gets credits for the work, a PI reassures him/herself why you are the chosen one.

Fail-fast is better than living in denial   

Time subdues everything, including ambitions. After 2 years, you must introspect whether you want to “continue” as a Postdoc. Let’s face it, a PD training is NOT for everyone and there is no need to feel guilty if you realize this after 2 years. In fact, you are better off when you attain this self-realization sooner than later. Fail-fast is a powerful mantra not just in drug discovery (to save millions of dollars), but also in Postdoc research (to save million joules of negative energy).

Much ado about “training”

In theory, a Postdoc is expected to receive training to enhance professional skills and research independence. Whereas sharpening professional skills lies in our “court”, the PI gets to “call the shots” in order for us to gain research independence. No matter what the reason is, most PDs are not “called” but instead receive “extended” training. This is where a Postdoc inadvertently obliges to become a “glorified” technician. There is learning involved in each and every day in everyone’s career and hence the word “training” must be used judiciously. Is there such a title as training Assistant Professor or training Dean, even though the incumbents are new to a field that involves a lot of learning? Unless the words Training or Trainee are eradicated in the “doctorate” world, nothing can stop the exponential increase in glorified technicians.

The midlife crisis

Nothing during the lifespan of a Postdoc is more complex and challenging than being in the middle of the five-year Postdoc period. Here is why: By continuing as a 3^rd or a 4^th year Postdoc, you send strong signals that your passion to do research is very much alive. But, this has its own repercussions which include: ever-before need to create a “trademark” to stand out in a crowd, over-exposure to lab atmosphere, encumbrances in moving the project forward because of saturation, strained relationship with co-workers and pressure from family to make a sustained living.

Quitter takes all

Let’s say you had a great run for five years. I’m sure this would have definitely provided some perks including papers, strong networking, improved rapport with PI, mastering your discipline, etc. But, if you cannot “parlay” these perks into finding a sensible job at the end of five years, then I’ve just one word for you – QUIT! Do not go overboard and continue as a Postdoc beyond 6 years unless you are promoted to a Scientist position. You are not born to fulfill the needs of a lab. And, unlike James Bond, you only live once.

In addition to the aforementioned reality, super reality and false reality, there is something else called sad reality. That is, “rules” exist for handling chemicals, radiolabeled agents and dead-mice, but when it comes to dealing with your postdoctoral training there are only “general guidelines” and not technical niceties. It is about time for a much-needed change. A “big bang” involving Postdoc associations, Human Resources, law makers, NIH and PIs must happen to separate the true reality from the other realities. Today is as good a day, as any, for all these parties to wake up!

Postdocs or Data-Producing-Humanoids

(I wrote this article for "The Postdoc Press (Issue 3)", a proud publication from the MUSC Postdoctoral Association)

Postdoctoral researcher is not just a revered title; it is an opportunity to envision things that never existed before. The data produced by a Postdoc (PD) plays a crucial role directly or indirectly for the advancement of science and technology, understand disease conditions and its treatment, support the intellectual strength and infrastructure of institutions, increase the influx of grant support which in turn helps recruit more lab personnel, handle lab finances, publish papers that puts the entire lab in spotlight, and build alliances and intellectual bridges between institutions. While there are cases where a successful PD experience results in a lucrative career, there are several instances where PDs unwittingly become an ‘academic slave’. This article carefully scrutinizes what the definition of PD means in a real world, what more a PD have to do in addition to producing data, responsibilities of institutions, funding agencies and the nation to restore the significance of a PD career.

To begin with, the January 29 (2007) letter written by Dr. Norka Ruiz Bravo and Dr. Kathie L. Olsen proclaimed the definition of a PD as follows: “an individual who has received a doctoral degree (or equivalent) and is engaged in a temporary and defined period of mentored advanced training to enhance the professional skills and research independence needed to pursue his or her chosen career path”.

Now, a postmortem analysis. Gone are the days where the word temporary period used to mean 2 or 3 years, but now this number spikes to 5 or beyond. There are several occasions where a 5-year PD training was marked as the upper limit (for example, to obtain a K99/R00 grant), but NIH/NSF fails to openly state this. Because of this, several institutions (and PIs to some extent) exploit PDs as a ‘cheap labor’ to beef-up their infrastructure. These days it is becoming increasingly common to see PDs beyond 5 years. If a PD career is considered a training period, then NIH/NSF must openly declare in its definition what the maximum length of the training period should be. Carefully avoiding this will result in more ‘victim’ PDs.

Let’s inspect the phrase ‘enhance the professional skills and research independence’. In labs, it is expected of any PD to produce more data and there is nothing wrong with that. What is not right these days is a lot of PDs are trained ‘only’ to produce data and not to worry so much about the future of the data or even about themselves. These doctorates know to create things that never existed before, provide scientific reasoning to complex phenomenon, troubleshoot state-of-the-art machines and publish papers, but they passively accept their bondage to labs and lack requisite skills to take a quantum leap upward. In short, a Humanoid in disguise!

The professional skills that are required in the present era includes – but not limited to – research ethics, grant writing, teaching, speaking & writing, business and negotiation, lab management. Because crafting technical skills to produce more data was assigned the top priority of most labs today and activities that promote obtaining independent funding are usually restricted to reputed institutions and that too in few labs, PDs find little room to increase the breadth of professional skills or the depth of research independence.  The initiatives taken by Postdoctoral associations across the nation to care for their peers are quite laudable. Since these associations are run by volunteer doctorates whose fulltime job is to engage in research, a more organized approach involving PIs and the institutions that foster continuous learning, improve communication and networking skills could play a vital role to fill the paucity of professional skills that the PDs lack. It must be made clear that producing more data is not an indicator of possessing professional skills.

Somehow in this practical world, knowingly or unknowingly, the very basic definition of a PD meant differently to different institutions, and it is about time NIH and NSF come forward to do something before the damage gets worse. To begin with, PDs should be recognized with a status, an open assessment and evaluation, NIH-standardized minimum salary, benefits, and help transit to regular career positions after 5-years, etc. Whenever key decisions are taken at the national level, at least 100 PD representatives (not from the NPA) must sit at the table to give their inputs. Because more science funding is the real solution, the institution should stop underpaying PDs and should look at their elected officials and demand that science be better supported.

Critics, who once passionately conducted academic research for the love of knowledge, today discourage anyone pursuing a PD career because they feel the system is antiquated and failed to fulfill its purpose. They were partially right because some of the concerns PDs face in most institutions today did not happen overnight, but are present quite some time. Concerted efforts involving PIs, academic institutions (especially the Human Resources division), funding bodies, governments and current PDs to improve the overall PD experience is the need of the hour. Otherwise, the humanoids will engender more humanoids! 

Einstein & Newton

It’s been so long since I read a book that gave me complete satisfaction. The wait is finally over and the book in question is “Einsten & Newton” written Dr. Aaron B. Lerner. It is a sheer surprise to me that the author Dr. Lerner was a physician at Yale University who also has a PhD in Chemistry. Despite his biology and chemistry background, Dr. Lerner seems to know how to analyze the life of two great Physicists of all time. When I was a lad growing up in India, any time when we try to outsmart the elders we were satirically called Einsteins and Newtons. Not that we deserve that accolade, it’s just that both Einstein and Newton are house-hold names used by people who has nothing to do with science and math.

The book begins with a concise introduction about the birth and early lives of both the scientists and goes on telling how unusual college students these two guys were! It is of no surprise to know that these boys behaved like Graduate students when they started their undergraduate degree. In fact, when Newton was in college, he developed binomial theorem, idea for calculus and initiated observations on refraction of light. Einstein was no stranger for self-learning either. He developed unique way to solving problems, read the book ‘Critic of Pure Reason’ at the very early age, and started questioning the foundation of physics.

You would not believe, but Newton’s mother was hard-pressed in order to get her permission so Newton can go to College. When he was working on acceleration, he created advanced calculus so he can continue his research. When he saw the apple fell on the ground, he questioned himself whether the effect of earth on apple is the same as that by the apple on earth, with the difference in force related to the differences in masses of two objects. This eventually led to the concept of acceleration due to gravity.

Einstein was never behind when we speak about original research. While he was working in a Swiss patent office and maintaining his family, he created extra time so he could perform his “independent” research using just pen and paper. It is astonishing to read that the foundation for his Nobel prize was laid in 1905 when he published the photoelectric effect without help from anyone. Not just that, the equation E=mc**2, a formula for Brownian motion, relativity theory were all published in 1905 alongside his PhD thesis!

On the personal side, while Newton happens to be the “Shy Guy”, Einstein socialized with people with rainbow of intellects! Newton was stuck in his room for most time where he forced himself to get mandatory sleep every night, whereas Einstein enjoyed his life doing outdoors sailing and, playing violin and piano. Newton’s engagement broke off due to the differences with his fiancée and lived as a Bachelor and a celibate, while Einstein was married at least twice. However, both the men were in their pink of the health during most part of their life because they believed sound body is a major requirement to perform sound research. Newton contributed to the public by serving as a member of parliament, whereas Einstein played a pivotal role in getting the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt's signature for the “Manhattan Project” that involved making atomic bombs that were later dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki! Both of them were religious, albeit to a different extent. Even though there was no Nobel Prize during Newton’s period, he certainly deserved at least two or more!

On a closing note, whereas Newton was respectable primarily among the scholars, Einstein was a household name not just for his contribution to physics, but also for world peace! I truly enjoyed reading this book and finished it almost within 24 hours (Thanks to Hurricane Irene wherein I was forced to stay home). I strongly recommend this book to anyone who have even a modicum of enthusiasm to learn about the legends, and a must for “All PhD students” who feel they are somewhat lost in their PhD marathon.  Please read this book (http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Newton-Comparison-Greatest-Scientists/dp/0822507528)

Some Excerpts from the book:


Newton


- Newton was born prematurely. His mother thought he would die soon after his birth
- Newton had all his teeth but one, and a full head of hair when he died! (Every man’s dream)
- Newton did not like to involve in activities that involve competition, nor did he study hard to improve grades. He however won a broad-jump contest by shrewdly waiting for a gust of wind to provide a driving force.
- Whenever Newton needed relaxation, he simply switched from mathematics to physics to chemistry to theology.
- Newton slept nude
- Newton is rarely funny!
- Newton usually keeps things to himself. Most of his discoveries that were made public is as a result of compulsion by others
- Newton’s only exercise was walking back and forth in his room
- Unlike Einstein, Newton did not produce any student, but merely helped created talented young mathematicians
- Newton was a bachelor throughout his life and a celibate
- Newton did not accept criticisms very well
- The first text book on theoretical physics was written by Newton
- At 26, the Cambridge university gave Professorship to Newton and let him do what he wants
- Once Newton was taking care of his livestock (horses) there was a storm. Excited Newton focused on calculating the speed of the wind and forget about the horses
- Newton invented differential calculus because it was required for him to continue his research about acceleration

Einstein

• Einstein is the only Nobel Laureate in physics who was awarded for his work done at his spare time, at home, entirely on his own, without being affiliated to any university
• Jewish Einstein never felt shy about supporting fellows Jews or expressing his Jewish feelings very strongly
• In 1944, Einstein handwrote a copy of his 1905 paper on special relativity (30-pages) and raised $6 million in order to contribute to the war efforts
• Einstein was straight forward. He never associated himself with Germany even after the world wars due to the mass murder committed by Hitler and his men.
• At the age of 73, Einstein was offered the “President” position of Israel. He however declined citing that he lacked natural aptitude and the experience to deal with people.
• Einstein in his last stages of life at the hospital jokingly said: “One can die without the help of Doctors”
• Einstein did not carry out any experiments
• Einstein’s got his green card in 1933 and citizenship in 1940
• Einstein was a professionally trained violinist and taught himself piano. He gave several concerts to generate funds for the needy
• Einstein considered Mahatma Gandhi and Franklin Roosevelt as the greatest contemporary statesmen
• Analysis of debris from atom bomb test of Oct 1952 shows the presence of an element whose atomic number was 99. Thereafter it was named “Einsteinium”
• In 1914, on a Solar eclipse day, a group of German astronomers went to Russia to test Einstein’s theory of gravity. The world war I broke out and these scientists were arrested

To Rajdeep, With Deep Respect

I wrote this email to Rajdeep, Editor-in-Chief (CNN-IBN), about a month ago hoping I could hear from him. Nothing like that happened until now.

--

Dear Rajdeep,

It is with deep sadness I am writing this question (rather a lengthy email). I am writing to you because I see you as the window of India.

The brutal crimes perpetrated by Sri Lankan costal guards against Tamilnadu fisherman is getting worse every day. It is debatable whether these fishermen actually cross the boundary for want of fish, but the bottom line is they ended up beaten heavily if not killed. So far, more than 550+ Tamil Fisherman has been killed under the pretext that they have crossed the Indian waters. Lately, four fishermen – Victus (22), Anthony (40), John Paul (23) and Marimuthu (32) – become victims.

This continuing barbarism orchestrated by Sri Lankan naval guards call for immediate answers for the following questions:

(1) Who gives the right to Sri Lankan naval guards to kill the Tamilnadu fisherman? Why not arrest those who cross the boundaries and reprimand them?

(2) Is this what Indian naval guards do to Pakistan fishermen who ended up landing on Indian waters?

(3) Why are the central/state government and Supreme Court turning a Nelson’s eye to these killings? Are the dead fishermen not Indians?

It is unfortunate that none of the leading dailies or television channels in Tamilnadu is interested in broadcasting a cover story of the death of 550+ Tamilnadu fishermen. The politicians in Tamilnadu won’t take up this issue until 2016 elections. May I request you to make a 30 or 60-min documentary on this issue and broadcast it in CNN-IBN during the prime time? And also, can you please bring this issue at the talking point of your ‘India at 9’ show sometime soon? I am sure the MDMK leader Mr. V. Gopalsamy (Vaiko) would be a great person to be included in the debate as he is the most knowledgeable political person in this issue.

I would really appreciate it if you could do this. You probably won’t get much advertisement money if you broadcast this documentary, but the dead fishermen family and the people of Tamilnadu would be eternally grateful to you and what is more satisfying than that?

Thank you Rajdeep. Whether you bring this point or not, I will continue watching your ‘India at 9’ show - the only Indian show I would like to watch every day.

Sincerely,
Boobalan (Chicago)

The Duplicity of the Fourth Pillar: the cases of Dr. Binayak Sen and Seeman

The timing could not be any better. Dr. Binayak Sen was granted bail by the Supreme Court justices H.S. Bedi and C.K.Prasad. The Judges not only absolved Dr. Sen from the Sedition charges but also made a point very clear: "He may be a sympathizer. That does not make him guilty of sedition." As expected, The Hindu - the top-rated daily newspaper in India - wrote an editorial containing in-depth critical analysis (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/article1704308.ece)

I am however disappointed when The Hindu did not come up with such Editorials and critical analysis regarding the arrest of Tamil political activist Seeman and his acquittal by the Judges of the High Court.

I respect the role of The Hindu in disseminating knowledge and awareness throughout the India. When people like Dr. Binayak Sen can get great support from The Hindu, why can't people like Seeman were never highlighted? It is important to remember here that Seeman was arrested more than once under the "National Security Act". This politically motivated arrest raised more questions than answers. How can a single person be a threat to a nation comprising 1.2 billion people? If indeed he is a threat, what kind of weak nation we have got? Is arresting Seeman the Government's way of solving a problem? Here is a Man who has dedicated his life for the upliftment of Tamils in Tamilnadu and in Sri Lanka, and asked nothing in return. And yet, the fourth pillar of democracy is not yet convinced of his pursuits. It is a sad reality that well-known magazines such as The Hindu or any other popular TV channels in South India has not applauded Seeman's single-handed fight against ruling India.