#pathway to phd

[chronically-a-bacteriophage]

parents evening my beloved: I say goodbye to the last one I will ever have...

[wanukilppari]

POV: You are PhD student and definitelly not going crazy

[prashasconsulting]

PhD by Publication: A New Era in Doctoral Education

Doctoral education was traditionally accepted as a laborious time-consuming process requiring at least three years of academic study together with the writing of an extensive dissertation. However with academia trying to meet such diverse professional and academic missions, alternative courses have emerged under the title PhD by publication. This presents a perfect opportunity for any researcher professional or academic, to produce a doctorate based solely on work previously published.

We are going to consider the PhD by publication, discussing its advantages, structure, and potential pitfalls. We shall also respond to some frequently asked questions so that the reader will get a full picture of this fast-emerging alternative.

What is a PhD by Publication?

A PhD by Publication, often referred to as a PhD by Published Works, is a doctoral degree granted without a traditional thesis. Rather, it is granted upon the basis of a portfolio of peer-reviewed and published research papers. Candidates put together their publications and present them as evidence of research contribution to a particular area of study.

Unlike the traditional doctoral programs, this PhD by Publication acknowledges existing contributions through previously published work by formalizing them.

Who is Eligible for PhD by Publication?

The program of PhD by Publication suits mostly:

•Experienced Academics and Professionals: Those with a record of publication in their subject area.

•Practicing Researchers: Professionals who have contributed large amounts of research within an organization.

•Mid Career Academics: Those who want formalization of their work for career elevation.

Eligibility can be based on:

1.Significant quantities of published work in journal articles.

2.Research that is novel to the field and contributes sufficiently.

3.Exhibits coherence in its body of work.

Benefits of Doctorate by Publication

1.Recognition of Present Work:

This route legitimizes the work done through research and contributions by one in the professional world, thus avoids duplication.

2.Time Saving:

Since most of the work is already done, candidates can concentrate on synthesizing their work and writing the contextual overview.

3.Flexible Approach:

It is suitable for professionals who have to balance work, research, and personal commitments.

4.Career Advancement:

A PhD can result in higher academic positions, greater credibility, and more opportunities for funding.

5.Cost-Effective:The shorter time frame and streamlined focus can reduce overall costs compared to a traditional PhD.

PhD by Publication Structure

1.Portfolio of Publications: The core requirement is the aggregation of peer-reviewed papers, book chapters, or equivalents of published works that document considerable contributions to the body of knowledge.

2.Contextual Narrative: Students are required to deliver a comprehensive introduction or summary-often referred to as synthesis chapter or contextualizing statement-that weaves the output of the publications into one cohesive body of work

3.Oral Defense: Similar to more conventional PhDs, oral defense in front of a committee of academics may also be required

4.Institutional Requirements: Each university can have different requirements in terms of the number and type of publications, the time of publication, and the type of contextual overview.

PhD by Publication Challenges

1.High Academic Standards: The research is required to be highly academic since only peer-reviewed and impactful publications are accepted.

2.Coherence Across Works: It may be difficult to ensure that varied publications tell a cohesive story.

3.Not Recognized in Some Countries: While it is gaining popularity, the PhD by Publication is not widely accepted or acknowledged.

4. Long Process for Application: It is not an easy process to contextualize and defend published work.

Trends in PhD by Publication Across the World

1. United Kingdom and Europe: The UK and Europe were the first to take on the PhD by Publication, and it has been quite a common route for several years.

2. Australia: Institutions in Australia usually provide this route to mid-career professionals and academics.

3. United States: While less prevalent, some American universities are starting to consider the model, especially in interdisciplinary fields.

4. Asia: The idea is taking off in parts of Asia, particularly for professionals in fast-growing industries.

Is PhD by Publication for You?

You should select this route if your professional and academic life meets the following criteria:

•Are you an established researcher with a strong publication record?

•Do your publications collectively demonstrate significant and original contributions?

•Are you in search of a flexible route to formalize your research achievements?

If the answers are "yes," then a PhD by Publication could be the ideal choice.

Frequently Asked Questions About PhD by Publication

Q1. How many publications are required for a PhD by Publication?

The number varies from institution to institution but typically ranges from 4 to 8 peer-reviewed articles.

Q2. Can I use co-authored papers for my submission?

Absolutely; co-authored papers can be included, but you do need to clearly demonstrate your contribution.

Q3. What is the duration of completion for a PhD by Publication?

It is shorter compared to traditional PhDs that last 1–2 years.

Q4. Does every university offer a PhD by Publication?

No; not all universities offer such a program. It seems to be more common within institutions that focus on applied research and professional development.

Q5. Can I attempt the PhD by Publication if my first degree is not available or exists?

In general candidates are expected to have already attained a master's or other equivalent professional experience at entry.

Conclusion

The PhD by Publication heralds a new world for doctoral education, offering accessible and time-effective routes in order for professionals and practitioners alike to gain formal award and recognition for their existing published work.

Candidates can gain an honored qualification and continue advancing through their careers by leveraging all of their existing work.

As academic landscapes are changing, this model draws attention to the importance of adaptation and diversity in university education and opens the possibilities for professionals from other spheres.

For candidates having a rich portfolio of impact research, the PhD by Publication is more than being an option; it serves as a chance to get their legacy in academia carved in stone.

[swappedandtrapped]

Swapping Research - Part 1

Starting to try and use AI for translations to English. I don't like it, but writing in English is exhausting.

Part 2 here Part 3 here

Marcus Chen gripped the bathroom sink, staring at his reflection in the fluorescent-lit mirror. "Trapezium, trapezoid, scaphoid, lunate, triquetrum, pisiform…" The naming of hand bones did little to slow his racing heart. Organic chemistry in thirty minutes. Dr. Zhang's infamous molecular mechanisms exam.

The bathroom door banged open. Tyler Reeves filled the doorframe, six-foot-three of basketball glory in team outfit, a crumpled paper in his hand.

"Thought I'd find you in here." Tyler's voice echoed against the tiles. "Pre-exam ritual?"

"I was trying to make sure I remember everything for the exam," Marcus said, straightening and adjusting his wire-rimmed glasses. "Some of us can't coast through life on jump shots."

Tyler's smile disappeared. He held out the paper: a formal notice from the university. "They said I'm on academic probation. One semester to get my GPA above a 2.0 or I lose my scholarship."

Marcus scanned the notice. "I told you to drop Evolutionary Biology. You needed to start with—"

"Not the point, Marcus." Tyler ran a hand through his too-long hair, his usual confidence replaced by a mild sense of desperation. "I need help. Not tutoring. Something… different."

"I have an exam in 30 minutes, and my med school interview next week. Whatever this is—"

"My cousin Alex," Tyler interrupted, lowering his voice as someone entered a bathroom stall behind them. "She's doing this neuroscience PhD thing. Consciousness… transfer. Temporarily."

Marcus stared at him. "You're describing science fiction."

"It's real. She's been mapping neural pathways, testing it on rats. They're… they're switching brains, Marcus. She needs human subjects." Tyler leaned closer, voice urgent. "Twenty-four hours. That's all. I just need to know what it feels like."

"What what feels like?"

"To have a brain that works right." The words tumbled out, raw and unfiltered. Tyler glanced around, then continued quieter: "I don't really like to talk about it. I'm dyslexic. Bad. Words swim around, flip backwards. Dad refused to get me tested.

Marcus remembered high school, Tyler recording lectures instead of taking notes, always asking to study together but never reading aloud. The pieces clicked into place.

"Tyler, I'm sorry, but consciousness transfer? It's just not possible."

"It's real. She's proven it. Just twenty-four hours in your body. To read and prepare without feeling like drowning, so I can maybe actually get something into this thick skull" Tyler's eyes held a desperation Marcus had never seen. "Please. I'm out of options."

Marcus thought of his carefully planned week, his interview preparation, his parents' expectations. "This is insane."

"One day. Then everything goes back to normal. I promise.

---

Alex Nguyen's "lab" was a repurposed storage room in the neuroscience department basement, filled with humming equipment that looked cobbled together from different decades. Monitors displayed brain scans in pulsing colors..

"The procedure is non-invasive," Alex explained, her undercut hairstyle severe under the fluorescent lighting. She adjusted electrodes on a strange helmet apparatus. "Consciousness mapping uses quantum entanglement principles to create a temporary neural signature exchange."

Marcus eyed the setup skeptically. "This can't possibly have IRB approval."

Alex's eyes flicked to Tyler, then back to Marcus. "We're in the theoretical testing phase."

"She means 'no,'" Tyler translated.

"The risks are minimal," Alex continued, typing rapidly on a keyboard. "Temporary disorientation, mild synesthesia, possible dream disturbances. The transfer nullifies and reverses naturally after approximately twenty-four hours."

"Has anyone done this before? Human subjects?" Marcus asked.

Alex's slight hesitation told him everything. "You'd be the first complete transfer. But the animal studies are promising. Rats with trained maze behaviors maintained those memories in their new bodies."

"This is crazy," Marcus muttered, but didn't leave. Something in Tyler's desperation had touched him. The vulnerability beneath the confident facade.

"Please. I wouldn't ask if there was another way." Tyler said quietly.

Marcus thought of their childhood: Tyler defending him from bullies in elementary school, the effortless way he navigated social situations that left Marcus paralyzed with anxiety. Maybe he owed him this.

"Twenty-four hours," Marcus said firmly. "Then we switch back, no matter what. I have that interview next week."

Alex gestured them toward two reclined chairs. "You'll be unconscious for approximately thirty minutes during the transfer. When you wake, you'll be in each other's bodies."

As Alex attached electrodes to his temples, Marcus felt panic rising. "Wait. How will we prove this actually worked? That it's not suggestion or—"

"Tell me something only you would know," Alex suggested. "Something you can repeat back afterward."

Marcus thought for a moment, then leaned over to Alex and whispered, "I secretly watch 'RuPaul' when I'm stressed."

Alex grinned. "The drag show? Seriously?"

"Don't judge. Tyler, it's your turn."

Tyler hesitated, then whispered something that made Alex's eyebrows rise.

"Didn't expect that," Alex said. "Ok, now that that's done, are you Ready?" Alex asked, hovering by the switch.

"No," Marcus admitted.

"Do it anyway," Tyler said.

The electricity began as a gentle hum at the base of Marcus's skull, spreading outward. Panic fluttered in his chest as the room blurred. His last thought was a desperate recitation—trapezium, trapezoid, scaphoid, lunate—before darkness pulled him under.

---

Marcues' consciousness returning felt like being yanked from deep water. He gasped, his body feeling impossibly wrong: longer limbs, different center of gravity, a dull ache in the right knee. His stomach heaved, and he barely managed to turn before vomiting on the floor.

"Easy," came Alex's voice. "Disorientation is normal."

Marcus looked up, vision swimming, and felt a primal horror unlike anything he'd experienced. Across the room, his own body was sitting up, looking at its hands with wonder. His face, but not his expressions, not his movements.

"Holy shit," his voice said from his body, Tyler's inflections all wrong in Marcus's mouth. "It worked. It actually worked."

Marcus tried to stand and staggered, unfamiliar muscles responding differently than expected. He reached up to adjust glasses that weren't there, fingers touching unfamiliar features. Tyler's features. His new nose, his soft lips, his beard scruff…

The violation went deeper than he'd imagined. Not just wearing someone else's skin, but inhabiting their flesh completely, feeling their physical pain, seeing through their eyes.

"Twenty-four hours," he managed to say, Tyler's voice emerging from his throat. "Not a minute more."

His own face looked back at him, wearing Tyler's crooked smile. It was real. Marcus wasn't in his own body anymore. And the raw, visceral wrongness of that fact threatened to drown him completely.

[reasonsforhope]

"A study looking at the bearers of artificial hearts found that a subset of them can regenerate heart muscle tissue—the first time such an observation has ever been made.

It may open the door to new ways to treat and perhaps someday cure heart failure, the deadliest non-communicable disease on Earth. The results were published in the journal Circulation.

A team of physician-scientists at the University of Arizona’s Heart Center in Tucson led a collaboration of international experts to investigate whether heart muscles can regenerate.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, heart failure affects nearly 7 million US adults and is responsible for 14% of deaths per year. There is no cure for heart failure, though medications can slow its progression. The only treatment for advanced heart failure, other than a transplant, is a pump replacement through an artificial heart, called a left ventricular assist device, which can help the heart pump blood.

“Skeletal muscle has a significant ability to regenerate after injury. If you’re playing soccer and you tear a muscle, you need to rest it, and it heals,” said Hesham Sadek, director of the University’s Sarver Heart Center.

It was previously thought that when a heart muscle is injured, it could never grow back.

“Irrefutable evidence of heart muscle regeneration has never been shown before in humans,” he said. “This study provided direct evidence.”

The project began with tissue from artificial heart patients provided by colleagues at the University of Utah Health and School of Medicine led by Stavros Drakos, MD, PhD, and a pioneer in left ventricular assist device-mediated recovery.

Teams in Sweden and Germany used their innovative method of carbon dating human heart tissue to track whether these samples contained newly generated cells. The investigators found that patients with artificial hearts regenerated muscle cells at more than six times the rate of healthy hearts.

“This is the strongest evidence we have, so far, that human heart muscle cells can actually regenerate, which really is exciting, because it solidifies the notion that there is an intrinsic capacity of the human heart to regenerate,” Sadek said.

“It also strongly supports the hypothesis that the inability of the heart muscle to ‘rest’ is a major driver of the heart’s lost ability to regenerate shortly after birth. It may be possible to target the molecular pathways involved in cell division to enhance the heart’s ability to regenerate.”

In 2011, Sadek published a paper in Science showing that while heart muscle cells actively divide in utero, they stop dividing shortly after birth to devote their energy to pumping blood through the body nonstop, with no time for breaks.

In 2014, he published evidence of cell division in patients with artificial hearts, hinting that their heart muscle cells might have been regenerating because they were able to rest.

These findings, combined with other research teams’ observations that some artificial heart patients could have their devices removed after experiencing a reversal of symptoms, led him to wonder if the artificial heart provides cardiac muscles the equivalent of bed rest like a person needs when recovering from injury.

“The pump pushes blood into the aorta, bypassing the heart,” he said. “The heart is essentially resting.”

Sadek’s previous studies indicated that this rest might be beneficial for the heart muscle cells, but he needed to design an experiment to determine whether patients with artificial hearts were actually regenerating muscles.

Next, Sadek wants to figure out why only about 25% of patients are “responders” to artificial hearts, meaning that their cardiac muscle regenerates.

“It’s not clear why some patients respond and some don’t, but it’s very clear that the ones who respond have the ability to regenerate heart muscle,” he said. “The exciting part now is to determine how we can make everyone a responder, because if you can, you can essentially cure heart failure.

“The beauty of this is that a mechanical heart is not a therapy we hope to deliver to our patients in the future—these devices are tried and true, and we’ve been using them for years.”"

-via Good News Network, December 31, 2024

[dearlenore]

hii i hope you're having a good day, i love your work <3

I was wondering if you could maybe write a short little thing about Spencer painting reader's nails ? like yk how it's harder to do your non-dominant hand .... and so Spencer sees her struggling and helps her do it.... idk sorry if this is weird...

This is so precious omggg😭❤️ I’m cryinggg! I gotchu sweetheart🥹💋

NAIL POLISH • S.REID

SUMMARY: when you find yourself annoyed at your the way your nail polish is turning out while using your non dominate hand, your ever so kind boyfriend offers you a little help.

PAIRING: gn!reader x spencer

tags: PURE FLUFF, reader wears nail polish, reader uses skincare / is implied feminine but not female

a/n: dad spencer is all that’s in my pea brain rn I should probably study tho… also you guessed it, peds surgeon reader 🥹

w/c: 0.7K

“DAMNIT” YOU HISS, tossing the nail polish brush back into the bottle like it had personally offended you.

The crimson polish on your right hand was perfect — sleek, glossy, and worthy of a magazine cover. But your left hand? A streaky, smudged mess that looked like you’d tried painting with your eyes closed.

You grabbed a tissue and started scrubbing the polish off your fingers, muttering under your breath.

“Rough morning?”

You glanced up to see Spencer Reid standing in the doorway, one eyebrow raised and that familiar half-smile quirking at his lips. His cardigan hung loose around his frame, and his messenger bag dangled off one shoulder like he’d barely noticed it was there.

“Ugh,” you groaned, tossing the tissue aside. “I swear, painting my nails should not be this hard.”

Spencer stepped closer, glancing at the battlefield of polish bottles and smudged tissues on the table. “You’re using too much polish,” he said, pointing at your ruined nails. “And you didn’t let the first coat dry long enough.”

You snorted. “Oh, so now you’re a nail expert?”

“Actually,” Spencer said, shifting into his lecture tone, “there’s a scientific reason why it’s harder to paint your non-dominant hand. Motor control is primarily managed by the brain’s primary motor cortex, which sends signals to your muscles through neural pathways. The dominant hand has stronger, more refined motor pathways because you use it more frequently for complex tasks. Meanwhile, your non-dominant hand relies on less-developed pathways, making fine motor skills — like painting nails — harder to control. Essentially, your brain isn’t as practiced in guiding those precise movements with your weaker hand.”

You stared at him, blinking slowly, smiling as you always did when he rambled

“…You realize you could’ve just said, ‘Yeah, it’s hard to use your other hand,’ right?”

Spencer’s smile widened slightly. “Yeah, but where’s the fun in that?”

You laughed despite yourself, shaking your head. “Okay, Professor Genius — since you clearly know everything, how about you show me?”

“Wait, what?” Spencer’s eyes widened. “I didn’t mean—”

“Oh no,” you cut in, grabbing a bottle of sleek black polish and pressing it into his hand. “You’re not getting out of this. If you’re so smart, fix it. I’m sure your 4 PHDS and 187 iq can handle glorified paint.”

Spencer hesitated, staring at the bottle like you’d just handed him a bomb. “I… I mean… I don’t know if I’m—”

“You’re not backing out now,” you grinned, patting the cushion beside you. “Come on, I’m desperate.”

With a defeated sigh, Spencer set his bag down and rolled up his sleeves. “Fine,” he muttered, sitting beside you. “But if I mess this up, I take no responsibility.”

“Deal,” you said sweetly, offering him your hand.

Spencer took it gently — his fingers warm and steady against your wrist. He picked up the brush, carefully swirling it inside the bottle before pulling it out and wiping the excess off the rim.

“You need thin layers,” he murmured, more to himself than to you. His brow furrowed in concentration as he swept the brush over your nail in one smooth, perfect stroke.

“Wow…” you said slowly. “You’re annoyingly good at everything you do,”

“I used to paint my mom’s nails,” he explained, not looking up. “On days when she was… struggling. It helped calm her down, and I guess I just… got good at it.”

Something softened in your chest. Spencer’s voice had grown quieter — careful — like those memories were something fragile.

“Well,” you said, a little gentler now, “you’re kind of a natural.”

He smiled faintly, focusing back on your nails. Each brushstroke was precise — steady, like he wasn’t just painting polish, but solving some intricate puzzle.

“So…” you drawled, watching him with a teasing smile. “Are you secretly living a double life as a nail artist? Should I start booking appointments?”

Spencer chuckled under his breath. “I’d make a terrible nail tech. Too much pressure.”

“Oh no,” you grinned, wiggling your fingers. “You’re definitely my new on-call manicurist.”

“I am not doing this every week,” Spencer warned, but you didn’t miss the way his smile lingered — soft and almost shy.

“Uh-huh,” you said smugly, admiring your newly perfect nails. “We’ll see.”

[finnlongman]

Picture the scene. You're a gay nerd who followed a weirdly common pathway of being super into Les Mis and Hamlet as a teenager to ending up a medievalist (you will see why the Les Mis connection is relevant).

One day, in the course of your PhD on friendship in the late Ulster Cycle, which is really just an excuse to think about Láeg and Cú Chulainn all the time, you find yourself looking at an early eighteenth century manuscript of Oidheadh Con Culainn.

You find this.

Please excuse me any transcription errors, because I'm doing this on sight while writing this post, and likewise translation, and also while crying, but:

"Is ann sin do choirigh Laogh an laochmhilid ina sheasamh ris an ccairthe chloiche 7 a aghaidh ar fhearaibh Eireann. 7 do chuir a sgiath ina chlé láimh ..." Then Láeg arranged the hero standing against the standing stone and his face towards the men of Ireland. And he put his shield in his left hand...

The context of the scene. This is the moment of Cú Chulainn's death. Láeg is helping him to the standing stone. So far, so much what I would expect from Oidheadh Con Culainn.

And then:

Ro dhealaig a anam ré corp Choingculoinn ann sin, 7 a druimm ris an ccairthe, 7 a lámh a láimh Laoigh mac Rianghabhra And Cú Chulainn's soul left his body then, and his back against the stone, and his hand in the hand of Láeg mac Ríangabra

Emphasis quite clearly mine.

This is not in any of the versions of Oidheadh Con Culainn that have been edited so far. I have never seen this before in my life.

In this manuscript from 1702-03, Cú Chulainn dies HOLDING LÁEG'S HAND.

(17-year-old Finn, fervent e/R shipper, would like to point out that at least Láeg was alive and this isn't quite a permets-tu? situation yet, but boy did I just get bodyslammed by a recursive loop of feelings nonetheless. And now we see why the Les Mis/Hamlet->medievalist pipeline is relevant.)

[nowimjustastranger]

StCMO Lore | Part 2

I changed Watchdog Ford's motivation for going into the multiverse and I think this narrative is far more fitting, with the added benefit of being angsty as all hell.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

Stanford Pines began his obsessive search for a solution soon after, determined to undo what had been done. But Death could not be reversed, nor could it be threatened or bribed. So Stanley Pines remained in Death’s tender embrace and, in his growing desperation, Stanford Pines began to explore other means of getting his brother back.

He left no stone unturned and eventually stumbled across the multiverse theory. A theory which suggests that our universe is not the only one, and that there may be countless other universes existing alongside it, each potentially with its own laws of physics and properties, essentially creating a "multiverse" where our universe is just one part of a much larger cosmic structure.

An idea began to form.

After getting his first PhD in evolutionary biology, Stanford Pines immediately pursued a degree in physics. In the meantime, Fiddleford found a job and bought an apartment near campus so he could look after Ford, who had begun to neglect both his health and hygiene in favor of pouring all his time and attention into turning his idea into reality.

When Stanford graduated early yet again, they moved to Gravity Falls together, where the barrier between Dimensions was weaker, and began to build a portal that could tear a hole between the two. Fiddleford was reluctant, suspecting that Stanford’s intentions were far from innocent or scientific in nature. But Stanford would do it with or without him, so Fiddleford assisted in order to keep him from working himself to death.

Ford also had a side project that he had started working on in college, his premonitions and sensitivity to changes in the universe leading him to experiment with harnessing those frequencies and applying them to his ability to see glimpses of the future in an unconscious state, increasing their strength with an amplifier so he could see into the future whenever and wherever he pleased.

He very nearly rendered himself braindead on multiple occasions.

When Fiddleford found out about Project Prescience, by quite literally walking in on one of Stanford’s tests, he aided Stanford in repurposing a biker helmet in order to implant the amplifier and external neural connectors into the frame. Once activated with a press of a discrete button on the side of the helmet, the system amplified Stanford’s premonitions to visions of future pathways.

Refining the tech takes Stanford and Fiddleford four years, but it’s ready by the time the portal is finished. They test it before Stanford gears up to go through, successfully entering the multiverse in an alternate dimension identical to his own except Gravity Fall was never founded. He stands in the middle of a forest where the Shack would’ve been, using the built-in communication device in his helmet to keep Fiddleford updated.

Stanford returns to his dimension and they shut down the portal, working on a way to shield their dimension from outside forces. Stanford designs a strong spell using unicorn hair to erect a barrier around their dimension, as well as performing a ritual on himself so he can come and go from his dimension as he pleases.

Also, Stanford convinces Fiddleford to build the memory gun by arguing that he could remain anonymous by using it on anyone who discovered his true identity. Unfortunately, Stanford intends to go behind Fiddleford’s back and use it to steal a Stanley from another Dimension. The memory gun still has an addictive quality, but only when it's used on the same person several times, but Stanford usually only has to use it on someone once.

[fatliberation]

I totally understand and can empathize with fat activists when it comes to medical fatphobia. But I do think its important to provide nuance to this topic.

A lot of doctors mention weight loss, particularly for elective surgeries, because it makes the recovery process easier (Particularly with keeping sutures in place) and anesthetic safer.

I feel like its still important to mention those things when advocating for fat folks. Safety is important.

What you're talking about is actually a different topic altogether - the previous ask was not about preparing for surgery, it was about dieting being the only treatment option for anon's chronic pain, which was exacerbating their ed symptoms. Diets have been proven over and over again to be unsustainable (and are the leading predictor of eating disorders). So yeah, I felt that it was an inappropriate prescription informed more by bias than actual data.

(And side note: This study on chronic pain and obesity concluded that weight change was not associated with changes of pain intensity.)

If you want to discuss the risk factor for surgery, sure, I think that's an important thing to know - however, most fat people already know this and are informed by their doctors and surgeons of what the risks are beforehand, so I'm not really concerned about people being uninformed about it.

I'm a fat liberation activist, and what I'm concerned about is bias. I'm concerned that there are so many BMI cutoffs in essential surgeries for fat patients, when weight loss is hardly feasible, that creates a barrier to care that disproportionately affects marginalized people with intersecting identities.

It's also important to know that we have very little data around the outcomes of surgery for fat folks that isn't bariatric weight loss surgery.

A new systematic review by researchers in Sydney, Australia, published in the journal Clinical Obesity, suggests that weight loss diets before elective surgery are ineffective in reducing postoperative complications.

CADTH Health Technology Review Body Mass Index as a Measure of Obesity and Cut-Off for Surgical Eligibility made a similar conclusion:

Most studies either found discrepancies between BMI and other measurements or concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support BMI cut-offs for surgical eligibility. The sources explicitly reporting ethical issues related to the use of BMI as a measure of obesity or cut-off for surgical eligibility described concerns around stigma, bias (particularly for racialized peoples), and the potential to create or exacerbate disparities in health care access.

Nicholas Giori MD, PhD Professor of Orthopedic Surgery at Stanford University, a respected leader in TKA and THA shared his thoughts in Elective Surgery in Adult Patients with Excess Weight: Can Preoperative Dietary Interventions Improve Surgical Outcomes? A Systematic Review:

“Obesity is not reversible for most patients. Outpatient weight reduction programs average only 8% body weight loss [1, 10, 29]. Eight percent of patients denied surgery for high BMI eventually reach the BMI cutoff and have total joint arthroplasty [28]. Without a reliable pathway for weight loss, we shouldn’t categorically withhold an operation that improves pain and function for patients in all BMI classes [3, 14, 16] to avoid a risk that is comparable to other risks we routinely accept.

It is not clear that weight reduction prior to surgery reduces risk. Most studies on this topic involve dramatic weight loss from bariatric surgery and have had mixed results [13, 19, 21, 22, 24, 27]. Moderate non-surgical weight loss has thus-far not been shown to affect risk [12]. Though hard BMI cutoffs are well-intended, currently-used BMI cutoffs nearly have the effect of arbitrarily rationing care without medical justification. This is because BMI does not strongly predict complications. It is troubling that the effects are actually not arbitrary, but disproportionately affect minorities, women and patients in low socioeconomic classes. I believe that the decision to proceed with surgery should be based on traditional shared-decision making between the patient and surgeon. Different patients and different surgeons have different tolerances to risk and reward. Giving patients and surgeons freedom to determine the balance that is right for them is, in my opinion, the right way to proceed.”

I agree with Dr. Giori on this. And I absolutely do not judge anyone who chooses to lose weight prior to a surgery. It's upsetting that it is the only option right now for things like safe anesthesia. Unfortunately, patients with a history of disordered eating (which is a significant percentage of fat people!) are left out of the conversation. There is certainly risk involved in either option and it sucks. I am always open to nuanced discussion, and the one thing I remain firm in is that weight loss is not the answer long-term. We should be looking for other solutions in treating fat patients and studying how to make surgery safer. A lot of this could be solved with more comprehensive training and new medical developments instead of continuously trying to make fat people less fat.

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved in our archive

By Dr. Sushama R. Chaphalkar, PhD.

In a recent research paper posted to the bioRxiv preprint* server, researchers in the United States investigated the potential effect of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on cholesterol metabolism, focusing on the role of the viral protein open reading frame 3a (ORF3a).

They found that SARS-CoV-2 causes cholesterol sequestration in lysosomes via the ORF3a protein, which disrupts protein trafficking and reduces the levels of bis(monoacylglycero)phosphate (BMP) in the cell, enhancing viral survival.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, disrupts lipid metabolism, particularly cholesterol homeostasis, which can persist during and after infection. This is linked to disease severity and long-term complications like dyslipidemia and cardiovascular diseases.

Cholesterol is crucial for cellular function and is primarily transported through lysosomes, where proteins like Niemann-Pick C1 and C2 (NPC1 and NPC2) facilitate its release. SARS-CoV-2 may exploit plasma membrane cholesterol to enhance infectivity.

Disruptions in the lysosomal cholesterol pathway can cause cholesterol buildup, impairing cellular functions, and viruses like Ebola are known to hijack this mechanism. Notably, BMP plays a dual role: it aids in cholesterol transport and contributes to viral infection by promoting viral fusion with lysosomal membranes.

In the present study, researchers investigated the potential impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on cholesterol transport in cells, focusing on the role of the viral protein ORF3a.

About the Study A variety of experimental techniques were employed, including culturing A549, HeLa, and Vero E6 cells, followed by SARS-CoV-2 infection at different multiplicities of infection. SARS-CoV-2 ORF3a-VPS39 interaction was studied using mutations at key residues (notably W193 and Y184, which were identified as critical for this interaction). Immunofluorescence, filipin staining, and confocal microscopy were used to assess cholesterol localization and vesicular dynamics, while high-content imaging quantified cell-specific responses.

Cholesterol levels were measured using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and lipid species were analyzed through shotgun lipidomics. For further protein analysis, western blotting was performed to detect secreted NPC2 and cathepsin D, along with cell lysates. Data were analyzed using ImageJ and Prism 9, and statistical significance was determined by t-tests or analysis of variance.

Results and Discussion SARS-CoV-2 infection was found to increase filipin-positive puncta in lysosomes of A549-hACE2 and Vero E6 cells, indicating altered cholesterol distribution, especially in lysosomes, without affecting total cholesterol levels. Among the 28 viral proteins tested, ORF3a showed the strongest increase in filipin puncta, suggesting significant lysosomal cholesterol sequestration.

Notably, SARS-CoV-2 ORF3a localized to lysosomes and caused them to swell, whereas SARS-CoV ORF3a did not induce such effects, highlighting a distinct pathogenic strategy unique to SARS-CoV-2.

ORF3a was found to interact with VPS39, a key component of the HOPS complex involved in cholesterol egress from lysosomes. Key residues W193 and Y184 were shown to form a hydrophobic binding interface critical for this interaction, distinguishing SARS-CoV-2 ORF3a from its SARS-CoV counterpart. Mutations at W193 and Y184 disrupted this interaction, while S171 and H182 had no significant effect.

SARS-CoV-2 ORF3a expression was shown to cause cholesterol accumulation in lysosomes, which was reduced by the W193A mutation. It also led to the mislocalization of NPC2 and increased its secretion, indicating disrupted NPC2 trafficking, likely due to interference with TGN-to-endosome transport. Additionally, BMP levels were significantly reduced in infected cells, which likely exacerbates lysosomal cholesterol sequestration.

In SARS-CoV-2-infected Vero E6 cells, BMP levels were found to decrease at 12 hours post-infection, coinciding with increased cholesterol at 18 hours. In HeLa-Flp-In cells, SARS-CoV-2 ORF3a was found to reduce BMP levels by 20%, with partial rescue in the W193A mutant. Lipidomics confirmed this reduction, correlating BMP loss with cholesterol accumulation and suggesting BMP reduction may contribute to cholesterol sequestration.

SARS-CoV-2 may reduce plasma membrane cholesterol to limit secondary infections, as shown by decreased SARS-CoV-2 infection in NPC1 inhibitor-treated cells. This supports the hypothesis that the virus manipulates cholesterol distribution to optimize replication conditions. Interestingly, the virus also appears to reduce its own infectivity within a single cell, suggesting a self-regulating mechanism to prevent viral overload and ensure broader host-level spread.

Conclusion In conclusion, a novel mechanism by which SARS-CoV-2 disrupts host cell lipid metabolism, specifically through cholesterol sequestration in lysosomes, has been elucidated. By uncovering the specific interaction between the viral protein ORF3a and host protein VPS39, the study highlights a critical role of lysosomal cholesterol trafficking disruption in SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis.

This discovery opens potential therapeutic avenues to target lipid dysregulation in COVID-19, which could help mitigate both the disease's immediate and long-term metabolic consequences, including dyslipidemia and cardiovascular complications.

Journal reference: Preliminary scientific report. Manipulation of Host Cholesterol by SARS-CoV-2. Aliza Doyle et al., bioRxiv, 2024.11.13.623299 (2024), DOI: 10.1101/2024.11.13.623299,

Study Link: www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.11.13.623299v1

[cupcraft]

“there are far more than two sexes”

And what are these other sexes called? What are their identificable characteristics? How do they reproduce? What gametes do they produce if not sperm nor egg? What chromosomes determine sex beyond X and Y?

They have many names at least from a medical perspective (Ie turner's) but the umbrella and preferred term is Intersex. I can't speak for intersex people on how they feel about terms like Turner's or Kleinfelter's (examples of intersex).

Biological sex can be defined by the following:

1. Genitalia and reproductive anatomical development and presentation (ie gyectomastia, alternative uteruses like a bicornate uterus, mixed genitalia, etc)

2. Sex hormones (ie androgens and estrogens)

3. Sex chromosomes. We typically think of female as XX and make as XY but it's far more complicated. There are many different combinations from X, X0, XXY, XXX, etc. There are even XY individuals who are born what you may consider "female" anatomically due to failure of the Y chromosome/other genes to go through male fetal development. There just is not Y or YY (an X chromosome is required for life).

4. Sex can also involved sexual reproduction and fertility.

Biological sex cannot just be simply defined by XX is female and estrogen and male is XY and androgens. Sex is defined by many different aspects and is complex. Intersex is a wide spectrum falling outside of what you consider the binary. To be intersex is very common as well.

Sex is also an emerging research concept on its ability to affect disease and cancer (ie sex specific transcripts from the chromosomes, pathways influenced by sex hormones, pathways that may differ between sexes for whatever reason for unknown pathways), which again is very complex and nuanced (this is my PhD focus and I'm happy to talk about it)

So that's a short summary any other science fellow or intersex ppl and etc are free to add on. And I can provide any articles and resources youd.need anon. I'm trying to take you at face genuine value and assuming this isn't bait.

[katiajewelbox]

Katia Plant Scientist is finally Dr. Katia Hougaard! Last month, I passed my viva voce exam at Imperial College London and officially earned my PhD in plant biology. A viva voce is the British academic system's final hurdle in the PhD pathway. This exam involves two experts who read the PhD candidate's thesis and then interview the candidate on his or her research. The aims are to make sure that the PhD candidate designed and carried out the experiments in the thesis and that he or she fully understand the scientific methods involved. Although there were many challenging questions, the viva went very well for me and I passed with minor corrections. This photo shows me celebrating the milestone with my supervisor Professor Colin Turnbull as well as my colleagues Dr. Po Yuan, Dr. Javaid Iqbal, and Dr. Rosa Lopez-Cobollo. I am very grateful to my supervisor for his unwavering support and mentorship in preparing for the viva. I will share more insights on the PhD journey in future posts! hashtag#katia_plantscientist hashtag#imperialcollegelondon hashtag#phd hashtag#phdviva hashtag#vivavoce hashtag#colleagues hashtag#plantbiology hashtag#phdjourney hashtag#biology hashtag#science hashtag#womeninscience hashtag#academia hashtag#lifeupdate hashtag#professionalmilestone hashtag#academicsuccess

[kaiserin-erzsebet]

I have an academic pathway question. How did you end up in your PhD program? Did you get your master's and work before applying or go straight in from undergrad? Are American or European schools easier, or does it depend on your research topic? I'm only in undergrad now but I really want to get a PhD in history someday and I'm interested in the Atlantic World and how America and Western Europe connect/are dependent on each other.

I'm sorry that it took so long for me to get to this. I have been remarkably burnt out lately.

But anyway, I can tell you what my path looked like, but I think I should caveat it with the fact that I had to work around the COVID pandemic, which caused admissions pauses and/or smaller than usual cohorts. So, the experience for me probably wasn't typical and won't reflect what applying now will be like.

I did apply to PhD programs out of undergrad, but upon reflection I really did not have a clear idea of what I wanted to work on. It is not a surprise to me, knowing what I know now about graduate school admissions, that I didn't get in.

When I decided to apply to a masters program in the Netherlands, I was doing it because I wanted to work with a specific professor who had been a visiting professor at an undergraduate university. I felt like he really understood the kind of questions I wanted to ask.

Now, here's one difference you should consider: at least in continental Europe (the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria is where I can speak for), you cannot apply to a Doctoral program without a Masters. If you are an undergraduate right now, you'll have to do a Masters and then a Doctorate as separate degrees in Europe.

Basically, both the US and European system call what they offer a Doctoral Degree. However, the US version is really much more of a package deal because it includes something called a "non-terminal Masters" which you get after completing coursework and your qualifying examinations (and sometimes other things depending on your program.) European programs are just the part after qualifying examinations where you research and write, so they expect you to have already done the work of an MA.

So, that's why I applied to an MA (technically a RMA, since that is a different distinction in the Netherlands that I won't get into) program in Europe and not a PhD.

This is where the story gets a little complicated, because I finished that degree in the summer of 2020. Which, as everyone remembers, was not a great time to be in a transitional part of your life. I actually got mailed my diploma because I could not get back to Europe with the travel restrictions.

I ended up applying to programs in the US, because trying to get back to Europe in the middle of the pandemic chaos seemed like a bad idea. I was offered a place in a interdisciplinary Masters program, which I took because: 1. I had a scholarship (I would not have paid for another degree) 2. It was interdisciplinary so it would be good for broadening my methodology. 3. It would let me work with Habsburg scholars, which I hadn't had yet. And I was also in the middle of my Germanist -> Habsburgist pivot. 4. It was one year and it was productive to do while we waited for the world to open up again.

After that I worked for a year teaching at the same university I did my Masters degree at, which gave me time to work on my application and make sure it was very clear and focused, since I was not going to do it again if I didn't get it that time. Since this was when applications opened up again "after" COVID, so there were double the usual number of applications.

My main reason for being at a US university was that there were more resources at my particular university for transatlantic travel and that there were more opportunities to teach during the program.

There isn't really an "easy" version as much as there are two different versions, especially in the humanities: in Germany at least, you're often applying to be part of a broad thematic project that has its own particular funding allocated to it and has its own supervisor. You can get funding for just your own project, but it is a process. Whereas in the US, you're applying mostly based on your advisor and committee and you need to pitch how your research fits that person and maybe the broader department.

There is also a substantial culture difference that I've found. Universities in Europe tend to treat you more like a researcher than a student. They really cut you loose to do your work, but also expect you to do all your own administrative work and planning. Whereas the US tends to build in more milestones and scaffolding to structure the process and check in on you. If you're not self motivated and good at asking for help when you need it, the approach in German/Dutch/Austrian academia can feel a bit like being thrown in the deep end with no swim lessons - I can't tell you if that's the same in "Western Europe" depending on where you are thinking. On the flipside, if you would rather do your own thing, the required parts of the US system can feel like nagging or micromanaging.

There really is no easier version; doctoral programs are hard work and quite a lot of commitment. It comes down to what academic culture you prefer and which advisors, supervisors, or departments are going to be the best for what you want to work on and how you work. The best advice I can give you is that you need to know how you do your best work; self-knowledge is one of the best things you can have in graduate school.

[dxmedstudent]

Oh I see, so we're back to demonising public sector workers. How predictable and boring.

The name changed, to bring it in line with terminology in other Western countries, Mr Clark. And because most Junior doctors, well, aren't junior anything - they've got an MBBS/MCHB/MD/equivalent at minimum, usually with a bachelor's or master's on top. Frequently, by the time they are a senior registrar they have a PhD under their belt. They are working adults in their late 20s and beyond - often into their late 30s or even 40s before they become a consultant. So, it's pretty infantilising and quite silly that the 'Junior' moniker hung around for as long as it did. Do we have junior anything else? There are no official "junior Lawyers". You don't get called to be a "junior councillor" or a "junior MP". Even new teachers aren't "junior teachers".

That's like suggesting that Mr Clark should be called a junior journalist because he's not head editor, or whatever a big cheese role would be in his current line of work. I mean, he probably doesn't even have a qualification IN journalism. Just a regular journalist? Sounds very junior to me.

What Resident Doctors did that nurses didn't do, as he's grudgingly acknowledged - was strike, consistently and for longer, and accept a different pay deal. That's it. We're on completely different pay scales that the government chose to offer different terms after industrial action in the past couple of years.

So if it's ANYONE'S fault that nurses may get a smaller pay rise, it's the government for CHOOSING not to match the deal they gave to doctors. Nobody else MAKES the government underpay a profession. They choose to ignore independent pay recommendations - whilst giving themselves pay rises consistently. It's NOT a bad thing that the government is getting called out on decades of below inflation pay rises for public sector staff.

He is right that nursing unions have let nurses down in recent years and SHOULD be paying attention to what the BMA did, and will do in the future. Like most doctors, I'm all for nurses striking and for them being paid more. I think nurses are definitely underpaid for the time and skill they put in - as I think is true for most public sector workers TBH.

I do think that his gender angle is false equivalency, (or at least, over simplified) though - at least when you're comparing completely different jobs. Medicine and nursing are both now dominated by women - and it's not as clear cut as GP = woman and hospital doctor = man. And whilst I've got a lot to say about the fact that we apportion a lot less funding to preventative care in the community - which is actually the bulk of care people need and receive, and whether maybe we should be looking into whether we're paying hospital doctors unequally between specialties in ways that impacts women unfairly - that's a different argument for a different day. I'd also like to add that if medicine wasn't as female- heavy, it'd probably be garnering more respect from politicians and journalists, and the public, today.

The point is that in this case, regardless of gender, nursing and medicine are different jobs that require different levels of financial investment along the pathway.

Given doctors spend longer at university and aren't paid as they train (unlike nursing students who get a salary for part of their training IIRC) and get to start earning considerably later, and have multiple thousand pound postgraduate exams that they have to finance themselves, as well as being shunted around different hospitals, towns and even parts of the country for their training. We're *different professions* that go through different training that costs a different amount to finish. Full time is considered a different number of hours and we work with different shift patterns. We take on different amounts of legal responsibility for clinical decision making. It'd be strange if we WERE paid exactly the same, on the same pay scale because the buy in costs are very different for both professions. If my degree and compulsory qualifications cost many thousands more than someone else's, and our responsibilities and hours are different, why would we be paid exactly the same? I'm not even arguing that nurses should be paid less - I'm sure there are plenty of situations in which a senior nurse does (and should) justifiably earn more than a doctor they work with - training, experience, skill etc should be rewarded. Hell, there are senior nurses out there in the top few bands who earn considerably than I do as a fully qualified GP - and good on them! But simply that it's normal for different roles to have different pay scales.

We shouldn't be pitting ourselves against each other - both should be paid adequately for our labour so that we can live comfortably. Nobody working a highly skilled, highly trained job with long hours and a ton of responsibility, especially in life and death situations, should be struggling to repay their training or to make ends meet.

I hope the nurses and junior doctors both give the government hell if it chooses not to pay them fairly when it next reviews their pay.

(Screenshots borrowed from Reddit because I'm not paying to read some hack insult us or nurses thanks)

[whyamiherewhosummonedme]

Hi hi! I know this is a little weird so feel free to ignore it, but I saw your post about the bacteriophage you characterized and isolated (and then swallowed). I'm doing phage research rn in my undergrad lab and I'm applying to MS/PhD programs in microbiology and immunology. I have no clue what I'm doing, do you have any advice as a (presumably) grad student?

You're probably in a similar lab to what I worked in at the time! I was an undergrad at the time. I will say, however, I am not in fact a grad student yet - I haven't followed the standard "four years in college then go to grad school" pathway in life like a whole lot of people. I had a couple years' gap in my schooling, though if all goes well I should finally get my Actual Degree in the near future.

Point is, sorry buddy I cannot help you, we're in the same boat here of suffering. Best advice I got that I've been going with is NETWORKING. Unfortunately it's really fucking important o7

[eretzyisrael]

By Diana Bletter

In a world first, researchers at the Hebrew University have discovered a distinct cellular pathway in the brain that indicates markers for future onset of Alzheimer’s disease, some 20 years before symptoms would be exhibited. This early detection could eventually lead to a treatment to prevent the degenerative disease.

“The study shows that Alzheimer’s disease is not just a form of accelerated aging but follows a different cellular path,” said Prof. Naomi Habib, and PhD students Anael Cain and Gilad Green of Hebrew University, who led the team of researchers at Columbia, Harvard University, and Rush Medical Center in Chicago.

Now that research has found the “molecular markers,” she said, “we can predict if an individual is on the cellular path to healthier aging, or a path to Alzheimer’s.”The video player is currently playing an ad.

This discovery will help lead toward appropriate treatments.

“We now believe we know what’s driving the disease, but we need to prove that changing the response would reverse that,” she said.

Using a data set from the prefrontal cortex of 437 aging brains, the researchers mapped 1.65 million brain cells and showed that these cellular changes — that start at least 20 years before the first signs of dementia — determine the fate of the aging brain and the progression of Alzheimer’s Disease.

The study was published last month in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature.