Study+guide+4

Q3 Where do scientists get their ideas from. There are many ways scientists can get their ideas from. Most of the university list honour's projects in their department in which the student may choose to base their research on. Once the project is taken up, other questions may arise while doing the experiment which needs answering and further research can be done based on those "other questions". Sometimes even the well known solution for a common problem can be used as a basis of research. For example, it was a common knowledge that stomach ulcers were caused by stress. However research by Barry Marshall concluded that the ulcers are actually caused by helicobacteria and had nothing to do with stress and can therefore be treated by antibiotics. Other ideas can be formed while reading scientific literature, attending conference, seminar or simply a mind that wonders. "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries and its not Eureka! but rather, "hmmm.... that's funny...." Yong.

Scientists can often get ideas from undertaking day to day tasks. For example, the scientist I interviewed is a neuropsychologist who also does clinical work. She found that tests that she was using just didn't seem to do what was needed. This lead to research into developing and then testing a new testing tool. Research ideas also come from contact with other colleagues eg at work or conferences. Discussions about common problems can lead to formulating new ideas to test. And generally from things we have general everyday contact with - scientists are curious people.

As for things that would be good to study, I think that we have so much to learn about the human brain, how it works and what bits do what. I feel that there is heaps to study here! Laurinda

DMc A lot ideas come from observing nature and the natural world around. One of my favourite says "Study nature - not books". From a harvard professor in the 1800's - Louis Aggaziz.

I would like to research rising acidity levels in the oceans - at what point will it have a catastrophic effect, will any marine ecosystems (such as hydrothermal vents) be able to survive and whether rising sea levels might buffer the increase? Sarah

Q4 How should lab log books be kept? Recording data in the log books is of high importance for the research scientist to keep accurate track of the work being performed and results being obtained. Moreover it gives the scientist authorship and ownership over the work being performed and the significant findings of the research. The general rule regarding the laboratory log book is that they should be kept in the research laboratory for atleast a period of 5 years after publication of the work. It is also recommended that the scientist keep a copy for in their personal possession as a back up documentation. In the log book the scientist is to write the procedures carried out or any changes to the standard protocol. it should also contain all the calculations performed. The results are to be updated regularly and any observations and findings should be recorded. d.Adnan shihab What happens to space left blank? Does anyone have to sign? What about dates - how would we know that a finding was really made on a particular date? Mary

DMc Lab log books should be signed and dated and they can be used as evidence in a Court. I'm not sure about Monash but A/P John Sherwood at Deakin was fastidious about logs.

Karen L. How relevant is the concept of the lab log book in the future? In my experience, particularly recently, there is a move to use laptops in the lab instead. I have no idea of the legal implications and admissibility of electronic files in court (how do you sign an electronic document?). If the laptop is connected to a network then most work places would have some sort of data backup system but if it's not and the laptop dies (as they seem to be prone to doing) the data may be lost. ML: interesting point - what field was this? Karen L -Mining R&D. The use of laptops in the lab seems to be a case of personal preference and I'm not aware of any policy regarding data backup. The best aspect of using a laptop in the lab is that in some cases data can be transferred directly to the laptop which negates the need for manual entry. I use a lab log book but in the 18 years of working in that industry, have only had it checked once (for dates). The idea of signing or noting blank spaces was, until I read the study guide, totally foreign to me. I assume that this is not the norm.

Coming from a forensic science background (although not a scientist) I can say that at our lab we didn't have log books just casework notes that were kept in a case file so that the information could be easily accessed. But our notes did conform to most of the log book procedures - each page numbered and signed, batches and dates of presumptive tests recorded, all evidence photographed and cross referenced with case numbers, each page checked and signed by someone else, all entries written in ink - including diagrams and maps, any method used named and version recorded. We were having to comply with court and scientific policies and I believe that was achieved, the legitimacy of notes have never really been questioned, it always came back to the method or continuity of evidence. At court notes recorded on a computer will be accepted if it can be proved that they have been written when it is alleged they have been written. If I was using a pc I would save a copy in an encryped and non-editable form like a read-only pdf that records a lot of information in visible metada - like the date of creation, the author and the organisation etc. Word only records each time something is edited not what was edited. Sarah

Q5 Describe Barry Marshall's discovery. Why was it hard for medical scientists to accept? Barry Marshall, with his colleague Dr Robin Warren, discovered the bacteriua Helicobacter pylori. This bacteria was noticed in the stomach at a time when it was believed that no bacteria existed in the stomach. They noticed a connection between the bacteria and the presence of ulcers.The scientists persisted in their belief against the tide of medical opinion which said that duodenal ulcers were caused by stress. Anecdotally it is said that one of the scientists infected himself with the bacteria to produce ulcers so that he could be cured with antibiotics. There was criticism of this method at the time. The medical fraternity held beliefs regarding the cause of ulcers that were so entrenched that it was very difficult to convince them of the finding.

I rather like the story about taking the cocktail of bugs. It resonates because my mother who is also a scientist, was working on extracting some drug compound from plants to replace imported sources during the war (II ). When she finally found crystals that she thought were the right thing what did she do? Dissolved a few and injected herself. She might have been less gung-ho a year or so later after my aunt, another scientist, missed the rat and accidentally injected herself scrub typhus. She died. Mary

DMc There was also a lot of money around from the drug companies who had a vested interest in the status quo. It never ceases to amaze me that in a profession where having an open and enquiring mind is essential, almost mandatory, that so many paradigm shifts through the history of science have been vehemently opposed by the "incumbents".