Welcome to Canada

As far a signs on a wall go, this one is my absolute favourite:

I’ve seen it a good few times. Right below the wheelchairs – as you ‘de-escalate’ to Canadian customs. I snapped that shot four weeks ago when Kate and I landed in Toronto – after nearly two years overseas.

Before leaving Brisbane I told a cab driver about my upcoming trip home. He was unimpressed. He said: ‘My niece is getting married in the UK next month, I haven’t seen her since she was four years old. And I can’t afford to go to this wedding either. Two years is nothing!’. Fair enough – Australia is a fair few dollars away, and we are lucky to be able to afford the trip. And maybe two years is not that long - but I did really miss home. I had spent two Christmas holiday’s ‘family-less’. It was time to see my brothers, my parents, the boys. And there’s another thing – and this will sound stupid - I have been craving Taco Bell, Tim Horton’s, Harvey’s, Wendy’s, and East Side Mario’s for many months - especially Taco Bell. I have never been accused of overly healthy eating. Incidentally I put on about ten pounds in four weeks in Canada.

I could write about our trip for days. But I won’t. Let me just say that we saw many of our friends and we had a great time. It seems like in the two years since I’ve been gone – most of my friends and family have been ‘winning’ in the game of life. We saw a lot of smiles. Our friends are moving up in the work world, getting married, starting families. I suppose that’s what happens in your late-twenties, early-thirties. Since I left, my parents have also changed. They have moved to their own little country paradise and they’re smiling a lot more. Here: let me just share a few pictures.

First, here's my little lady. Thrillied to be back in Canadia.

The Huckstables.

Michel, Bryan, Andy on Rice Lake.

A beersby tournament. Of course.

Marek, with the t-shirt of the month.

Officer Merril, me, and a small wolf-pack.

The lovely Lowe sisters.

Matt and Ziggy. My dad doesn't look as comfortable on a horse as he does on a volleyball court, but he'll get there.

Katrina and Greg.

Andy and Matty. We all got dolled up for a good friend's wedding.

My mom has gone completely 'country' since I left. Why not.

There are many more... but I have to draw the line somewhere. Let me leave you with a Sauble Beach sunset over Lake Huron. For all the thousands of miles of beautiful beaches in sunny Australia, very few Aussies get to see a sun setting over the water. It’s an east-coast country. And if you want to have a beer and enjoy the sunrise – well then you’re drinking at 5 am :)

No doubt that Canada was great to visit but I'm happily back now. Brisbane is home for me now - Kate and I will likely be here another year or so – and it’s good to be back. Taco Bell or not – this place relaxes me.

At the Virgin-Australia check-in counter at LAX – the ‘airline guy’ asked me for my country of residence. I said: “Brisbane, Australia” and the young Aussie girl behind him who was heaving luggage onto a conveyer belt looked up at me and shouted “Queenslander!!!” - and as soon as I heard her accent, I felt a sudden wave of comfort come over me. There’s something about the people in this state. It has to be the heat. It's as if they understand that life is not supposed to be difficult. They laugh a bit more. They have a bit more fun. I’m pretty sure I will be drawn to this place long after we leave.

brain chemistry

Have you ever wondered why the job of 'mercenary' exists?  A private soldier?  What would possess someone to travel the world in search of wars to fight?  Should they not prefer to be unemployed?

I'm fairly sure an addiction to danger is biochemically similar to a heroin addiction.  Are you surprised by that?  Excitement causes the release of hormones and neurotransmitters that produce a sweet, sweet chemical 'high' in our simple little brains.  There's nothing you or I can do to stop it. But can we actually become truly 'addicted' to your own brain-chemicals?  I don't see why not. These neurotransmitters are not too structurally different from opiates like heroin.  Incidentally, excercise releases plenty brain-chemicals as well.  Many people become 'addicted' to excercise. What happens when such a person stops?  Do they suffer withdrawal symptons?  Perhaps deep depression.  I think they can.  I've just read a book called 'Warrior Brothers' about an Australian SAS soldier  - turned private-security-contractor - turned civilian-husband-father-writer who understands very well that he should be happy in his current role but just can't seem shake that deep desire to be shot at by someone once again.  

I can not relate to any such ummm... danger-phelia.  I certainly don't have any desire to sky-dive or rock-climb like my younger brothers do.  I don't like heights, I don't watch horror movies, and I have no problem driving slow these days. Certainly, some people are more prone to addiction than others. And naturally these differences are both nurtured and 'natured'.  But I could probably also argue that every one of us is an addict to some degree?  I know that I have latched on to the occasional TV series, musician, or hobby like it's crack.  I wonder what is happening in my brain when an episode of LOST ends and I am powerless against pressing play on the next one?  But these are not real addictions are they?  They are temporary and I don't miss them when they're done.  On the other hand, I have been 'grounded' from the sport of volleyball for three months now after hurting my back, and I think you could question whether I have been acting like the same'ol chipper Jake that plays that silly game regularly.  Maybe this could indeed be called 'withdrawal'.  I don't know.  It certainly feels like there's something missing.  Wouldn't it be nice to be addicted to work? :) I'm sure some people are.  I guess it depends largely on the nature of your job.  And I suppose that brings me right back to... 'mercenary'.

Adrenaline addiction must be why the job of 'mercenary' exists.  I feel bad for this author an anyone else who puts themselves in harms way for the wrong reasons.  He tells some great stories.  He has returned from East-Timor, Afghanistan and Iraq unscathed despite the best efforts of armed rivals; a skilled and wise soldier but also a benefactor of no trivial amount of luck.  He writes about some of his close friends who were equally skilled but not as lucky.  And now the man is in his late thirties, safe at home with wife and three kids, studying and writing, and he can't seem to shake a strong urge to go back to Iraq.  I am sad for him.   He should be able to let it go.   Some of my laboratory chemistry can be a bit hazardous but it is surely nothing compared the potential outcomes of some of our 'brain chemistry'.

Enough ranting.  See ya.

Wisdom from Polska

I like little proverbs. Simple pearls of wisdom. Four words will do.  Happy wife, happy life.  Measure twice, cut once.  Better late than never.  Better safe than sorry.  Waste not, want not.  No pain, no gain. Early birds catch worms.  Loose lips sink ships. 

But for some of the real gems you have to allow for a few more words... like Mr. Gump's: life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get.  Or a dull pencil beats a sharp memory.  I read a funny one today: If in doubt, go left.  Sometimes, a couple of proverbs can leave a guy a bit confused: does the early bird really catch the worm or do good things come to those who wait?  And do many hands make light work or do too many cooks spoil the broth. I guess it depends on who the hands belong to. Come to think of it, many proverbs seem to be food-issue warnings: don't count your chickens before they hatch, put your eggs in one basket, bite the hand that feeds you, or bite off more than you can chew, cry over spilled milk, or judge a cookbook by its cover ;)

Anyway, the reason I bring all of this up is that the Polish language has some great little proverbs. Strangely enough, I stumbled on some of these online today and now I'd like to share a few with you.  

A couple of them send me right back to my young'in days. 

Here's a standard one from my dad: "Śpiesz się powoli" which translates literally into 'hurry slowly' but more specifically meant 'slow the heck down you crazy child or you'll hurt yourself'.  

And my mother would sometimes toss out "Złej baletnicy przeszkadza rąbek u spódnicy" which translates to 'A poor ballerina is bothered by the hem of her skirt' and essentially means 'quit yer bitchin!'.

Here are some more:

"Gdy pies je, to nie szczeka, bo mu miska ucieka"  An eating dog doesn't bark or his food will run away.  In other words: don't talk with your mouth full.  "Gość w dom - Bóg w dom"  Guest in the house, God in the House.  From my experience, this is a good description of Polish hospitality.  "Kto rano wstaje, temu Pan Bóg daje"  Who wakes up early gets stuff from God.  A Polish early bird, being VERY catholic, would naturally expect a gift form God to be much better than just 'a worm'.  "Jak sobie pościelisz, tak się wyśpisz"  The bed you make is the one you'll sleep in... as in ye reap what ye sow.  "Lepszy wróbel w garści niż gołąb na dachu" I like this one: A sparrow in your hand is better than a pigeon on the roof.  "Myszy harcują, gdy kota nie czują" When the cat's away, the mice will play. "Nie chwal dnia przed zachodem słońca" Don't praise the day before the sun has set... cuz it might yet suck!  "Paluszek i główka to szkolna wymówka" A sore finger and a headache are standard excuses for not going to school.  Polish people are big on education.  I think it's because the communist culture that my parents grew up in rewarded very few things - but education was one of them.  Here's another: "Ucz się ucz, bo nauka to do potęgi klucz." Learn, learn, because education is the key to greatness.  "Piękna miska jeść nie daje."  A pretty bowl won't feed you :)  "Wolnoć Tomku w swoim domku" Tom is allowed to do whatever he wants in his own house.  "Dobrego nawet karczma nie zepsuje, a zlego nawet kosciol nie uratuje."  A good man won't be spoiled by a tavern, but not even a church can save an evil man. And that's good, because I like a good tavern :)

Here I am with a friend named Andreas having a couple of beers in one of the coolest tavern's that I will ever be in.  It was called 'The Brazen Head'.  Peace.

family, chemistry, skype :)

I was asked by my mother-in-law during an Easter skype session today to describe my research in 'ten words' to an assembled family audience in front of her computer in Grimsby, Ontario. I've answered similar questions before. I think a reasonable answer goes something like this:

1. We
2. make
3. new
4. molecules
5. that
6. might
7. become
8. medicines
9. for
10. Cancer

There's not much point in describing 'how' we make these molecules unless you have some time because the process is complicated. I sometimes say it's: 'kinda like cooking' or 'mix and stirr' and these statements are essentially the truth. Some chemists favour the non-specific term: 'standard synthetic methods' but I consider that phrase about as useful as: "blahblah blahblahblah blahblah".

But Sandy's question sounded a bit too good to be true. Could a room full non-scientists watching me on their computer from Canadia actually be interested in the specifics of my research work? Even in just ten words? Nope :) I started my careful answer and was interrupted with a barrage of laughter when Kate's uncle Ronny cut me off after just three (of ten) words with:

"Okay, we've heard enough Jake!"

I have always appreciated a qood quick joke, no matter if I'm the butt of it. I certainly liked this one. My wife's family hails form the very quickest of the quick-witted parts of Great Britain. They constantly laugh at themselves and each other and they don't hesitate for a second to include other victims. I appreciate the humour. I can't even pretend that my 'organic chemistry research' is the least bit interesting to the average person when compared with... lets say Indiana Jones (Raider's of the Lost Ark) or a playoff game in ANY sport. Maybe even a regular season game.

Nonetheless, I like what I do more and more as I get older. That has to be a good sign. I think I would prefer to read a good synthetic chemistry journal article than re-watch Raiders of the Lost Ark.

You might be glad to hear that I think that most of the responsibility for the fact that you might find organic chemistry incomprehensible and boring lies not with you but with me. Almost any topic can be simplified and appreciated even if it is not completely understood. But in this century it is we 'scientists' who have been responsible for allowing ourselves to be branded as 'incomprehensible and boring' or even 'mad'. I think every researcher has an enormous responsibility to communicate effectively; and not just to his fellow academics. We should make an effort to simplify and teach anyone who wants to learn without putting them to sleep.

So.... I make new molecules that might become medicines for cancer. It's kinda like cooking. If you want to know more, I can certainly try in person.

I've been working on a book that explains some of the details without much confusion or sedation... but it's no easy task and I'm pretty busy.

For now, here I am with my lovely assistant at a recent costume party ;)

Our Scary New Housemate

A few weeks ago, on a Sunday afternoon, Kate ran into the house and looked at me, in breathless silence, with a horror in her eyes that I had yet to see in all the years I've known her. She was paralyzed with fear. My wife had been gardening beside our house, found a large hole in the ground, and then suddenly she had locked eyes with a monster. "Jake, there's a huge snake living under our house!!" She said after a moment, barely able to get the words out.

Although snakes in Australia are notoriously deadly, Kate and I live in the middle of a big and busy city and have been here for almost two years without meeting anyone who has encountered a poisonous snake. So, assuming that I would probably find a carpet-python (potentially dangerous to our cat but not likely to try and swallow my wife) I went outside, carefully, to have a look. Here is a picture (taken later :) of the hole that Kate had found.

As I circled this hole in our garden (from a good distance) I saw the monster's head poking out of the darkness. It was huge! And it was looking at me too. And it was no python.

I've found a picture on the web of what I saw:


I am far from knowledgeable in the field, but even I can tell you that a python looks a lot more like this:

So here's some culture: In Australia, all snakes are protected species and they are relocated, and not killed, whenever they pose a risk to people. Finding a snake on your property is usually followed by a call to a licensed snake catcher for help. I'm not sure how I knew this. I don't remember anyone ever telling me. I may have seen a licenced catcher once on television on a show called Bondi Beach (the reality TV version of Baywatch - minus the implants). As you might imagine, I jumped online and quickly found a number for the 24/7 mobile phone of the licenced snake catcher assigned to our suburb, a man named Geoff.

I called him and opened with: "Hi... ummm. I don't know how this works, I'm Canadian"
And he responded by saying: "Have you seen a doctor about that?"
It was plain to me that Geoff and I would get along so I relayed the two main facts. Hole in my garden, monster looking at me from inside at which point Geoff promptly stated: "It's probably a blue-tongue mate! Does it have a pointy nose?"
It did, as a matter of fact. But what the heck was a 'blue-tongue'? Well thankfully, a blue-tongue is neither poisonous, nor is it a snake. It is a harmless lizard that's all scare and no substance. Apparently, they also make a horrific noise when threatened. I asked Geoff if our cat was in any danger.

"Nope," he replied, "Your cat would probably win that fight. But have a look at my website under 'identify snakes' to make absolutely sure it's not a brown snake or a red-bellied black snake. Those would kill your cat in one bite." Then he added... "They could kill you in one bite too mate."

Thanks for that last comment Geoff, but I could have done without it. I looked carefully at the man's fantastic website[

www.snakecatcher.com] and found lots of pictures of the relevant snakes and of the heroic snake catcher himself. I got that 'good guy' feeling as I spoke to him.

I'm going to finish with some educational pictures. First, these two you definitely don't want to find in your garden. The extremely venemous red-bellied black snake and eastern brown snake.

And this is a picture of what our harmless little friend probably looks like. (We have yet to see him out of his hole).So... to proudly summarize: Kate and I now have a blue-tongue lizard living under our house. How cool is that!

And for the record: I used Google images to find all of these pictures and I'm using them without permission. But you're not paying to read this so I don't think it matters much :) Cheers

Why Evolution is True

The following argument is one that I imagine biologists must be very tired of making. I truly hope that I might see a day when it will no longer be necessary to say the following:

How difficult is it to convincingly present the evidence for biological evolution, and to display the failure of the "intelligent design" case in comparison? Piece of cake. Evidence exists from fossils, biogeography, and embryology. We have seen new species formed by natural selection both in the fossil record and in real time. We can see vestigial structures such as the human appendix, poor organization, and dead genes. If there were a designer, this might be considered evidence for gross incompetence.

Evolutionary theory makes testable predictions. For example, biologists can predict where, in place and period, fossils will be found. Or they can confidently make very specific claims such as: if an animal species has brightly coloured males and drab females, it will have a polygonous mating system.

Furthermore, DNA sequencing supports the evolutionary relationships of species originally deduced from EVERY fossil that we have found. Every DNA molecule that we sequence, every organ system that we dissect supports the idea that species evolved from common ancestors. And what we don’t find also provides support. We don't find mammals in Precambrian rocks, humans in the same layers as dinosaurs, or any other fossils out of evolutionary order.

We can show that the mechanism of adaptation is indeed sufficient for the emergence of complexity from simpler elements. For example, in the case of eyes, starting with the light-sensitive pigments seen in flatworms and going through the increasingly more sophisticated versions of precursor eyes respectively in limpets, the chambered nautilus, ragworms, abalones, and so upward - we can show show how every stage of the process confers some evolutionary advantage in the way of finding food, avoiding predators, and/or reproduction. The process required huge lengths of time and the billions of failures, but it did happen.

Religious efforts to derail biological enquiry waste time and energy. How credible are religious claims? How much influence should religious viewpoints have in the public square? What should be the relation between religion and science? These are all issues on which we just can't seem to agree.

Can religion and science not speak different kinds of truth? Creationists (as "intelligent design" theorists) squarely treat religion and science as direct competitors for the truth. They claim that "irreducibly complex" natural phenomena can only be explained by invoking a designer. “We don't understand this so let's say God did it.” If one cannot see how some complex thing came to be, it is not better to keep looking for the explanation, or even to accept the one does not know the answer, than to take the quick-fix of claiming that God did it?

Science starts with no prejudices, but is open and self-critical. It is the enterprise that seeks to understand and is always stands ready to revise itself in the face of contrary evidence. It is a good process. And it does not try to prove that there is no God. Science and atheism are not mutually inclusive.

Understanding technical science, especially the mathematics of it, is difficult. But can any responsible person claim complete ignorance about what many consider humanity's greatest achievement? Are there any good excuses for a lack of fundamental understanding physics, cosmology or biology with countless good books on the shelves? Nope. And might I suggest: "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry Coyne.

(I must give credit for this post to A.C. Grayling at Barnes and Noble dot com who reviewed Jerry Coyne's book. I have rearranged and simplified Mr. Grayling's words at my discretion but most of them are still very much his.)

Conspiracy Theories

I have known a wide variety of people through sport. On Saturday night I spoke to a volleyballer who happens to have a gift for wise business decisions. Many people 'buy & sell' for a living but I am quite ignorant on such topics.

I am a scientist and a skeptic. After a few drinks, my friend shared a 'conspiracy theory' which was new to me. I'm all for freedom of speech and I like hearing a tale that I can disprove as much as one that can be proven. In essence, I was told that national banks and federal reserves in many democratic countries have long acted in the best interest not of their citizens but rather a small group of international bankers who have managed to 'legalize' a white-collar crime of global proportions. Naturally, these bankers belong to families with obscene wealth and power whose sole goal is to further increase their wealth at the expense of the masses. You might guess that these bankers also control the media, buy politicians, orchestrate wars, and use their tremendous influence over the boom and bust of the business cycle for personal gain. Most significantly, they cripple countries with interest payments on 'national debt'. Presumably these individuals, unlike Bill Gates, are also able to stay off of the 'world's richest' lists.

The world is full of grand conspiracies: the CIA killed JFK; the moon landing was fake; aliens visit; global warming is a hoax; Diana was murdered, and 9-11 was orchestrated by the US; and I'll leave out the very-blatantly religious ones (like 'the evolution hoax').

Each one of these claims has one big thing in common. It requires the silent collusion of many 'powerful and evil people'. My first instinct is always disbelief because I feel intuitively that such secrets are too hard to keep. One 'carefully blown whistle' would sort things out immediately. Furthermore, even though we've all heard that power corrupts and recent history has demonstrated some great villains, I do believe that most people are 'good people'. Call me naive.

But far as conspiracies go this 'evil international bankers' one is a bit unusual. On Sunday, I had a look at the web. The Internet is fantastic at quickly at disproving conspiracy theories, but details are scarce in this case. Support for it is also hard to find. It saddens me to say that I found the obvious few websites that spin a similar but strongly anti-Semitic version that I refuse to dignify with attention because it preaches hate and violence against innocent people. I did find one exceptionally-long low-budget documentary film from a few years ago that proposes this same theory without any 'hate' talk and supports it with historical quotes by famous people (which may or may not be real). The documentary does predict the current stock crash but I suspect that was inevitable sooner or later.

After some research and thought, I remain skeptical and unconvinced but I am also aware that although I have grown up in a very peaceful and stable world, it is far from perfect. I am not ignorant of the fact that just sixty years ago 'everyone' was at war. 

One thing is for sure: the global economy is ridiculously complicated.  The possibility that some wealthy people might be 'cheating' seems plausible enough.  But who really knows?  I'd like to hope that the American government is regaining control of their financial mess.  If you believe the golden rule: "Whoever has the gold, makes the rules" then maybe you should have bought some 'gold' last year because everything else is just paper. As I understand it, most economists agree that the current global financial system is fundamentally flawed. Growth is unsustainable. Inflation can't go on forever. Further from obvious is an alternative, or a solution. My blog-post-inspiring-friend predicts that the stock market (although it may improve in the next few months) is still 'years from hitting bottom' and he also speculates that you and I are likely destined to live through a complete global financial collapse accompanied by rioting and war. I sure hope he's wrong. And so does he.

Stewart and Colbert

I love what Jon Steward and Steven Colbert do for us. Brilliant - both of them. Especially Colbert, with his entire show 'in red-state character'. The guy is an absolute genius. So much of American news and politics seems to be tailor made for comedy. When I get time to watch them, usually in long bunches online, Steward and Colbert never fail to impress. The shows are funny - VERY funny - but also a bit sad. Blunt sarcasm is probably the best way to present some of the ridiculous realities of the world around us. America is a particularly strange beast. The whole world has its problems but the US has such vast quantities of both good and bad qualities - sense and nonsense – that the contrast is hard to fathom. When these comedians show it to us, and they do it well, I suppose it is inevitably both sad and funny. Full episodes commercial free are streamed online. I am a huge fan.

So here’s the interesting bit: since March 4'th, Jon Stewart has attacked financial news network CNBC for their lack of responsible reporting of the stock market before the crash last year. He has essentially accused them of criminal behaviour. For the episode that aired on Thursday March 12'th, I think Steward should get a medal. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report both stream an archive of episodes online. I recomment you watch a few now and again if you need a laugh. But this one was special.

Prolapse

We volleyballers love our Advil but 'real' painkillers are new to me. After an injury to my back a few weeks ago I've been on a hefty cocktail of anti-inflammatories, muscle-relaxants, and 'real' painkillers. The type I could sell on the street to help pay off student debt.

I'm uncertain of the appropriate etiquette of sharing personal medical details on a blog but it's all new and interesting to me and it seems like a reasonable act in this case so here ya go: The source of my troubles was of course a volleyball tournament. But to the point - I recently witnessed a GP pick up of the phone and politely order an MRI of my lower back which was done at a specialized 'scanning' clinic just four hours later. Turns out the Aussies have a pretty functional health care system. I saw awesome pictures of my insides! The framework of my spine (and yours) is composed of bones and 'discs'. Bricks and mortar. Sadly a piece of mortar - one of my lowest disks - has attempted to escape. It chose rear exit through an angry 'doorman' called 'my spinal cord'. If anyone has experienced a sensation that the pros have referred to as 'severe sciatica' you will have some idea of the associated discomfort.

I write about this here for you partially because my wifey posted this picture on facebook and, although I am clearly smiling, some family and friends have expressed sympathy and concern accompanied by questions.

I am a fan of answers via this forum so your summary is as follows: I'm not in a wheelchair :) but have briefly used one a couple times in the past weeks. Not briefly enough to avoid that picture. The finest experts have prescribed the following treatment: a single injection of cortisone into one of my 'nerve roots' followed by the often applied optimistic-wait-and-see-strategy accompanied by physiotherapy. (At least they sound optimistic - but as I will note in a moment - doctors lie if they believe it is useful) I will not discuss any other treatment options today. I am now a day or so post-injection. The pain of which - brief but RIDICULOUS - I was so unprepared for that I still smile at the thought of the several doctors who could have, but presumably for my own good did not, warn me. The procedure seemed complicated - sliding me in and out of a big fancy CAT-scan machine repeatedly to make adjustments to the needle sticking into back. Needless (no pun intended) to say, I hope never to re-live the experience. On the bright side the cortisone has worked its magic and I already feel like a functioning human being again. Unfortunately I think it’ll be a long, long while before I feel like an athlete, even just an old one again. Still I can walk comfortably so I’ve gotta give some respect to modern medicine. Way to go... medicine!

I know I’m not the first 'tall dude' faced with recovery from a herniated disc. I've already played enough volleyball for two lifetimes. My life is not threatened - I do not feel sorry for myself and I do not want sympathy from anyone but my wife (and that's only becuase she brings me stuff like cups of tea if I say I can't move :). But if you have a positive rehab/physiotherapy story I'm more than interested. Cheers.

Working with the enemy

Most of us know what the word ‘chemotherapy’ means today: the use of drugs to treat cancer. A chemotherapeutic agent is a very much a 'no-nonsense' molecule. The killing of a cancerous tumour requires toxic chemicals. Essentially these are poisons. And as we also know, they cause considerable damage to non-cancerous parts of a human being. I once heard an expert in the field say the following: “A cancer drug is any drug that kills more tumors than it does people.” I suppose the margin need not be large to satisfy an terminally ill patient.

Thankfully, from my vantage point I can see just how many thousands of researchers worldwide are working every day to improve these medicines.

I have recently had the pleasure of collaborating with a biology group at the Garvin Research Institute in Sydney. This group focuses on pancreatic cancer. If you must develop cancer, this is the one that you do not want. Despite the wonders of modern medicine, pancreatic cancer is still very nearly a certain death sentence.

To the point: I have been pleasantly surprised by my experience of working with biologists. Generally, chemists and biologists behave like oil and water. There is some degree of contempt. Many chemists feel that we are smarter and harder working than biologists. They probably consider themselves cooler and more relevant. There is not much doubt that they often do smell better then us. With little common ground, we don't have much reason to be friendly. A biologists does not (and can not) do what I do and vice versa. More to the point: I don’t understand what they do. They work with living cells while I work dead substances.

But times seem to be changing. A lot of modern research programs are 'cross-disciplinary'. Sometimes we use fancy terms like 'on the interface' to describe this and get funding. In my field of synthetic chemistry, this is becoming quite common. The fact of the matter is: synthetic organic chemists like to make bioactive molecules. Molecules that have some effect on a living organism. The first significant questions such a chemist must ask are: what do I make and why? During my PhD studies, I was motivated to synthesize target compounds simply because they were ‘complex looking natural products’ and we wished to prove that they could be made synthetically in a lab. A 'chemist vs nature' contest. But today my purpose is quite different. I now make molecules because we think they might kill cancer cells in new or improved ways. Structural complexity is still welcome but it is no longer the point. For me, the biggest practical difference is that this research, unlike my previous work, requires the cooperation (and preferably friendship) of a biologist (or two).

So how does one approach a biologist? Well, to make a long story short: via email.

I'm glad to say that when my supervisor reaches out across the great chem-bio divide, he continually finds that the other side is much closer than we expect. So on with the reserach.