Christina Szalinski

Christina Szalinski

Christina is a science writer for the American Society for Cell Biology. She earned her Ph.D. in Cell Biology and Molecular Physiology at the University of Pittsburgh.

Modeling membranes, nano-magnets to control cell activity, and a gain-of-function protein behind a severe progressive brainstem disorder were hot topics at the 2013 ASCB Annual Meeting in New Orleans, December 14-18. This year, ASCB continued the tradition of weaving two scientific threads—biophysics and medicine—through many of the 254 science presentations.

Contending that no enemy could have devised a system so effective at destroying U.S. science and technology competitiveness as the policies pursued by Congress and state legislatures in "disinvesting" in education and innovation, a former president of Lockheed Martin and longtime presidential science advisor Norman Augustine warned that the U.S. economic engine was in decline in a recent TEDx talk.

Mathieu Coppey imagines using tiny magnets to move cells within living organisms. Coppey, a researcher at the Institut Curie in Paris, isn't envisioning a modern day version of "magnet therapy" touted a century ago by quack medical practitioners. Instead Coppey is using nanoparticle-size magnets to manipulate processes in cells.

Aside from Google Hangouts and Skype, it was the first time I'd been on video since my friend caught me singing to Spice Girls several years ago. I'd picked a high pressure venue for my return to video—the ASCB Annual Meeting in New Orleans. I was scheduled to give a short talk on Monday about scientists and social media. On Sunday though, I found myself in a small room in the convention center for a previously unscheduled coaching session on video with Susan Tomai, founder of Oratorio, a DC-based company offering media and presentation training.

Thursday, 19 December 2013 11:13

ASCB 2013 Twitter Highlights

Here's what happened at the 2013 ASCB Annual Meeting as told by Twitter users:
Wednesday, 18 December 2013 13:58

Twitter Reactions to ASCB 2013

Here's what people said on Twitter about the 2013 ASCB meeting in New Orleans:

Is there life after graduate school? For doctoral students and postdocs who've been wondering what their future lab life could be like outside academia, say in the biotech industry, here's a chance to get a taste and some intensive training in a free-to-the-student 12-day MBA-style, case-based course. ASCB and the Keck Graduate Institute (KGI), with generous funding from EMD Millipore, have teamed up to offer "Managing Science in the Biotech Industry: An Intensive Course for Students and Postdocs" to 40 postdocs and graduate ASCB members this June in Claremont, CA.

Elaine Fuchs grew up surrounded by scientists. Her father and aunt were scientists at Argonne National Laboratories, and later her older sister became a neuroscientist. So Fuchs has followed in the family footsteps. Today she is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, a professor at the Rockefeller University, and a widely recognized pioneer in adult stem cell research. She is also a former ASCB President. As an ASCB stalwart and a stem cell pathfinder, Fuchs was drafted to serve on the ASCB Stem Cell Task Force last spring and helped write the preliminary report, which was presented for public comment last month.

Tina Han, postdoctoral fellow at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), found out that she'd just won $5,000 on Facebook. It wasn't a holiday giveaway or a scam. It was a missed voice mail from ASCB and a friend's quick Facebook message that Han was the winner of ASCB's $5,000 Kaluza Prize supported by Beckman Coulter for outstanding research as a graduate student.

Tuesday, 26 November 2013 00:00

What is Significant? Reevaluating the P-Value

You finished all your replicates, your data are entered into your favorite statistical software, and you've got your fingers crossed that the test reveals a P-value of less than 0.05. It reads 0.039 and you breathe a sigh of relief. Without that P-value, you would have been stuck with your null hypothesis—that terrible possibility that your observed effect was meaningless. Instead, with the P-value on your side, you're finally ready to publish a significant observation. That is, unless you show it to Valen Johnson, a statistics professor at Texas A&M University, who has just published an analysis in PNAS1 that indicates your data are not so convincing.

Page 4 of 7