Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Science Hack Day SF 2015 - Amino Acid Dependence of alpha Helix Length

Last year at Science Hack Day SF I led and ardent band of marauders into battle in an attempt to create a simple method to sequence DNA. Though we accomplished some stuff it was alot of work! This year I just wanted to hangout and relax and code for 8 or 10 hours straight.


The project I decided to work on was the amino acid dependence of secondary structure lengths in proteins. Proteins as we all know and love, are little nanomachines. In order to better engineer and create proteins from scratch we need to understand how they have evolved and why. The smaller parts that make up proteins (i.e. alpha helices, beta sheets, &c.) are made up of specific amino acids with specific properties. I wanted to take that one step further as I have never seen a paper or heard much about the amino acid dependence based on the size of a secondary structure element. One could imagine that a smaller helix might have a propensity against certain amino acids that are less helical as opposed to a longer helix. 

Protein Model of Lysozyme, alpha helices are in teal,
beta sheets are in red, loops are in purple

I downloaded the amino acid sequence and secondary structure of each protein in the PDB(http://www.rcsb.org) and then wrote code(code is here) to parse and quantify the data. In the end I was a little dissapointed. It doesn't seem like many or any amino acids really have a dependence on secondary structure length.

Here is a graph of the ones that seem to change the most.

Alanine(A) might have some dependence and same with Proline(P) though I think Proline is an artifact(helices tend to end with prolines as a helix breaker, if this helix breaking residue is included in the count it can skew the percentages for shorter helices).

Anyways, want to look at beta sheets next and then maybe the protein size dependence of the amino acid dependence of secondary structure length. Or even secondary structure length dependence of protein size dependence.






Monday, October 5, 2015

And the Nobel Prize goes to a Biohacker

I heard something said by a collaborator, Vidhi Mehta, which moved me.
"Will the next Nobel Prize be given to a citizen scientist?"

I sat back and I imagined. What if this week a phone call was made to a Biohacker that I know, instead of the usual academic Scientist? Wouldn't that be something?

Thinking about my life and my career, I see how important this is to society and I want to be a part of that. I want to make Science available to everyone so they can contribute to the benefits of society.

This could be you but it probably won't be easy. It will probably take hours and years of dedication and work and perseverance but I think there is a chance that in the next 10 to 20 years, you can pull it off.

I think education is key. I always try and impress on the Ph.D. Scientists that I know how much they need to teach and lead and show others how to do Science. How they can give knowledge to change the world they live in.

One thing I have found by working at NASA is how little work a single person is capable of on their own. This is also sad because Nobel prizes are given to the Principal Investigator who didn't do the experiment and who might not even have come up with the experimental procedure. I guess the prize needs to goto someone but it seems the whole, limiting it to individuals, in the majority of cases is wrong. I think this is important because many Biohackers still work on projects in isolation in the majority of cases.

Biohackers need to start coming together and combining their powers. Maybe then the Nobel Prize will be within reach.



Wednesday, September 9, 2015

Is this Scientific paper on Genetic Encryption publishable?

The paper in question:
How to Protect your Genetic Assets Through Obfuscation and Encryption
In software based systems, obfuscation and encryption are techniques used to prevent reverse engineering and access to information. As society progresses towards using more Genetically Modified Organisms(GMO) and DNA sequencing becomes more inexpensive, a company’s genetic intellectual property can be reverse engineered and stolen by simply analyzing the DNA sequence. To prevent theft, techniques will need to be used that obfuscate and encrypt what changes are being made in the genome. This paper provides different methods that allow the safeguarding of years of research and development and millions or billions of dollars in monetary investments.
 
For the past few months I have been working on the fairly novel idea of genetic encryption. You can find a few sparse mentions of it on the internet but as we like to say in Science, to my knowledge this idea has never really been explored in depth.

I began by thinking in the context of how a company could protect a genetic asset(GMO) that is worth alot of money due to its genetic traits. I am usually on the other side, trying to break the protections but there needs to be something to break before one can break it. So I decided to try and build it.

I ended up writing a paper that runs through examples and ideas on how someone could institute Genetic Encryption and Obfuscation. Though I wouldn't consider the paper my finest work, it definitely has its merits, foremost because it is a prediction of our biological future.

Originally, my acknowledgments included:
"To everyone who is doing good Science for shit pay because someone tells you there is price for doing what you love. And to everyone who wants to fuck the system because it really needs it."

After consideration I took out the second  sentence about fucking the system because I thought maybe it was going too far. I was wrong.

I heard about bioRxiv and thought it would be a great place to submit the work as it is a free publishing server that promotes openness in Science. I knew my paper was more Biological theory and so might suffer some prejudices but I didn't know it would be this bad.  Usually these pre-print servers do not reject any papers unless they are ridiculous. My paper was rejected... The moderator said it was because the paper not experimentally based! I guess I understand that maybe bioRxiv only wants experimentally based papers but why?

Arggghh. Fuck the system, I put that line back in the paper.


Ok, well, maybe I can submit it to aRxiv another Scientific publishing server that focuses more on math and theory. I have submitted a single author paper there before and it was published without any issues. Genetic Encryption seems to fall under math and theory so it seems like a good fit. I submitted it to the Quantitative Genomics section(Genetics and Encryption seems to fit there) and thought nothing of it and then I received an email this morning that the paper was rejected.

The email:

The moderators determined that your submission was in need of significant review and revision before it would be considered publishable by a conventional journal.  Please note that arXiv moderators are not referees and provide no feedback nor detailed reviews with the removal of submissions.

WTF? What revision does the paper need? I am sure there are some small issues with it but significant revision? I guess it is partially my fault. I know some of the people in the Genomics pre-print community and they are pretty militant and dear I say stuck up assholes?

Where to next? I don't want to pay to have a Scientific paper published because that is the totally opposite point of Science but I want people to see this paper. I think it is interesting(maybe I am wrong) and I think it could spur some interesting innovations and discussions.

In the end what this all really tells me is just FUCK THE SYSTEM.

When someone can do serious Science but can't put it out there for people to see how is this system supposed to work?

Are we really doing Science anymore?

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Wildtype vs Mutant

 
 
I have been feeling a little angry lately because it seems like the ability for DIY Scientists to accomplish things is still difficult. This is noticeably seen through a lack of Scientific publications or data generated by us.

People in DIY Bio seem to be working towards something that doesn't seem possible because of the lack of resources, knowledge and tools.
Papers, plasmids and strains that would be dirt cheap if the whole system wasn't run by profiteering gluttons($65 for a plasmid, seriously addgene? $200 for a strain at atcc).
Academic scientists sit by and use the phrase "open science" as a motto of apathy. How long would publishers survive if scientists stopped citing and publishing in their journals? Or refused to pay publishing fees? And just posted data to their website instead? And DIYers remain with no access.

At The ODIN(http://the-odin.com), I have been trying to provide cheap prices and single researcher size quantities to DIY Scientists to allow them to do experiments. After lots of contemplation, I want to move away from my job as a Scientist at NASA because I think big things can happen in DIY just like what came of the computer hackers in the 90s. I want to help that stuff happen by creating more resources and tutorials for people.

This is where I need your help.

In the next few months at The ODIN, we have plans to release a Codex of plasmids and bacterial strains(yeast maybe?) for cheap. We want people to have the resources they need. Sign-Up at http://wildtypevsmutant.com and let me know what you are looking for or need.

We are also planning a crowdfunding campaign to take cutting edge genetic engineering tools like CRISPR and make them accessible physically, intellectually and financially. We might be looking for some beta-testers soon. Again, Sign-Up at http://wildtypevsmutant.com to keep updated. (Also, let me know what you think of the video)

I think that until genetic engineering arrives in many homes, what we do will just be scary and misunderstood. At The ODIN, we want to create a conversation around "Why do people think mutants are bad when they are here to save us?", i.e. Wildtype vs Mutant.

I appreciate all the support people have given The ODIN so far and I hope to continue to provide to the community through biting commentary and ad hoc Science.

Finally, to make DIY more successful get involved if you aren't already. Teach classes at your local hackerspace, if you can't, then write tutorials online(I would be glad to host them on The ODIN), mentor other DIYers or if you need a mentor contact me!

There is a little ways to go before DIYers can accomplish cutting edge Science so let's make this thing work, together.




Monday, August 31, 2015

What's it like to be a Synthetic Biology Researcher at NASA - Part 3

Ok, this blog post is where things start to become scary. My goal in writing all of this stuff is not so much to call out any individual but more to show people the crazy issues I have experienced at NASA.

People often say to me "Well maybe it is just in your building, or in your group or at NASA Ames." but it's not. I know this because I have reviewed papers for NASA conferences and been to NASA conferences.

In Science when you write a paper about the work you have done, you generally submit it for review by other Scientists so they can give you feedback(this is putting it nicely, more like non-constructive criticism) about your work. Then if your work is of reasonable quality it can be published. At NASA, I have had the "pleasure" of reviewing Scientific papers for conference proceedings, specifically the International Conference on Environmental Systems (ICES). This conferences focuses alot on the ISS and how to keep it up and running so the astronauts stay alive.

The first year I did 3 reviews and rejected two papers outright. The two papers rejected were from NASA and the one accepted was from a company doing work for NASA. And let me tell you, it was leagues above the other two papers in every way.

The main issue with the two papers was that their data had no relevance to their conclusions(such as studying if ghosts exist by looking for orbs in pictures taken, does one really prove the other?). To make it even worse, the papers were written with so many grammatical and spelling errors it was gross (I tried to list them all but gave up because it was taking up lots of time). There were graphs without any labels(seriously? how is anyone supposed to know what they are looking at), basic statistics errors and many more issues.

Despite how bad the papers were I decided to review again in 2015 because even if I was just one person maybe I could make a small impact. Maybe people would stop submitting their shit if they knew someone might reject it. To my absolute amazement I was randomly assigned a paper that wouldn't even pass a high school Science course. I won't post the paper but here is my review.

Review from 2015 ICES Conference
-----
This paper discusses and analyzes the chemical aspects of water used by astronauts aboard ISS 38-41. The paper is well written and provides a lot of data. Would be interested in more information as to the possible sources of the DMSD, is it coming from the ion exchange bed? 

There are some major issues, Background[written] is almost an exact copy of the paper submitted to ICES last year(2014) by the same authors. Table 1 and Figure one are exact copies, Figure 3 is a zoom in of the Figure 3 from last year! The graphs are all almost identical except for 4 additional points on most of them. Not only was Figure 1 reused, it appears to be taken from another paper with no similar authors(http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140002686.pdf)!!!!! If this is a common graphic floating around NASA you cannot publish it if YOU did not make it and you CANNOT republish it even if you did make it! This is considered Scientific plagiarism especially with image and data reuse and stealing. This is Scientific misconduct and this paper must be rejected!
-----

I was told that this was not that big of a deal and they weren't going to send my review to the authors....
The authors seriously tried to scam the reviewers by zooming in on picture and cropping it to make it seem like it wasn't the same picture they used from the previous year (Also, putting a picture of an astronaut in your Scientific paper, no matter how cool it may seem, has no Scientific relevance). You would lose your job most places besides NASA if you submitted this paper.

Imagine my frustration. Imagine if people knew that there were lots of researchers at NASA who either A) Didn't know how to do Science and write up a Scientific paper OR B) Plagiarized whole papers.

You are correct, I don't know if this is generally true across NASA.
But I have a number of lines of evidence against real Scientific contribution happening at NASA:

1) The papers I have reviewed(above) from other NASA research centers
2) The work of others I have heard from talks or in passing(I have walked out of at least two research talks because they were so bad)
3) Leaving the American Society for Gravitational and Space Research (ASGSR) conference a day early because the Science was so bad and when I asked specific question in a public forum about experimental issues they were ignored.

What do I consider bad Science? Something that would receive low marks in the first year of graduate school. This means that most of the Scientists seem to have only an undergraduate education's worth of knowledge and skill. However, this is probably true, as a Ph.D. or even a Master's degree, are not required to be a Senior Scientist at NASA.

I don't think most people are being flagrant though. I think that they just don't know how to write a Scientific paper or how to ask reasonable research questions because they weren't trained to be able to do these things.

There is a reason modern Scientists endure 5+ years of graduate school and PostDoctoral training, to make sure the Science produced in the world is of the utmost quality. 

I understand this is not _all_ of NASA. There are still people at NASA that do contribute sound research, I am just beginning to wonder if they are the anomaly?



Saturday, August 29, 2015

Creativity and Science and Art


Two quotes today on creativity:

"The trick to being truly creative, I’ve always maintained, is to be completely unselfconscious. To resist the urge to self-censor. To not-give-a-shit what anybody thinks. That’s why children are so good at it. And why people with Volkswagens, and mortgages, Personal Equity Plans and matching Lois Vutton luggage are not."

"It's not Art unless you can fail miserably."

I am not a big fan of quotes because anyone can say anything and that doesn't make it true. However, lately, I have found myself in many positions where I am looking at the things I do in the context of it being a creative work. I like to view myself as a creative person, which is sometimes more true than others, but I am learning it is a scary place to be. Mostly because, you can fail miserably. That idea that I had, that I spent alot of time on, maybe it is not as interesting to other people as it is to me? Maybe it is really stupid and I am just being really biased?

Failing is really scary in Science. Not failing in that your experiment didn't work type of way but failing in that your ideas are wrong or not completely thought through. Scientists are always asking, "What did I miss?" I have spent years honing my craft and trying to develop my mind into a creative knowledgeable machine and I don't want to be told it is not. BUT I know it is not always going to have the most spectacular and brilliant ideas. I know sometimes those ideas will be wrong or crazy, that's part of Science and part of creativity.

I try and be unselfconscious as much as I can but it is hardwork.

This is the life of an Artist and Scientist though. You should be afraid, have the crazy ideas and have people tell you you're wrong or give you that look(you know that look people give you when they think you are crazy?). You should be challenging yourself everyday and sometimes that means challenging others who also proclaim to be Artists and Scientists. That is how we make each other better, that is how we respect the craft.

If you had a hard time being "creative" lately. Ask yourself how much you really care what other people think.













Thursday, August 20, 2015

What's it like to be a Synthetic Biology Researcher at NASA - Part 2

I work at NASA as a research fellow. A research fellow is an indepent PostDoc that writes a grant proposal for their research. The proposal goes through review, there are about 50 new fellows accepted across the world per year for NASA.

It all started when I met Masood Hadi at the first Gordon Research Conference for Synthetic Biology in 2013. I was wearing a NASA t-shirt that said "I need my Space!". Someone I knew told me that there was a person from NASA at the conference and so I decided to introduce myself. We talked briefly about Science and I showed him my poster. He suggested that I should apply for a fellow position to work with him, only problem was that the application was due in 3 weeks!

I arrived back from the conference and emailed Masood to propose a topic for collaboration. Unfortunately, he didn't email me back till 1 week before the proposal was due(yikes even less time)! I worked my ass off and came up with something.

Here was my proposal: Zayner Proposal

Though it is not one of my best proposals I still think it was pretty cool.

The proposal is titled: Bacterialforming: 3D Light Controlled Sculpting Using Bacteria

The basic idea was to 3D print soil using light. It would work by mixing the soil with an engineered bacterial that would express and secrete enzymes to harden the soil when exposed to light. Shine light on specific parts of the soil and it hardens, in theory. I was using the pDawn system of light activated transcription and using iron reductase genes for soil hardening. Some limited research has shown(or just been suggested) that by changing the oxidation state of iron one can harden soil(very skeptical about it now). Both Lunar and Martian soils contain alot of iron(why Mars is rusty in color) so you can see why I wanted to mess with it.

The lab I was working in was not setup when I arrived at NASA! This meant it was my job to set everything up and test all the equipment. Not a huge deal but definitely set my research back a few months. There also was very little in the way of reagents and chemicals. Fortunately, most of the labs in my building are empty so I could "borrow" chemicals from those labs when needed and "promise" to replace them when we had our own.

A moment on this, in academia Professors are called PIs(Principal Investigators) they run labs and are able to use lab space as long as they have money and researchers working with them. At NASA it works differently. A lab is basically a space anyone can use if no one complains but if someone has already "claimed" it, then they will keep that space till they die or leave(I am not even joking. Sadly, there is a person on our floor who must be in his 80s and came into work a bunch when I first started. Word around is that he hurt himself(broke his hip or some such) and now has not been at NASA in at least 6 months. His lab door is locked and the space unused). The people who can claim space are usually Civil Servants and to all common knowledge it is almost impossible to fire a Government Civil Servant because it is a government appointed position. What ends up happening then is there are a bunch of people with no money and no one working in their lab space but lots of unused chemicals and equipment. There are ~7 of ~14 spaces on my floor that are either rarely or never used. Of the spaces used they contain 1-3 researchers at most! (not including when summer interns are around). Average academic labs are 5-10 people minimum. One space was just left until a fridge failed. No one cared that thousands of dollars in enzymes and chemicals were just destroyed, bacteria growing everywhere, it smelled gross, even to me(I have partial or almost complete anosmia). Occasionally, when bored, I would hold my breath and dig around in there to see if I could find anything useful. Recently, as in two weeks ago, a freezer failed and no one knew who's stuff was in it. Inside were animal specimens that had been around for 10 or 20 years and the only reason people knew the freezer failed was the smell the rotting tissue made in the building.

Things started to go downhill a little with my "mentor" Masood Hadi after I setup the lab. He wasn't around much and wanted me to do certain things. Experiments for some of his old papers and create figures and posters for him. At first I obliged, wanting to be a helpful colleague but when it appeared he was doing no work on his own and was just taking advantage of my goodwill, I stopped. Understand, Masood was not my boss. As a fellow, I am supposed to be a independent researcher, independently funded and working on my own independent projects, Masood could not fire me. He was supposed to be my colleague not boss.

He started requesting me to do more and more stuff for him and I started to refuse. This definitely did not help the situation. I'll be honest, and most of you who know me know that I am no diplomat, but I will tell you to your face what I think. Sometimes I can be better than others but I generally don't want to waste your time and mine by trying to convince you something I am doing or you are doing is going to work out well, when it really will not. I have never been described as "nice" or "a people person".


Around this time, I also learned that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to have my experiments sent up to the International Space Station(ISS). This is because the solicitations for proposal don't come out often(once every year or so) and then they take around 1.5-2 years to go up(if the rocket doesn't explode) and another 6 months to 1 year to receive them back. That's if your proposal was one of the few chosen among the 50? - 100? submitted.

Another issue I found out was that the equipment on the ISS is very primitive. Because it costs a shit ton of money to validate equipment, there is very limited equipment and so very limited experiments that one can do on the ISS. What this means is that most of my experiments that I proposed from my fellowship would not be possible to perform on the ISS, even if they could be sent up(testing light activated gene transcription in microgravity). Understand, NASA won't let you send up an arduino with some LEDs. They know how many screws are on their modules in the ISS and they can account for every one of them(I think). You can imagine that if an LED is lost and short-cicuits something, serious damage can occur! So to propose a new ISS experiment would require writing a million dollar grant for hardware validation and development.

Sooooo my research lines started to become less promising and so I decided to look for other research avenues that would interest NASA. Stuff that could be developed on Earth and have a greater impact. This led me to waste recycling.

Alot of Scientists in the sustainable resource field focus on breaking down cellulose and lignin. One day I was staring at the molecular structure of these molecules and I noticed that they were very similar to plastics, long hydrocarbon chains and aromatics. After some research I found that very little research had been done in the field of bacterial or fungal synthetic plastic degradation. I was pretty excited. Imagine if we could engineer a bacteria that could degrade all the plastic waste in landfills.

The way I pitched it at NASA is that the astronauts use about 200 kg of plastic, per person, per year. Imagine if you are taking a trip to Mars with a 4 person crew and it takes about a year to arrive. That means you will have around 800 kg of plastic waste! Throwing it out is not really an option because that far away from Earth, every material is precious, urine is proclaimed the liquid gold (right Elysse?). If you could recycle it into a feedstock for algae or plants or something of that nature it would be awesome! Also, obviously it would be super helpful on Earth, 32 billion kg of plastic waste is generated each year and less than 10% is recycled so each year ~28 million kg of plastic waste is deposited on Earth!

In the past year I have focused on two main avenues in my plastic degradation research: 1) Bioprospecting 2) Genetic Engineering.

I worked fast, came in on the weekends and in a few months time my research began to show promising results. I took my summer interns and we traveled all over the Bay Area, from trash dumps (trying to convince them with my blue mowhawk and government ID that I was a NASA scientist and needed a garbage sample) to having the interns jump out of the car and collect trash on the side of the highway (thanks Tyler and Nathan!).

Why collect plastic waste? The sun has strong UV rays and prolonged exposure to UV mutates a bacterial genome faster than normal. Plastics as a synthetic polymer was first introduced ~108 years ago, if a bacterial generation occurs in 1 hour, that is almost 1 million bacterial generations. We are talking at least 10^25 possible genomes of bacteria engineered naturally, in say, the bay area plastic (understand that the estimated number of human beings to have lived over the whole history of the earth is only 10^7(100 billion)). I figured that some of these mutated bacteria in nature might have evolved a mechanism to interact with and degrade plastics and survived to tell about it (that's natural selection!).

We ran large screens by washing off the plastic waste to remove bacteria and then attempting to grow them in a media that has no carbon source except fresh the plastic we added(polystyrene and polyethylene). Carbon is needed for bacterial survival so without it they die! This means that the bacteria would need to break down the plastics to live and grow. We had a bunch of successes and identified a number of bacterial gen(uses|ii?) through 16s rDNA sequencing. I used an electron microscope to actually see that the bacteria were colonizing the plastic! See the pictures below (that is false coloration to make it look cool).





You can see the bacteria go from initial colonization to forming biofilms, (biofilms are basically just large communities of bacteria).

Despite my successes and promising research, my relationship with Masood became a disaster. He was on the search committee for a job that opened up at NASA and he told everyone else about the job but me (I eventually found out when someone randomly, not in my building or lab, told me about it). One of his only responsibilities as my mentor was to approve my travel paperwork, basically a formality. He refused to do it and many meetings and emails and arbitrations ensued. Finally, he was forced to sign the papers.

At this point my disgust for the NASA working environment was peaking. The first two years of the fellowship are guaranteed but the third year of my fellowship would need to be approved by Masood, the same person who was actively trying to limit (dare I say sabotage? (maybe a little to dramatic)) my career.

So what happened next? Stay tuned for the next episode in this on going series.



Monday, August 10, 2015

What's it like to be a Synthetic Biology Researcher at NASA - Part 1


A question I received quite often besides the obvious questions such as "What can you tell me about the aliens that have been to Earth?" or "What experiments has NASA been doing with time travel?" 

is

What is it like to be a Scientist at NASA?

I work at NASA Ames in Moffett Field, CA. We are located directly next to Mountain View and Sunnyvale which are considered the heart of Sillycon Valley. Google and many other tech companies have offices nearby. In fact Google recently decided to lease a portion of Moffett Field and during my tenure here I have seen alot of testing of the Google Self-driving car on our research campus.

Yes, that is totally a 1980s pixelated display outside the second guard gate.


The government is pretty strict about security because there is the possibility that NASA Scientists have access to sensitive and classified information(none of us really do). Because of this my laptop hard drive is encrypted and I can only log into my computer using a card reader attached to my laptop that reads my government issued ID card.

Every morning and every time I leave base I need to enter through two guard gates. At the first guard gate they check my State ID and at the second they check my government ID which required a background check and they contacted a bunch of my friends. The guard gates are staffed 24/7.



I work at The Centers for Nanotechnology and Mars Exploration. Besides Aerodynamics studies and some Mars Rover instrumentation and being the back drop for some MythBusters episodes, Ames is known for Astrobiology but fortunately not the Arsenic Bacteria fiasco.


Our building isn't ugly on accident. The exterior is supposed to look like micrometeorite impacts on the Lunar surface. 



Ames is home to NASA's Bioengineering Branch and Synthetic Biology program. There are actually very few of us doing Synthetic Biology here at Ames. Currently, there are 4 Fellows with the occasional intern.

For an innovation lab our sign is pretty bad, I know, I didn't create it so don't blame me.

Where I work looks the same as most academic labs except that I build my crazy stuff like my artificial evolution system sitting on my lab bench with all the tubing.

As a Fellow at NASA I had to write a proposal that was reviewed and approved by NASA and then they provided me with the resources I need to accomplish my projects (if you have a Ph.D. and want to apply go here: http://nasa.orau.org/postdoc/). I was chosen as one of ~200 fellows in the whole world, they chose around 50 each year as the old ones rotate out. Fellows apply to work at one of the 10 facilities in the US not just Ames. Despite trying to follow my research proposal, as is Science, my projects change and so I am usually able to follow whatever crazy ideas I may have as long as it follows along with NASA's goals of space exploration. Especially if it involves going to Mars! It is kind of weird writing proposals telling people how you are going to help Astronauts live on Mars!

Because Synthetic Biology is such a new part of NASA things are slow. There is not much overlap between the few projects that are going on and most of us researchers are working alone. 

The mission to Mars is supposed to occur around 2030 so understand that the timeline at NASA is 15 years! That means the whole publish or perish academic game plan is kind of out the door. The goal is to think about the future. This is not easy for myself or most humans to try and build technologies for 15 years in the future but it is possible. 

Though most people are stuck in the past...



~80% of NASA's ~17,000 permanent employee workforce(including students) is over the age of 40 (~70% over 45 and ~54% over 50). This is worsened by the fact that anecdotally I have noticed that very few people retire, creating very few new openings. Numerous stories have been told to me of people dying on the job from old age (YIKES!).

However, most employees at NASA are contractors and not permanent employees. This means that the government hires a company to do some work and once the contract is up for recompete (every few years) a contractor can potentially lose their job, though many manage to stay on and just switch contracts to the new company. Most of the work at NASA is done by contractors and the average age of contractors is higher or just as high as permanent employees! Let me stop and say that there is nothing wrong with people being over 40 years of age in Science, the problem is that when the influx of new ideas and talent is not around, everything stagnates. In my opinion research Scientists need graduate students more than graduate students need research Scientists both because of labor and ideas.

We constantly receive emails telling us how to avoid slipping and hurting ourselves and how we should not believe people when they send us spam email asking for our bank account information. It sometimes feels like I am in a retirement home.

The numbers for total NASA employees including fellows(~200) and contractors(20,000-30,000) is difficult to find but is suggested to be around 50,000-60,000. During the Apollo era the number was around 300,000. I don't know if NASA should still have those same numbers and I think it would be a waste of money. All the bureaucracy at NASA prevents things from moving quick. In synthetic biology NASA still has not even really done recombinant protein expression experiments(a basic experiment) on the International Space Station (ISS) and who knows if it will even happen anytime soon? But we are supposed to create "synthetic biology" for space.... I think NASA does a great job in research and development but I think private industry are the ones who are going to push the boundaries of space exploration. Companies like SpaceX move so much faster and are willing to take more risks than NASA.

I have learned alot at NASA about how to deal with bureaucracy. I always tell people that working in the government is exactly like what they think, no one works, money is wasted and everything moves sooo slow. I think the problems come from a combination of things but mostly it is people just not caring. If you couldn't be fired from your job even if you didn't even come into work, would you go into work? Alot of people don't come into work. My "mentor" Masood Hadi, comes into work about once a month and works a second job...
You can imagine coming from a top tier research university that this was big a culture shock. I worked 7 days a week and so did many people I knew and now most people I know barely work 3 days a week. 
A funny story, after working at NASA for about 6 months, the Vice Chair of our division told me that working in the lab so much presented a safety hazard(I had a higher chance of being injured) and so I needed to not work in the lab at least one day during the work week. I tried to argue but to no avail...

Working at NASA has been interesting. I am fortunate to have had this opportunity and to explore crazy research projects and ideas and I have meet some cool people but I plan to leave if I can find another job that fits me. 

In the next few weeks I will post more articles on the topic of NASA, including more about my research and how and why the Synthetic Biology program at NASA is being ended this year.




Saturday, June 20, 2015

Copying Your Brain Won't Save You From Death

I was crouched down in the rubble of what used to be part of the University of Chicago. The age of the building provided a wealth of protection in it's brick and mortar exterior. If only architects in the past fucking knew that their creations would now only be useful for protection against lasers used by aliens bent on human destruction maybe they wouldn't have used so much paper thin glass.

No one had been responding on the communicator for a few days now but the network connection in my heads up display showed full signal so I imagine everyone else must be dead. Fortunately their brains were probably just downloaded into a new body at one of those secret underground layers one of the rich silicon valley mother fuckers created. Hopefully mine would be also if I was killed. Though I have never been killed before so I don't know? I always kind of mistrusted the idea that "I" would still have consciousness if my brain was transferred to a computer or another body.

Before the attack on Earth I was in Data analysis, BIG Data. They said it was the next BIG thing and it was. Big Data analysis helped us discover the interstellar ships heading towards Earth. Some people didn't believe it, I did and started to learn to use a weapon immediately. I figured the worst case scenario I could impress my friends with my new-found weapons handling skills.

Rubble, Chicago... I am starting to fall asleep, barely slept in the past week, just been trying to avoid enemy confrontation and death. Death, oh yeah. Why avoid death if my consciousness can just be downloaded, just like copying the memory from one computer program to another. But wait, then there are two programs, each one with individual consciousness. If the electrical signal and proteins in our brains are what gives us consciousness, copying that won't keep us alive it will just create a whole new person that is identical to us in thought patterns and knowledge and life experiences. It won't be me, it will just be a copy of me. Shit, short of removing my intact brain and transferring it to a new body a brain download won't really save me, will it? Have they been just using this as a way to inspire people to fight? Fuck, Ass.

Wait, maybe I am just tired and delirious. I need to get out of this place, find somewhere to rest.

Fuck, an explosion just happened on the other side of the pile of rubble.

Shit, fuck. Should I fight or run? 

Fuck it, why not do both?

.....

I remember dying, and then waking up, here. I remember me wondering if this "me" would be the same person as old "me"? I have the same memories, same thoughts, same ideas but that old me, that other me, was a program just like me, a human program. Computer programs run and end and die and go into the ether. Are human beings much different? Copying a computer program or restarting it makes it a different instance of the program not the same one. No matter how much I think I am the old "me" I am really just a copy, a different instance, a copy. I wonder what old me was like?


-------------------------------------

I read alot of Science Fiction and brain copying is a common technique used to allow people in the stories to die but be reborn. The problem is that copying the brain wouldn't theoretically allow one to live on after their death, it would only be a copy of you. However, maybe by keeping a consciousness connected to the new consciousness then you would continue to live on. This would require much more then just a storage medium for memories, it would require an artificial brain at both the upload and source locations.

This is still not a crazy idea. We can already use microelectrode implants in the brain or even just basic EEG to control a prosthetic. The algorithms and electronics that control these actions become a simplistic yet real part of the brain. But, without the brain that part is nothing. In effect, the goal of consciousness networking is to slowly(or perhaps even quickly) replace brain portions so the consciousness is never separated from the "brain". If the consciousness is ever separated is it still you or just a copy? I believe it is just a copy.

Once the consciousness is separated from the "brain" it loses what makes it you. 




Thursday, June 11, 2015

That Time I Drove a Martian Rover Through a Dust Storm.... in a simulation

There I was telerobotically operating a Martian Rover. Through the camera I could indistinctly see the Martian landscape, it was obscured by a massive dust storm taking place. With a max speed of ~0.2 km/h, I was slow and steady but using my joystick I eventually was able to navigate the rover to Valentina, an astronaut waiting for it to arrive. Wheew, that was tough! Despite the poor visibility I was able to find Valentina through a distinct sound providing a sort of 3D acoustic locator. I spent the next two hours attempting to locate Neil, Valentina, The Spirit Rover, Wall-E the Rover and the Martian base through a combination of both visual and auditory cues. This simulation was part of an experiment at NASA Ames, where I work, to test navigational displays.

In the experiment I played the role of an astronaut telerobotically operating a Martian Rover. I drove the rover around Mars on a set path and at certain points in time I was asked the location of an object, "Is Valentina to your left or right?". Using a 2D map that showed the location of everything and.or sound (with a map and no sound, with sound and no map, with a map and sound) I was supposed to identify in a matter of seconds where different things were located. There was more, the rover had 4 gauges, CO2, O2, H2O and Batt, these needed to be reset randomly and periodically.
Gauges, in the upper left and 2D Map in the lower left


To start it was overwhelmingly complicated, Valentina's sound was a foot stomping, Neil was a foot crunching on gravel(or regolith for the space nerds), Spirit was a engine revving, Wall-E was an old engine knocking and the Base was a waterfall. Depending on their location in 3D space determined how loud you heard the sounds(distance) and also in which headphone, right or left, you heard the sound(direction). So there I am navigating this course, resetting the gauges and attempting to keep clear what direction everything was located in!

Initially I thought the task was so difficult that I would be making lots of errors. After a bit of training though I was crushing it. I figured out that I didn't need to know where everything was at one time just half of where everything was. For instance, if I knew Neil and Spirit were to my right, that means that Valentina, Wall-E and the Base were to my left. The sounds added alot, I could take my eyes off the 2D map and focus on the gauges or driving and use the sounds temporarily when I needed to.

I felt that the simulation with only a 2D Map was the most difficult because it required my eyes to be doing 3 things simultaneously, the gauges, the driving and the location of everything. I would often mix up the right and left directions because I would lose focus of one task. It's an interesting question I wish to explore.research, how many tasks can a human hold in their focus at one time? Can we train ourselves to do more?(that's going in the ideas document)

The amount of focus required by me was immense, white knuckle style, gripping the joystick tight. In the next few weeks I will participate in another experiment that involves docking in outer space.

You're just jealous. I can see it.




  

Thursday, May 28, 2015

The Future of Microbiome Forensics

I wrote an article for the Biononymous website about microbiome forensics an area I have been interested in for a while. I thought I made a blog post on it but I can't find it. Anyway, you should check it out.



http://biononymous.me/the-future-of-microbiome-forensics/

Saturday, April 25, 2015

Drug Deals of the Future

I received a text message

Hey I'm coming to pick up the drugs be there in 10 minutes

I totally forgot Nico was stopping by but no big deal. I had plenty. I just need to find my digital scale to weigh it out. Well, actually, I can't find my scale. I guess I will just give him what we agree is appropriate.

Nico arrives and he comes into the apartment James Baxter is laying around, the best cat ever. As you can tell James is wary of drug deals.



I open up the freezer and pull out a little plastic baggy with white powder in it and a small plastic bottle. I tell Nico that I haven't tested the new stuff yet(in the bottle) and I don't think there is quite a gram in the plastic bag so I give him the old stuff in the plastic bag and dump a little bit of the new stuff into a container and give it to him. He goes to pull out some cash and I tell him not to worry about it. We exchange a few pleasantries and then Nico leaves.

I never said I was good at being a drug dealer. I give too much away for free.

Ohhhhh, you must be confused. That white powder wasn't cocaine or another elicit substance it was actually Kanamycin, an antibiotic drug that Nico was using to select for genetically engineered organisms he has been working on creating at Biocurious.

The other evening, one Patrik D'haeseleer, came and picked up some Science supplies at my apartment on his way home from work. I dropped some stuff off for Antonio Lamb earlier this week.


It is such a cool and weird world we live in that things like this are occurring. I enjoy being a part of this because of the surrealistic situations it puts me in (well, also, I am inspired by people's passions for doing Science and want to help).

I always wanted to be a drug kingpin(jk jk lol). I mean I always to be a Science kingpin. Doing Science everyday.

I was talking to a Ph.D. Scientist recently and they brought up something I hear often, "I don't think that these Biohackers will ever accomplish much.". I think people say that because they are short-sighted. Instead of thinking of a future where "drugs deals" go down for Kanamycin to genetic engineer OR maybe even deals that are for an awesome strain of bacteria or plants that you just engineered, people think of what they have experienced.

I say stop that. Start thinking beyond your experiences and not what has happened to you but what can and will happen in the future. Don't expect it to be there tomorrow or a week or a year or ten years from now. Maybe fifteen years though. I'll be honest I would be restless by twenty. However, every investment you make, I make, has the potential to be a catalyst. I was talking to someone the other day and telling her how sometimes we need to put ourselves out there. Our weird and crazy thoughts and ideas. Because these could be a catalyst for someone's enjoyment or an inspiration for our future. Well, do it and maybe you will be slinging some Kanamycin one day.



Disclaimer: No drugs were taken during the events that occur in this post or during the writing of this post(I swear). Also, I'm not a drug dealer.







Wednesday, April 8, 2015

Protecting Yourself From Being Framed by Doctor Doom Using CRISPR Cas9

Being Framed Need Genetic Engineering Help 

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/crg/4969303548.html



You are a framed Tony Stark (Iron Man), the police give you a call and tell you that they want you to come down to the police station so they can ask you a few questions, just a few. You being the tech genius you are know that they are going to want to take a DNA sample and the DNA collected from the crime scene is going to match! That's because your nemesis, alcoholism, wait... I mean, Doctor Doom, planted your DNA there.

Ain't no thing.


You already have a special concoction of CRISPR-Cas9 in a virus that will insert other DNA into your epithelial cheek cells through genetic engineering. Oh Snap! You specifically target the loci that are used by criminal investigators and because CRISPR-Cas9 is not making any germline changes after the cells die the effects are gone. So now at the police station when you offer them your DNA cheek swab, because you are such a cooperative citizen, the framing doesn't work out. Doctor Doom is such an amateur.

Though CRISPR-Cas9 has the chance to do many positive things I don't think many people think about all the possibilities that will occur now that everyone can have their hands on it. See, computer hackers use custom written software to hide their digital tracks and have done so for over 20 years but very little work or thought has gone into hiding our physical tracks. 

Some people, like Artist Heather Dewey-Hagborg, have put some thought into obscuring DNA to protect privacy but these techniques and ideas are still limited. 

Biotech and genetic engineering will be such a huge part of our future. People tend to not focus on the implications for things as simple as comic book stories. How soon till someone writes a movie or comic book where genetic engineering is not portrayed in a crazy light but in a sophisticated and complex manner that can be used for real world things? 

It seems the same things occurred with computers. The first computers in movies and such were only used to run space ships or do fantastic things. Now in movies computers are used for boring things like storing all your back-ups of the videos the terrorists made for you when they captured Tony Stark. Seriously, Obidiah encrypt that shit or something. 

Update:
The craigslist post went kind of viral