Measles, microwave, and on being a newly minted Ph.D.

Chenshu Liu
Aug 27, 2017 · 5 min read

*this article is adapted from the author’s speech, at the Ph.D. Hooding Ceremony, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, May 14th, 2017

Measles, once eliminated in the U.S., broke loose earlier this year in Minnesota. While young children were suffering from severe complications of this extremely contagious viral disease, some parents still believe it’s a gamble to vaccinate and that “it’s better to have measles than to have autism”, referring to the now-debunked theory that vaccination links to autism. Meanwhile, on the other side of the globe, articles painting microwaved food as the culprit for stomach cancer are regaining momentum on the social media. Often crammed with overblown jargons and quotes, these articles feed the innocent public with decorated misconceptions that, heating food with a microwave in your kitchen generates “altered molecules” that will nurture the cancer cells, as the increase of stomach cancer in the last two decades came hand in hand with the wider use of microwaves.

photo c/o commons.wikimedia.org

While most people enjoy what scientific breakthroughs and technological innovations have brought to us, there is this hidden but resilient flow of doubts about the very fundamentals upon which modern science is built. The logical, evidence based thinking, which we scientists feel as natural as breathing, can still feel quite alien to a large number of people. For instance, the notions might not have been well communicated regarding, what it means that no relationship between vaccination and autism has been found, through extensive cohort and case control studies; and what is the difference between correlation and causation, as well as the role of confounding variables.

For me, learning about correlation, causation and hypothesis testing at Columbia’s introductory course on biostatistics has been truly transformative. The appreciation of the scientific method, the simple but neat paradigms that guide us to make unbiased, evidence-based decisions, has been one of the defining moments in my career. Working in the lab studying the quantitative aspects of cell biology, I follow logic and statistics to test working hypotheses every day. However, while significant results eventually sift through piles of datasheets, the process of our reasoning, the process of getting from point A to point B, more often than not, are confined to the inner circles of scientists. Often times, what the general public finds out in the news are the end results ripped off the underlying thought processes. I couldn’t help but wondered: as scientists, are we using the scientific method to its full potential?

For all of us working in the lab, we have experienced many moments of frustration when experiments don’t work; but when they do work, all the excitement, the unforgettable moment we realized that scientific method has led us to solid conclusions which can push forward our understanding of the world. But because we are so focused, except for the exciting moments in the lab, we rarely have the luxury to share with the rest of the world, in plain language, the process how the scientific method really helps us in asking critical questions, in evaluating the strengths of evidence, and in distinguishing between different possibilities. To me, this could be even more important than the factual results and findings of science per se. During my Ph.D. studies at Columbia, I was fortunate enough to experience firsthand, how the scientific method can actually have simple yet profound influences outside the lab. By designing and teaching a statistics course on my own, I got the chance to work with a big group of motivated undergraduate students who hadn’t been exposed to scientific research before. Instead of focusing on formula and p-value, I tried a hands-on approach by providing them with real world research data, namely, on how fast cells divide after being treated with different cancer drugs. It was really amazing to be a witness of all those ‘Aha’ moments among my students, when they finally connected the dots and started to appreciate the value of the scientific method in action, and to start to figure out on their own, how to reliably interpret what they observe, and what constitute as a piece of solid evidence.

Aha! As the kids “Aha-ed”, I had a Eureka moment as well. I suddenly realized, the scientific method, even when not actively in use at the bench for designing assays or analyzing data, can still be quite helpful, or even more instrumental, in spreading the excitement of scientific research, and in communicating the ideas of logical, evidence-based reasoning to a truly broad audience. That was a critical moment in my own growth, not only as a budding scientist, but also as a global citizen in today’s world.

The world today confronts new waves of challenges, such as the denial of climate change and the resistance to genetically modified food. One of the many things I have learned during my Ph.D. is to think big and always have the big picture. As newly minted Ph.D.s, we are probably thinking of engaging the world and solving some of the greatest problems and dilemmas of mankind, with evidence-based experimental science. While we embrace the responsibility that comes with the tremendous capacity of science, it is important that we don’t forget a large number of people could and will, think and choose, quite differently should we scientists have done a better job in explaining the scientific method that empowers our society to this day.

For 250 years, Columbia Medicine has been a beacon where science, truth and knowledge hold the light for humanity. Now this light is needed more than ever before. If every one of us, as a practicing scientist, carries on the torch with Lion’s spirit, keeps the flame burning by being a creative advocate for the scientific method, not just the results — perhaps one day in the near future, a newborn child will never be put in the danger of contracting measles, and the public awareness of cancer and its treatment can be based on solid evidence instead of anecdotes and rumors. And ultimately, our society’s decisions, big or small, can be made according to real facts rather than the alternative ones.

)
Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade