@Luigi Mathematical.. though I have worked a little bit on bioinformatics— mostly related to NGS

we had a guy do his phd here and at the front of the thesis he had a list of 7 other publications that weren't included in his thesis... on top of the 6 he had in it the thesis, three of which were published... in science twice and nature once :O

*not nature, PNAS

@WYSIWYG 2 published paper sounds tough - especially since the review process can take such a long time. We have a strong recommendation of at least one published paper, but no published papers can be accepted, but then the thesis has to go through an extra external review before the actual thesis defence.

That's a good solution. My colleague had two papers (instead of the three) and my boss had to argue with the university that one of the two was in Cell and could have easily been split into two smaller. But who does this?

I currently have the situation where I have two papers which could very easily be written as one, I probably wouldn't have them as two if wasn't for the thesis - but I think they do benefit from it, it means I can be more focussed in each paper rather than trying to cover many bits of theory in one paper.

they started life as two distinct projects and began to start crossing over a bit

In the case I mean this was work which was built on each other. So it's ok to publish it together. And get a high impact publication.

yes for sure

in that case it definitely makes sense to combine

I am using the DuckDuckGo search engine. I think it gives more relevant results compared to google @Luigi

hello @Chris

are you available?

What's up?

I had a question about my recently closed question:

Of course, my first question is: why was it closed?

I talked with @medica to help me post good question but we didn't talk about questions being closed because they were unclear... Plus, my question didn't seem unclear...

So seemingly general consensus is that a virus is not a living thing therefore cannot be killed, but they can be "deactivated" which would be the viral equivalent of killing a virus... It's a bit like defeating a robot army, you don't kill them because they are never alive - you deactivate them.

(that would be my diagnosis of the close votes - but its not my field so I don't know if its correct)

but that's the question... how do we deactivate the viruses using immunotoxins?

You can't. Because toxins need a living organism to have some effect. How should this work on non-living things?

@Chris well.. toxins is a general term.. can't u use any chemical that deactivates viruses?

surely we can. But these are not chemicals that you want to bring into a living body because they are harmful to cells as well.

@Chris then how does the immune system deactivate viruses?

@TAbraham Can you please take a book on immunology (Janeway gives a nice introduction) and then read the chapters on immunity and cytotoxic t-cells? I am not going to explain this here in the chat or over at bio.sx - this is ways too much material and you need at least some background.

@TAbraham That's why I close-voted your question. Why, in the human or mammalian body, would you need an antibody-toxin complex to "kill" a virus? First, you don't need a toxin to "kill" a virus; the antibody-virus complex will get phagocytized. That's good enough. Immunotoxins are a great way to kill cells - cells - with specific markers that one can "make" antibodies to.

You continue to fail to do the reading people suggest you do before asking questions.

Yepp.

@medica you don't understand what I am trying to do...

you are trying to find a way to fight viruses

@TAbraham I seem to understand it better than you do...

And that's not good.

i am using Fabs, which can't generate immune response...

I am using Fabs to fight off viruses...

Why? Why use Fabs?

But if it would be that easy, don't you think somebody wouldn't have used it to make drugs?

^^

that doesn't really make sense

Fabs to prevent HAMA response..

you don't need foreign antibodies

Why use Fabs when the body makes entire antibodies that take care of the virus?

our body is really good at meaking specific ones

^^

no, to treat viral diseases that immunosuppress the body

So, like HIV?

then, you can't rely on the body..

I guess...

about which viral infections do you think?

HIV=?

Don't guess...learn the basics

Yes!!!

And reading a basic book about immunology (I like the janeway, but there are others) is fun as well

I learned a lot about antibodies for this project of mine...

If it would be that easy to fight off HIV then this way would be used alreasy. No more messing around with various antiviral drugs.

@TAbraham - as long as you keep demonstrating a basic lack of understanding of immunology, and when Fabs are actually helpful (like for digitalis overdoses), your immunology questions will continue to be closed.

@TAbraham Not enough!!!

You can't just ask blind questions. Science doesn't work that way. You have to think of a specific way to deal with a problem, read about it to see if it's been tried, and if it has, if it's been successful, and if not, why not.

You can't just say, i'd like to kill the HIV virus.

Help me to figure out how.

That's too broad.

@TAbraham You continue to ignore good advice.

You are digging yourself into a pit which will get increasingly harder to climb out of.

Just take a week and Read Janeway.

And a lot of things will be much clearer...you will have other questions though...

But if you are making the effort, we will know it and be more willing to answer your questions. Honest.

@TAbraham - have you heard this advice from anyone besides me before (here)?

@TAbraham - I don't know if you're afk, but if you have heard this advice, ask yourself why you've decided it's not necessary.

You have people working in Science, giving you good advice, and you don't act on it.

That will never help you to get ahead in your studies or your work.

Alot of "Science" is talking things over with others and thinking about it, turning it over, looking at it from different angles. To do that, you need to actually listen and share in a way that's acceptable to most people.

If you can't do that, you're cooked.

An important point in science is to take the critic and advice from others. You need to learn this to be able to do science. This doesn't happen in the free room. You need help (I do this as well) from colleagues.

This is nothing personal - this is the normal progress.

Yes.

That's why people co-author papers. :)

That's why people discuss in labmeetings and at conferences. This can be pretty tough sometimes.

Yep. I've felt stupid at times when talking to others, but it helped me learn.

When you see this as a chance - yes. If not, you will go under.

Cooked.

Well, I'm off. I have nothing more to offer, and I'm very sure it's all been offered before. nothing else I can do.

Let you real scientists solve problems. :)