Current Conditions

75° F. Steady sea breeze. Sunny. Clear. Pale moon. Santa Catalina Island atop a distant fog bank. Palos Verdes in the haze up the coast.

I walk across the beach through three odor plumes: grilling hot dogs, pot, salty sea mist.

Talking Odor Perception on Huff Post Live

I’ve been on the road and am just now getting around to posting a link to this smelly panel discussion hosted on Tuesday by Josh Zepps. It’s me, Stuart Firestein, Bonnie Blodgett, and Sissel Tolaas.

AChemS XXXV

I’m in Huntington Beach, California, for the 35th annual AChemS conference of smell and taste scientists. Missed the last two meetings so glad to be back in my home state reconnecting with colleagues. Hope to blog and tweet the best parts for you to share. This was the view Wednesday afternoon from the Hyatt Regency across the pool, the PCH, and the beach, with the Pacific on the horizon.

Society for Neuroscience President: “Shut Up,” He Explained

With over 42,000 members the Society for Neuroscience is the largest scientific association in the field. Its president, Larry Swanson, sent an email to members today discussing President Obama’s brain research initiative. It is a remarkable document. I reprint it in full below (emphases mine).

Swanson makes two points: SfN members should support the plan because money, and they should keep any misgivings about it to themselves because money.

This disgraceful note is what passes for science advocacy today.

Dear fellow Society for Neuroscience members,

Following a week of extraordinary attention to the field of neuroscience and support for biomedical research, I write to share the SfN Executive Committee’s view about President Obama’s announcement of a U.S. brain research initiative and why we believe it is important for the neuroscience community to both embrace and help shape it through scientific dialogue. I had the privilege of attending the President’s announcement at the White House, and, after listening to his words, I am excited and confident that this and other emerging global funding initiatives can be tremendously positive for our field.

The announcement comes at a critical time in neuroscience. Unparalleled scientific progress and possibility co-exist alongside growing challenges caused by shrinking or flat national government budgets for science research. Precisely because of these realities, the Executive Committee believes the President’s announcement represents a critical moment to both pursue scientific opportunities and make the case that now is the time to increase science investment. Last Tuesday’s White House announcement prioritized an initial investment in pilot tools and technologies. We think this is a reasonable place to start as it acknowledges the long horizons and deep challenges inherent in studying the brain, as well as the advantages of developing revolutionary new methods for discovery. The project also has established a rigorous process for determining investments and future planning, with an exemplary NIH Advisory Committee comprised of distinguished scientists from across our field with a strong emphasis on basic science.

While we should all continue to explore and discuss questions about the scientific direction, it is important that our community be perceived as positive about the incredible opportunity represented in the President’s announcement. If we are perceived as unreasonably negative or critical about initial details, we risk smothering the initiative before it gets started.

At the same time, SfN knows that scientists will be challenged to make progress on even these initial projects — let alone pursue the field’s ongoing vital work — without sustained and growing financial investment in the scientific enterprise. The President articulated the outlines of a possible long-term vision for focusing on brain research, with an emphasis on basic science, and NIH Director Francis Collins has consistently emphasized that the initiative likely requires a project spanning a decade or more and strong NIH-wide funding. His comparisons of the project to the Human Genome Project, while not a perfect scientific analogy, suggests to the public a long-term commitment. To help realize these possibilities, SfN will continue advocating strongly for sustained investments to support neuroscience and the biomedical research enterprise overall, and we will need all of your voices in those efforts for years to come.

SfN encourages healthy debate and rigorous dialogue about the effort’s scientific directions. Testing of assumptions, methodological debate, and constructive competition are central to scientific progress. I urge you to bring all this to the table through our scientific communications channels and venues, including the SfN annual meeting in San Diego this fall and The Journal of Neuroscience.

Thanks to your extraordinary scientific achievements, the neuroscience field is capturing the world’s attention, and, here in the United States, rallying a nation to support more focus on scientific discovery. Thank you for your commitment to advancing science and improving health. I look forward to participating with all of you in this ongoing discussion as the initiative takes shape.

Sincerely,
Larry Swanson
SfN President

This message shows that Swanson is clearly in damage control mode. Obama's BRAIN proposal has been criticized by many scientists and Swanson wants to suppress open dissent so as not to jeopardize SfN's rent seeking activities.

Exit question: Can you find the part where Swanson describes the actual neuroscience that $100 million in tax money will buy?

Bonus question: What is the scientific term for “trust us”? (Answer: “an exemplary NIH Advisory Committee comprised of distinguished scientists.”)

Bonus question 2: What is the scientific term for “don’t air your disagreement in public”? (Answer: “bring all this to the table through our scientific communications channels and venues.”)

Green on Green: People vs Pelicans

Here at FirstNerve we enjoy watching the contradictions emerge when one form of political correctitude collides with another: wind turbines vs eagles, save-the-whales vs preserving Native American culture, municipal composting vs clean air, etc.

The contradictions in La Jolla, California, are ripe and getting riper as the thick layer of pelican poop and cormorant crap on the town’s seaside rocks grows deeper and smellier by the day. A new AP story updates what we wrote about last year—the protected status of the scenic cove makes guano abatement nearly impossible, yet the unbearable stench is bad for business, tourism, and quality of life in general.

A waiter at a beachside cafe is quoted as saying resignedly, “Poop is a part of nature.” True that. But as the San Diego Union-Tribune pointed out, it is California’s excessive regulatory culture that “effectively sanctifies animal waste.”

California’s love affair with regulatory environmentalism could cause cognitive dissonance headaches. More regulation of CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) because the stench of manure from thousands of closely packed animals is an environmental issue? Yes! Take steps to reduce the stench of guano from thousands of closely packed birds because it’s an environmental issue? Yes! Er, no! Uh . . . let me get back to you on that. 

Pass the popcorn.