Detta Consults

👋🏻 Hands up if you're responsible for the complete absence of creativity in life science companies. We, scientists, love to go on about how creative we are and talk about just how much we love to find new solutions for old problems. A pretty good way to think, right? Funny that. Because it seems that the second you walked through the door into that life science/biotech company, all sense went out the window. Here's an idea. Take a look at some of your content. I mean content on your website, I mean your LinkedIn content, I mean all of your content. Now, put yourself back in the shoes of that curious and creative scientist and tell me what you think. I'm going to guess that BORING is the first thing that comes to mind. It's like a competition to see who can create the most mind-numbing content. We're all over here trying to escape the old corporate shenanigans and there you are forcing it back down our throats with content designed to make me wanna smash a burning hot frying pan in my face over and over again. It's funny because it seems despite all of those things being in your DNA (you know what I'm talking about), creativity isn't one of them. So, if like me you want to celebrate creators who think with their own minds, creators who who put corporate speak in the bin and step up to the name "scientist", here's who to follow: 1) Brian Krueger, PhD 2) Bill Hinchen 3) Sara Holland 4) Steve Harvey 5) Dennis Lendrem While writing this list I asked myself "Where are all the women at??!" So, where are you? I have to tell you, I look forward to the day when millennials/Gen Z take over the business world because maybe, just maybe, we'll have some chance of putting the creativity back into science (and many other things). And now back to my original question, who's responsible for the complete absence of creativity in life science companies? Because someone here is. And it's time for you to take some accountability. My name is Martina, I am a scientist, a life science marketer, a creative, a business-minded woman, a mother, a wife, a friend and, most importantly, a truth-teller. Happy Monday.

Hello network! My baby sister, Grace Holloway, is looking for a lab-based job. She finished her Bioscience undergrad in 2022 and has been working various jobs since then. But, she is desperate to work in a lab (for money, not for free). She’s based in London so could work there or anywhere commutable from there. If you know anyone that may be able to help, please direct them my way as I will be acting as her recruitment consultant 😂 *Yes, she is a LOT younger than me - 19 years, in fact.

Scientists - looking for the next book to read? Check out the post below for our review of Dennis Lendrem’s Apes In Lab Coats.

Academics in the life sciences. Check out the post below and let me know if you're interested.

Welcome to my last week on LinkedIn in 2023 (cue dramatic music). Starting the week with some more old science. “The methods of constructing a ship, train or aeroplane are quite different right from the start, but embryos of fish, birds, and man, use the same prototypes for the development of the various systems and organs. Nature's new designs are always created out of old models.” We’re going back to the future. Last week it was December 1956. Now it’s the 19th of July, 1957. In the words of Professor G. M. Wyburn, “It remains a major biological puzzle why certain cells become the contracting units of muscle, others the nerve cells of the brain, or gland cells secreting complex chemical substances?” In summary, how do cells specialise? Since you ask, let’s start with what was still undiscovered in 1957. - Seeing was believing In 1957, scientists based much of their knowledge about cell specialization and determination of cell fate on morphological observations made through microscopy. - DNA - you mean that pretty little double helix?  James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA in 1953, but scientists did not understand the molecular details of how genes controlled development at that time. - Being different. Not as cool back then The scientific community recognized the concept of cellular differentiation, but they needed a well-defined understanding of the molecular processes behind it. - We were not yet skilled manipulators Scientists had limited techniques for manipulating and studying genes because the development of molecular tools were yet to emerge. - A map was great; we needed someone to give us the right directions! Our understanding of molecular signalling pathways was limited, with the identification of signalling molecules and their receptors still in the early stages. Where we are now? In a pretty great place, I’d say! We unravelled molecular mechanisms like genes, pathways, and transcription factors behind cell differentiation. This took me back to my MRes days of Hedgehog and Bone Morphogenetic Protein. We discovered stem cells! The original MVP, stem cells are major players in development and tissue repair. It turns out nurture has a massive impact on nature. We now know that genes are modified without affecting the underlying DNA sequence. GAMECHANGER! We learned that DNA’s more frivolous sibling, RNA, plays a crucial role in directing the orchestra of gene expression. We can now look at cells one at a time! Thanks to the advancement of technology, extrapolating information from single cells is now the norm. Gene editing is no longer science fiction; it's a reality, thanks to CRISPR-Cas systems! These molecular scissors allow us to delve into the functions that define cellular specialization. Disclaimer: This field is highly complex and I’ve only covered about 0.00000036% of it here. But LinkedIn will only let me write 3000 characters!

Thanks to everyone who got in contact yesterday about my new podcast Blooming Late Scientists. I've had a few questions asking exactly what I'm looking for. For season one, I'm looking to speak to the following: 1) People who worked in a non-scientific field before moving into science. Your Saturday job doesn't count sadly. 2) People who got a PhD later in life. I'm particularly interested to hear from those in Biology, Chemistry and Physics-related fields (for now). So, to answer the most common question - no, you do not need a PhD to be a guest (see point 1). Please get in touch if this is you and you'd like to tell your story. I know many people would like to hear it.

Hello everyone 😃 In the New Year, I’d like to start a podcast all about late bloomers, particularly those people who changed careers or did a PhD later in life and moved into biotech. If you’re interested in being a guest and telling your story, please get in touch! I’d love to hear from you! P.S. This includes startup founders! Thanks for the nudge Brian Krueger, PhD

"𝑨 𝒘𝒂𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒃𝒐𝒅𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒔𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆. 𝑰𝒕𝒔 𝒄𝒂𝒖𝒔𝒆 𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒕𝒐𝒐 𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒔 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒃𝒆𝒆𝒏 𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝒘𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒆: 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒄𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒊𝒔 𝒂𝒔 𝒏𝒆𝒄𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒂𝒓𝒚 𝒂𝒔 𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒚". It's true; one of our biggest challenges is getting scientists to communicate their work. Except that quote wasn't written this year, last year, the decade before, or the decade before!! This is a quote from the New Scientist, December 1956. It seems we've been fighting the same science communication battles since days began. Of course, today we're surrounded by brilliant sci-comm specialists. They tend to work for startups or larger companies looking to commercialise research or expand their existing product lines. But we really need to hear from the researchers themselves and at a much earlier stage. Let's compare this to a product launch. You don't wait until launch day to start marketing your product. That is a huge missed opportunity. You need to build awareness LONG before that. Your science communication is the same. Get it out there. Sidney Barrington Gates, FRS (the author of this article), knew what he was talking about. And so, my friends, do I. I’ll leave you with this: “𝑰𝒕 𝒔𝒆𝒆𝒎𝒔 𝒕𝒐 𝒎𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒔𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒇𝒊𝒄 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒉𝒂𝒔 𝒆𝒙𝒑𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒍𝒊𝒌𝒆 𝑳𝒐𝒏𝒅𝒐𝒏 𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒆 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒐𝒅, 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒎𝒐𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒊𝒕𝒔 𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒕, 𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒆𝒑𝒉𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒐𝒓 𝒓𝒂𝒅𝒊𝒐 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒊𝒄𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒐 𝒔𝒖𝒊𝒕 𝒊𝒕𝒔 𝒈𝒓𝒐𝒘𝒕𝒉.” Stay tuned because next Monday, we’re talking developmental biology from 1957. Now that, you will not want to miss!

If you LI people don't apply to these positions then, quite frankly, you've lost the plot. - Senior Scientist - Mol Bio - Research Associate

Another great testimonial for Detta Consults training services. Get in touch (link in bio) if you'd like to find out more. #lifesciencemarketing