Alex Sobko, PhD

PTM CRISPR Modifier!!!... lnkd.in/dmJQHJKD

@AmiDar @ctmurphy1 Freedom and dignity to kill innocent Jewish children, rape women, kill 1400 people on their land? Don’t you think Jewish blood is just a water?

I will keep repeating: I am sad and angry and appalled. Terror is always wrong. Revenge is not a strategy. A child is a child is a child. Freedom and dignity for all. Release all the hostages. Let more aid in. Stop and think. Without a vision for a shared future, there's no end.

Thanks for having me, @amanpour.

Rejection of your paper or grant has NO relevance to the opinion of #research community. It is nothing but the opinion of one person. Several examples: 1. The first paper on graphene was rejected from Nature because “it did not constitute a sufficient scientific advance”. Later, it was awarded a Nobel prize. 2. The first manuscript showing the microbiome-brain connection was published after 7 submissions that took 3 years. Today, this field has exploded. I expect it will get a Nobel prize in the future. 3. Theodore Maiman tried to publish a paper describing the first operating laser in Physical Review Letters and… got a rejection! 4. Peter Ratcliffe, who worked on cells’ response to changes in oxygen levels, got his key paper rejected from Nature (see photo). Later, he was awarded a Nobel Prize for this work. And there are many other examples… . And yet I see so many young scientists stressing about rejections. For some reason, they seem to genuinely expect that the editors should know which study is truly worth it. As a result, many rejections are met with surprise and disbelief:  “How could they reject it? They publish so much trash, and yet they think our detailed 3-year-long study is not interesting to the community! WHY?” . Well, the reality is: - Most editors have very little time to delve into your study. They can easily FAIL to recognize the potential impact of your study. Proper communication in the cover letter and clear writing style can help (although only to a limited degree). - Many reviewers have little idea about the science in your paper. But they can have a big ego. So, if they have a bad day or were rejected recently, it’s easy for them to find 1000 technical reasons to reject your paper as well. - Most scientists genuinely don’t know if your discovery can make any impact. If we could predict the course of science, we would be living very differently! My message is simple: Forget about objectivity. Academia is a very subjective world. Fight for objectivity but don’t take it for granted. A great study will be found, cited and recognized. Disregard of where it’s published. A bad study requires a high-impact journal to be found and cited. But the long-time recognition might be a problem. High-IF journals are simply billboards. Their rejections do NOT represent the opinion of a scientific community. You can get rejected but don’t reject yourself! Believe in your results. #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter

@elonmuskewl No!

@leslievosshall With all respect to African people, you have hundreds of candidates applying for the same faculty position, in a hunt for equity do you need even more??…

So much #STEM talent on the African continent. We can all do more to help deserving students get the mentoring they need to apply to US PhD programs. Role models include @gabrielgihanan "Guide an African Student through Graduate School Application" afrisnet.org/graduateappmen…

@YMerbl @NatureCancer Hats, maps, and congrats!…😊

Curious how cancer cells manipulate their protein degradation machinery to suppress anti-tumor immunity? Today, we report in @NatureCancer that the PSME4 cap impairs proteasome activity and antigen diversity, thus weakening anti-tumor immunity and the response to immunotherapy🧵

@SRosbakh German is indeed not the point. Don’t bother to call, to interview, invite for online or in person talk, check what is going on with you - formally reject and it is all set! Frustrating! Your life just keeps going in its own way…including newly published articles, talksinterests

Yesterday, I got a rejection letter for a position at a German university I applied two (!) years ago. During the 'selection' process, I became father, moved to another country, wrote several papers and grant applications, and grow some grey hairs. #IchbinHanna

@AndreaBMaier Stay safe with our news!…

A great start of the day at Sheba Medical Centre!

My research is available on @ResearchGate: researchgate.net/publication/36…

Clip from The Brain: Hannah describes her synesthesia, a condition that fascinates neuroscientists. #BrainPBS pbs.org/video/23655632…

lnkd.in/dpasyijy lnkd.in/dvrxswEd

@OdedRechavi TEDx Vienna talk was just excellent short talk, very much to the point! Enjoyed it!…😊

Cool! Thanks! 🤟

"OUTLIVE" by Peter Attia, MD. Chapter 1. The Long Game. Read by Alex Sobko, PhD youtu.be/aZT31tJ0Y0c via @YouTube

"OUTLIVE" by Peter Attia, MD. Chapter 1. The Long Game. Read by Alex Sobko, PhD. lnkd.in/dQAwr_Es lnkd.in/dhMuXu2s

@KrizhanovskyLab @elonmusk @paulg Yeah, say, compare life-span predictions for a person, who’s grandparents reached age of 90-s, depending on his environment: Russian ghetto - like dev town, among elderly folks versus vigorous, intellectually and physically stimulating Weizmann Institute’ campus with sexy younger

@elonmusk @paulg Hey @elonmusk, it seems you mixed between maximal possible lifespan and your/our lifspan. The lifespan of a person is mostly dependent on the environment, lifestyle, social status etc.

The survival curve inflates like a sail, but the far end of it doesn't move much.

Biology articles that I published from home over past 3 years - beware those who don’t like me and for enjoyment of myself, dear!…😊

Sobko A (2023) Cell Migration Hypothesis of Synesthesia. Cell Dev Biol. 12:266. longdom.org/open-access/ce…

@Tzahore Enjoy yourself!…

Thank you guys for the support. It was really fun. ועוד משהו שרציתי להגיד: יש לנו אהבה והיא תנצח ❤️❤️

R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-U-M !!!