Browsing STEM Topics Expectation vs Reality.

in STEMGeeks8 days ago (edited)

I've been trying to find the time writing this reality vs expectation topic for days now. I occasionally do manual curation so I tend to browse multiple communities just to see which posts can trigger my liking.

Warning: Images used on this post are mine and they contain preserved human tissues for histopathologic processing. If you have a low tolerance for the gross stuff, don't bother scrolling down.

When I browse STEM community posts, I had this mental image that the trending/hot pages would contain some quality posts about STEM topics near or the same caliber as the ones I can find on established science journals or articles site. Maybe that expectation is too damn high to meet so I eventually lowered the bar by expecting at least people posting what they actually do related to STEM. That concludes the expectation portion.

The reality is having a lot of posts just repeating information derived from some other site then copy pasting the reference. The bulk of the idea is often derived from what they have read rather what idea they have generated from real world experience. Maybe I'm a little bit too abstract when I said the words above but see the image below.

Orientation of GIST.jpeg

This is a gastric tissue resected from a patient managed as a case of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor. You can google what this disease means or check it out from my favorite resource page GIST pathology outlines.

P means posterior. S for superior. I for inferior. The D was supposed to be an A for anterior but I'm going to cut my surgeon some slack as they got a busy day and probably half awake when they sent me back this pic when I asked about the orientation of the specimen.

Cut section of GIST.jpg

After cutting up the specimen, you can see the red part in the middle of the tissue unpreserved. I bathed this baby in concentrated formalin for an entire night. The thing about fatty tissue specimens is that you need to use concentrated formalin, not the regular 10% formalin because that stuff penetrates slowly on fat. An ordinary nonfatty specimen can be penetrated by regular formalin at a rate of 0.4cm per hour. That's a trivia.

I signed out this case as a GIST, with a 6.9cm widest tumor dimension, intermediate risk. We got some diagnostic criteria for classifying low to high risk based on the tumor size and mitotic counts. It took me 50 high power fields counting only 3 mitotic figures. The risk category also differs based on what part of the GI tract the specimen was taken from.


WHAT AM I GETTING AT HERE?

There are several layers of info scattered within those few paragraphs people who are in the same profession can understand but framed in a way that it ain't too alien for even layman to understand, not too complicated to miss the context anyway. Even if you didn't wholly understood those few paragraphs you'd get enough idea keep up with the post is about.

I live my topics shared here.

While a lot of STEM topics generated felt half assed paraphrased articles from a compilation of webpages, some are actually good in their own right. No shame in writing like a freelance SEO/Content creator for churning out content, I've been there years back and those skills are always useful for platforms like Hive.

It doesn't matter if you have a masters degree, Ph.D., or diplomate at something here if you're just sharing generic topics that have less of your personal touch and more of what anyone else can find on Google. I also think being too uptight about only the best well written STEM posts can be a deterring factor to make the community grow.

How many users actually engage with STEM related topics, live them, and curate other than curators? I'm an advocate of chill writing because that stuff is more personal and good when executed right compared to a robotic text I'd read of some research journal.

When people go to this site, I imagine them not really looking for research journals but STEM topics that are chill to understand and burn some time. Make them think for a few moments then move on learning something new.

By the way, if you ever want to preserve a body part, make sure you submerge these in formalin.

Poorly Preserved Myoma.jpg

This is a myoma from a uterus. The dark-brown part is supposed to be tan-brown (the lighter color below the dark-brown part) when properly preserved but some idiots just like to spend a little amount of formalin or get confused about how much is adequate especially when the specimen displaces the formalin on the container making it look full. Naturally, I'd get a microscopic view of destroyed tissue architecture (not that it's difficult to see it's myoma on this case but the thought is there).

This is the kind of info you just don't find on google naturally but sparks a short moment of wow, now I learned something. I'd like to see more of those types of posts on STEM because those show more personality than robotic text from a paraphrased content sourced all over the internet.

~END~
@adamada was here

Posted with STEMGeeks

Sort:  
 7 days ago 

When I browse STEM community posts, I had this mental image that the trending/hot pages would contain some quality posts about STEM topics near or the same caliber as the ones I can find on established science journals or articles site.

There are very few here that can post at that level about STEM or anything for that matter. There are a few really experienced people in their field here, so it does happen but it is certainly not the majority.

Most people just write to collect rewards. Many with as little effort as possible. It is the sad reality when ever action can result in money.

STEMGeeks wasn't built for a repository of science papers, it was so anyone can talk about STEM topics regardless of experience. I would have loved to have more interesting and unique posts and discussions, but realistically it isn't going to happen until we drastically grow our user base.

There are very few here that can post at that level about STEM or anything for that matter. There are a few really experienced people in their field here, so it does happen but it is certainly not the majority.

Yeah, at some point I recalled Freya Blekman being a hit in the community until they stopped posting and never came back :/

I would have loved to have more interesting and unique posts and discussions, but realistically it isn't going to happen until we drastically grow our user base.

Same, also picturing the community have something close to reddit where people crowd source complex problem solving within their respective fields under the STEM umbrella. I tried onboarding some of my colleagues in the medical field but the responses I end up with are the usual not into crypto, too complicated, and cocky 'I'm already earning a lot and busy to bother with those things' (partly true as some colleague have successful careers).

I'm hoping to see more post of people just flexing their own science experiment, working on a project talking about it in a casual manner, rather than creating content built from snippets of info somewhere else.

"When people go to this site, I imagine them not really looking for research journals but STEM topics that are chill to understand and burn some time."

You're right... I should say that first. But you got me thinking about the remote possibility of attracting actual clinicians and researchers (like yourself) to this platform. I think I've heard the idea thrown around before, but is there a way to make posts EVERGREEN if they meet certain criteria. So they could be upvoted after the 7-day mark... and a more robust cataloguing system could maybe be built so we can reference this more important stuff.

Just thinking out loud. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! :)

and a more robust cataloguing system could maybe be built so we can reference this more important stuff.

The problem with sharing content done by professionals on the field here is how difficult it is to verify ideas especially when there is a lack of people to check on the content. I see math posts and programming posts thrown around but I can't see if there are any flaws as it's not my field.

I like the idea of using the blockchain tech to incentivize people in the STEM fields to post what they know and share info across borders as researches often get nothing to a small cut when their journals are published somewhere else. The reality is a lot fo researches made aren't being monetized by the people that made them due to having sponsors prohibiting that privilege or the researcher knowing less about how to market their research.

To onboard more professionals, it goes back to the core of getting more people interested in crypto as most just stick to their career and passively invest on traditional investment vehicles (the paycheck is secured especially for specialized degrees) so incentivizing them to post on Hive is a waste of their time when compared to working on their regular jobs at $ rates per hour. Overall, it's a steep battle and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

Congratulations @adamada.stem! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You received more than 800 upvotes.
Your next target is to reach 900 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Check out the last post from @hivebuzz:

Feedback from the June 1st Hive Power Up Day
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!
 7 days ago 

Yeah, that’s the downside of the “wiki like” journal posts. There are a lot to digest, especially those who are not versed in the subject.

For those who are, it’s like a boring trip back to school.

Adding to a lot of links to the posts also becomes a drag to read just to piece together context. I prefer to read complicated stuff dumbed down and talked in a casual manner without compromising the meaning. Shows mastery for the subject because reading those journal like posts feels more like reading snippets from different voices rather than a cohesive personality talking behind the post.

 7 days ago 

I think we are asking for too much by this point.