role reversal

I have been fortunate enough to attend a mathematical biology conference this summer.  Strangely, the usual roles from the past few years have been reversed.  Usually, my friends are all biologists who can criticize experimental papers down to the minutiae of the cell lines and other assumptions.  At this conference, it was very strange to realize that I had at least an average and perhaps pretty good overall appreciation of the biological significance of the posters and talks (excluding neuroscience, as I don't have a background in it).

It is a peculiar feeling indeed to stand at at someone else's poster and explain the biology back to them, question their assumptions, and attempt to interpret the results in light of that knowledge.  It just feels wrong, because I'm really not an experimental biologist and have only a hazy idea of areas outside my own.  So if I'm the one explaining stuff and being skeptical, that's really scary.

This is not to say that there weren't people that did not know their stuff - many people were in very good collaborations and knew their biology and even medicine thoroughly.  If someone makes a simplifying assumption, I do not have a problem with that, as long as there is a good explanation or at least a plausible regime in which it would be relevant.  It just was not very reassuring that so many projects were a bit shaky on the biology, the reason being that if you make a bad assumption early on, then all the work following may end up going to waste.

I really hate making this criticism of my field, because I'm very pro-mathematical biology and the incorporation of modeling into the biological sciences.  Back when I interviewed for graduate school (and was a lot more ignorant of many of these issues), a large number of biologists were skeptical of my work and critical of modeling in general.  Of course, I was quick to defend my own work and the field as a whole. Unfortunately, after this conference - and a couple years immersed in the medicine and experimental biology - I found myself agreeing with some of their criticisms.

This is not an easy field, and I will definitely acknowledge that there is much to learn on all sides.  I can't even pretend to know enough to criticize the technical details of other's work.  But in my opinion it is inexcusable to not know at the least the basics of the biological system one presumes to work in.  I know that many people come from mathematics, but when creating a model, there are inevitably simplifications that will be made.  How can one make informed choices about those decisions without knowing a system thoroughly?

A senior mathematical biologists gave me some very good insight, however.  He told me, To work in this field requires a major investment and dedication to the biology.  Many mathematicians are not ready to make the leap.

And I guess that is okay - but we as a field have a long way to go.