|
DOOP posted:I doubt 99.5% pure acetone makes good nail polish remover. I mean, it should remove nail polish but with a whole bunch of other stuff as well The good nail polish remover is just that. You keep it in a safe location because it's a hazardous material and it's smart to treat it as such. If I were that person's ehs I'd be mad as heck but I'm not so meh. At least put it back.
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
Its more the fact that we had very little acetone to begin with (thanks to the operators using most of it to clean centrifuge parts) so her taking that bottle left the lab with very little. I expect she'll be screaming at me tomorrow 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
DOOP posted:I expect she'll be screaming at me tomorrow Jesus if you don't have the clout to be able to stand up for yourself report it to EH&S and have them do it for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
The incompetence of one of my coworker's is seriously baffling to me. He has literally never once gone an entire organ harvesting without completely deviating from the protocol and also most likely loving up data for one of our most important studies  I think all I've done my last few posts is post E/N poo poo here, my bad. But ugggghhhhh. Okay, done I promise. Question though, does anyone else use/make PBS(phosphate buffered saline) in their labs? Our protocol has us using sodium phosphate monobasic and dibasic, while in my histotech book I'm studying from every protocol uses potassium monobasic and sodium dibasic(might have the mono/di switched on those, not enough coffee in the world right now...). I know it's not a huge difference, but I'm wondering if that can make a legit difference in the quality of solutions, specifically paraformaldehyde, we use.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
I'm just a babby lab tech/research assistant, but we also use just one form of potassium phosphate and one form of sodium phosphate. I believe it's potassium mono, sodium di? So, yeah, probably in accordance with your histology textbook.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Antivehicular posted:I'm just a babby lab tech/research assistant, but we also use just one form of potassium phosphate and one form of sodium phosphate. I believe it's potassium mono, sodium di? So, yeah, probably in accordance with your histology textbook. Yeah I'm wondering why we're using Na/Na instead of K/Na. Definitely gonna bring it up with my supervisor. I could maybe see some explanation if we were looking at potassium pumps/channels in neurons, but... we're not, haha. Maybe I can point it out and look good to my supervisor 
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Johnny Truant posted:Yeah I'm wondering why we're using Na/Na instead of K/Na. Definitely gonna bring it up with my supervisor. I could maybe see some explanation if we were looking at potassium pumps/channels in neurons, but... we're not, haha. Maybe I can point it out and look good to my supervisor PBS is kinda of a lovely buffer, unless of course you are working with cells and have to care about some potassium/sodium balance. Na+ is a stronger ion electrostatically than K+ and considering the amount of Na+ is much higher than the K+, Na+ will dominate the electrostatics. Not doing cell work, but unless my protocol for some reason demands it (we do a lot of stuff on following published protein expression and purification protocols), I would go with either just NaPO4 + NaCl and adjust pH or use something like MES, HEPES, MOPS or Tris. Phospate falls out of solution with Ca and other cations, which cause a lot of issues for us.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Are HP/Agilent GC's supposed to be turned completely off at the end of the day? Not just turning off the gases, but a full shut down? We used to only turn off the gases, but switched to a full shutdown recently and started having a lot more problems
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
DOOP posted:Are HP/Agilent GC's supposed to be turned completely off at the end of the day? Not just turning off the gases, but a full shut down? Uhhh...what? We have a Thermo, and we only cut down on gasses when we reduce the temp to 40 C. Even then we keep the column flow on. We have a FIC detector and some of the more heavily used gasses are reduced automatically after we turn off the flame. We haven't had any major problems. But you shouldn't shut down completely unless it is for heavy maintenance. It ruins the column quickly, as far as I know.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Dante Logos posted:Uhhh...what? We have a Thermo, and we only cut down on gasses when we reduce the temp to 40 C. Even then we keep the column flow on. We have a FIC detector and some of the more heavily used gasses are reduced automatically after we turn off the flame. We haven't had any major problems. But you shouldn't shut down completely unless it is for heavy maintenance. It ruins the column quickly, as far as I know. The service manual says do not shut off the GC, our SOPs says do no shut off the GC, but *in whiny VP voice* But what if the power goes out and there's no one here Dude just wants to save 20 bucks on the electric bill
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
DOOP posted:Are HP/Agilent GC's supposed to be turned completely off at the end of the day? Not just turning off the gases, but a full shut down? Absolutely not if they're MS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
DOOP posted:The service manual says do not shut off the GC, our SOPs says do no shut off the GC, but Restek says to plug the column if you shut down http://blog.restek.com/?p=4495 Financial would try to save money by never changing the oil in your car
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
poo poo we don't even turn off our icps.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
At my last job, we used a Shimadzu GC and never shut it down. It was only typically used once every 12 hours, for final product certification.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 00:21
|
|
It's burgin' time! 
|
GCs are made to stay on no matter what. Shutting down/starting up is bad for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Question for anyone in this thread with a phd, is it still worth getting one anymore? this past weekend i was catching up with a buddy at a local university working on one in the same general field as myself (NMR spectroscopy) the work is really interesting (looking at cell expression via NMR), he said that if i wanted to join the group, because of the level of experience I have (5 years in industry (dear god its been that long...)) his adviser would likely fall over himself trying to get me to join his research group. its tempting since usually you need an phd to work in NMR but i keep hearing about how their are way too many phds and don't want to spend the rest of my life justifying my existence, also having to take a break from money is a bit scary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 12:28
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Question for anyone in this thread with a phd, is it still worth getting one anymore? this past weekend i was catching up with a buddy at a local university working on one in the same general field as myself (NMR spectroscopy) the work is really interesting (looking at cell expression via NMR), he said that if i wanted to join the group, because of the level of experience I have (5 years in industry (dear god its been that long...)) his adviser would likely fall over himself trying to get me to join his research group. its tempting since usually you need an phd to work in NMR but i keep hearing about how their are way too many phds and don't want to spend the rest of my life justifying my existence, also having to take a break from money is a bit scary. Typically you still need a PhD to work with NMR, since that is usually the only way you get hands-on experience with spectrometers. Actual NMR work is not really that hard, since most people work on a phenomlogical/black box level with NMR. Cell expression using NMR, are we talking about metabolomics? Cause that is the new hotness within the NMR field. Whether it will lead to actual real jobs outside of the university remains to be seen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Question for anyone in this thread with a phd, is it still worth getting one anymore? this past weekend i was catching up with a buddy at a local university working on one in the same general field as myself (NMR spectroscopy) the work is really interesting (looking at cell expression via NMR), he said that if i wanted to join the group, because of the level of experience I have (5 years in industry (dear god its been that long...)) his adviser would likely fall over himself trying to get me to join his research group. its tempting since usually you need an phd to work in NMR but i keep hearing about how their are way too many phds and don't want to spend the rest of my life justifying my existence, also having to take a break from money is a bit scary. In most companies, you move up with proven ability and achievement, not just degree. There are some really bad PhDs out there with some impressive degrees. And some really smart and talented people without PhDs. As for NMR specifically, there are career paths for non-PhD NMR people. Just start out as a tech (industry or academia), learn how to maintain the instrument, then help researchers, then get your own projects. My experience with NMR labs is that if you can run the instrument and be friendly and helpful with the researchers, you're in the top 10% of NMR people. Just my experience, YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Question for anyone in this thread with a phd, is it still worth getting one anymore? this past weekend i was catching up with a buddy at a local university working on one in the same general field as myself (NMR spectroscopy) the work is really interesting (looking at cell expression via NMR), he said that if i wanted to join the group, because of the level of experience I have (5 years in industry (dear god its been that long...)) his adviser would likely fall over himself trying to get me to join his research group. its tempting since usually you need an phd to work in NMR but i keep hearing about how their are way too many phds and don't want to spend the rest of my life justifying my existence, also having to take a break from money is a bit scary. I did undergrad research in NMR and loved it. I just kind of lucked into a pretty cushy, if low paying, student tech job  Just to be clear you said the same general field, implying you are working in it now, or you are an industry chemist in something besides NMR? I went to a really large state school with 6 spectrometers so I got hands-on experience although obviously they didnt let me do much as far as maintenance besides tune and match probes and fill cryogens tbh take your friend's advice with a grain of salt. Almost any adviser in hard science will jump over themselves to take you as long as you got good grades and preferably have some research experience. It's cheap labor for them and honestly part of the reason there is such a glut of PhDs. Having said that there are some companies for which there is a hardline stance on a PhD, no question. Most however will let you substitute x years of work experience for a masters requirement, y years for a PhD etc. NMR jobs aren't many unfortunately because of the very high expense which is why I switched to specializing in LC, GC, and mass spec. It was just too risky for me to spend 4-6 years studying something that wasn't a guaranteed job and I ended up loving chromatography just as much. This was in 2008 though so YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
seacat posted:I did undergrad research in NMR and loved it. I just kind of lucked into a pretty cushy, if low paying, student tech job Currently an analytical chemist specializing in NMR in GMP now. its a ok job at a CRO that I've done it for about 5 years now that started paying pretty well recently. We had a bizarre reshuffle recently where they axed some managers and the most recent hires and now we report to off site managers. Based on how things are looking I will probably have to find a new job in the next year or two. I'm just trying to decide what I might do next, new job in science, double down on science or get the gently caress out of science. This adviser is pretty well liked apparently, talking to a few people at the office who have met him or know of him and everyone says he wants his students to succeed and is a great guy to work for and tries to help them find decent post docs, the more i think about it though the golden handcuffs have got me at this point so i rather keep my bags of money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Currently an analytical chemist specializing in NMR in GMP now. its a ok job at a CRO that I've done it for about 5 years now that started paying pretty well recently. We had a bizarre reshuffle recently where they axed some managers and the most recent hires and now we report to off site managers. Based on how things are looking I will probably have to find a new job in the next year or two. I'm just trying to decide what I might do next, new job in science, double down on science or get the gently caress out of science. As someone with an PhD + postdoc experience in NMR spectroscopy (specifically protein NMR) I would say getting the gently caress out of science is a good idea. The problem is never getting a PhD and then a post doc, it is rather what to do afterwards. Either you go back to industry with rougly the same prospects as you have now (since there are not that many NMR positions out there) or you go on with academia which is a pain of its own. If I am guessing right, the advisor you are talking about does NMR on metabolomics. I know some NMR people that works partly within that field and sofar it seems like a field that is pretty far off from being mature (which of course also is an oppurtunity). Out of sheer NMR curiosity, how do you use NMR in GMP? Looking for impurities using 1D 1H and 13C NMR spectra?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Out of sheer NMR curiosity, how do you use NMR in GMP? Looking for impurities using 1D 1H and 13C NMR spectra? We do that sometimes but a lot more as well, About half of what i do is ID verification so either yearly testing of existing standards (does it look like last years spectra?) or testing whole new compounds (does it match what the person submitting it say it is) with the usual suite of 1D and 2D experiments usually, 1H and 13C with 19F or 31P mixed in from time to time. The rest of my work is qNMR which, depending on the project is either a) purity of things when they don't have chromophores or we have not enough for the additional testing needed to determine purity. or b) testing of in production samples, this usually is just checking solvent ratios to see if a swap from one solvent to another is done then i tell the person running the reactor if they can go forward with their batch record. The third thing that is done but not where i work is using solids NMR to determine formulation of some drug products, usually its done to study forms that in a particular lot i would love to do this but alas we dont have a GMP qualified solids NMR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
I think the handful of people who got promoted high without PhDs benefited enormously from the 90s/2000s job market. Today there are plenty of PhD applicants for each job posting and companies rarely have to settle for a BS or MS. Even if you do manage to get promoted up internally, it only takes a recession to be back to associate/lab tech. Getting a PhD shouldn't be necessary, but overall it is the new normal. IMHO, get BS, work in biotech, save $, then do a PhD in your 30s.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
john ashpool posted:I think the handful of people who got promoted high without PhDs benefited enormously from the 90s/2000s job market. Today there are plenty of PhD applicants for each job posting and companies rarely have to settle for a BS or MS. Even if you do manage to get promoted up internally, it only takes a recession to be back to associate/lab tech. There are still some companies out there that require PhDs for promotions above a certain point. But they're in the minority, imho.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
john ashpool posted:I think the handful of people who got promoted high without PhDs benefited enormously from the 90s/2000s job market. Today there are plenty of PhD applicants for each job posting and companies rarely have to settle for a BS or MS. Even if you do manage to get promoted up internally, it only takes a recession to be back to associate/lab tech. It depends on your field. I work in QC/R&D in manufacturing, currently in medical devices and pharma, and have seen lots of resumes. Very few PhDs applied and I never interviewed any that did. I can count the number of PhDs amongst the hundreds that I've dealt with over the last 8 years in operations, quality, management (middle-management to executives), metrology, service/repair, sales, contract labs, finance, etc., in one hand. Probably even fewer masters degree people. I started working in 2008 so it's although it's not a decades-long sample I haven't seen anything close to needing a postgrad degree as the new normal. Maybe your field is different, I dunno. A PhD teaches you how to do research. That's pretty much it. If you choose get one understand that unless you get pretty lucky your 4-5 year old thesis will be at best marginally related to what you end up doing for a living. Don't doubt that some fields (e.g. synthesis, advanced research) require them but for most it's kind of of a waste of time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
I'm aboard the "get PhD if you want R&D" train. A MS will get you a higher pay but a BS catches up in a few years. Likewise a PhD doesn't offer much beyond more cash upfront if it's not directly related to the PhD. Pay your dues as a lab tech and be ready to pounce on something else. Having actual production lab experience does far, far more than a piece of paper. People want lab rats that know how to do the same analysis 5000000 times without loving up. Also don't go for a PhD in a hard science in your 30s. That's just my opinion since I'm 29 and gonna work on making a baby when insurance enrollments happen this year. Babies don't go well with PhDs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:I'm aboard the "get PhD if you want R&D" train. A MS will get you a higher pay but a BS catches up in a few years. Likewise a PhD doesn't offer much beyond more cash upfront if it's not directly related to the PhD. Babies don't go well with anything  Congratulations on planning to have one. Keep it to one and be a part of the change this world needs!
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
goodness posted:Babies don't go well with anything They really don't. We're planning two. Banking on not having a douchey, spoiled only child being a net gain for the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:They really don't. Only douchey and spoiled if the parents let it happen. Those same parents will easily make two kids douchey and spoiled. Be a part in reducing word population!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
I lucked out so loving hard not getting a Ph.D. I'm getting a little resistance breaking into the R track, but in a few years I should be there. Plus I'm already making as much them anyways. Does anyone have an Octet HTX? I'm about to pull the trigger on one and wanted to know if there's anything I should look out for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Anyone here do anything with cleaning verification / validation / logging? I'm in a fight with QA over interpretation of 21CFR requirements around equipment use and cleaning tracking. They're insisting that I need to have a separate use/maintenance/cleaning logbook for each of 44 different approximately identical pieces of equipment (stainless steel bins in three sizes, each with its own SAP #), while I'm pushing for three logbooks (one per size) with a separate page for each SAP # so that they all have individual pages in a logbook, rather than their own logbook. (WHen a page fills up, QA would claim the entire logbook and re-issue a new one with the last usage line hard-printed as the first line on each page, for a fresh start + traceability.) I think 44 logbooks is ludicrous, especially for something that acts as a glorified secondary container. How are you people handling this sort of stuff at your sites?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Sundae posted:Anyone here do anything with cleaning verification / validation / logging? I just wrote and completed a cleaning validation and read an obscene amount of research on cleaning validations. (This is for a topical OTC drug product, it is classified as a drug but YMMV depending on location and how hard auditors want to bust balls) I've had a similar situation happen before actually - 1 logbook per piece of equipment and like 3 pages get used. I don't know what an SAP# is but ultimately what matters to the Agency is that proper records are kept and proper doc control is followed. We're kind of a mom-and-pop shop sized pharmaceutical company (about 200 employees, maybe 8 dedicated to the pharma division and we make only 4 different formulas). I know 21CFR210/211 just got reissued (boy, that little book is fatter this time) but from years of reading regs I really do not think they go that specific on how you keep your documents as long as proper procedures are issued ahead of time, written, followed, and proper doc control is followed. Again we're not a huge pharmaceutical company but we absolutely are under the pharma umbrella. Sounds to me like your quality department are being a bunch of assholes. (I work in Quality, so this is not favoritism ). I've been through quite a few FDA and ISO Audits and as long as your documentation is complete, and it makes sense, and it can be justified, it doesn't matter how you consolidate it. Companies change and times change and needs change. Even 21CFR11 had to be clarified recently because people were suffering profit loss due to over-regulation with no improvement in public safety. Depending on how rich your company is, you might just let this one go if you don't feel like doing battle with them. I mean I think maybe we have a total of 50-60 notebooks/binders/lab notebooks for the whole pharma side of our facility! Not for ... the same piece of equipment. But we are a young operation so if you're a $5billion pharmaceutical plant maybe it makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
Sundae posted:Anyone here do anything with cleaning verification / validation / logging? We track this stuff electronicly, so log books don't come up at my site, so I'm not an expert in this area by a long shot, but I could see the request coming from an audit risk mitigation angle. Putting everything in one book means that if you are asked for the cleaning record on 1 piece of equipment, you have to give them cleaning records from all of the equipment in the book. You could then pull other pieces of equipment into a scope if an auditor sees something off on a different line/page for another piece of equipment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Hey crosspost from the chemistry nerd thread:DemeaninDemon posted:Speaking of jobs, my company is hiring a chemist in the trace analysis lab. A BS+ and production-level lab experience needed. It's a class 10 cleanroom lab so you get to wear the bunny suit! You'll work evenings/nights mostly alone so that means you get to learn most everything the lab does. Pretty sure that includes a really nice ICP-MS and various trace-level chromatography instruments. It's semiconductor manufacturing so you will work with HF and worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Hey crosspost from the chemistry nerd thread: ISO Class 10? Where are you reading your regulations? Class 10 is far more forgiving than 8; we have an ISO Class 8 and nobody wears bunnysuits. And never had a problem on gowning. Someone in your quality department set unreasonable specs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
seacat posted:ISO Class 10? Where are you reading your regulations? Class 10 is far more forgiving than 8; we have an ISO Class 8 and nobody wears bunnysuits. And never had a problem on gowning. Someone in your quality department set unreasonable specs. Oh right we don't use ISO classification. It's ISO class 4. Full smock, hoods, and booties+ ground. It's semiconductor manufacturing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Oh right we don't use ISO classification. It's ISO class 4. Full smock, hoods, and booties+ ground. I just visited a couple semiconductor manufacturing sites. Crazy stuff. The groups I was talking to don't appear to be doing much "traditional" chemistry other than testing their chemicals. Mostly SEM and some TEM testing. Honestly though I have no idea what they're doing at the production line as we are working with their labs that test failures and customer issues/complaints. Do you work in production? I'd love to hear what a standard day looks like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Lyon posted:I just visited a couple semiconductor manufacturing sites. Crazy stuff. The groups I was talking to don't appear to be doing much "traditional" chemistry other than testing their chemicals. Mostly SEM and some TEM testing. Honestly though I have no idea what they're doing at the production line as we are working with their labs that test failures and customer issues/complaints. I work in R&D so it's production plus trying to develop methods for new materials. Mostly testing the chemicals since the various wet processes, platings, and planarizations have tight controls. Some thin films in the deposition processes checking elemental ratios. Typical day is hitting the sample counter and chugging through it all. I'm the only one there at night so I do almost everything in the lab. I'll do wet tests, icp-oes, IC, CVS, particle sizing, and the dishes all at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
Sundae posted:Anyone here do anything with cleaning verification / validation / logging? Most of our equipment (platewashers, Milli-Q, eyewash, any automation equipment, etc) do each get their own logbook though some are then put into larger binders for each model. Most weekly maintenance is also entered into either the electronic lab notebook or the instrument management system. Though with a container that has no moving parts and is just being cleaned you could probably get away with combining them into one, idk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
Youth Decay posted:Most of our equipment (platewashers, Milli-Q, eyewash, any automation equipment, etc) do each get their own logbook though some are then put into larger binders for each model. Most weekly maintenance is also entered into either the electronic lab notebook or the instrument management system. Though with a container that has no moving parts and is just being cleaned you could probably get away with combining them into one, idk. Quality unfortunately ruled that I have to have a separate logbook for each and every mobile piece of equipment. 44 logbooks it is (and even more once we get tablet press tooling received in house).
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 04:13
|
|