Michael Dustin (The Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology)

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Peter O'Toole (00:02):
Welcome to The Microscopists, a bite sized bio
podcast hosted by Peter O'Toole,sponsored application Institute
of Rheumatology, and he talksabout how he tweaked his grant
applications that made all thedifference to getting them

(00:24):
funded.

Michael Dustin (00:25):
And then we went from, you know, almost like that
kind of triage point to getting,like, the top score in a grand
round when it worked.

Where the convention for naming antibodies
came from.

So one molecule might have 20 names based on
different people making theseantibodies, so they decided to
get together, all of the peoplewho are making antibodies and
analyzing these surfacemolecules, exchange the
antibodies. And this started theCD thing, which some, you know,
CD 1 through. Now they're intothe 100.

And which is best, at Twitter

or LinkedIn for networking and science
communication? Twitter, x typething. You know, I have an
account, and and and I'll tweetpapers, like, you know,
preprints and things. But but,you know, basically, most of the
real utility comes from fromLinkedIn here.

All in this episode

of the Mycross Twist.

Hi. Welcome to the Mycross Twist. I'm Peter
O'Toole from the University ofYork. And today, I'm joined by
Michael from the University ofOxford. Mike, how are you today?

Fantastic. Thanks, Pete.

Actually, I should probably introduce you a
bit better as a groundbreakingfamous immunologist that we're
now very lucky to have over herein the UK. And that's when you
go red and get dyed.

Of course. Yeah. No. It's been great. It's been
great being here.
I've been here 10 years now atUniversity of Oxford, and, yeah,
it's been it's been fantastic.I've really been enjoying my,
it's almost like a, like our ouryou know, one of the things that
enabled my wife and I to do thiswas by our daughter getting to
kind of college age and and andleaving home and things. And,

(02:04):
you know, so we had, like, thisempty nest and kind of, but just
decided, okay. We can bepostdocs again and basically go
off and do something totallydifferent, which has been our
pretty much our last, yeah, last10 years.

So your wife is also a scientist?

Yeah. Yeah. So, actually, we're both working at
the University of Oxford. Youknow, previously, we'd had, you
know, worked in differentacademic institutions in the
same cities in Saint Louis andand New York. But, you know, in
in Oxford, basically, we wereinitially in different institute
buildings.
I was I was at the KennedyInstitute. She was at the
Meadowlark, and now we actuallyboth work at the Kennedy. So so,

(02:40):
yeah, again, this is somethingwe're both really kind of
enjoying, you know, I guess,learning learning about Oxford
and learning about, you know,doing research in a different
setting. It's been, enjoyed.Very enjoyable.

And and I say actually, so let's stay on this
point then. You say you'reenjoying Oxford, getting to know
Oxford. How are you findingcoming over to the UK
culturally?

Yeah. You know, like the, it's in we work in in
English, but, of course, youknow, a lot of the, you know,
little sort of expressions andthings and way people, you know,
use language are subtlydifferent. So so, you know, I
guess I've had to, you know,kind of recalibrate to, you
understanding when I'm beingtold no indirectly or, yes, I'm

(03:25):
very excited about that. Justtrying to figure you know, sort
out sort out sometimes, like,what kind of reaction I'm
getting. But the, you know, I Ithink in general, like, Oxford's
been like a a new playground,you know, kind of scientifically
and also culturally.
Like, I'm affiliated with thecollege for the past couple
years, which has been a reallyinteresting experience with the

(03:46):
Brasenose College. And, youknow, so that's sort of you
know, I'm in a researchinstitute. So in a lot of ways,
you know, my research more orless has been, you know, doing
research in different excitingplaces, and this is, you know,
like a new exciting place to doresearch. It was, yeah,
different colleagues, differentspecific opportunities and
things. But, you know, I mean,you know, the the the teaching

(04:06):
system in in Oxford is reallydifferent than the teaching
system I experienced, say, atBoston University as an
undergrad.
So I was in these, you know,like, huge lectures and these,
you know, kind of the there werediscussion sections, but it was
kind of it was it was reallykind of not the kind of, you
know, tutorial system thatOxford and and Cambridge, use
where they're, you know, reallygetting together with, and and

(04:29):
kind of customizing thateducational experience. So I
haven't, you know, donetutorials yet, but this is now
something I'm getting, you know,kind of, hopefully I will
before, you know, well, now thatI'm not affiliated with the
college, and get a chance to,you know, learn about this, you
know, different way of, youknow, enriching, you know,
undergraduate education. And Ithink yeah. And I I'm really

(04:50):
also a strong believer in, youknow, getting into labs early,
and and having, you know, kindof hands on research experience
at the undergraduate level. AndI'm and I'm trying to sort of,
you know, see if I can, youknow, pitch this also to the to
the folks at Praising House andand to kind of maybe increase
opportunities for that earlyexperience, which maybe, you

(05:12):
know, is again, maybe considereddifficult to fit into the
curriculum in a, in in in, say,you know, Oxford's programs.
So so, again, it's it'ssomething that I may I'm kind of
interested in maybe, you know,seeing although, you know,
obviously, this is a 1000 yearold institution and things. I'm
probably not gonna have too muchof an impact on how they do
things. But at the same time,yeah, I'm I'm interested in

(05:35):
trying to to tweak, you know,little things about, about how
how they might, you know,provide those experiences,
which, you know, were soformative for me.

Well, it's interesting you say that. Just
last week, we interviewed forsummer studentships, at York.
We've got something calledGeneration Research, which
Gillian Barlow's running atYork. And the quality of the
students. And, actually, it wasthe sum of this.
It was the 2nd year studentsreally shown through, and they
won't have had much labexperience. They'll have had
some big lab experience fromnot, you know, getting into it.

(06:07):
And, it was really tough. Theywere mind blowingly good. And I
think the summer studentships,it opens their it probably
changes their career pathbecause they get to really
understand research during thattime.
And I think it then boosts theirtheir 3rd 4th year because
they're now more motivated, gota better appreciation of it. A

(06:27):
top do you know? Maybe find moreof a passion and love for
science. I've got to say thesestudents already seem to love
it, but I do think and the nicething about generation research
is they're kind of almost blindCVs. So you don't get to know
who they are and they're funded.
So so they can afford to do thestudentships. That was really
cool. But actually we had onereally cool student. Well, we

(06:48):
had 3 really cool ones, and wehad to flip a coin, pick 1. And
I think I've just found fundingfrom somewhere else to get a
second in.
But do you do student ships,summer student ships in the
labs?

You know, the, the medical students have this
program they're called, FHSprogram, so so they kind of they
do have a, you know, 2 months orso for research in their medical
curriculum. Otherwise, it wouldvary quite a bit by department
in terms of you know,biochemistry has some, you know,

(07:21):
kind of also some researchopportunities and things, but
you know the thing that I,again, I kind of really
benefited from as anundergraduate was being able to
kind of follow a project for,like, 2 years, and it wasn't
obviously full time. It wasreally kind of quite part time
by when it was possible to tocome into the lab and things.

(07:42):
But it was, you know, it really,I think that's really different
than even, like, something whereyou have, like, a summer or
something. So so, again, like,that, kind of, you know, thing
where you can, you know, from,like, maybe 2nd year, bring
together, you know, a, you knowand, again, it's it's it might
not be for everyone, but, youknow, for people who really feel

(08:03):
like they've gotten that, youknow, bug for doing research, to
have that opportunity to, youknow, connect up these
experiences as opposed to havingthem as, you know, multiple
isolated internships orsomething.
So again, it's, you know but Iknow recognizing that that's
that my you know, unique and andworked out. But I but I know
other people, say, when I was atBoston University, like, other
other people were, you know,kind of doing that also. It was

(08:24):
kind of just getting startedafter, you know, maybe like, I
had cell biology as a course in2nd year and then basically
really got really excited aboutcell biology and then kind of,
you know, just just approachedthe PI and the, you know, the
professor from the course. Andhe basically said, you want to

(08:47):
do research in the lab, don'tyou? And I was like, I suppose.
Yeah. And and he kind of thenjust captured me and kind of,
pulled me in and and and reallyhelped me along, really kind of
a quite, you know, maybesomething on the order of, 5 to
10 hours a week or something,but but, you know and then with

(09:07):
some interruption, some breaks,but then otherwise letting me
kind of, you know, get gothrough a whole thing and
actually write a paper at theend and stuff that we published
in a peer review journal, and itwas like you know, it was an
opportunity. So, whether allthat can be, you know, put into
a program, or or do you justsort of enable it? You know? And
I think in that case, it wasreally kind of informally
enabled.

(09:27):
There was, like, a senior thesisproject that was, of course,
that basically I then fed intothat already with quite a bit of
work under my belt before thateven, you know, thesis, kind of
senior thesis thing started.

Could just be a case of allowing it to happen.

Yeah. Yeah. I think that would be and and and
maybe just having, an, you know,like an, an interest and, you
know, like you say, like youlike you have a funding
mechanism for some of the summerwork, that would be that that
could be quite important becauseI I remember, you know, living
off of, like, $500 a month, youknow, in Boston while doing some

(10:04):
of this, you know, kind ofsummer work in the lab there.
And, you know, even shunningother jobs that would have, you
know, probably been more thatwould have probably paid better.
But, you know, essentially justwanting to get back into the lab
and and and do that, even if itwas sort of, you know, relying
somewhat on, you know, kind of,still input from parents and
things to be able to afford it.
But, you know, at any rate, Imean, I think I think, you know,

(10:26):
some mixture between, you know,if if if the model that you're
driving could also connect upwith some, you know, if it's in
if it's in the same university,you know, like, an ability of
the student to basically comeback and kinda continue things
if there was a strong interestand, you know, might might be
might might set set the, youknow, set the stage for, you
know, someone then from thisundergraduate stage really

(10:47):
developing almost kinda like amaster's like project and then,
you know, being able to segueinto a PhD without you would
have too much additional, youknow, you know, lab training or
experience.

That's like a long term internship, almost
sort of a long thing internshipthroughout that period. So how
how how have you found living inthe UK? So outside of the
science, how have you found thatside? Is is that is that being
very different? Was it was itunnerving actually?
Oh, come on. You should take it

as We went we've had very different, you know,
kind of, like, I grew up in theHudson Valley, in a town called
Poughkeepsie, which is also kindof a college town. It's a little
bit it reminds me quite a bit ofOxford because it's kind of a
medium sized city, industrialcity. Like, they had a lot of
IBM, you know, basically, sokind of computer manufacturing
and things and design. So very alot of technology oriented

(11:43):
things, but also Vassar Collegeis there. So it was kind of it's
sort of and then surrounded byfarms and kind of countryside
and, of course, all the, youknow, the Catskill Mountains and
things like that.
So so it was kind of like thissort of nice mix of sort of,
like, rural and city. And, youknow, so but then we went to,
Boston, St. Louis, New YorkCity, lived in Manhattan for 10

(12:07):
years, 13 years actually, beforemoving to Oxford. So going from
Manhattan to Oxford was quite achange in lifestyle, no matter
how you slice it or things. Imean, kind of like a unique
urban experience to to a muchmore, you know, kind of, again,
like the sort of medium sizedcity, with with you know, very

(12:28):
heavily influenced by a college.
So, but, you know, we have greatneighbors here. So we have a
house in North Oxford, and wekind of you know, our our
neighbors are really great. So,yes, one of them is was is
academic. 1 of them, you know, aformer Oxford chair, and one of
them was, you know, basicallyjust people like a a guy who had

(12:49):
a garden, built business andthings. But, you know, and and,
you know, just wonderful peopleand, you know, so, enjoyed those
interactions and and and othersand other and also just, you
know, it's a very internationalcommunity.
So, like, our institute, I wouldsay, is less than half of the
PIs are probably were originallybased in the UK. They've really

(13:10):
come from all over it. So so wedon't really have much, you
know, feeling of there's there'sa kind of a transition, I
suppose, between, you know, the,you know, being a fully expat
like and not having theseconnections to, you know, you
get the sort of you know, veryfamiliar aspects of
international science, which Ialso, we also had at other

(13:32):
universities we worked at. So,again, like, the you know, so
it's not such a shocking thing,but, you know, I mean, some
things are, you know, just kindof, you know, different about,
you know, kind of, but I thinkin a in a in a charming,
pleasant way, I think, you know,particularly for the, let's say,

(13:53):
Oxford area.

And, so you said was your daughter, you said,
that went to university? Yeah.

So so, you know, my our our daughter, you know,
is, you know, back in the USstill and is actually kind of
returning to school now. So soshe, you know, didn't finish
college. She was when shereached college age, you know,
she did we you know, she she,you know, decided she, you know,

(14:23):
didn't wanna do, you know,university at that point or or
go to college. She, you know,basically has an interest in in
kind of veterinary 3rd brightkid veterinary. Was working at
that point in kind of a vet techkind of direction in New York.
And, and then she, the you know,kind of met the love of her life

(14:43):
as a, zoopathologist and andbasically then started going
around with his training inthere in Kansas City, New
Hampshire, and Pittsburgh for awhile, and now they're settled
outside Washington, DC, which isactually quite convenient
because I I visit Washington alot and do various things, and
and that that, you know, givesus an opportunity to see to see

(15:04):
her more. But essentially, yeah.So she's she's going back to
school now, kind of, in in in ain a biology area, probably
maybe with an interest in longterm interest in medical school
or, you know, veterinarypursuits. But that would be you
know, that's something thatshe's doing, you know, maybe
what one might call a as amature student, in in the UK.

That I just have a chance to ask, so how often do
you actually get back to seeher? Because that's the other
side. It's one thing when yourchild flares a nest, but
actually still wanna kind of seethem and be close and, of

course Of course. Of course. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah.
So this was why, you know, whenwhen you when you, you know,
look back on things, you say,oh, it's so easy to get back and
forth between the US and the UK,and, you know, we had a my lab
was maybe initially 5050 from2013 to 2015 or so, so we were
going back and forth all thetime in New York, and she was in

(15:53):
New York, so yeah, again, wewere seeing her all the time.
But then, with the pandemic in2020, it kind of changed that
whole thing, and also that was,you know, so this is when her
and her husband Ryan were kindof, you know, bouncing around to
all these different places. Sowe never visited them in Kansas
City. We never visited them inNew Hampshire because it

(16:16):
happened in this time framewhere there was just very little
travel. And, and now now that,you know, when they were we we
we did get to visit when theywere in, Pittsburgh and, you
know, kind of now now catchcatch up pretty regularly that
they're in the DC area.
It's quite easy. So so again, itwas, yeah, it was there are all
kinds of things we didn'tanticipate, like, you know,

(16:38):
Brexit, you know, Trump, maybeTrump 2. This is, like, you
know, all these things that aresort of, you know, so we were it
was the clip that we left. It'sa, you know, value left. So so,
you know, the the world's asurprising place.
And and I guess but, you know,we we roll with these things
and, we use Zoom a lot, youknow, basically, for our
communication during thepandemic and, to to, you know,

(17:00):
stay in touch.

So I tried to actually thinking of, the world
changing and everything else.Going back into the research
side of things, fundingobviously is changing, always
evolving, and the funding, Imean, is the world changing. And
over in the UK, obviously, it'svery competitive. You have to
write your grant proposals toget your funding. So I believe
were you welcome trust funded tostart?

(17:22):
Are you still welcome trustfunded?

Yes. So so the, our original recruitment was
with a Wellcome Trust principalresearch fellowship. So it was
like which is like an amazingopportunity. And and that
really, you know, was 7 7, 8years of the transition. It was
really kind of like the thestart up package for transition
in the lab from NYU to, toOxford along with, you know,

(17:48):
support from so so the KennedyInstitute, is a research
institute within within Oxford.
It moved from Imperial Collegein where it was affiliated with
Imperial College in London to toOxford in a new research
building in 2013, and that'swhen we arrived. So the, you
know, the Kennedy TrustRheumatology Research is a

(18:11):
charity that basically was abeneficiary of patent royalties
from patents related to tumornecrosis factor based targeted
therapies that were, you know,kind of developed. I mean,
interestingly, like, theantibody that was the original,
like, anti TNF, you know, thatwas used in the clinical trials

(18:32):
that were run by, you know, theKennedy Institute, was made by
Jan Vilcek, at NYU. So so when Iwas at NYU in the, you know,
2000s, there was this, you know,huge windfall of money from the
licensing of that antibody andand the patents that were
generated around, you know, youknow, kind of dealing with the

(18:55):
anti drug antibody effects in,you know, administering
antibodies as a long termtherapy, generated lots of
revenues for the, you know,essentially Imperial, when
Kennedy was there and and thethe Kennedy Trust Rheumatology
Research, which is kind of thecharity that supported the

(19:15):
Kennedy Institute from the1970s, so kind of been investing
in that for long term.
And the institute is kind of areinvestment of of those funds.
So so it's kind of so so from afunding standpoint, you know,
the Kennedy Institute is a longterm project of the Kennedy
Trust Rheumatology Research, andwe we benefit from that quite a

(19:36):
bit. And, you know, but but it'sa you know, it's basically,
they're a funder. We writegrants, and this is similar with
the Wellcome Trust. And, youknow, I have to say, I I guess
right.
I think, you know, in the US, Iwould say, you know, the NIH pay
lines and things fluctuate overtime, but otherwise, the system

(19:56):
is very stable. Like, thefunding, you know, platform has
really you know, maybe thebiggest thing that would have
changed in my lifetime maybe wasthe emergence of the Howard
Hughes Medical Institute as amajor funder. And and I guess at
the same time, I guess, like,the Wellcome Trust became a
major funder in the UK but is abigger percentage of UK funding

(20:18):
than, say, HHMI or something inthe US. So clearly, when the
Wellcome Trust changes its mindabout something, that has a huge
impact on research in the UK,and it really forces, like, lots
of people to re calibrate andkind of imagine things. So,
yeah, so I think I feel like thefunding landscape in the in the

(20:39):
UK is and also, you know, withthe ERC, like, our relationship
with the ERC, we've we've gottenwe've benefited from significant
ERC funding also.
We had an advanced grant andhave a synergy grant now. And
even navigating the Brexitprocess created quite a bit of
volatility and uncertainty. But,you know, again, it seemed like
the best bet at that point wasjust to keep writing those

(21:01):
grants, to keep submittinggrants to that organization, And
there have been different waysthat they've been funded over
time, over the past few years,but they've always been funded
if they were competitive in thatsystem. So so I think I think
the bottom line is you just keepwriting print, and that's and as
long as you're happy with thatand that process of thinking
about things and writing anddiscussing with people, that

(21:22):
that's part of the job in someways. It's not just a way to get
funding, but it's also part ofthe you know, process that you
use to basically innovate and,you know, you're challenged in
some ways to innovate and keepkeep moving forward.
But, you know, as long as youcan kind of be at peace with
that, then then I think I thinkit's actually a a healthy

(21:43):
system.

So so I I should just probably I just realized my
pen is actually from HowardHughes. It's from Janelia. So
it's it's just Yeah.

Right. And I think right. And and and
certainly, HHMI has been a modelfor, you know, things that say,
Walton has done over time and,you know, but it but, you know,
I think every let's say, itseems as an organization like
Walton, maybe every 10, 15 yearsor something, asks, okay. Is
what we're doing the rightthing? And then, you know,
basically shakes things up, andand I guess, you know, you could

(22:13):
say in some ways in terms of,like, you know, you see some
costs in terms of some, youknow, continuity and, you know,
say, individual organizationsbeing able to maintain certain
kind of skills and things may bechallenged a bit.
But, you know, I mean, ingeneral, I think the you know,
scientists are, you know,adaptable by nature maybe is one
of the one of the phenotypesthat we select for, and and you,

(22:36):
you know, kind of Yeah. Youknow, you work with it.

I think the most successful academics are are
very good at moving andadapting. It's a critical
aspect, I think, in academia tobe able to adapt and evolve,
with with the funding models,which which can feel
instinctively wrong for somebecause they're they're very
naturally keen or their passionis one area. And sometimes you

(23:02):
have to evolve that area to fithow the funding is going. So I I
actually have a differentquestion. Have you, how often do
you do your grant proposalsfail?

You know, probably over time, you know,
like, our eventual success ratewith revisions is probably okay.
It's probably might be more than50%, but individually, in terms
of individual grants and whetherthey get funded or not, you
know, in a way, you might almostsay, for my NIH period and other

(23:38):
things, that it may almost becloser to almost like the what
you might say, like, randomchance, like closer to the pay
line. Because, you know, Iguess, you know, early on, I I
did struggle to get my first NIHfunding when I was just starting
my lab in, at Wash U. And, youknow, so I guess one one

(23:59):
important thing was that the,Emily Nanaway, who I chair at
that point, and Steve Teuteltam,who was kind of like a, you
know, we I was kind of sittingbetween 2 departments, and they
were the they were the heads ofthose departments. And, you
know, they supported us.
They they kept they they, youknow, sort of gave us they they
put us under some pressure, but,you know, they did they did they

(24:20):
did support, what I was tryingto do in my group and saw that
there was something there. And,you know, so we went from
getting, like, you know, theidea that we were pitching.
Maybe we weren't quitecommunicating it properly or
whatever, but, you know, when itwhen it wasn't when it was an
idea and we were kind ofbuilding up the underpinning,
you know, kind of, technicalelements of it, we were getting,

(24:44):
like, you know, triage, whichwould mean, you know, in the NIH
system US system would be lower50%. And then we went from, you
know, almost like that kind oftriage point to getting, like,
the top score in a grant roundwhen it worked. You know?
So that was sort of, you knowand, again, like, people I've
I've talked to, you know, kindof just informally spoken with

(25:06):
people who, you know, saw thisdevelopment, you know, from,
say, like, the study sectionside or something. I'm supposed
to talk about these things. But,you know, again, it was, like,
many years later and kind ofjust just sort of in a general
way saying, you know, wow. Thatwas really interesting to see
that because, you know, theywere trying to decide, like, is
this something that, you know,we can support or we should

(25:26):
support or it looks interesting,but it's you know, we don't
quite get it. And then, youknow, eventually, you're saying,
oh, that's what they were tryingto do, and then realizing, okay.
That's actually okay. So so soholding on to that point was a
bit of a you know, there's a bitof a cliff edge there, but it it
did, it did eventually connect.

If you never got that funding, you know, well,
it's career making, isn't it?And to have got those results,
which I guess I guess I'mpresuming is around the super
mac super molecular structuresof their synapse, immune
synapse.

Yeah. Right. Right. Exactly. So this was this
kind of, you know, paper, thatwas published in Science in
1999.
And when that was, you know,when that data even before the
paper was published, when thatdata went into the grant so so
there's always, like, this kindof grantsmanship thing about
between preliminary data, whichisn't published yet, and the

(26:19):
data that's published, whichyou've already done, and
therefore you can't write forfunding for. And so so I believe
we we had that data in the grantbefore the while we were, like,
in in in revision for the paper,and the so the then, basically,
the paper was both, you know,well reviewed, and the you know,
at that point, that work in thegrant was seemed like, oh, okay.
That's what they're trying todo. So so it was kind of, yeah.

(26:41):
So so it was our sort of, youknow, so it was kind of like a
eureka moment that was actuallyshared with all of these, you
know, kind of, you know, purepeers, basically, who were who,
you know, we all we all knoweach other and things, and it's
sort of just, you know, theywere just trying to understand
what I was what I was going onabout with these supported
bilayers and things, and wherewhere is this gonna go?

(27:02):
Was it just sort of like a sortof like a a niche biophysical
tool, or was it something thatwould actually impact the way
people think about these things?So,

that's interesting. You know, you talk
amongst your peers and yourpeers are judging whether it
was. So that suggests you'requite well networked even in an
early stage of your career. Sohow important would you say
networking is and what's thebest what is the best way to
network today?

Oh, yeah. So I guess as a as a student, so I
worked with a, you know, like,kind of a a guy who was an
assistant professor, so it wasreally his lab was in an early
stage, but he was clearly on anupward trend. And you and again,
like, for us, he had atransformative technology. And

(27:48):
so as a so as Tim Springer so asa student, he was he worked with
Jack Strawinger. So, again, sohe was, like, well connected in
the, you know, say, powerstructure of, you know,
immunology in the 19 seventiesand eighties, so so clearly
working with, you know, a veryvery highly well known
scientist.
And his work was you know, hedid outstanding work as a

(28:08):
student. But then he he did apostdoc with, Cesar Millstein in
the UK. So so, again and that'skind of what in a way, one of my
early connections with the UKwas that, you know, these people
that I was, you know, workingwith early on did a lot of
their, say, postdoctoralresearch in Europe at that time,
and, you know, working withthese giants of, you know, in

(28:29):
various fields. And, he learnedhow to make monoclonal
antibodies, and Mil Sands Levythen came back to Harvard and
basically started makingantibodies to things and made
antibody monoclonal antibodiesto a number of adhesion
molecules used by lymphocytesfor cell cell communication.
And, you know, the problem thatit was in front of the groups

(28:50):
that I was working with as anundergraduate was purifying
membrane proteins, likereceptors that were involved in
cell cell communication, was ahuge challenge.
And just being able to doconventional biochemical
purification was reallyimpossible, just too expensive
and and and would never reallywould never work because of the
heterogeneity, physicalheterogeneity of the molecules.
But these monoclonal antibodies,1 step, million fold

(29:12):
purification. So so, you know,when I was a student and
basically started planning withthat as just doing a lab
rotation with him, it was like,oh my god. They've solved this
huge problem that that, youknow, my undergraduate lab was
basically destroyed by in someways. You know, really, like, I
guess they they got grants to dothis, and then they couldn't do
it because of the, challenges ofof purifying these proteins and

(29:34):
these, like, detergent extractsand things.
So so so, again, it was like thethe networking thing came in
from getting into a rising anarea that was kind of emerging,
and then for at least for methen, basically having, you
know, early papers in that. Soeven as a at the beginning of my

(29:55):
graduate work, say, I startedin, you know, 84, 85, had a
paper in 1986, you know, again,using these monoclonal
antibodies to characterize oneof these adhesion molecules, one
of many, you know, now, butmaybe an early one at that
point. And and then just, youknow, starting to go to meetings
and just meeting people through,you know, kind of emerging

(30:17):
collaborations. Like, theseantibodies were great
collaboration tools because youcould kind of distribute them to
people. And this was sort oflike in immunology, there were
these workshops that they had inthe starting in the 1980s where
people realizing they had theseantibodies, and they were all
calling they were all naming themolecules they recognized in

(30:38):
just, you know, kind ofperfusion of ways that one
molecule might have 20 namesbased on different people making
these antibodies.
So they decided to get together,all of the people who were
making antibodies and analyzingthese surface molecules,
exchange the antibodies, andthis started the CD thing, which
some CD1 through now they'reinto the 100. And this was an

(31:01):
early you know, kinda likeinformatics project. It was like
the genome project. It was likethe, you know, cell atlas. It
was basically a collective thingwhere people got together,
pooled their results, used aclustering framework to
basically identify the differentantigens, and then publish these
in these big books, you know,which you can still probably
find in libraries and things.

(31:22):
And I think there's even someonline access. But but, again,
this was, like, a a hugeformative thing, and those
created enormous networks. So wegot lots of you know, we would
get antibodies in for becauseTim was an antibody producer. He
would get these antibodies in.So we have, like, hundreds of
little tubes of, you know, kindof these, you know, highly
concentrated antibodies, and wewould just, you know, do all

(31:43):
these experiments.
And then we'd go to these, youknow, meetings and argue about
who should be CD 1 or whatever.You know? I mean, that was,
like, when in the one of theinitial meetings, they had to
decide, okay, who would be, Whatwould the CD want? You know?
Like you know?
And and this was sort of, youknow, somewhat of a political
thing, but it was also somewhatof a collective, you know, form,
you know, sort of process. So soagain, I thought that was, so in

(32:05):
my career, that was a networkingopportunity. So I suppose, you
know, these are still thesethings are, you know, now going
on and probably on an industrialscale. And I think, you know,
getting involved with thosekinds of things is a is a great
way to network in addition to,you know, filtering all of the
social media type stuff. But,you know, I think certainly
getting together with people whoare doing things and have

(32:26):
relevant, you know, tools andstuff and and sharing those.
Like, even microscopy, say, youknow, one can, you know, you
know, certainly that work a lotaround microscopy technology
because different places havedifferent, you know, strengths
and things, and you can youknow, not not everyone can have
everything. So that that cancertainly be a way to, you know,
connect up with people and say,hey. I've got an experiment. It
would be great on yourmicroscope.

Tim, I I had a question, which this leads
really quite nicely onto. Howcompetitive would you say the
field is? You know, is it a verycollegiate field or are there
are there different parties? Isit is it is it nicely
competitive or is there someaggressive competitiveness in

(33:08):
your area at the moment?

Yeah. Well, it's interesting because because, I
mean, we've worked on, let'ssay, t cell antigen receptors
for a long time. Like and, youknow, and and one thing you, you
know, you run into in any fieldis at any particular moment in
time, people will have kind oflike a working model, and they
believe that they fairly wellunderstand what's gonna happen

(33:31):
when, you know, when you inducea perturbation. So so when we
were looking at these, this kindof immune synapse concept, and
this this would involve t cellsgoing from a motile state to
stop to stopping. And, you know,so at this so so we had 2 it was
interesting, you know, when youwhen you then kinda just query
everyone, what what do you thinkwill happen when a desalcede's

(33:52):
antigen, when it sees and itrecognizes its proper MHC
peptide complex.
You know, some people wereperfectly happy with what we
were seeing, which is that theystopped, but other people were
thinking, you know, no, theyhave to keep moving. And and
then there was some in vitrodata that would support that. So
so it was kind of, you know,interesting. Like, around 1999,
2000, that time frame, you couldhave a pretty, you know, robust

(34:19):
debate about about, you know,basically, which one is which.
And and, you know, now nowadays,I mean, there's still a lot of,
you know, say, for Oxford, like,one of these, say, Oxford based
theories for t cell receptortriggering would be based on
movement of CD 45, a largephosphatase, away from the t
cell receptor through some, youknow, kind of the membranes come

(34:40):
close together.
This protein with a largeexosomein gets pushed out, and
that creates an environmentwhere the signaling can
basically go forward because thephosphatase is
dephosphorylating, and thekinases then can have a chance
to, you know, basically build upa signaling complex and
condensates and all these kindof things. So so, you know,
there's sort of like a a bigargument about conformational

(35:01):
dynamics of the t cell receptorright now. And and it's kind of
interesting because even thetech even as the technology
advances and we get better viewsof what's going on, there's
still a controversy. So so youthink, eventually, this has to
be solved. This people have tobasically be able to say, okay.
This this is a you know, peoplehave to basically be able to
say, okay. This this is a youknow, is this like a GPCR that

(35:21):
undergoes criticalconformational changes, or is
it, like, this rigid body thatjust sets up this short space
and then presents thesecytoplasmic domains for
phosphorylation without actuallyotherwise changing? And that is
still a quite robust argument.And, again, you know, people
will declare victory one side orother will declare victory in a
certain moment in time based onsome new observation, like, say,

(35:43):
the cryo EM of the t cellreceptor was one such event. And
then the, you know, the findingthat if you do cryo EM on t cell
receptors in detergent micelles,they look exactly the same, like
different receptors look exactlythe same with or without
ligation.
But then, you know, if you donow now it's starting to emerge,
and, you know, there's apreprintout that basically says
that if you do the samestructure in a membrane disc

(36:06):
with a bilayer, that now itlooks like it can actually, you
know, exist in a number ofstates, and that that makes the
quality of the data much lower.But it actually, you know,
because it's because it's ayou're basically trying to catch
a falling structure of some kindor, you know, you're looking at
something that's actuallybreathing. But but, you know, I
think, again, it's it's, it itcontinues to be a, you know,

(36:29):
like a hot topic, and we'regonna have a meeting in June
where we'll have a chance to,you know, see some data from
different perspectives and andcontinue to argue about this.

Which which is why I guess science remains
healthy. Mike, I'm gonna changetack and ask some quick fire
questions. Okay? So are

we the

early bird or night owl?

Nite Owl.

Nite Owl? PC

or Mac? Mac. Back from 84. So that I was
hooked in 84.

McDonald's or Burger King? Neither. What would
you choose? The cats choose whatwhat would you choose outside of
that for your fast food?

I love the, the, like, sort of falafel stands,
you know, little truck foodtrucks, that have, like, the,
you know, the lamb and the, youknow, sort of mid eastern mid
eastern fair, You know, kind of,quite probably equally un not I
should probably be able to say,but equally unhealthy, but
basically, yeah. Yeah. A littlebit more like a mom and pop sort

(37:33):
of level. Yeah.

Coffee or tea? Coffee.

Even even even now I've been in England, you
know, it's, yeah, afternoon teais still not a normal thing.

I'll keep you with coffee. Beer or wine?
Sorry? Beer or wine?

Oh, you know, either. I would say beer. Okay.
If I had to if I had to chooseone, but and there was no social
pressure. Like, sometimes at adinner, there's a collective
decision, like, okay.
You go with a bottle of wine oror beer, and then I I can go
either way in that setting. Yep.If the say, if a guest wants to
do wine, that's great. Maybemore towards red wine. But, you

(38:14):
know, basically, the yeah, ifit's just sort of like
everyone's doing their ownthing, I might I might go with
the, you know, like the Belgianale or something.
Yeah.

Okay. I'll answer the next bit if it's Belgian
ale. Chocolate or cheese?

You know, for dessert, probably more towards
chocolate.

Okay. UK or US?

Oh my. So, you know, I just say UK at the
moment. You know? I'm we'rehere. We're we're all in.

But you you still got a US passport. I'm just
checking. You still got

a US passport? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Right.
It's hard to get rid of that.It's actually like a like a like
a leech. You know?

TV or book?

You know, my wife will probably my wife is
more of a book person. I'mprobably more of a TV person.
Yeah.

And, what are you watching?

Visual. Like, no no longer TV. It's more like
your your computer screen.Sorry?

What are you watching at the moment?

You know, we've been doing the 3 body problem. I
think we just completed thecurrent set of, the through body
problem, which is basically youknow, so it's kind of I guess
we'd I I I use these, you know,kind of, services quite a bit.
You know? But that's a Netflixthing, I guess. But but, you
know, so so streaming services.
And and, yeah. So, yeah. So wekind of not quite binge watched

(39:43):
it, but basically took it inover a period of a few weeks.
Yeah. And that that's that's thesort of I've read those books,
so so so I guess I did read thebooks first.
But, you know, I was interestedto see how they would how they
would, you know, basically,present it. And then certainly,
it's easier to present somethingwith that kind of scope as a
series as opposed to just asingle movie.

So is is there any, is there TV or streaming
that that that you'd actuallythat you're gonna confess to
even though you don't reallywanna confess to watching?
Anything really trashy that youenjoy watching?

You know, you know, I've done all the John
Wick movies.

That's not trash. That's that's

That's probably cheap movies. That's that's
actually quite that'smainstream. Yeah. Well and, you
know, maybe this the equivalent,the equivalent kind of, do them
up sort of, trash. You know?
The the obviously, the that'sthe high culture version of it,
but there's there's also yeah.So so I I'll some of the some of
the streaming when I just wannaunwind with the, you know, in

(40:46):
some cases, this kind of, actalong those lines.

Which leads nicely onto. What is your
favorite film?

Oh, like a single favorite film. Yeah. But
at least based on things thatI've watched a lot of times, I
guess, you know, like, you know,the I I kind of I I I I really
do like the, yeah, ChristopherNolan films, like, Inception

(41:15):
and, you know, I guess andthere's one now, that I'm I'm
actually gonna blank on thename, but it was basically one
of the earlier films with thissort of reverse chronology. I'm
just blanking on the name of it,but basically it was something
to do with memory, like, Mementoor something like that. But but,

(41:40):
you know, basically, it was ayeah.
So so, you know, essentially,yeah. So probably, you know, I I
I've kind of enjoyed some ofthose things that kind of play
with your mind a little bit interms of, thinking about, you
know, kind of, dreams or time oryou know? And, again, like, that
was a thing where it was kind ofsomeone who has short term

(42:01):
memory loss, and and kind of,like, how we how what how that
could be you know, how thatwould change their perception
when they basically, you know,reset after having forgotten
everything that's happened intheir immediate past. But they
have a long term memory oftheir, you know, distant past,
so it's quite a you know, again,you have maybe some conundrums
around that.

And what's your favorite food?

You know, probably from, you know, a
family kind of traditionalstandpoint, like, the Maine
lobster is is sort of like thewould be sort of like one of the
Dustin sort of, you know, kindof kind of favorites that I'll
still, you know, rarely veryoccasionally, but but, you know,
kind of often sometimes takeadvantage of.

So at home, are you the cook or the washer
upper?

Usually, the washer upper, but there are a
couple things I do, you know,for dinners, that are sort of
that rotate into the, but butusually on the yeah. So during
during the, lockdown periods andpandemic of things, we did kind
of, like, diversify ourrepertoire of things that we
were, you know, kind ofpreparing. And we're still kind
of in that, you know, workingworking through the things, or

(43:14):
we're right now kind ofrepeating some of the things
that we made in that time framefor the first time.

Okay. I didn't ask you that when we're doing
the films. Star Trek or StarWars?

You know, like, I mean, early on, Star Trek
yeah. I mean so so, you know,we, I was kind of raised on
that, I would say, in some ways.Like, that was something that
was, you know, you know, again,with all of its, you know, kind
of period, you know,strangeness, but, yeah, so so
did did enjoy that.

Okay. X, Twitter, or LinkedIn?

So, you know, LinkedIn has been the most
useful for me, because, youknow, it's a great way to get in
touch with people and companiesthat don't have good websites or
at least websites that let youreally track people in the
organization. So, you know, I Ithink that's sort of like the,
and we do a lot of collaborativework with with, you know, pharma

(44:12):
and small biotechs and thingsaround this immune synapse
topic, which is, you know, kindof a, in a way, sort of a a
framework for how some of these,you know, drugs,
immunotherapies, and thingswork. So so, yeah, so that's
been so so LinkedIn's beenreally useful, like like
Twitter, x type thing. You know,I have an account, and and and
I'll tweet papers, like, youknow, preprints and things. But

(44:33):
but, you know, basically, mostof the real utility comes from
from LinkedIn and connectionsmade there.

Okay. And final quick fire question. Favorite
color?

Green. You know, this I you know, as as a child,
I had kind of a, I would say,like, a hyperactivity, and and I
was a slow slow to learn things.And, you know, green was the
first color I could really naildown, you know, as again, when I
was when I was really young. Soso then I kind of stuck with

(45:06):
that as a favorite color.

That that's that's that's the best answer
anyone's given to date. Althoughlooking at your shot, I'm I'm
surprised you didn't say greenfluorescent protein or yellow
fluorescent protein.

And and it's green fluorescent protein. So
that that reinforced mydecision, you know, that that
basically this is the evolved,you know, fluorescent, color
that you used to but, of course,you're switching blue light, you
know, so it's all although thewhole spectrum basically is is
is now of you know, it's reallyI I say the visible spectrum is
my favorite part of thespectrum. Although, you know,

(45:37):
we're using x rays now too andand electrons and stuff. So so I
guess, you know, it's it's

a Take take it. You mentioned when you you know,
hyperactive learning gets tosort of green the first color
you can remember doing. What'sthe first job that you can
remember ever wanting to do as achild?

You know, it's interesting. Like, I I really I
guess if I were to filter it andkind of, you know, present it, I
I really kind of love the ideaof being a, like, a like, a
naturalist studying studyingnature. So that was sort of, you
know, I kind of I remember Iremember actually saying this, I
wanna be like a hermit, youknow, because that's what I

(46:20):
thought, you know, this was sortof like was like, you know, if
you're watching these, you know,you know, studying animals in
the, you know, in theirenvironment, could be in the
desert. I was quite interestedin desert. You know, that this
would be, you know, sort of likebeing also the whole lifestyle
would be sort of like, you know,you're camping.
It's sort of you know, it wouldbe it would be sort of like a
but but, you know, that was thatwas my first interest. And I

(46:42):
actually kinda even when I gotto college age, I was kind of I
did actually, like, look at,like, wildlife biology programs.
I applied to one at UVM, andthat was, you know, again, kinda
before I decided to just go withbiology at BU. And, again, BU
was kinda like, okay. It waslike, you know, Boston, you
know, versus versus Burlington,Vermont.
I was kind of you know, maybemore drawn to Boston as a

(47:04):
student at that point.

So and from the extreme of what one wants to be,
if you could do any job in theworld for a day or a week just
to just to know what it feelslike, What sort of job would you
like to do?

That's a good question. Oh, maybe maybe at
this point, like, you know, youknow, like a CEO of a big
company, you know, just headinga big company or something, and

(47:46):
just seeing what that you know,I don't know. On a given day,
nothing may happen. But, youknow, it may be I guess on a
busy on a busy day, like a busyday for someone who's running
something really large, becauseagain, I don't have any idea how
anyone would view that when Ihave a hard time managing, you
know, like, a lab with, youknow, 10, 12 people or
something. You know, how do youdeal with, you know, this kind

(48:08):
of huge hierarchy?
I suppose it's a lot ofdelegation, but, you know, I
guess, yeah, it could be and,again, we're like I said, I I
mentioned earlier that we'rewe're kind of spinning out a
company, and, you know, rightnow I'm just like a kinda like
an academic founder, so I'm notI'm not gonna join the company
any you know, and I have, youknow, the 2 there's a student
from my lab and another Oxfordstudent who are basically the

(48:30):
CEO and the CSO. So they'restarting this you know, it's
just like this this that littlething at this point called
Grants of Bio. But but, youknow, again, I'm I'm really
excited about that, and and,again, like, I I I'm kind of
interested to see, you know,because because they're they've
been kind of it's interesting,like, this generation I don't
know if it's this generation orit's maybe based on what's been
processed, but these guys havehad lots of entrepreneurial

(48:53):
training, as part of their like,Ashley J. Naharinen, the guy
who's one of the guys from mylife who's starting this, has
done lots of these, like, kindof pitching competitions and all
of these sort of entrepreneurialsort of, you know, just workshop
y kind of things and educationalexperiences that he's done in,
you know, parallel with hisDPhil and his undergraduate work

(49:15):
and things.
So he's been kind of buildingtowards this for a long time.
And but I think but I think it'slike and, again, they're doing
it with a, incubator called ycombinator, or accelerator, I
guess, you might call it, calledcalled y combinator. It's out in
San Francisco, and they'regetting lots of, you know, you
know, kind of just huge learningcurve of of basically talking to

(49:37):
their, you know, people thereand people from these, you know,
successful startups of the, youknow, past 10 years or
something. So so it's really,again, it's quite exciting.

It's a brave thing for them to do.

Yes, yes. They're all in. They're all in.
And that's, you know, so, atleast, you know, the y
Combinator's thing is, like,the, you know, the the the
success of this company is, youknow, we've had some input into
some, you know, kind ofobservations or phenomena that
that they're, you know, buildingon. But really, it's gonna be
them, you know, who who won'tmake it or break it, you know,

(50:11):
because that's that's the, youknow, they're putting their full
time into that.
And, you know, again, I thinkit's it's exciting to watch. And
again, this is something thatI've as I've gotten, you know,
even from, you know, my firstmove from St. Louis to to NYU,
you know, being able to beinvolved in supporting someone
who's just starting out, isalso, like, a really nice thing

(50:35):
to be able to do once you'vegotten through that sort of
threshold of getting to the nextstep or something. Like, you
know, you've gone from, youknow, you've you have got tenure
or whatever. And and, you know,when I when I when we moved to
NYU, there was a junior PI namedWen Biao Gan who was also was
interested in, like, having 2photon microscopy, but didn't

(50:57):
have sufficient funding as anassistant professor just
starting his lab to do that.
He was using various things theycould do with conventional
fluorescence microscopy on verythin specimens, but he wanted to
go into the cortex. So, youknow, when I was talking to him
during my visits to NYU, he waslike, you know, I can build the
microscope that's needed forthis and just from parts for

(51:21):
well, you know, that's a lot ofmoney, but but, you know,
relatively speaking, a less thana commercial system. And, you
know, so part of my thinking inthis was like, okay. We wanna
learn this technology. Here's aguy who has the skill set to
build it, I was convinced, andhas his own set of questions.
So he has his own set of biologyhe wants to study, so there's no
competition at all, and we canlearn from him. So that was one

(51:42):
of the attractive things aboutmoving. And, you know, we we
sort of so we kind of with ourstartup package, we had to
bankroll the microscope. And,you know, he had a paper of
Nature within a year. It wasamazing because he knew he
wanted to basically look atdendritic spines in the cortex,
and he had an idea about, like,what he would find in an adult
animal.

(52:03):
And and it was, and he was, youknow, again, they they they went
in and did these heroicexperiments and collected this
data, and and, you know, hepublished those results, which
were actually kind of goingagainst the trend of the time in
terms of, like, synapsibility inthe in the brain because he was
looking at adults. Everyone elsewas looking at developmental
systems. They wanted to seedynamics, so that's what they
saw. He wanted to say, see,okay, what's a stable network

(52:24):
look like that's actuallyfunctioning? And he found lots
of stability.
So you know, I guess the thingabout you know? And that you
know? So we weren't we weren'tinvolved in those papers at all,
but, you know, it was great tobe able to have them put it on.
And and and we did do someexperiments together, and and
and that was a lot of fun too.

We we try I know it was interesting because
actually if you if you don't goto tools today's term today's
sort of world, access toinstrumentation of whatever
nature is a very big pull foracademics. So they can start
answer questions that they maynot be able to address
elsewhere. If that technologyisn't available, multi photon

(53:05):
back then was obviously a niche,emerging. I understand. We might
possibly be that 1.
Have there been any reallychallenging times, difficult
times in your career that you'vehad to overcome?

Well, I mean, really just, you know, that that
first in a way, like, we had alot of fun in the lab. Like, I
was actually working in the labfor the first 5, 6 years, and
maybe that was even even like aproblem. I wasn't I wasn't
working hard enough oncommunicating the the
information in the grass, allthat. But but, you know, that
was that was great. And but butit was there were stressful

(53:41):
periods there and things wherewe were like, okay.
This is not working out. Like,we we need to change something.
And, you know, and again, youknow, there was support and
there was pressure from our fromfrom from the leadership in in
in our in our department. So soI think, you know, the, yeah, so
that was tough, in some ways.But, yeah, but a lot of but a
lot of fun in others.

(54:01):
So, you know, What what

would you say has been the most fun? Well, if you
could repeat a year, what wasthe most fun year that you've
ever had? It's gonna be the sametime, isn't it? I can see this
coming.

You know, well well, you know, the, yeah, so
that that that working on thatpaper is a good time, but I'll
pick it a different thing. So sothere was, in 2015, so after we
moved to Oxford, we got invitedby, Ron Vale and, Mike Rosen to
do a summer in Woods Hole, andit was sort of like maybe 2

(54:35):
months, and they had an HHMI,you know, collaborative workshop
grant of some kind. It wasbasically like, you know, to
basically bring together peoplefrom, like, 3 or 4 labs. You'll
have this you know, set up thislittle sort of lab in Woods
Hole, which reminded me of thelabs I worked in as an undergrad
at BU, in the eighties, youknow, with actually similar

(54:57):
level of regulation. I thinkit's become more, you know,
normal now, but, you know, atleast at that point in 2015, it
was kind of, like, you know,very informal in a way in a
regulatory framework.
But it was sort of I actuallygot to do some experiments and
work with some of the thingsthat people you know, I'd worked
up to maybe 2,000 in the lab. Sofor 15 years, I was doing

(55:18):
nothing in the lab. And I got,you know, like, for a month or
so to basically just tinkeraround in the lab with a postdoc
and a student who joined there,and then all the other, you
know, postdocs and studentsfrom, you know, Ron's lab and
and Mike's lab. And and, youknow, and these are now, like,
all colleagues, you know, in inthe field. They're all people
who've, you know, are are stillin the mix in some way.

(55:39):
And and, you know, as I was justvisiting, Marcus Taylor in
Berlin just just last week, andand, you know, kind of hanging
out and seeing how he's doing atthe Max institute where he's
working. And he was one of thepostdocs who came over with, I
guess, like, a future mayor, andand he had a maybe connection
with Ron Vale too. So it wassort of like you know, it was it
was a great little, you know,just sort of let's do things

(56:01):
together around condensates andsignaling. And and, yeah, they
had, like, you know, 10microscopes or something, and
everyone just sort of, you know,did experiments, you know, some
and and, you know, with somedesire to basically trade, you
know, little our little tradesecrets and things that are sort
of, you know, not you can'treally even write enough detail

(56:23):
in a protocol, in a paper todescribe these things, but we
all got to, you know, kind ofexchange them. So it was really
it was really fun.

That's so joke.

You can't do it you can't do it every every
every year probably, but, youknow, some people do. I mean,
some people pilgrimage back toWoods Hole and just, you know,
tinker around in the lab

Sounds more focused given that collegiality
networking. But, yeah, thosethose sort of tips, you know,
the tricks of the trade typetips and sharing those in the
game for us. That sounds it's avery smart idea, actually.

Yeah. And this was and this was, like, all you
know, maybe several labs in thisarea in different fields of
biology, like, not justimmunology for which is which
was our kind of interest, but,you know, people working with,
you know, other types of cellsand stromal cells. And, you
know, just sort of it was it waskind of a bit of a melding pot
or, you know, kind of a chanceto just sort of cross pollinate.

(57:17):
And again, it was great. It wasa lot of fun for me just because
I got to tinker around in thelab a bit.
And it was sort of like I feltlike I wasn't being
irresponsible. I was kind of youknow, it was part of a it was a
worthwhile effort, you know,that I could have that
reconnect. So

The out of work, what sort of hobbies do you
have? I I know you got a petdog, Potter, I think.

Yeah. So we've had we've had various dogs over
the years, starting from when wewere, you know, kind of just
going off to our postdocs,finishing graduate school and
going to postdocs. So right. Sowe always had the, you know, dog
training and keeping the dogkind of, you know, sort of like,
was our first in a way, like,our first child got us ready for

(57:59):
having a family with ourdaughter and then and then kind
of, you know, now now, you know,kind of bizarre or, again, our
our little boy at this point.But the, yeah.
I mean, I mean, photography, Imean, it may sound a little bit
too close to what I do in someways, but from high school, had
an interest in, you know, maybeteenager years, had an interest

(58:21):
in in, you know, photographywith film. Now mostly digital,
obviously, but I'm stillcarrying around and enlarger.
So, you know, one of these days,I could go back to film if, if I
found a good dark room to setup, a place to set up a dark
room. And, of course, like, youknow, labs don't have those
anymore because everything ispretty digital. I think we still
have the film developer maybebecause some people are still

(58:43):
hanging on to ECL, but it's youknow, or or this luminescence
based, gel technology.
But, you know, the the, yeah,the opportunities to maybe maybe
at some point, I'll see if Icould, like, rent some space in
a dark room and play around withthat. That would be fun.

Yeah. I I I when I started at York, we had a
couple of dark rooms. Once theygot the multi photon microscope
in it. Yeah. Good place to putinto a dark room.
It's an ideal place. No windows.Yeah. And the other ones now got
a label free base focus systemin there. So, yeah, yeah, both
of them gone as a as theelectron microscopes really went
digital at that point.
Yeah.

Sure. Sure. Right. Right. Right.
Film became obsolete.

So so your hobbies at a film, it's actually
my my my my research, my PhDsupervisor, Richard Cherry. He,
when he retired, got intophotography in a big way and
then started to get quitecompetitive in his club and
everything else. It's I guessthat eye for imaging, makes it

Well, nature you know, I I remember I mentioned
that, you know, I was interestedin nature early on. And so
photography you know,photographing, you know, we've
done at least you know, we didone big trip to Panama where we
did sort of, like, bird watchingand photographing lots and lots
of photography of, you know, allthese beautiful birds and
things. So so, you know, I couldsee, you know, if we had more

(59:59):
time, you know, maybe retirementor something, you know, kind of,
yeah, getting getting gettinginto that more, as sort of like
just sort of a, it's not soclose to to to the microscope
work, and it gets you outside.So

Peter O'Toole (01:00:14):
So we we are up to the hour already, but I I
have to ask you. If you got anyregrets if you go back and
change something? Because theydon't they don't think you would
change.

Michael Dustin (01:00:26):
You know, I think I think mostly around just
kind of communicating better insome situations. You know, I
guess, you know, I think Ithink, like, in academic
settings, I I guess what Ilearned through several
transitions and things is that,you know, being, you know,

(01:00:48):
completely open about thosekinds of, you know, just just
basically what you're thinkingat any time in terms of, you
know, you know, if you feel likeyou need to make a change, just
to just, you know, let everyoneknow that that's that's what's
happening. Because I'd I'd say,like, when I left WashU, I kind
of regret not communicating moreclearly with my with my chair at

(01:01:11):
that point. And, you know, and,you know, then then when I
decide when when the kind of theidea of moving from NYU to
Oxford came up, I was much morecommunicative about that whole
process and what my thinkingwas, and it was obviously much,
much, much better. So so yeah.
So I think, like, you know, justI guess as, you know, sort of,

(01:01:34):
like, communities, like, youknow, again, anything about, you
know, collaboration, fear, allthe peer review stuff, you know,
that, you know, that we'rereally, completely dependent
upon communication with our ourcolleagues and, of course, like,
the closest colleagues, like,the people in your department
and things. So, basically, tobe, you know, really open with
them about what those kind ofthings, like, you know, things

(01:01:56):
that would affect, you know,kind of thing big things like
moods and and stuff like thatnot to be you know, because I
was kind of I guess at thatpoint, maybe I was a little bit,
maybe just a little bit lackconfidence to basically just
say, hey, I'm thinking aboutthis. And it turned out that
they they knew everything, youknow, so everyone knew

(01:02:17):
everything that was going onbecause they obviously have
their own networks and things.So it was just kind of, you
know, in the end, I think thatkind of open communication is
sort of a key, you know, to andagain, I think, you know, it
it's possible that in other jobsettings, that maybe there are
even, like, kind ofconfidentiality issues or
something that would say, youknow, that, you know, that that

(01:02:38):
that would in that in whichcase, that might be that might
be that might be different.
But I think in in in academicpursuits, I, you know, I I think
we're, you know, really, reallythis kind of, you know, my
experience openness would be theway to go.

And and on the theme of communication, although
we're just over the hour, Ishould just point out for
everyone watching, listening,you actually do quite a few
different YouTube clips reallyexplaining the meteorological
insights.

Oh, yeah. Well, this was this was at that Woods
Hole I mentioned in 2015. So,Ron Vale, and and his wife were
basically organizing thisiBiology series, which has lots
of fantastic, you know, thesethese kind of videos, but they
did these kind of likeweatherman type things, like

(01:03:28):
where you have the green screenand you kind of redesign your
slides so that, you know, 1third of the slide is blank that
you can stand in, basically, andthen, you know, that you're
basically pointing at the, youknow, at at at you know, rather
than using a pointer, you areliterally in the picture
pointing at whatever you'retrying to to communicate. So,
yeah, so we made the series of 3videos that were kind of, you

(01:03:50):
know, maybe a 2015 snapshot ofwhere that field was, but kind
of, you know, trying to startwith more basic immunology
concepts. And I guess, like, thefirst one is probably pretty
accessible for, like, a sciencelike, a high school science
student or something on thatlevel.
Like, maybe maybe not like likea total you know, someone who's,
you know, no longer, you know,thinking thinking about science

(01:04:13):
at all. But but, you know, but Ithink, again, yeah, that that
was a lot of fun. And maybe evenjust kinda preparing that and
kind of, you know, getting intothe mindset to kind of, you
know, do that was was was a lotof fun. And that was so that was
part of that thing. Like, so Icould do experiments, and we and
we did those videos that same inthat same 2 months.

To say and the so the impacts on that sounds
really good. We we're well overthe air. We have to stop. And
there's so much I wanted to talkabout. We haven't talked about
spatial imaging.
We haven't talked about thefirst first microscopes and
where where you see the futuregoing, but we have to wrap up.
And, Mike, it's been a realpleasure. I hope everyone
listening. I I think there'sbeen so much useful advice in

(01:04:50):
there that I think we can alllearn from as well. And just
carry on inspiring.
Mike, thank you very much.

Thanks, Pete. It's a pleasure. And, Yeah.
Yeah. Happy to happy to catch upon some of these other things at
some other point.

Thank you for listening to The Microscopists,
a Bite Size Bio podcastsponsored by Zeiss Microscopy.
To view all audio and videorecordings from this series,
please visitbitesizebio.comforward/themicrosoftopists.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Breakfast Club

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Michael Dustin (The Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology)

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Breakfast Club

The Joe Rogan Experience

All Episodes

Michael Dustin (The Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology)

On Purpose with Jay Shetty