Purely a figment of your imagination

What amuses, annoys, concerns or otherwise interests me – Noodlemaz

Around and About

Other places on the interweb where I may be found:

  • avatar_noodlemaz

    I use this just about everywhere – I’ll do a short post about how I made it at some point!

    See also my sockpuppet MoralMaz, which arose from an ongoing conversation/running joke.

  • Storify
  • The Malcontent
    New politics, culture & media site. From @TheXXCorp
  • The Pod Delusion
    Archive of skeptical/sciencey/politics/interesting things podcasts. I did only a few reports over the years.

Bits and bobs:

  • This is my voice in these cancer-explainer animations I did for work together with Phospho Biomedical Animations.
  • Photo taken by me in this Telegraph article about work’s programme to bring disadvantage schoolkids to the lab.
  • Science Is Vital Exec Committee 2015-
  • Sense About Science
    – Contributed to Celebrities and Science, and various other projects, often as part of Voice of Young Science.
    – Resident photographer at this “What Next?” Libel Reform Event at the Free Word Centre, co-run by SAS.
    – I interviewed Dara O’Briain about Libel Reform for SAS (he’s a lot taller than me..!).


Before I stopped doing research, I published (and helped publish) some:

Baker M, Robinson SD, Lechertier T et al. (2012) . Use of the mouse aortic ring assay to study angiogenesis. Nat Protoc vol. 7, (1) 89-104.

Reynolds LE, Watson AR, Baker M et al. (2010) . Tumour angiogenesis is reduced in the Tc1 mouse model of Down’s syndrome. Nature vol. 465, (7299) 813-817.

Germain M, De Arcangelis A, Robinson SD et al. (2010) . Genetic ablation of the alpha 6-integrin subunit in Tie1Cre mice enhances tumour angiogenesis. J Pathol vol. 220, (3) 370-381.

Robinson SD, Reynolds LE, Kostourou V et al. (2009) . Alphav beta3 integrin limits the contribution of neuropilin-1 to vascular endothelial growth factor-induced angiogenesis. J Biol Chem vol. 284, (49) 33966-33981.

  • I wrote the legend that went with the pretty image (taken by my supervisor) that we submitted for the JBC cover, too.

5 thoughts on “Around and About

  1. Maz, sorry to ask you this here, but I’m without a Twitter account. I just saw this old tweet of yours (https://twitter.com/noodlemaz/status/246974183509200896) and was wondering if you can still remember who wrote the piece. I’d certainly be interested to know. Thanks.

    • Can I ask why, Cathy? They’re good people, just not too well informed on that particular issue, and looking at it from a specific angle that means intactivists, like myself, won’t like it very much at all.

      • I thought it was unusually bad, even given the dismal standards against which I’m judging it; I was also trying to guess the sex of the person who wrote it. I’m assuming female; it’s just a hunch. I’d hope all morally serious people would dislike the article, not just activists looking at it ‘from a specific angle’. What other angle is there?

        Quoting Morris was amusing. The line about the foreskin being useful before trousers (to protect against shrubbery and the like…) seems to coexist quite peacefully with all the unsubstantiated crap about the foreskin being uniquely vulnerable to tearing and all that ‘penile epithelial trauma’ stuff, etc. No one notices that.

        I take it s/he is a friend of yours? I must say that I fail to see how some halfwit enthusiastically championing the sexual abuse of boys (and quoting pervs in support) can reasonably be considered ‘good people’; perhaps the issue matters less to you than I’d assumed. No doubt as a feminist, had the article been championing date rape or fat shaming or transphobia (or whatever else), its author, no matter their other wonderful qualities, could not possibly be considered ‘good people’ in your eyes. I guess those things are OBVIOUSLY bad, and that’s the difference…

        • People are easily misled in things with which they are unfamiliar, or, indeed, intimately familiar.
          Are you seriously suggesting every parent taken in by this custom is a horrible person? It’s easy for us to be angry and mortified by it, we’ve done our homework.
          When the article in reply to Morris’ article (itself a reply to my article) in The Skeptic is published, I will alert everyone. Including this person – whom I met once, who is not female, whom I speak with on twitter about other things sometimes.

          Giving people the benefit of the doubt based on what else I know of their personality does NOT mean I do not care greatly about this issue and I resent you insinuating otherwise here.

          Education is a slow process, and being rude to people who do what they do in good conscience is rarely a successful tactic.

      • I looked it up and found that Akshat Rathi is responsible for it; the repetitive use of the cutesy, trivialising ‘snip’ suggested to me that the author was female, so I’m quite surprised. I recall reading something by Emily Bazelon where she managed to use that verb (or some conjugation thereof) no fewer than a dozen times. Amazing that in such a short piece Rathi was able to get so many details wrong, though; it doesn’t seem that many ‘science journalists’ do much but tell us how excellent some study whose publication they’ve been alerted to happens to be (often including testimonies from the authors as to the awesomeness of the findings); no one seems to care that this small task force group of physicians (none of whom are particularly distinguished), the ‘AAP’, simply wrote a review article in which they cited the studies they liked and ignored all the others; the sections on HPV and HSV-2 are the most obvious casualties. Journalists should do their jobs: Rathi has only made his readers even more ignorant than they were to begin with. And a thirty-second browse would have alerted him to the creepiness of Morris. I was glad to see Brian Earp gave him a bit of a talking to. Clearly Rathi was just phoning it in; one wonders what he bought with the £10 The Economist paid him. I hope it was worth it, scumbag.

        I don’t wish to argue with you – you seem like a very lovely girl, and it’s unusual enough to see women who self-identify as feminists caring to do more than screech ‘it’s nothing like FGM, though!’ at the top of their lungs; I’m quite sure you’re worth your weight in gold. We really don’t disagree here, so I’ll not waste your time further. All the best.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s