How we feel is a mostly a function of if and how we feel connected to the people around us. Building, maintaining, and growing relationships is thus key to how we feel and also how successful we are. Academia is in many ways an unusual place since careers are enabled by scientific publications and discoveries, and not by people skills. However, it is never too late to learn. Here are my top three ways how to become more successful by improving your relationships at work.

• Be curious. Often, we forget to be curious about why other people around us act the way they do. We forget that the "inner models" people have of the world are very different from each other. Trying to project your model onto somebody else is often the cause of substantial misunderstandings, leading to conflict and unhappiness. Rather, take your time to truly be curious and ask the people around you about how they see things and what motivates them to act in a specific way.
• Be consistent. There is nothing more challenging than a boss/supervisor/colleague who one day is super flattering and excited, then the next day very abrupt and seemingly impossible to please. We all have natural mood fluctuations, however as a leader it is your responsibility to deal with them in a way that they do not affect your work relationships.
• Be honest. So often, it is much easier to slightly distort reality to make a difficult conversation a bit less difficult. The problem with this approach is that over time these little deviations from the truth start to accumulate and ultimately erode the trust people have in you. The better strategy is to be honest (and compassionate when you have to deliver bad news). In addition, if you promise less but put extraordinary effort into keeping all your promises, you will feel better and be more successful in the long run.

Try these strategies and please let me know how things go, either in the comment section below, or you can always reach me directly here.

Take care,

Flavio

It has been a while since I have last posted here. I have spent the last few months furiously writing grant applications to raise funds to continue our exciting research in the Frohlich Lab. I take great pride in how lean and efficient our lab is, but still, research costs real dollars. Also, I have started to think in earnest about how to reach a broader audience with our message about the brain. #scicomm As a result, I have launched two new initiatives that I invite you to check out and provide feedback on. Both have a brand new website that will be enriched with more content over time.


1. tacs.academy
Yes, this is an actual web address taking you to a website to inform that public in a balanced way about transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), which our Carolina Center for Neurostimulation actively investigates as a potential treatment for psychiatric illnesses such as depression and schizophrenia. The goal was to write about something very technical in a way that the non-expert can understand. I would like to give credit to the book "Don't be such a scientist" that has truly opened my eyes. A book worth reading!

2. flavio.network
Again, yes, this is an actual web address (recognize a theme?) that takes you to a brand new site that will provide insights about how the brain works as an inspiration for all of us to learn, grown, transform.

More news to follow. I wish you all the best with your own (new) projects. Remember, whatever your dream is, start TODAY to make a step towards realizing that dream.

Take care,

Flavio


Reminder: This site uses affiliate links.

Science is highly competitive. We compete for positions, grants, awards, and recognition. Science is also very personal. Most of us identify very strongly with our work and are not able or willing to make a distinction between our work and our own existence as a person. Together, this makes a toxic mix. I am writing this to advocate for a different mindset that is healthier and perhaps will also create the better science. Here are my proposed 12 rules for making science a less stressful yet more productive enterprise.
 

1. Organize events (seminars, workshops, conferences) that are inclusive and fair in the representation of opinion, gender, etc.
2. Be kind as a reviewer – no need to use expressions of disgust, derision, and indignation if you do not like an idea / paper / proposal. Just explain calmly why you are unhappy with it and what you would have preferred to see instead.
3. Openly state the limitations of your study in a designated paragraph of the discussion section.
4. Talk openly about your own struggle with stress and mental health issues to show that we are all dealing with the same kind of challenges.
5. Go look for great science that has not received endorsement by the elite journals and networks. When you have found it – you will – give it a boost by talking and writing about it.
6. Be honest with your trainees, even if the conversation is very uncomfortable.
7. Do not sit on manuscripts, review them promptly (internally and externally).
8. At conferences and meetings, make a conscious effort to speak with the (junior) trainees who look/are lost.
9. Be nice to the people who enable us to focus on our science, and yes, that includes the cleaning personnel.
10. Remind yourself and everyone around you that a single study does not provide any final answers, even if it was your latest Nature or Science paper.
11. Do not let your press office publish exaggerated press releases (“Cancer cure in sight!”).
12. Share, share, share.

 
What rules do you have? What am I missing? I am looking forward to reading yours in the comment section below.
 
Take care,
 
Flavio

I know it has been a while since I posted here - lots of great things are under development. I will catch you up over the next few weeks. For now, I wanted to share with you a (random) list of concerns that have cropped up over and over again in grant review of my own work. I am hoping this list can serve as a checklist as you are working on your applications:

• Lack of preliminary data
• Lack of description / justification of a method used in the proposed work
• Sex as a biological variable not fully considered/discussed
• Rigor and reproducibility not fully addressed
• Research requires a device that is not yet built
• From figure legend not clear what exact measurement is shown (protocol, time-point etc)
• Behavioral intervention not described in detail
• Personnel: Unclear who does what.

Hope this list of help - good luck with your grant writing!

​Flavio

..our just published paper of tACS for the treatment of chronic pain (abstract here). Today, I would like to share with you how we got started with this exciting new research direction and how things came together for that study.

Origin of the Idea
Before we initiated this work, we had not studied chronic pain. A graduate student approached me with the desire to develop a new treatment for chronic pain and I sensed a great opportunity to support her idea and initiative. The principal investigator for this study was Dr. Karen McCulloch, faculty at the UNC School of Medicine. The first step was a review of the literature and what we found was that there are only very few (perhaps less than 10) scientific publications on how brain activity is altered in chronic pain. To my surprise, the vast majority of research is focused on acute pain, which we hypothesized to be very different from chronic pain, which is persisting pain even if the original cause of the pain is long gone.

Our Idea
As an outsider, we had the freedom to not be bogged down by existing paradigms and research cultures. Our idea was straightforward. We hypothesized that there is a change in the alpha oscillations, which is a fundamental brain rhythm impaired in many disorders of the central nervous system, and that transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) can restore alpha oscillations and thus reduce pain symptoms in patients with chronic pain. More specifically, we speculated that alpha oscillations are reduced (corresponding to elevated neuronal firing) in the areas of the brain encoding touch.

Our Study
With this hypothesis in mind, we planned and executed a double-blind, placebo controlled study, which is described in our new paper (NCT03243084). To my surprise, we found convincing evidence for the hypotheses. Typically, in any scientific study, about 80% of the results make sense (on a good day!) and 20% leave you more confused (next study!). In this case, it was unusual how well everything lined up.

Getting it Published
The process was very smooth (highly unusual!). As you would expect for a new idea, we first were met with an editorial rejection from one of the leading journals in the pain field. We tried another, equally established journal, made it passed the editorial pre-screen and both reviewers were enthusiastic and incredibly helpful. Paper accepted.

Parting Thought
This was a highly synergistic collaboration between two outstanding trainees in my group Dr. Sangtae Ahn (postdoc) and Julianna Prim (graduate student, co-mentored with Dr. McCulloch). They have complementary expertise which was needed for such a new and exciting study. When I asked them why this all worked out so well, the answer I got was that I asked them to sit at neighboring desks, which facilitated their collaboration. Small details do matter!

Take care,

Flavio
PS While our first study looks really exciting, no single study can provide any final answer and much more work will be needed before this becomes a clinical treatment. This study was mostly a neuroscience study to understand if there are indeed brain rhythms which are impaired in chronic pain and if tACS can engage these rhythms. If you are interested in this kind of work, please consider a donation to enable this line of research. Also, you need to know that the study was performed with a device from my start-up company Pulvinar Neuro LLC. The company played no role in this study.

There are many elements that make a day a productive and meaningful day. Today, I would like to share some thoughts with you about  the beginning and the ending of a work day. The following five tips reflect what I learned about how to ring in and out workdays:

Tip 1: Never look at your phone/tablet/computer for anything work related before you actually start your workday. Taking your time to prepare for the day will make you way more productive. The last thing you need is distraction in the form of many urgent but really not that important emails or (depressing) world  news. Rather, I recommend you focus on a routine that nourishes your mind and body. This will give you the strength and resolve you need to succeed in your workday.

Tip 2: Always start your workday with writing down your goals and reviewing your calendar for what is coming up. I encourage you to critically ask if the scheduled activities really reflect your goals for the day. If they do not, I recommend (and yes it feels uncomfortable) you cancel the items which are not aligned. For example, if my goal is to work on an important grant proposal but my schedule is full with unrelated meetings, I will cancel these meetings. Pro Tip: Never lie about why you cancel the meeting. Simply state that you have something important that requires your full attention. If somebody asks (nobody does), explain in more detail. 

Tip 3: Set an alarm for when it is time to start wrapping up your day such as 30 minutes before you want to walk out of the office. When the alarm rings, put everything down and start wrapping up.

Tip 4: Before leaving the office, clean off your real and your virtual desktop such that you are prepared for a fresh, new start the next day.

Tip 5: Make sure you get the chance to reflect on your day at the very end of the workday. Be willing to see the good and the bad, and make plans for the next day based on what that day has taught you. Be open to learn, change, and improve.

I hope these strategies help you getting your days structured and fulfilling. Please let me know how it goes by posting a comment below.

Take care,

Flavio

We had an indoor weekend due to the major storm passing through. Luckily we got mostly spared and our thoughts are with the ones touched by the storm. I noticed quite an uptick in tweets about how long the day is when you cannot go outside (with your kids). Here is what I did - and yes this is very nerdy:

We spent a lot of time measuring things. The idea is very simple (and very familiar if you are a scientist or in a relationship with a scientist..). In parenthesis, I am cross-linking the steps with a scientific paper.

• You ask a question that has a numerical answer (introduction).
• You guess what the answer is (hypothesis).
• You find a tool to take the measurement (methods section)
• You take a measurement to determine the answer (result section).
• You compare your guess with the measurement (discussion section).
• If they are different, you come up with a story why (discussion section).

You do not need a fancy research lab to do this. All you need is a bit of imagination and some (cheap) sensors. Also, cell phones do include a lot of sensors and there are apps that can be used. I am not including them here since I am a firm believer in limiting screen times for kids, independent of content (yes, we can argue you about this..). There is something special in terms of the learning and the entertainment when you carry around a measurement device and read from its display.

Here are some sensors that work well for such activities. Note that none of them are toys. Please stay safe and use them in an age-appropriate way. All of them are less than $25 on Amazon (except the CO2 sensor). Please see here to learn how my site uses affiliate links. Below are some sample questions that kept us entertained and curious.

​
Here are some basic but (too kids and adults like me who are still kids) fun questions. Always add the question "Why?"

Temperature:

• Is it warmer inside or outside?
• Are different rooms of different temperature?
• Does the temperature change during the day?

Humidity:

• Is it more humid inside or outside?
• Is humidity different in the bath room?

Electricity using the plug in "KillAWatt" (only for adults, under strict adult supervision, outlets are nothing to play with)

• Is the voltage the same for different outlets?
• Is the frequency the same for different outlets?
• Does voltage change when all lights in the house are turned on or off?
• Does the frequency change when all lights in the house are turned on or off?
• How much power does a tea kettle draw?

CO2 Concentration

• How does CO2 concentration change when the windows are open / closed?
• Does turning on the gas stove change CO2 in the kitchen (adult supervision, safety etc)?

Sound pressure

• How loud can you be?
• How quiet can you be (preferred!)?
• How loud can your instrument be (piano, violin, etc)?
• What is the difference in loudness when the distance to the noise source is increased?
• 
  

Luminance

• What is the brightest light we have in the house?
• How dark can we make a room?

PH

• What is the pH of various drinks?

Electricity using the multimeter

• What is the voltage of a charged AA battery?
• What is the resistance of different materials?

And so on. Have fun happy Monday!

I spend a lot of time thinking about how I can improve and learn to  in whatever I am doing. This constant searching of new and better ways how to live and work brings me a lot of joy because it gives me the feeling of moving forward, of spending time in a meaningful way, and of challenging myself to be and do better than I currently am.

Over the years, I have shared with you some of these thoughts, many related to academia and how to become a better leader in the world of academic research. Today, I want to summarize some of these thoughts by sharing with you 3 key rules to get to the next level:

Rule 1: Never settle. It is so easy and comfortable to settle. However, the price you pay for that will be a heavy burden to carry, namely the feeling of having missed out on life in its richness. Signs that you have settled with yourself and your life are

• "This is just who I am.."​
• "I have tried to [get better] but it does not work for me"
• "[External circumstances] define this and I have no influence over them"
• etc.

Instead, I recommend you tune your sensory systems to recognize areas in your life where you have settled and question yourself if you really found the optimum or if you have settled at less than the optimum for your momentary convenience. If you realize you have, it is time for the next rule.

Rule 2: Small incremental steps of improvement. It is easy to sit down and make a list of few big things that we want to change in our (professional) life, make an ambitious plan (to be implemented on Monday) which will be already in complete disarray by Tuesday. Rather, figure out a 2 minute thing you can easily do and hold yourself accountable to do it everyday. Start with kindness and generosity. Here are some examples that have worked very well for me:

• Make sure before you leave the house to say bye in a meaningful and mindful way to everyone in your house.
• Take the stairs instead of the elevator.
• Randomly ask one of your co-workers how they are and actually listen to the answer with empathy.
• Send off a positive tweet when you read an interesting paper (try to tag authors).
• Surprise someone by buying them coffee.
• etc.

Rule 3: Never ever cut a deal with yourself. Often, we work hard to improve something and feel that in return we deserve some slack for something else. I can tell you that this principle will never make you happy since you are ultimately engaged in a constant negotiation process with yourself that costs lots of energy and drains you. This is one of the reasons why dieting never works. We chose the light vegetarian option but then deserve that delicious desert. Nope. Will .. not ... work. Make things that matter to you non-negotiable, before you realize it they will have become habits and happen on their own.

Give it a try and let me know below in the comment section how these three rules are working out for you!

One of the staples of an academic lab is the so-called "lab meeting". I remember lab meeting as this frightening event where suddenly all eyes are pointed towards you and your science gets assessed by your peers and your professor. Will it be thumbs up or down? Will I get asked to do another year of boring control experiments? You get the idea. These are typically weekly meetings that often last one to two hours and assume various formats but it often boils down to trainees getting up and giving updates on their science. In my group, we spent some time thinking about lab meeting and decided to make some changes, here are our thoughts, in the hope they may help others make lab meetings more productive and fun.

• Whatever type of lab meeting you have, still way better than a lab that does not have lab meetings. To me that has always been a sign of major dysfunction if the group does not manage to assemble at a some reasonable interval to discuss science-related matters.
• Often, trainees spend substantial time polishing slides, preparing introductions to their science, and practicing their presentation. Although this helps to improve presentation skills, it has several disadvantages. First, the actual time spent discussing science is limited. Second, it creates this artificial (and wrong) perception that only polished stories can be shared with the group. Rather, the point should be to get plenty of input EARLY in the project when things by design are not yet polished. Overall, steering towards shorter updates - starting early in the project life cycle - is ultimately more helpful and also more interesting.
• Another anxiety-inducing lab meeting style is to go around the table and have everyone give a short update. I am not a fan of this approach since invariably two things happen. First, the trainees who had a rough week (and yes doing science is often rough) leave the meeting demotivated. Second, there is always this one person who hogs plenty of time in the hope to impress the professor with how hardworking and dedicated they are. Not ... a ... fan.

So what is the solution to all this? I am sure there are many and please post below your thoughts - I am eager to read what you have figured out that works. This is all about the learning, also for me. In any case, we have settled on the following format, wich we call innovation meeting to illustrate that it is a new format focused on early-state discussions:
​
We meet weekly for two hours and we have a shared spreadsheet where people add what they want to discuss to a queue together with an estimate how much time it will take. Every week, we work through that queue during the meeting (being flexible if urgent stuff has come up to ignore the order of the queue). There is explicit encouragement to present small and preliminary things, perhaps a single plot, a question about experimental design, a confusing result etc. So far, the meetings were highly productive and lots of fun since everyone learned a lot. Mission accomplished...

As some of you may now, we have started the Carolina Center for Neurostimulation last year to accelerate the convergence of our brain stimulation research with clinical brain stimulation such as FDA-cleared transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment-resistant depression. Figuring out how to interface the realities of clinical care with research has been a rewarding learning experience for me. If you are a scientist interested in translational research, I highly recommend you hang out with clinicians who treat patients with the disorder you are interested in. For me, spending time in the clinical realm through shadowing and collaboration has been truly eye-opening.

Today, I am delighted to announce that the UNC Department of Psychiatry together with our Center has worked hard behind the scenes to augment the TMS options offered to patients with depression. Processes in the background have been streamlined to minimize time-to-treat. In the near future, there will be options to opt-in and contribute to research on biological variables that predict the treatment response and on augmentation of TMS with other potentially synergistic modalities while receiving TMS. More details to come as we are finalizing our research plans. In the mean time, if you are interested in clinical TMS for you or your loved ones, please do not hesitate to contact our Department to schedule a brain stimulation consultation by calling (984) 974-3854. 

Small Print. Please note that I am not a medical doctor but a researcher. Please direct all your medical questions to your healthcare provider. In case of a medical emergency, please call 911.