Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Dear Russ,
        After I left the USMC in the mid-60's (safely!!), I was anointed as
a TA in anatomy (an area of biology that now lies dormant, the space having
been occupied since that time by physiologists, cell biologists and now,
molecular biologists).  My first lab responsibility was Comparative
Vertebrate Anatomy (NOTHING virtual!), and when we arrived at the shark,
after a couple weeks, I had decided to do something about the
mispronunciation of the term 'diSSection'.  Every young pre-med in the class
called his activity 'di-secshun', and I determined to change this
malapropism.
        Thus, one afternoon, sharply at 1:00pm, I presented at the front of
the lab with a shark, carefully laid out between two rows of 10 penny nails
on a 6-by, and a family heirloom of WWII in Southeast Asia, a 3-foot
machete.  Turning the shark so that its midline lay as a connector between
me and the class, I proceeded to demonstrate a 'DI-Sec-Shun!' by
mid-sagittal-ing the animal - as cleanly as one might expect with a 3/16"
thick blade, with ONE ROUNDHOUSE STROKE!  The demonstration proved to be the
talk of the week, and, of course, it's raisin-duh-ettra was lost amid the
chaos that ensued.  Moving on.
        In line with this thread, it is interesting to note that the
Congressional leadership responsible for oversight of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission  are apparently well-trained to call their responsibility
"NewQueLar Energy" and have infected various other powerful entities within
and without the beltway with their virus.  And how GREAT IT IS to hear a
prominent CELL biologist use the same pronunciation when speaking of
"newquelar division" before a rapt group of a thousand, equally absorbed,
colleagues.  How about the thousands, or millions, who believe that one
fixes biological specimens with 'paraformaldehyde'!
        The level of disquiet that you may feel about 'confocal EM" can be
avoided if you simply put yourself in the shoes of the well-educated news
announcer/commentator/producer.  In such a condition you will neither know
nor care that there is a difference between 'Dis-section' and 'DI-Section',
that 'newquelar war' is just not what it is cracked up to be, that
paraformaldehyde is NOT a fixative, or, 'EXsetera, EXsetera, EXsetera'.
That's the way Columbia has fine-tuned graduate journalists of all kinds for
decades.  Further, if the scientists can't get it right, why should anyone
else.   I mean, computer jocks have been saying, "Data IS!", since the first
computer engineer, who failed English, misspoke, and then miswrote the
phrase.
        As an excuse for the IT designers, you might remember the common
explanation, often provided to neophytes, of a 'confocal laser scanning
microscope' as similar, in certain instantly forgettable ways, to a
'scanning ELECTRON microscope'.  Your examples represent the work of folks
who went to class and learned - - - 'whatever they remembered'.  Their work
was then checked for errors by those 'IN CHARGE'.  Even worse, the producers
of the web sites may actually have decided on the phrase you saw, after
lengthy consideration of the 'greater' bite and 'lesser' confusion from the
phrase 'confocal electron' than from 'confocal laser scanning'.  They do it
in newsrooms every day - after graduating from Columbia GRADUATE school of
journalism (boy! is he off on journalists!).
        Think, also, of the times you have found the peanut butter missing
in the super market, it having been relocated by a new graduate of a
UNIVERSITY-LEVEL food-marketing major who is trying out her/his
newly-exorcised skills in crowd control.  Or, how do you feel when your
child's teacher sends a note to your home begging you to remember to remind
"your CHILD to bring THEIR #2 pencil for the big test on Tuesday."

Apologies for the 'blanquettes', and Cheers,

Fred Monson (aka, 'Grumpy Fred', to the grandson!)

P.S.1.  A scientist once wrote, with great economy in HIS refereed, edited
and published Materials and Methods:  "Histological slides were analyzed by
a blinded, disinterested pathologist."  I, of course, accepted the statement
at face value.

P.S.2.  If you can't teach them, and they won't learn, just remember, you
can not shoot them in reprisal!

Frederick C. Monson, PhD
Center for Advanced Scientific Imaging
West Chester University
West Chester, Pennsylvania, USA, 19383
610-738-0437
[log in to unmask]


> ----------
> From:         Russell McConnell
> Reply To:     Confocal Microscopy List
> Sent:         Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:20 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      'confocal electron microscope'
>
> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
> Just to be sure that I'm not missing something pretty important...
>
> I recently ran across an article on the web that had an image with a
> caption identifying the image as a 'confocal electron micrograph'.  I
> wrote a quick note to the editor of the paper informing him that such a
> thing didn't exist.  I received the following reply, leaving me
> wondering whether I've missed something, or maybe that I need to be more
> finicky when it comes to online publications!  Which is it?
>
>
> dear russell mcconnell... many thanks indeed for yr msg - you wouldn't
> believe how much time we've spent wondering how best to respond, not
> helped
> by the number of people/organisations who use the term... including the
> CDC,
> from whom we obtained the original image, with its offending caption...
> here
> are some notes from our pictures editor who found several sites that
> appear
> happy to use the term... pls note that we have now amended the caption
> on
> our site!
>
> <snip>
> http://www.nhm.ac.uk/mineralogy/facilities/emu5.htm gives a definition
> of
> confocal electron microscopy - suggesting it may exist after all. This
> lab
> claims to have one.
>
> This lab, http://www.vet.uga.edu/GradRes/, also has "a confocal electron
> microscope located in the Center for Advanced Ultrastructural Research
> near
> the College."
>
> And here,
> http://www.med.stanford.edu/center/communications/publications/stanmed/pre
> vi
> ous_issues/2000spring/slime.html , Stanford is relishing its
> contribution to
> research: "With the invention of the confocal electron microscope in the
> early 1990s, scientists could snoop into the lives of bacteria without
> destroying or damaging the biofilm."
> <snip>
>
>
> --
> Russell McConnell
> Confocal Imaging Facility Technician
> Department of Neuroscience
> Tufts University School of Medicine
> M&V Building room #137
> 136 Harrison Ave.
> Boston, MA 02111
> Tel. (617) 636-3795
> http://www.neurosci.tufts.edu/Imaging
>
>