Hell no, forgive me for seeing the humourous side to it but I was trying to figure out whether keehaa genuinely intended to spell it 'fundamentle' (as evidenced twice in the original post) when, for all intents and purposes, he/she appears to have a very firm command of English, aided by my (skewed, perhaps) observation that most non-native English speakers rarely start a conversation with a "hi ya folks" salutation. It's also interesting to note that keehaa's posts appear to be lazily posted with missed capital letters and frequent missed punctuations.

What you have reminded me today is that I am not amongst friends, colleagues and associates on this forum. Most of us are strangers to the rest of us here, and elements of humour or sarcasm is further veiled by the difficulty of communicating not only to fellow peers but peers in other countries and cultural background purely by mere words on the computer screen.

One thing you should know is that in the short time I've been on this forum I have shown nothing but support for those whose threads I've posted on. Take it how you will.

manda - thank you for your kind words regarding my sound and useful posts in this forum. It is not my thinking that many people notice. I am known to be many things amongst my friends, colleagues and associates. A number of them know me to be dedicated, focused, unquestioningly steadfastly loyal and trustworthy. A number of others might think I'm cunning, but lazy and an introverted reclusive or worse still, a liar and a cheat(??). But most at some point or other, have known me to have a witty sense of humour, the kind of humour that strikes right at the heart of the observable life unfolding before all of us. And I believe my best work has been delivered deadpan, I know I've managed to incite belly-laughs from the most straight-down-the-line of individuals. That is, amongst my friends, colleagues and associates of course.

While you're checking your calculations, I also recommend checking to see if you've spelt 'fundamental' correctly in your papers too.

Why am I always the last to know about who's male and who's female around here?

I could bring you on a tour of my old lab and give you a running commentary on the various psychotic nutcases (some with extensive background/Hx) you will meet along the way. I'm not even attempting to exaggerate psychoses. Hell, bring along a copy of the DSM IV if you want and I'll throw in a little match-the-nutcases-with-his/her-mental disorder quiz. Correct guesses win a mystery prize at the end of the tour.

..and here we have 404 demonstrating his bizarre personality.

Stacey, it sounds like you're very familiar with the people I work(ed) with.... I've worked with some seriously emotionally psychotic people.

Good luck with it. If I were you, I'd make the application for medicine anyway, and then make the decision whether to accept if there was an offer.

If I didn't receive an offer, well then there'd be no regrets and lingering questions of 'what if..'.

Your supervisors are crossing the line between being plain lazy to being grossly negligent.

If all else fails at the meeting, sneak a little laxative medication into their coffee. There is much satisfaction to be had seeing them enjoy the effects of induced bowel movement.

You never know if minor modifications or discoveries could lead to something much bigger later... and that's what your research diary is there for. Your IP is your most valuable asset as a research scientist.

It's not so much about telling your supervisor to get first mention.

It's more about being the first to write about your hypothesis in your research diary/journal.

The argument for inclusion in the anecdote described above came down to the role of the neuropathologist, as well as the rank & title, proximity (physical or otherwise) and relationship (professional and personal) to the other researchers.

Other than that, there was no clear cut argument here, no clear cut evidence for and against.

I'm also not entirely sure on this but if they paid you for your services, then it's a service they paid for and that's that, in which case it would be nice for them to include you in the 'thank you' list rather than as a co-author. UNLESS, you made a prior arrangement with them to be acknowledged.

I know of a neuropathologist who performed definitive diagnoses as part of the job for years, and it was like a nuclear bomb exploded when it was discovered that researchers were using the diagnosed tissue in their published (or-soon-to-be published) research without including the neuropathologist as co-author. There was a very firm stand against the offer to include a thank-you acknowledgement. The neuropathologist was eventually included as co-author. I suppose I could argue both ways for and against inclusion as co-author in this circumstance but I must say the argument seemed to point towards inclusion in this case.