Chromatography Forum

There seems to be the legitimate fear emerging, that the forum is steadily drifting away from professionalism. For instance: posting.php?mode=reply&f=5&t=15685
We may be even supporting dangerously bad analytical processes (lots of possible examples for some time now), or even criminal activities (are we asked to help a one man pharmaceutical firm to concoct some questionable pills ? viewtopic.php?f=19&t=15693 ).

Maybe we should not feel compelled to answer every post??

We're getting old, Hans!

When I started doing chromatography 40 years ago, I had to become a chromatographer and learn a great deal about the technique in order to use it effectively. I think we're now at the point where a majority of users are not professional chromatographers; they're biochemists, or synthetic organic chemists, or formulators, or . . . To them, a chromatograph is (justifiably) an "appliance" like a computer or a smart phone. Most of the time they follow the instructions for the method and it works. When it doesn't, they turn to places like this for help. I take it as something of a responsibility for us "greybeards" (to steal from another thread!) to pass along some of our hard-won experience (and, Lord knows, you've certainly been generous about that!).

You're quite right that not all threads deserve an answer (as of now, the excipient thread has not received any, which isn't surprising because it has nothing to do with Chromatography), but I tend to give special dispensation to questions in the "Student Projects" section. Many (if not most) of those reflect ignorance, but that's the point: ignorance is not stupidity; it can be cured. In fact, that's what being a student is all about .

I have not been on the forum as long as either Hans or Tom, but I do notice an increase recently in questions that are utterly impossible to answer because they contain no information whatsoever on the instruments or the conditions of analysis - there was one recently that did not even distinguish between gas and liquid chromatography as the separation technique.

In idle moments I speculate as to how the posters expect anyone to solve their problems - this is not an issue of technical expertise, or of people using instruments just as tools, it goes to the fundamentals of problem solving as an exercise in working things out on the basis of evidence and testing, which is what science itself is.

This is not confined to internet forums - I have had lab technicians come to me with similar "my peaks are tailing/small/gone" questions. I suspect that they think that "experts" just know things. It worries me - where is the next generation of experts going to come from ?

I am also puzzled that they apparently have nobody within their organizations that they are able to ask for similar help, and yet at least some of them are running analyses on drugs etc, which we might hope are being done by people who know what they are up to.

Peter

where is the next generation of experts going to come from ?

Probably from the same place as the last two: a small minority of users who become captivated by the technique and what it can do. I'd bet that there are at least as many chromatography experts now as there were a generation ago; what we see as a problem comes from the fact that there are a lot more non-expert users, so the concentration is going down.

To mutilate a quote from Robert Heinlein: "The total amount of chromatography expertise is a constant. The population of users is increasing. You figure it out!"

where is the next generation of experts going to come from ?

I'd bet that there are at least as many chromatography experts now as there were a generation ago; what we see as a problem comes from the fact that there are a lot more non-expert users, so the concentration is going down.

And if I had more of a chemistry background I could probably argue that too much dilution can make a solution much less reactive

Peter

I won't mention homeopathy!

I just want to say "thanks", because I count myself amongst the non-grey-beards (just...) and have learned a lot from this forum. Tom is right, many of us have come to chromatography from other paths, and now practice chromatography without a valid licence. I have no formal training in analytical chemistry (so I follow the "how do I make a 1M solution?" threads with interest where the solute is horribly hygroscopic or volatile... the rest I ignore). On the other hand, I've been measuring things for 20 years, and do rather care about getting the right result. I'm probably one of many here.

Some of the unprofessionalism, I think, is a matter of viewpoint. Coming from an academic background, I feel strongly about trying to use both brain cells at the same time; to me it's important to understand why we do things, and I expect to question established methods and judge them for how they appear now, not merely accept them because I'm inheriting them from people who knew better. The jewels of the past sometimes tarnish, unfortunately, even when they were once things of beauty, and when they have done a lot of good (other jewels sparkle like new). It sounds hideously vain to set amateur thinking against past expertise, but if we can't question things, no matter what their provenance, how can we ever advance? There's no guarantee that past experts would have the same opinion today, if they were in our shoes.

But to someone in a regulated environment, questioning the lab's quality assurance document, or its methods book, is unprofessional rebellion (and rightly so: the whole lab's reliability relies on the undisputed fact that everyone works the same way). If the book says "thou shalt not smooth thy chromatograms!", then I will look unprofessional if I argue that the chromatograms are already electronically smoothed anyway, that I'm always retaining the original data when I smooth, and in any case, why is making a poor job of integrating a noisy peak better than smoothing it and integrating it well?

So please forgive me if I look unprofessional sometimes; honestly I come here in good faith and try to do a good job. Incidentally, introducing the ideas of a regulated environment into a non-regulated academic environment is a bit of a thankless task anyway, with representatives of both sides considering me to be an undesirable element. Tom's right; if anyone like me comes here ignorant of the professional approach, and goes away knowing a little more, the site has done something useful.

Hey, and if anyone ever identifies that one-man pharma outfit, please let me know where not to buy...

I tend to ignore the posts in which the author is looking for a quick answer, i.e. "I have no peaks, what is wrong??"

Hopefully, I've never been guilty of that. I try to include as much background as I can when I have instrument issues. If you're familiar with any of my threads, I post a lot of chromatograms and pictures, which seems to help as far as views and replies.

I ask questions on here after exhausting possibilities with the operator's manual, online resources, and tech support. The vets on here really know their stuff!

And also a thank you to everyone here that has replied to my posts and pointed me in the right direction. Much appreciated.

John

I concur with most of the above...

I also feel that, if you look at the brain as a reservoir, then look at what these pipsqueaks know about the myriad formats, configurations, and pros and cons to each when it comes to computers, home theater, cell phones and all of the media streams available to each, there will has to be a little spillage. When I first encountered "serious" technology in the form of a Ti80, I had time to sit and figure out how to use it, read the manual etc. A year or so later, I had access to a CPM based computer, another year later, DOS... It all came at a manageable rate.

Today, kids in their tween years have 100 pages worth of directions for their phones, their computer OS and each application they aspire to be proficient at. On top of that, they have to know how to eradicate malware, unhack their facebook accounts and become experts in video card specifications lest their MMPORG scores suffer the consequences of inferior hardware. They may not have a clue about stoichiometry or chromatography equations, but they know why they prefer 1080i to 720p and if they prefer plasma, LCD or LED-LCD video displays as well as the relative benefits of ordering them with wireless and/or bluetooth connectivity.

Hopefully, a few of them (today's aspiring chemists) will shun their 4g smart phone friviolity in favor of learning how to properly use and appreciate the instrumentation available to them. Maybe some will eventually realize that higher resolution LC-NMR will eventually be of greater benefit to mankind than playing Angry Birds on a higher resolution tablet will be.

where is the next generation of experts going to come from ?

I'm with Tom on this one...don't worry. I think quite a few will come out of small companies with good ideas who hire people and purchase instrumentation in order to solve problems. That's where I came from. I was hired by a small start-up and became their chromatographer by having an HPLC dropped in front of me and being told to learn it. I've made just about every mistake a chromatographer can and I've learned from all of them. I've also learned art of chromatography reasonably well and am not hugely worried about future prospects for employment.

With that said, I see civil and detailed discussion to be of paramount importance here...without it, there's no point to a forum such as this.

I have seen something of a decline lately, which is why I've kept largely quiet. Unfortunately I think some of that may be due to the vacuum created by the loss of Uwe.

I have seen an increasing problem, perhaps it is with age! Whilst I agree that issues with the lack of technical knowledge can be "cured" I am concerned that some people seem to have no desire to investigate and find things out for themselves. This applies to many things, not just science. Is this a symptom of the "Google" age where so much information is available at a few keystrokes and there are "experts" who have done all the work before? Knowledge is more than facts and figures, it is about the process as well as the result. The human race has moved forward by thinking and testing theories against actual outcomes. Have we reached a point where eveything is know and there is no more learning to be done?
If I ask you a question and you tell me the answer what have I learned? If you do not know the answer what do I do, ask someone else or figure it out for myself?
GCguy
(in a very philosophical mood)

I agree with DR in that the world wants more stuff - more quickly. Overload. And
that is not just material stuff. There is a "need" for knowledge and its more "accessible" than before. But just a little knowledge is dangerous in those who can't grasp the context of it. The key is pitching at the right level. These arguments are similar to those who wish to bring back apprenticeships.
WK

I do not doubt for a minute that "'twas ever thus" is a pretty accurate description of what we see now, and what has gone before. The forum members, even including those who only pop up once with a question and then never appear again, are a tiny, and very very biased sample of the whole of chromatography. Almost by definition they are people with problems (and a very small subset of them have answers as well).

In the pre-internet era asking advice was mostly invisible - ask the guy on the next bench, look it up in the (hardcopy) manual, ask the supervisor etc. The equivalent process is now public - post it on the internet - which is almost bound to make it look worse now than it used to be. I wonder though if there is a generation of lab supervisors who are wondering why junior staff never ask them questions any more ?

But what still puzzles me is how anyone, no matter what their level of technical expertise, expects a problem to be solved when they do not provide any details. The next logical step is for them not to post at all, and expect the internet experts to divine by telepathy that they actually have a problem.

It is tempting to say - "so don't answer", but if the experts don't answer, someone else will (it happened recently, no names no pack drill) and you do not have to look far on the internet to find forums where the blind are leading the blind.

It's been a long day ......

Peter

I believe there is another category of forum users out there - those (like me) that quietly follow the posts and replys and learn much useful information in the process. I agree, at times there does seem to be a decline in the politeness and professionalism of posting. However, I see the same thing at times in day to day operations of the corporate world.

I fall somewhere between the "Chromatographer" category and the "Chromatography user" category - after using HPLCs, GCs, and ICs off and on for about 8 years. I had the good luck of having a very knowledgeable supervisor teach me initially, and then a good dose of curiousity and tenacity has done well by me since then. I agree that the "next generation" of experts is out there in any number of laboratories learning from their co-workers and solving problems on a daily basis.

In the meantime I need to go make sure my ICP torch is still lit since it's being a little sketchy lately, check on the standards coming off the IC, and calibrate the pH meter on the titrator...among other things.

Just when all seemed lost, a spark of hope glimmered on the horizon...

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15736

Look! Complete sentences! Instrument conditions! A complete description of the issue versus the expected!

I point this out as an example of part of the problem at the heart of the 'quality of Forum' issue: to me it seems like there are a large number of posters whose original language is not English (which obviously is not the case in the post above), and while English is the de facto language of the board, I believe things are getting lost in translation. Now, my wife is an interpreter, and one thing I have learned from her is that the cultural aspect of interpreting is one of the hardest concepts to convey to the uninitiated. One of the hardest parts of her job is being as direct and socially awkward as she has to in order to accurately reflect the message she is interpreting. I think the bruskness and directness of some of these posts, coupled with the lack of skill in using the English language, may be a part of the problem. I can imagine if I was from a completely different culture and was communicating a problem on an internet Forum, my post might come off as arrogant/rude/uncivil, when the cultural biases of the reader are taken into account. Someone from my own cultural background may read it and think nothing of it.

However, a bigger part of the problem is the obvious lack of adequate training available to new chromatographers by their respective companies. Anyone who has read my posts over the last few years may have gleaned that I have been trained almost exclusively by this Forum and the Internet in general, and while that is neither preferable or optimal in terms of learning the craft, it is what it has been. I think a lot of the problem posts we see here may be from employees of start-up labs in second/first-world countries where the chromatography experience is on par with mine - lacking. In addition to the language barrier, this can be a formidable challenge when translating to English all of the unique vocabulary of chromatography from your native language. So, I think a bit of patience may be required in order to allow the poster to figure out what the Forum needs in order to help them.

I did have a thought along these lines a few weeks ago, but I do not know if it is possible within the constraints of the programming of the Forum. In any case, I thought it might be useful to have the "New Post" button be accompanied by extra fields, like Instrument type, separation mechanism, column name and dimensions, mobile phase, gradient parameters, detection method, analytes, etc - some sort of multi-field fill-in-the-blanks form arranged so that a new post in any forum (except Student or non-chromatography board sections like the Water Cooler) be accompanied by as much information as possible from the beginning, to eliminate the inevitable "can you post the important parameters" post from anyone interested in helping the original poster.

Anyway, just my few thoughts. Take them as you will.

Bisnett 2, I think that you hit some nails very squarely on their heads ! And if it could be done the fill in the box idea might work quite nicely. The old cynic in me has a suspicion that the modern generation of software users would have to have drop down menus for every box

Another thought that occurs, which kind of links to your observation that people are being dropped into the analytical deep end, is that some of the posters have probably only ever seen one GC or HPLC, and so to them that instrument is the whole of the technique - this GC with whatever column and detector it has is the only kind there is, so what's to specify ?, and we only run one kind of sample etc.

There is, of course, a sticky for new users that politely asks them to provide the analytical details. Maybe that needs to pop up for everyone's first dozen or so posts.

Peter