A must-read paper on fin regeneration from Ken Poss' lab
http://www.cell.com/developmental-cell/fulltext/S1534-5807(13)00484-X

If you like these two great papers, you qualify for the uber-nerd society
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6156/361.full
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6156/357.full
Publishing back-to-back in Science must come naturally for some folks…

Your mom was right: sleep is good for you :-)
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6156/373

How many men would be willing to go through this to get some more hair on their scalps?
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/10/16/1309970110
And some others just shave it. Go figure.

A good read: interview with Harold Varmus
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6157/416.full

Superenhancers are the new super thing!
http://www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8674%2813%2901227-0
Awesome paper. Soon I will have to regret my rants about "OmicOmics".

Take that, nerds! Exercise makes you smarter:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155041311300377X
But not any kind of exercise (see below)...

Here are the English (with some help from the Canadians) sticking it to the Americans: your football is worse than ours!
http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/131017/srep02972/full/srep02972.html
Who would have thought that banging your head may have negative consequences for your brain? Not the NFL. Oh wait, some of these NFL talking heads came up through the (head-banging) ranks. Oops. How about fMRI on Beavis and Butthead?

This was all over news this week, so I have to chime in too. Newsflash: all Homo erectus may not have looked exactly the same:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6156/297.summary
At least we modern humans all look exactly the same.

I dread the day when bench science becomes obsolete...
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/186.full
Take note: the illustration is in the best tradition of fake science. All of the information displayed on the 20+ screens would fit on one regular computer screen just fine. But then it would not be "big science" :-)

George Church is always fun and provocative
http://www.nature.com/news/improving-genome-understanding-1.13907
In a nerdy way of course. But if you are not a nerd, why are you reading this?!

Eugenics anyone?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24398312
Apparently someone recently patented DNAmatch.com ;-)

Transgenerational effects of defects in folate metabolism
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550413113003859
Blaming everything on your parents is sooo last year. Grandparents!

At least one big pharma company appears to be interested in real science:
http://www.nature.com/news/novartis-reboots-brain-division-1.13912
BTW, director of NIBR Mark Fishman worked with zebrafish before moving over to the industry 

I don't know about you guys, but there were no real surprises for me in this study:
http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2013_10_08/caredit.a1300219

OK, so this lists MD/PhD as a great career choice:
http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2013_10_10/caredit.a1300225
Now, look at page 4 of this document (and hope there was a problem with this survey, especially if you are a female) http://photos.the-scientist.com/legacyArticleImages/2011/12/2011_SalarySurvey.pdf
If it is on the internet, it must be true, right?

And now a continuation of  last week's theme on discrepancy between calls for STEM grads and the actual job market:
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/phillypharma/Teva-says-it-will-cut-5000-jobs-by-the-end-of-2014.html

A nice popular science read on the perils of genetic diagnostics
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/27.full
20% discordance rate in analysis is really troubling. For those without genetic predisposition to math (see below), thats getting one in five wrong.

And once we're at it, some genetic traits should NOT be studied of course:
http://www.nature.com/news/ethics-taboo-genetics-1.13858
Why? Because burying your head in sand is the most effective way to deal with potential controversy.

One of the findings in this study is that "People began to sweat slightly on seeing the pictures and smelling the odours, anticipating that they would get a shock."
http://www.nature.com/news/sleep-therapy-can-change-bad-memories-1.13792
I sent you guys enough links to high profile neuroscience papers to write a script for a Sacha Baron Cohen "reality" movie…

A fascinating (but not surprising) read on open access publishing:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
BTW, this really is NOT about open access publishing. It's about predatory publishing. Why would "Science" put "open-access" into sub-headline? Your guess is as good as my :-)

It really should not take a PhD to see a hint of disconnect between politicians cries for "more STEM graduates" and the actual job market:
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/phillypharma/Merck-says-it-will-cut-8500-more-jobs.html

And if you do get a PhD and become a postdoc: you become awesome to the point of invisible and uncountable:
http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2013_09_30/caredit.a1300214
Oh, and if you were a postdoc at the NIH? Then you are on unpaid leave until politicians figure out who has bigger balls and can pee further. While collecting their salaries of course.