An Interview with Associated Content Writer Jorge M. Rivas

Hello and welcome to the final article of several interviews with some of the AC Content Producers whom I find most intriguing. You've heard from writers whom many of you already know well and from writers whom you may not have previously met Jason Bauer. Now you'll hear from the summer's most prolific science writer as he talks about his writing and vision for AC.

All in all, I think we've had a most engaging mix of seven very interesting AC CPs who have very good things to share about life and writing. Read on through to the end!!

Introduction to an Interview with Jorge M. Rivas

Jorge M. Rivas is a committed scientist who envisions AC and AC CPs as an integral part of a new society. His vision sees AC as a "universal stage" and an "immense opportunity" for CPs.

Hear Jorge M. Rivas tell about his path to becoming a successful scientist and scientific writer. He may surprise you with his comments about modesty, truth, and an equal society. He'll inspire you with his idea about pioneering movements and grassroots reporters. [Links take you to some of Jorge M. Rivas' articles.]

Jorge M. Rivas Envisions

Codie: 1) What is your background and experience, including your previous association with writing.

Jorge: With respect to my background and experience, you can basically say that I have been a professional student most of my life. My friends and family think I am crazy for having spent more years in higher education than in between kindergarten and college (yes, more than 12!). But, I have no regrets. I love being a scientist.

Most of my writing experience has been associated with my education and training: from my college chemistry thesis to hopefully my latest research paper later this year.

Professionally my training has been in chemistry, immunology and physiology (medicine). I consider myself a translational (pre-clinical) scientist. What that means is that I endeavor to find cellular, tissue-based or animal-based models that will allow the efficient evaluation of existing or novel macromolecules (proteins, polysaccharides) for the prevention and treatment of disease.

Codie: Does this relate to the orthomolecular work of Linus Pauling relevant to the biochemical effects of such things as enzymes and vitamins?

Jorge: No. Orthomolecular medicine, as I understand it, is a philosophy that addresses disease with respect to balance of nutrition and metabolism. I do not think that it opposes conventional (allopathic) medicine (as some believe). It may, however, sometimes try to place too much emphasis on the use of vitamins and supplements as a panacea for disease. Nevertheless, many experts state that there will be major support for nutritional science research in the coming years.

My recent work has involved elucidating how proteins or polysaccharides (complex sugars) can be effectively used to manipulate inflammatory or coagulation pathways for the treatment of bacterial infections and sepsis (infection in the blood).

The ultimate objective of this work, of course, is to have these studies lead to a clinical trial and perhaps the development of a new medicine.

Codie: 2) With your credentials, you obviously don't financially need to write for AC. Why do you choose to write for AC, particularly in light of motivations, goals and inspirations?

Jorge: The chief reason for writing for AC is that it provides an esplanade where I can bring to the forefront issues of public health, contribute to science education, and perhaps provide a distinct point of view with respect to scientific issues of civic interest.

One of my goals for this 'media of the people' is to try to present both aspects of a story whenever I can. I will also try to explain to my readers that contrary to popular belief, most of all, scientists have to be modest (and unassuming) because you are only as accurate and knowledgeable as your last experiment.

My other goal is to bring to light (as opposed as to what is presented in the mainstream media), that the majority (>98%) of scientists are not arguing about whether a basic fundamental scientific theory (such as evolution) is true or not, but instead, that they are just arguing about the features and/or details of the empirical concept.

Codie: Could you elaborate on this? Do you mean that the truth of a "basic scientific theory" is assumed or do you mean that the question of truth is considered irrelevant to the paramount examination of features and/or details of the empirical concept and that the examined features/details will ultimately tell whether there is truth or not?

Jorge: The most important thing to remember is that science is mostly interested in observing and measuring the physical natural world that we can perceive with our senses (with our without the aid of instruments or technology).

The first step in this process, is to make an observation and postulate a hypothesis (or prediction) that explains a specific set of phenomena. The key feature is that there must be a way of making the hypothesis falsifiable, in other words, it necessitates the existence of a counter observation that can prove the prediction false.

If you can not do this, then you are dealing with aspects, positions or outlooks that could be defined as being in the realm of the supernatural. Even in esoteric fields such as quantum physics, there has to be mathematics available to be able to disprove a hypothesis. If there is no way that a hypothesis (that explains any phenomena) can ever be proven false, then it is not considered science.

Codie: 3) What benefit or reward, either personal or professional, do you derive from writing for AC?

Jorge: The benefit or reward that I derive from writing for Associated Content, is that it gives me an opportunity to share my science and medicine "translating" skills with a broad audience. It also allows me to present science and biomedical information in an unbiased, educational, and informative manner so that the general public understands more about science and medical topics and therefore can make informed decisions when evaluating science-based [governmental] policy issues.

It still surprises me how so many educated people are misinformed about the current scientific literature or about what mainstream scientists are actually discussing with respect to contentious topics such as stem cells, cloning, global climate change, and evolution.

My hope is that AC will become a pioneering movement where grassroots reporters can showcase stories that can truly make a difference in the U.S. and around the world.

Follow-up Question

Codie: In light of your desire to "present science and biomedical information in an unbiased, educational, and informative manner" with the aim of elucidating the discussions scientists are having about profoundly important topics that require continuing formation of government policy, can you give a brief summary of "what mainstream scientists are actually discussing" with respect to one of the topics mentioned (stem cells, cloning, global climate change, evolution) that is of particular interest or personal importance to you?

Jorge: This question is difficult to answer as it seems quite open and broad in nature. What I can tell you is that many scientists are concerned that the general public is not deriving good scientific information from the media. Whether, this is because of ignorance, negligence or simple apathy, I do not know. Yet I do believe that Internet websites, such as AC, are poised to create a universal stage that will equalize the exchange of information between ordinary individuals.

Hence, this is an immense opportunity to finally create a true egalitarian society where no one is discriminated against and everyone can participate. It is interesting to speculate that global equity may first occur in virtual space before it actually is achieved in the real world. I guess we need to start somewhere, might as well be here and now.

Final Note from the Interviewer, Codie Leonsch-Hartwig:

We were meant to have an eighth interview with AC CP Kristie Leong M. D. but time constraints made it impossible for her to participate in spite of her initial enthusiasm for the project.

We sincerely regret her absence and still have all our questions: Why does an M. D. with a family practice, with an interest in prevention and alternative medicine, choose to write four and five articles a day for AC and cover topics as varied as jewelry making and starting canine businesses as well as medical information? And moreover, how can she possibly find time for these and making and selling jewelry and owning a bakery?

So, I guess we will have to hope that one day she will answer these questions herself and keep reading her Content!!