I'm a little unsettled. Is too much enthusiasm over talking science a bad thing?

In my office I put up 2+2=5. People stopped and thought about that one more than the posting of the new lunch rules. They were convinced there was some hidden meaning they missed out on. Bottom line, if people don't know the gossip, they demand we either let them in on all the dirty details or scold us for the gossip

Taking it down doesn't make much sense to me, for the reason that its significance is close to you. Do you take down pictures of your family? So what if it's an MRI. People put up ultrasounds of their children. I don't see anything wrong with that. And if someone doesn't know what an ultrasound is, that's an opportunity to talk about it. Just like an MRI.

Let me ask you this: If we accept that science discussion and education is a Good Thing, no matter where and when or how it happens, then is hanging an MRI of importance to you any different than an MRI of some anonymous person with the same condition?

I guess hanging an MRI of someone with a dangerous condition could seem sort of morbid, especially if you know that person well enough to have trouble detaching. Still, the only real worry there is that it might bother you, or alternatively that people might wonder why it didn't bother you. If neither of these was the case, there's no real cause for concern.

I have similar debates with myself when posting to my blog. Where do we draw the line? Some previous commentors might disagree, but I don't like to publish info about my family, if I can help it. I try to ask myself if the person whom I'm writing about would be troubled by my actions. Now, if it were my MRI on the wall, I think I'd say, "Hey, have a look at my beautiful brain!"

It took me a moment to understand the colleague's objection, frankly, since obviously the image was attracting interest and generating some nice discussions... a hallmark of truly meaningful art. And yet it's science! It's both! :) It's equally unclear whether people were upset by the personal connection, or moved/inspired by it.

I understand Jeannie's concerns about posting too-personal information on a blog -- I'm quite careful of such things myself -- but this situation is not quite the same thing. It's in your private office, after all.

Bottom line: if it makes you or other people uncomfortable, it might be a good idea to take it down. But if people find it beautiful and it's sparking interesting, educational discussions -- I'd vote for leaving it up.

Incidentally, there's a Boston-area artist called Nash Hyon that has a series of science-themed paintings based on the periodic table of elements. Her work is breathtaking, and I dearly wish I could afford one of them. :) But one is titled "galadium" (I'm getting the name completely wrong but don't feel like looking it up just now; it's one of the elements used in taking MRIs). The painting is built around an MRI of her late husband's brain -- he died of brain cancer, and his death sparked the entire series. That personal aspect to the story makes her art more powerful... Disturbing isn't always a bad thing.

Aha! It's gaudolinium

I have to confess, I don't get it. Was your colleague pointing out it was too "geeky", or too personal, or both? Or was it too obscure? If all the offices on your floor had belonged to neuroscientists, would the point still be valid? What if you had omitted the personal aspects in your explanation?

I come at this from a different angle, I guess. I'm a liberal arts guy, fiction writing and, decades later, visual arts on top that. One thing I'm interested in is exploring scientific visual metaphor, so an MRI sounds like no big deal. I had an MRI done over 15 years ago. I haven't had the time to chase it down, but have thought of many ways of turning that into art, if it still exists. What if you had first run the MRI through Photoshop and played with adding color and distortion until you found something beautiful. Then framed it and put that on your wall. Would your colleague's point still hold? What if it had been prize-winning biomedical images like these?

In visual art, there's a premium put on authentic individual gesture and subject. Geekiness, done right, would be a big plus as there's not a lot of it in this domain. And of course, being concerned about accessibility to/communication with the public is, as a general rule, a negative.

With the caveat of being cognizant of the social environment, so as not to be obtrusive or off-topic and to be conscious of audience, I'd argue the enthusiasm, the positive emotion about science is one of the critical missing elements in scientists' communication with the public. As I said, I don't get it.

I don't understand the objection, either.
Could you elaborate on the reasons for not posting the MRI?

Patient privacy??? Most of us can't diagnose from an MRI, so that seems far-fetched.

Personal stuff in an office??? I don't see that family photos or baby ultrasound snapshots are any different; people post that stuff in every office.

Please explain?

Oh, PS, would it be any different if the MRI were framed nicely, and you could tell people (possibly just the sqeamish people) that you have it on your wall as art?

Thanks, everyone, for the comments. To answer some of the queries:

An important part of the situation that wasn't clear enough is that the MRI is looking at something serious. So, I think it's more about it being personal, and that the scan is really a reflection of someone's suffering and sadness. Not from an arms length, anonymous sense, but a real "this person" is actually part of my life sense. And even if I keep things anonymous, or have the appropriate permissions to tell the story, I can't shake the feeling that having it up was maybe a subtle act of disrespect. It's funny, but I think "wonky" is a perfect word for it - meaning that it does tread that line, and I'm inclined to agree that at the end of the day, it's what makes you uncomfortable or comfortable that dictates your actions. What's telling, however, is that it didn't make me uncomfortable until someone said words.

You mentioned that the opinion to take it down was from someone you trust. I think that's a big part of it. Respect comes in all different forms, and it can definitely be pretty powerful. Maybe you can get your hands on an anonymous MRI scan, and then the anecdote becomes more detached?

That makes sense. As to why it went up and the appropriateness wasn't obvious to you initially, there's a shrink's load of possibilities. Consider that the close personal involvement might have effected you, which is understandable, and excusable.

David,

Part of the deciding factor for me would be the opinion of the person that the MRI represents. How do they feel about you hanging it on the wall? Would they be embarrassed or feel that their privacy has been violated in some way?

If so, then I would take it down.

If, however, they share your feeling that the MRI is a valuable teaching tool, I would leave it up.

i saw this topic mentioned at Sadly, No / it piqued my interest as my daughter intends to use a digital of my echocardiogram in a theatrical presentation and that is completely okay with me / and yes, i do have a "heart problem" although would require a fair amount of expertise to see that in the recording as well as a considerable amount of imagination to see the entity beating the drum / smile

as for the MRI i read the comments with interest, too, while deciding not to burden myself and you with an irrelevant opinion

wonderful blog, by the way

Interesting,
I did something similar when my son was diagnosed with a brain malformation. I made printouts of his MRI and hung them up in my (rather small office that I shard with a bunch of other graduate students), on the wall right above my desk. There are dividers between the desk, so it is sort of my territorium, but it wasn't exactly hidden. I suppose it was my way of dealing with it. Actually, I was proud of my son. For well over a year, the left-hand side of my son's brain had everybody fooled into thinking the right-side was there too. I don't see anything wrong with what you did. No one asked me to take them down. Of course, they were all (budding) scientists too.

I don't see why there's anything wrong with it if the owner of the head has given consent.

Dr. Ng, I don't mean to sound insensitive, but MRI is an MRI is an MRI. It is just what it purports to be, an image, whether of brain or any other organ. Per se, it has no ability to be (quoting you):
"a reflection of someone's suffering and sadness."
It is you who are ascribing an emotional component to it, because you happen to know whom or what it represents to you. This shows empathy, but undermines the detachment of a scientist.

I guess, this is exactly why surgeons are generally forbidden to operate on their loved ones. And I do think that it was wrong of your colleague to suggest taking it down, because his/her imposition - important to you because of your trust - clouded your artistic/scientific sensibilities, leaving you to deal with the raw emotional component.

It's just envy.

I have hung up various visualizations of my own scan, as decoration from time to time. I can see my cataract implant in one of them, it shows up clearly.

Kids, just ask the technician where your scan's being done what medium they use for file storage and when you can bring by a blank and they'll give you a copy. It's your information, after all!

Likely they'll want a mag-optical disk, the ones that look like giant hardshell floppies and cost $20 or $30. But if you have Osirix (OSX) to view the standard data files, you can go through the files and visualize your brain from whatever angle and slice you want.

My ex-wife cut hers up and made a backlit collage, called "Our Beautiful Daughter".

Go back to your intention. If your intention was low enough to disrespect...then it was distasteful. But, you seem like a pretty sensitive guy to me from your writings. So, if your intention was to be completely in awe of God's creation because it is indeed scientifically and artfully fascinating, and moreso because it is a picture of the actual brain that sits in your friend's head...then it's all good.

After reading all of the many comments posted here, I must say that I agree with those that posited that it is your trust of the person who suggestion the MRI's removal as a reason you then felt the need to do so. *shrug* Perhaps I am wrong.

Suirauga has it right that the MRI itself hasn't any of the things you ascribed to it. If I were to look at an MRI, I'd probably not have any clue about the interpretation, unless there was a very obvious mass or... well, something.

To be honest, the whole time I was reading this post and the responses, one question kept coming back to me: Did the colleague feel it needed taken down because of what he said, or was it more of a realization that these things happen to people, and the reminder that they can happen to people we love was too much to handle?

I personally would not have taken it down... unless there were several people whom it made uncomfortable. If it's just the one, well... you can't please everyone. It's like the ultrasound or family pictures: it's a picture of a part of your life. It's no more reasonable for people to ask you to remove it than the others. Just my two sense. (Yes, "sense" is the way I intended it.)

I think that the only major consideration is the attitude of the MRI subject. Beyond that, it comes down to how many visitors are uncomfortable/upset and how much you care about their reactions.

But beyond that, one could view an "abstract" MRI as being down toward one end of a spectrum of "medical artifacts." Always assuming the agreement of the subject, we could move along a bit and ask about displaying ...

* An x-ray of a compound fracture of a leg;
* A photo taken during the surgery to repair the compound fracture;
* A photo of the amputation, assuming that the compound fracture couldn't be repaired;
* An autopsy photo, assuming that the surgery went **really** badly.

I can see each of these as representing some combination of marvel at the human body and at medical skill. And then there's always the Body Worlds exhibition - http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,,669680,00.html

As the innocent soul who wandered into your office, there's a line somewhere beyond which I'd probably start to back away, but I find it hard to define in abstract terms just where the line is and why.

Let's see, putting something highly associated with death on your wall... wonky... not wonky... no, that's just unfeeling. Since pyschopaths would do that as well, I feel your colleague was hasty, logically speaking. Buddhists would go for it, though.

- - - - - -

We are drowning in light PhotoperiodEffect.com

To tell you the truth, I don't think there is anything wrong with what you put up. I often find myself looking at something that has a significan impact on me and find it helpful to come to terms with the issue. It also opens the door to interest and comment and there is certainly nothing wrong with that.