David Suter
davidsuter.bsky.social
David Suter
@davidsuter.bsky.social
PI at EPFL / gene regulation / chromatin / epigenetics / genomics / stem cells / transcription factors / single molecule / protein turnover https://www.epfl.ch/labs/suter-lab/ - and 🎹 https://www.youtube.com/@davidsuter594 / https://soundcloud.com/suterd7
Thanks Elias !
November 11, 2025 at 10:38 AM
Thanks Milena !
November 10, 2025 at 1:04 PM
Big thanks for the fantastic organization of this competition + the opportunity to play on such beautiful instruments, as well as to the EPFL/UNIL Chopin piano competition for their special prize. And looking very much forward to playing during several concerts planned in 2026.
November 10, 2025 at 10:15 AM
Paper rejections are also more emotional for me - I feel like grants are anyway lotteries while papers...are...lotteries having some numbers better/worse than others 🙃
October 26, 2025 at 2:17 PM
Hey ! I just tried, I have to say it is pretty impressive...and useful ! Thanks for sharing this resource
October 16, 2025 at 7:27 AM
Thanks Juan !
September 26, 2025 at 10:07 AM
In flux, balance holds,
Through storm of concentration,
Stem cell self remains.

Congratulations to former very talented PhD student Romane Mizeret, with help from @armelletollenaere.bsky.social and Cédric Deluz, +
big thanks to EPFL genomics (GECF) and flow cytometry (FCCF) facilities.
September 26, 2025 at 8:15 AM
OCT4 drifts, unsure,
SOX2 holds steady, unmoved,
NANOG climbs with strength.

Mass-action falters,
Binding bends to hidden rules,
Genes choose subtler paths.

Core regions endure,
Three voices sing constant truth,
Pluripotent flame.
September 26, 2025 at 8:13 AM
Special prize for "how to finish things you start" 💯
August 14, 2025 at 10:47 AM
Rejoice ! They are probably implementing the 3-factor authentification 🤓
August 13, 2025 at 8:34 AM
Yeah sure in that case sounds a bit crazy...basing authorship on career impact sounds like weaponizing authorship (or lack thereof) for career advancement, which IMO amounts to fraud
August 7, 2025 at 3:44 PM
individual credit when very few people were involved compared to studies with zillions of authors.
August 7, 2025 at 12:48 PM
cases is another one. I do think it is relatively obvious that when less people are involved, this means more work per person which I think should also be recognized differently. So I would say this argument can never be used to play around with authorship, but I feel it natural to give more
August 7, 2025 at 12:45 PM
I feel like this has to be contextualized a bit to answer properly. Authorship should always be attributed when work has been done, full stop. Now the question of whether an author deserves more credit in a two-author paper than in a 50-author paper (where credit was attributed properly in both
August 7, 2025 at 12:43 PM