I've been doing three years worth of analytical chemistry research (biomedically related) with one publication under review. However, I did a summer research program in molecular biology/cell biology research and absolutely loved it. I would definitely like to pursue the PhD part in this field.
My question is that I've noticed that most of the MSTP schools and successful applicants have done/are doing biology-related biomedical research and not chemistry based. Will this put me at a disadvantage?
Thanks!
I definitely have some thoughts on this. I think the general perception of most people, including mine at one point, was that it does not matter what field your undergrad research is in as long as you are utilizing the scientific method in your work. I myself worked in a computational chemistry lab 2.5 years where I used computers all day to model proteins. Besides that, I only had one summer of wet laboratory experience (studying micelles) under my belt when I applied. I thought that my lack of bio research would not hurt me, but I think the whole application process has changed my views on that.
If you think about it, the type of research you do as an undergrad should and does have an effect when you apply. Questions the admissions committees are thinking probably include, "Why hasn't this student further explored research in this field as an undergrad if he/she wants to pursue graduate study in it?" Since I was in a chemistry lab and wanted to pursue a PhD in pharmacology, I tried to explain my reasoning for transitioning into this field. But, PI's and adcoms are very aware that your knowledge/skills are all lacking when it comes to biologically-related research. Some adcoms wondered why I stayed in the same chem lab my senior year even though I was interested in pharmacology. Definitely a fair question from their end.
Now I'm not saying that if you want to pursue a biochemistry PhD and your undergrad research was in immunology then you are screwed and you must go do some biochemistry research asap. But, if your project as an undergrad is on a totally different field then it is much more difficult to explain not only why you want to transition to a different field, but more importantly why you are capable of making that transition. If you had a lot of qualified students with only a few seats to offer (aka MSTP and MD/PhD programs across the country) and you had to give an acceptance to someone who had bio vs chem research, the adcoms will probably chose the bio student if both applicants have similar stats.
Why do I think is? Well, even though we talk about a lot about MST programs and the exciting frontier of translational research, remember that you are basically applying to an MD and a PhD program. For an MD you need certain things including grades, MCAT, volunteer, etc. For the PhD, you basically need your grades and research experiences. I believe the fact that my undergrad was 90% chem research and only 10% wet lab bio experience did hurt me and I understand why. My point is that to avoid having a similar problem emphasize why you are interested in this other field and why you know you are capable of making this transition.
One last note, you said earlier "that most of the MSTP schools and successful applicants have done/are doing biology-related biomedical research and not chemistry based" ... I think you can see why that is now. Most students are going to have undergrad bio research for MSTP and now adcoms are going to face a similar problem to the one I outlined earlier.
