Feedback on Exercise Science Major & Research

[PRScustomGTR]

I was hoping I could get some feedback on how my research will be seen by adcoms.

I am a rising a junior and will be applying next summer (before my senior year). I am an Exercise Science major with Biology and Chemistry Minors. In my two years of college, I have participated in exercise physiology research testing the effect of different resistance training protocols on energy expenditure to determine the optimal load for weight loss. Next year we will begin a 2-3 year long training study involving women using explosive versus slow rep speeds to show that explosive rep training causes greater increases in energy expenditure and greater improvements in body composition than slow reps (contrary to the general female population's notion of using slow reps to "tone").

I was very involved in the precursor study to determine what the optimal resistance training load for energy expenditure and next year, since all of the seniors in the lab are conducting their own projects for their internships, the women's training study will most likely be my project for next year. My PI does not have major funding as my institution is not primarily a research institution but he is applying for some small NSF and NIH grants as well as a local foundation grant.

This summer I have an internship at University of Rochester Medical Center and I was awarded an NSF grant for this summer as well. I hope to get another summer internship next summer. I most likely will not get any publications as an undergraduate unless it is from my summer research or from the study we have done over the past two years, as the training will take many years to complete.

I currently have a cGPA of 3.92 and a sGPA of 4.0. I was an RA and a tutor this year and for the next 2 years I will be an ER scribe and a supplemental instructor (kind of like a TA).

Are there any current MD/PhD students who can comment on how this would look to an admissions committee? Or does anyone know how exercise physiology research is seen on an application as it is not a basic science or bench top research?

Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[StIGMA]

It depends on what you want to do in graduate school. If you want to continue with this sort of research, you may not need a PhD. At the moment (from your description), your understanding of hypothesis-based research is not where is should be, ie: you are beginning a larger study (experiment) to 'show' something? This may be a reflection of your PI.

If you want to transition to bench research for a PhD (in preparation for utilizing bench research in your career), then bench research will significantly improve your application. If you plan to continue exercise physiology-related research (or human subjects research), then I do not see how bench research would help your application.

As a potential MD student, determine where your interests are and then ask if you need a PhD. Start with the MD as baseline, and only if the MD cannot accomplish your goals, then see where the PhD could fill in the gaps. I fail to see how a PhD training would contribute to this sort of human subjects research compared to an MD with streamlined research training.

 

[PRScustomGTR]

Stigma,

Thanks for your response. I understand the description of the studies is a bit lacking; I didn't want to write too long a description for fear that no one would read it. Based on the literature and previous data collected by my PI, we hypothesized that out of 3 different 1-RM loads (48%, 60%, and 72%) the 60% of 1-RM load using explosive reps for bench and squat would cause a greater increase in energy expenditure, result in greater force production, and greater lactate production. The data we have collected show that the 48% load significantly increases energy expenditure over the 60% and 72%. When work is matched per set, the 48% and 72% are nearly equal but it is not feasible for recreational exercisers to use a 72% load. For our study next year we will be training two separate groups of women using the 48% load with varying explosive versus slow rep speeds (one group of explosive contractions with 2 second eccentrics and the other with 2 second concentrics and 2 second eccentrics). Because muscle hypertrophy occurs due to greater time-under-tension, we hypothesize that the slow rep group will have increase in lean mass with little to no change in fat mass while the explosive group will have a decrease in fat mass. We hypothesize that the explosive reps using moderate weight (48%) cause an increase in energy expenditure because the lower weight can be moved at a greater velocity, increasing cross-bridge cycling which cannot be done with the 72%. Greater energy expenditure with a moderate load as opposed to a heavy load is contrary to current literature. If the slow group does indeed have an increase in lean mass this will disprove the notion of lifting a moderate weight slowly will help "tone," but will in fact do the opposite.

I do plan on transitioning to bench research and I am concerned as to if my summer experiences will be enough. I desire an MD-PhD to do translational research but nothing involving training like my current research. I've narrowed my research interests down to neuromuscular diseases like (myasthenia gravis or muscular dystrophy) or bioenergetics/metabolism to research obesity or diabetes. As an MD student, I want to help treat people with the disease as well assist others who show risk factors; I am a very strong proponent of exercise as preventative medicine. My reason for the PhD is that I want to help advance knowledge about the disease as well as facilitate development of new treatment methods. I feel as though the MD-PhD will offer the freedom and opportunity to see patients, continue research, as well as teach the next generation of scientists (all of which are activities I do now).