help me decide! compare/contrast 2 research positions

[Dulcina]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Ok, so I have a decision between 2 research positions, and I wanted help deciding.

I know what the most common response is going to be--- "Just pick the research topic you're more interested in, because ultimately you'll work harder in that job, and get a better LOR"

BUT... I'm pretty equally interested in both jobs, so I wanted a bit of help.

JOB#1
-at a biotech company

-project: Looking at biomarkers for cholesterol processing. Essentially, they feed humans/animals stable isotopes, and with these, track the processing of cholesterol through the body. Using these, they can determine the efficacy of different drugs aimed at reducing atherosclerosis.

-small emphasis on papers, large emphasis on producing a 'sellable' product

-35k pay


JOB#2
-at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab

-project: Looking at the effect of radation on chromosomal damage in sperm/eggs/zygotes/other tissues (breast, mainly), and extrapolating to cancer in later life. (it has been found that if you expose DNA to a low lvl of radiation, this 'prepares' it for higher doses, resulting in lower lvls of damage. weird, huh!)

-huge emphasis on papers (how good is this?)

-27k pay


THANK YOU for all your input!

 

[Tourterm]

If you're asking which would be best from a med school application point of view, they both look good. Really, from the stats on your MDapplicants profile, you're in a damn good position no matter what.

If you are asking in just the general sense of what would be good for you, I don't know. It's a personal choice. If you truly like both jobs and find them equally interesting, you're gonna have to look at other factors here. 8,000 a year difference for one. What about benefits? Commute time? Working hours? How much do you know about the two places? What was your gut feeling after talking to some of the staff or visiting the site? Aside from the research topics, what would be your actual duties at these two positions? You may find your actual responsibilities more enjoyable at one job than the other. I think the more you find out about the two positions, and the more aware you are of what you are looking for, the easier this decision will be.

On an unrelated note, the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab position sounds more interesting to me. Some researchers at my graduate school were working on low level radiation and it's effects on DNA damage and tolerance, made for some interesting seminars.

 

[Revenant]

I'd say Berkeley but I have no idea.

Therefore disregard this post.


(post count +1....mission accomplished)

 

[cadingcading]

Ok, so I have a decision between 2 research positions, and I wanted help deciding.

I know what the most common response is going to be--- "Just pick the research topic you're more interested in, because ultimately you'll work harder in that job, and get a better LOR"

BUT... I'm pretty equally interested in both jobs, so I wanted a bit of help.

JOB#1
-at a biotech company

-project: Looking at biomarkers for cholesterol processing. Essentially, they feed humans/animals stable isotopes, and with these, track the processing of cholesterol through the body. Using these, they can determine the efficacy of different drugs aimed at reducing atherosclerosis.

-small emphasis on papers, large emphasis on producing a 'sellable' product

-35k pay


JOB#2
-at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab

-project: Looking at the effect of radation on chromosomal damage in sperm/eggs/zygotes/other tissues (breast, mainly), and extrapolating to cancer in later life. (it has been found that if you expose DNA to a low lvl of radiation, this 'prepares' it for higher doses, resulting in lower lvls of damage. weird, huh!)

-huge emphasis on papers (how good is this?)

-27k pay


THANK YOU for all your input!

Having gone through a similar situation, go for the boss who you think won't be a jerk and will be supportive of your research. What does the workplace look like? I am saying this because they both sound good in terms of helping you along your career path. Keep in mind that the biotech company pays more so they can work you to death. Good luck!

 

[nick_carraway]

Personally, I think that Berkeley would be better.

Reasoning:

1. Your PI at Berkeley will be better known in academic circles which could help you if you need an update letter or an additional LOR later in the process.

2. You sound more interested in the radiation therapy. Even if you don't, it sounds more interesting to me.

Then again inventing things is pretty cool. Do you want to improve therapeutics or do you want to pursue knowledge for knowledge's sake?

 

[Depakote]

If you're focused on your career. I would go with the job that gives you the best shot at publication. If you can get your name on publications (as many as possible) those stick with you forever... It won't just help you get into med school, but will help you with residency and beyond.

If you can afford the 8k difference in pay, go for the second job, really get to know your PI, get a great LOR out of it and really work to get your name on some publications (even if this means picking up some side projects).

 

[jr doctor in sd]

The berkeley one seems cooler to ME haha...but i dont know how thatll effect what YOU choose

 

[mindquick]

go for the biotech company. more money, and a chance to move upward.

 

[axeon123]

Assuming you're applying to medical school, so I wouldn't be concerned with the salary at the moment, should be a last priority, right? Have you spoken with both parties, which one made you feel more comfortable. Have you had a chance to go around and see where you will be working, speak to the people you have been working with? It's a much more enjoyable experience if you get along well with the people you work with an are in a place you are comfortable. This is personal experience from different labs and clinics I have been in. I would rather have published papers at the moment, since it looks to be more feasible to get a paper out, rather than fully produce a sellable product in the time-frame you have (which I'm not sure).

 

[adamMD]

JOB#1
-at a biotech company

-small emphasis on papers, large emphasis on producing a 'sellable' product

-35k pay

I'd pick the biotech job. The research sounds very interesting and your results could benefit people in the near to immediate future. The pay is better and finally there isn't as much writing. I just finished a thesis in cell biology and I must say that writing is one hell of a lot of work. Soooo much time must go into researching other articles, finding articles, making damn sure you're quoting authors correctly, working out stupid formating issues... It is far from fun.

 

[Dulcina]

What about benefits? Commute time? Working hours? How much do you know about the two places? What was your gut feeling after talking to some of the staff or visiting the site? Aside from the research topics, what would be your actual duties at these two positions? You may find your actual responsibilities more enjoyable at one job than the other. I think the more you find out about the two positions, and the more aware you are of what you are looking for, the easier this decision will be.

On an unrelated note, the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab position sounds more interesting to me. Some researchers at my graduate school were working on low level radiation and it's effects on DNA damage and tolerance, made for some interesting seminars.

they both have the same benefits, commute time, and hrs. I know a bit at the two places. I know the boss at Berkeley, and I know anotehr employee at the biotech company. As for actual responsibilities--the biotech company said I'd mostly be running assays, and the 'creative' part of the job was up to me.. I could do as much or as little as I wanted. For berkeley, I'd be helping run the experiments, looking at DNA damage through a few techniques (staining DNA, etc etc).

Argh! difficult decision!

 

[Dulcina]

so I guess... I have one basic question.

With all else being equal, how good is a publication?
I'm leaning twds berkeley bc it is more academic rather than industry, but still pretty torn...

 

[nick_carraway]

so I guess... I have one basic question.

With all else being equal, how good is a publication?
I'm leaning twds berkeley bc it is more academic rather than industry, but still pretty torn...

Like dep said, publications help a lot. You'll need them for residencies and fellowships eventually so you might as well start early. Those guys have entire pages of their CVs with pubs on them.

As a follow up to my post earlier, you should choose Berkeley for another reason. The idea that low doses of radiation could prevent cancer just blows your mind. Let's see your beloved biotech company throw you for a loop like Berkeley can. Craaazy.

 

[TheRealMD]

I'm assuming you've never worked full-time but you want to pick the job you'll hate the least, simple as that. You might not be as interested in it (few jobs are like that), but if you're surrounded by good people then most decent jobs can be rewarding.

Don't pick a job because you think it'll get you a better LOR or improve your application the most. You don't have enough experience with either to really determine that if you're asking SDN for advice.