Research troubles.

[itsogre]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I finished MS1. I thought I wanted to do psychiatry/neurology, so I applied to a research program through my school and got funding to do neuroscience-related benchside research this summer. I am a pretty efficient worker benchside, but the PI/lab are not very well organized, and the PI is sending me mixed signals - I feel like a right idiot for doing basic science research that will most likely not turn into anything productive besides a poster. also through some shadowing and soul-exploration, I realized that psychiatry or neurology are not the appropriate career paths for me.

so now I'm having indigestion just thinking that I am far I am behind in finding clinical research to do, particularly in pathology and gen surgery. Residents and clinicians are not responding to my slightly desperate e-mails asking for clinical research opportunities. I'm getting rather panicky. What can I do to gain a clinical research opportunity? Are there types of studies that are inherently easier to publish that I should look out for?

any helpful tips on student research appreciated.

 

[TBV]

Go in and talk to someone in the research office, usually they have a list of people still looking for research minions and you can look up their CV to see who's publishing rapid fire. You might lose your grant but honestly they usually don't pay much that would put a dent in loans. Plus those lectures they make you attend are a bigger pain in the ass than you realize.

 

[Adjet]

As far as types of studies, retrospective chart reviews & review articles are inherently the most feasible to publish as a medical student given the time constraints. So if you have options, go for those. Also Path and Gen Surg aren't super competitive specialties so worst case if you just got a poster out of this summer and found something 3rd/4th year, you'd probably be fine

 

[jdh71]

I finished MS1. I thought I wanted to do psychiatry/neurology, so I applied to a research program through my school and got funding to do neuroscience-related benchside research this summer. I am a pretty efficient worker benchside, but the PI/lab are not very well organized, and the PI is sending me mixed signals - I feel like a right idiot for doing basic science research that will most likely not turn into anything productive besides a poster. also through some shadowing and soul-exploration, I realized that psychiatry or neurology are not the appropriate career paths for me.

so now I'm having indigestion just thinking that I am far I am behind in finding clinical research to do, particularly in pathology and gen surgery. Residents and clinicians are not responding to my slightly desperate e-mails asking for clinical research opportunities. I'm getting rather panicky. What can I do to gain a clinical research opportunity? Are there types of studies that are inherently easier to publish that I should look out for?

any helpful tips on student research appreciated.

My advice. Finish was you started regardless. You weren't going to get a paper over the summer. If you thought you were you were naive and there need not be shame in that. But you signed up for something. Do it well.

 

[TBV]

My advice. Finish was you started regardless. You weren't going to get a paper over the summer. If you thought you were you were naive and there need not be shame in that. But you signed up for something. Do it well.

I got 2 papers and a conference presentation over a summer...

 

[jdh71]

I got 2 papers and a conference presentation over a summer...

You're either lying or got tossed a bunch of huge bones.

 

[TBV]

You're either lying or got tossed a bunch of huge bones.

Did get some bones. All work completed over 8 weeks in the summer, did some writing then for 1 and over the school year for another. Not saying I was in an average lab but many many in my class published and I don't think it's that crazy to expect to get one.

 

[Petypet]

You're either lying or got tossed a bunch of huge bones.

I got 2 first author papers and and an oral presentation over a summer too. Not impossible by any stretch, especially with a good mentor and previous experience.

 

[jdh71]

Did get some bones. All work completed over 8 weeks in the summer, did some writing then for 1 and over the school year for another. Not saying I was in an average lab but many many in my class published and I don't think it's that crazy to expect to get one.

I do. I think it's absolutely crazy. At least for anything worth publishing. I spent a total of 2.5 years (before residency and during fellowship) doing bench research. Two papers. Five abstracts. 1.5 years of retrospective chart review and creation of a database that lead to 3 abstracts and a presentation at an international meeting. The paper languished and died and has since become redundant so won't be written.

I can't think of a single complete project that could be started and finished in 8 weeks leading to multiple papers. I suppose a guy could walk into something already almost done and finish up the very last bit of it. Some get lucky. It shouldn't be a common expectation.

 

[jdh71]

I got 2 first author papers and and an oral presentation over a summer too. Not impossible by any stretch, especially with a good mentor and previous experience.

I'd like to see your pubmed and see what kind of horse**** nonsense done in 8 weeks lead to that many papers and presentations.

I guess with all of the fly by night low impact factor journals these days, maybe all the snowflakes can have a publication now.

 

[Goro]

Do you realize how hard it is for anything done over a summer to be end up publishable? You're lucky if all you end up with is a poster.

There are two choices to make here. Either learn some useful techniques that you can use when you do a research rotation (assuming your school has these), OR bail now and try to find something else.

Of course, bailing on your PI will send signals elsewhere.

If you're so desperate to publish, do a case review and get it into an online vanity journal. $500-1K out of your pocket and instant publication. But it won't be in Pubmed.

I finished MS1. I thought I wanted to do psychiatry/neurology, so I applied to a research program through my school and got funding to do neuroscience-related benchside research this summer. I am a pretty efficient worker benchside, but the PI/lab are not very well organized, and the PI is sending me mixed signals - I feel like a right idiot for doing basic science research that will most likely not turn into anything productive besides a poster. also through some shadowing and soul-exploration, I realized that psychiatry or neurology are not the appropriate career paths for me.

so now I'm having indigestion just thinking that I am far I am behind in finding clinical research to do, particularly in pathology and gen surgery. Residents and clinicians are not responding to my slightly desperate e-mails asking for clinical research opportunities. I'm getting rather panicky. What can I do to gain a clinical research opportunity? Are there types of studies that are inherently easier to publish that I should look out for?

any helpful tips on student research appreciated.

 

[TBV]

I'd like to see your pubmed and see what kind of horse**** nonsense done in 8 weeks lead to that many papers and presentations.

I guess with all of the fly by night low impact factor journals these days, maybe all the snowflakes can have a publication now.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. And the game has changed, now med students have to gun for as many as they can get even if it is a low impact journal... goes on the CV

 

[jdh71]

Don't hate the player, hate the game. And the game has changed, now med students have to gun for as many as they can get even if it is a low impact journal... goes on the CV

It cheapens the entire endeavor. Congrats.

 

[Petypet]

I'd like to see your pubmed and see what kind of horse**** nonsense done in 8 weeks lead to that many papers and presentations.

http://www.nature.com/nchembio/journal/v8/n9/abs/nchembio.1022.html

Not done in a summer but certainly not horse****. 99% of medical student research isn't going to end up in a journal with impact factor of 6+, as it shouldn't. The goal is to get people interested in research, publishing, going through the IRB, peer review, etc. Yes, it is very easy to publish, but the point is to disseminate information and getting people interested and involved. Certainly my 2 retrospective publications are not ground breaking but I went through the IRB, collected data, analyzed data, got the paper submitted, went through peer review, and got it published.

 

[TBV]

It cheapens the entire endeavor. Congrats.

I'll remember to care later. Thanks.

 

[jdh71]

http://www.nature.com/nchembio/journal/v8/n9/abs/nchembio.1022.html

Not done in a summer but certainly not horse****. 99% of medical student research isn't going to end up in a journal with impact factor of 6+, as it shouldn't. The goal is to get people interested in research, publishing, going through the IRB, peer review, etc. Yes, it is very easy to publish, but the point is to disseminate information and getting people interested and involved. Certainly my 2 retrospective publications are not ground breaking but I went through the IRB, collected data, analyzed data, got the paper submitted, went through peer review, and got it published.

Oh. So wasn't done in a single summer. Noted.

 

[jdh71]

I'll remember to care later. Thanks.

This attitude is what is wrong with your generation and why we can't have nice things.

 

[Petypet]

It cheapens the entire endeavor. Congrats.

That is why some publications have IF of 1 and some are 15. Thats why not everyone can fund labs and huge research projects. Publishing in Nature is still a tough endeavor.

Oh. So wasn't done in a single summer. Noted.

No that paper took 3 years. My 2 horse**** publications were. So hostile...

 

[Petypet]

I finished MS1. I thought I wanted to do psychiatry/neurology, so I applied to a research program through my school and got funding to do neuroscience-related benchside research this summer. I am a pretty efficient worker benchside, but the PI/lab are not very well organized, and the PI is sending me mixed signals - I feel like a right idiot for doing basic science research that will most likely not turn into anything productive besides a poster. also through some shadowing and soul-exploration, I realized that psychiatry or neurology are not the appropriate career paths for me.

so now I'm having indigestion just thinking that I am far I am behind in finding clinical research to do, particularly in pathology and gen surgery. Residents and clinicians are not responding to my slightly desperate e-mails asking for clinical research opportunities. I'm getting rather panicky. What can I do to gain a clinical research opportunity? Are there types of studies that are inherently easier to publish that I should look out for?

any helpful tips on student research appreciated.

PM me, I can try and help.

 

[TBV]

This attitude is what is wrong with your generation and why we can't have nice things.

Are you going to be ok over there old-timer? You're doing a whole lot of whining for someone who is from a "tougher" generation.

 

[jdh71]

That is why some publications have IF of 1 and some are 15. Thats why not everyone can fund labs and huge research projects. Publishing in Nature is still a tough endeavor.


No that paper took 3 years. My 2 horse**** publications were. So hostile...

Im not hostile. I'm trying to help set realistic expectations.

And your linking to that paper isn't making sense. If that was your paper and you took three years then my point is made.

 

[jdh71]

Are you going to be ok over there old-timer? You're doing a whole lot of whining for someone who is from a "tougher" generation.

I'm not whining. You simply didn't do anything real. Even admit. Did for a CV. You should be ashamed to even admit it. There are real scientists and this cheapens everything they do.

 

[Petypet]

I'm not whining. You simply didn't do anything real. Even admit. Did for a CV. You should be ashamed to even admit it. There are real scientists and this cheapens everything they do.

No the point is most research is worthless and done for a CV or secondary gain. Even my Nature paper that took 3 years is not that beneficial for anything other than my CV and some grant proposals and it made my PhD.

The point being is in a summer research internship you can complete some clinical research that is publishable and presentable. Who cares if its real? If its peer reviewed, was fun for the learner, they learned the process of research who cares. Show me 1 publication in New England Journal of Medicine and I'll show you 20 papers by each contributing author that was likely bs. We all start somewhere.

 

[TBV]

I'm not whining. You simply didn't do anything real. Even admit. Did for a CV. You should be ashamed to even admit it. There are real scientists and this cheapens everything they do.

I'm ok with that, I hate research and it's not my fault my hands are forced into it but that's how it works these days. Absolutely despise it and ill do it again too, it is a means to an end.

 

[itsogre]

My advice. Finish was you started regardless. You weren't going to get a paper over the summer. If you thought you were you were naive and there need not be shame in that. But you signed up for something. Do it well.

I didn't do due diligence in selecting what type of research/mentor I'm involved in this summer :'(. I've got OK publications getting published from my prior work benchside as an undergrad so at least I've got that going for me. i just really really really really should've done something clinically-oriented instead of sticking to what I'm comfortable with ie lab-work

thanks for your words

 

[jdh71]

No the point is most research is worthless and done for a CV or secondary gain. Even my Nature paper that took 3 years is not that beneficial for anything other than my CV and some grant proposals and it made my PhD.

The point being is in a summer research internship you can complete some clinical research that is publishable and presentable. Who cares if its real? If its peer reviewed, was fun for the learner, they learned the process of research who cares. Show me 1 publication in New England Journal of Medicine and I'll show you 20 papers by each contributing author that was likely bs. We all start somewhere.

Your 3 year paper didn't look particularly useless to me. It opened some inetersting doors. One could easily springboard off of it for grants, which it does look like happened.

I wasn't talking about clinical research. You can chart review and potentially write a paper in 8 weeks, probably working 60-80 hours per week, but its' not inconcieveable, especially if you have a straight forward IRB that would wave consent.

I thought it was pretty clear the context of my comments were basic science. If it wasn't, then that is my bad, but I think my point stands.

And yes. We all do start somewhere, but to think that 8 weeks will equal a first author paper in almost any type a research is generally naive. My advice would be to set expectations much lower than that.

 

[Amygdarya]

http://www.nature.com/nchembio/journal/v8/n9/abs/nchembio.1022.html

Not done in a summer but certainly not horse****. 99% of medical student research isn't going to end up in a journal with impact factor of 6+, as it shouldn't. The goal is to get people interested in research, publishing, going through the IRB, peer review, etc. Yes, it is very easy to publish, but the point is to disseminate information and getting people interested and involved. Certainly my 2 retrospective publications are not ground breaking but I went through the IRB, collected data, analyzed data, got the paper submitted, went through peer review, and got it published.

This paper was published 4 years ago. Did you do that work as a full time PhD student or postdoc? Remember, we're discussing how much can be achieved by a medical student over the summer, not your research prowess (FYI, I know something about research, and I agree with jdh71 that nothing of substance can be done over 8 weeks, and that the vast majority of medical student "research" for the purpose of residency applications - just as pre-med "research" for the purpose of med school applications - is a load of BS.)

 

[ProfMD]

Nobody is expecting Nature/Science/Cell papers out of every med student. The point is the experience and to demonstrate insterest.

Evan retrospective reviews and case reports have their place. Even the best researchers have their share of publications in low IF journals. In smaller fields, even the best journals are low impact just due to having a smaller audience.

My advice - stick with what you signed up for. If you bail, you make yourself look bad and risk your reputation - not worth it.

You can also try to find some retrospective chart review type stuff to do on the side.

You have a few more years left to do research in your chosen field. No one will look down on the fact that this summer was spent doing research in a different field.

As far as the IF of the journals - residency faculty have a good idea of which are quality journals in their field and which are not. Don't sweat it.

One other piece of advice - when you go to interview for residency, make sure you can speak intelligently about every paper on you CV - you will be asked about them.

 

[Stagg737]

I'm not whining. You simply didn't do anything real. Even admit. Did for a CV. You should be ashamed to even admit it. There are real scientists and this cheapens everything they do.

Then you should be petitioning PD's who only accept students with X number of publications, even if they're mediocre or crap, in order to get into a specialty instead of the students who are just trying to meet a pre-req standard to get into the specialty they desire. I'm not advocating for putting out crappy research, but it's a bad system that requires students to jump through arbitrary and unnecessary hoops to land a position where they won't use the skills from said pre-req.

 

[Wordead]

Your 3 year paper didn't look particularly useless to me. It opened some inetersting doors. One could easily springboard off of it for grants, which it does look like happened.

I wasn't talking about clinical research. You can chart review and potentially write a paper in 8 weeks, probably working 60-80 hours per week, but its' not inconcieveable, especially if you have a straight forward IRB that would wave consent.

I thought it was pretty clear the context of my comments were basic science. If it wasn't, then that is my bad, but I think my point stands.

And yes. We all do start somewhere, but to think that 8 weeks will equal a first author paper in almost any type a research is generally naive. My advice would be to set expectations much lower than that.

Sounds like you're way too set in a bench research mindset. In surgical subspecialty research the vast majority of it is retrospective chart review stuff that doesn't take much time. It's not uncommon for med students doing a year of research to come out with 5+ first author pubs, a couple of which are in the highest journal for the specialty.

 

[jdh71]

Sounds like you're way too set in a bench research mindset. In surgical subspecialty research the vast majority of it is retrospective chart review stuff that doesn't take much time. It's not uncommon for med students doing a year of research to come out with 5+ first author pubs, a couple of which are in the highest journal for the specialty.

I think I clarified in that post you actually quoted that 1) I was talking about basic science and that 2) you could put together a chart review in 8 weeks.

I'm glad you told me what I had already said though. It's one of the reasons I like SDN.

 

[lampshade4u]

I'm ok with that, I hate research and it's not my fault my hands are forced into it but that's how it works these days. Absolutely despise it and ill do it again too, it is a means to an end.

bingo

Then you should be petitioning PD's who only accept students with X number of publications, even if they're mediocre or crap, in order to get into a specialty instead of the students who are just trying to meet a pre-req standard to get into the specialty they desire. I'm not advocating for putting out crappy research, but it's a bad system that requires students to jump through arbitrary and unnecessary hoops to land a position where they won't use the skills from said pre-req.

double bingo

 

[Wordead]

I think I clarified in that post you actually quoted that 1) I was talking about basic science and that 2) you could put together a chart review in 8 weeks.

I'm glad you told me what I had already said though. It's one of the reasons I like SDN.

Your 3 year paper didn't look particularly useless to me. It opened some inetersting doors. One could easily springboard off of it for grants, which it does look like happened.

I wasn't talking about clinical research. You can chart review and potentially write a paper in 8 weeks, probably working 60-80 hours per week, but its' not inconcieveable, especially if you have a straight forward IRB that would wave consent.

I thought it was pretty clear the context of my comments were basic science. If it wasn't, then that is my bad, but I think my point stands.

And yes. We all do start somewhere, but to think that 8 weeks will equal a first author paper in almost any type a research is generally naive. My advice would be to set expectations much lower than that.

No, you said youd have to put in 60-80 hrs a week to maybe write that one paper and that it was naive to think it would result in anything substantial. But yeah keep snarking away. You think you need a minimum of 480 hours to write a paper, but I'm the idiot.

 

[dozitgetchahi]

Your 3 year paper didn't look particularly useless to me. It opened some inetersting doors. One could easily springboard off of it for grants, which it does look like happened.

I wasn't talking about clinical research. You can chart review and potentially write a paper in 8 weeks, probably working 60-80 hours per week, but its' not inconcieveable, especially if you have a straight forward IRB that would wave consent.

I thought it was pretty clear the context of my comments were basic science. If it wasn't, then that is my bad, but I think my point stands.

And yes. We all do start somewhere, but to think that 8 weeks will equal a first author paper in almost any type a research is generally naive. My advice would be to set expectations much lower than that.

I agree with the points about BS research piling up. One thing that always makes me chuckle is when pre-meds (and most med students, too) show up with some abstracts and start going on and on about how they 'researched' this and that. No ya didn't, grasshopper. Either your 'research' was total horse puckey (which usually the case) or you participated in a long-term project that a PD and grad students/residents/etc were gracious enough to allow you to help with while they did most of the heavy lifting. In either case, it's highly unlikely that you conceived of it yourself and drove it through to fruition without the help of several people that were way more knowledgeable than you.

I think that mandating that pre-meds and med students participate in research this way is a bit silly, but it's the name of the game for a lot of things nowadays.

And 8 weeks is highly unlikely to result in anything. Even my own piece of horse puckey submitted as a medical student (article involving a survey regarding medical student and resident use of social networking for residency and job selection) took >6 months from start to finish between IRB, waiting for the responses, writing the damn thing up, multiple journal rejections, multiple rounds of edits for the journal that accepted it, etc.

 

[jdh71]

No, you said youd have to put in 60-80 hrs a week to maybe write that one paper and that it was naive to think it would result in anything substantial. But yeah keep snarking away. You think you need a minimum of 480 hours to write a paper, but I'm the idiot.

Eitht weeks for a horse**** chart review that you do often seen in surgical journals is conceivably possible. Which is what I said. I'm happy to see that you continue to make my same point. Snark. Snark. Snark.

Does it hurt you in the feelz?

 

[Wordead]

Eitht weeks for a horse**** chart review that you do often seen in surgical journals is conceivably possible. Which is what I said. I'm happy to see that you continue to make my same point. Snark. Snark. Snark.

Does it hurt you in the feelz?

I really just pity you. Have a good one.

 

[jdh71]

I really just pity you. Have a good one.

That was supposed to be an insult correct?

 

[typhoonegator]

This has been a nice diversion, but returning to the OP: you're probably better off staying where you are and working through it, rather than jumping ship without having a place to make shore. Make it the best experience you can, learn a lot, and aim for a nice letter from the PI even if you don't get the tangible publication results you would rather see. My first summer experience netted me a poster and an abstract at a local meeting, and eventually the work I did got me a middle author paper that came out after I started my PGY2 year. I was able to get some more work done later in medical school doing some more clinical work that I was proud of but was not at all impactful. It got the job done, and now I spend almost all of my time doing research, paid for by you, the taxpayer, in the ivoriest of ivory towers. Happy ending for me, as well as my post-docs, coordinators, and summer students, none of whom labor under the assumptions that 8 weeks of dedicated work will get them anything more than a nice local poster and letter, and perhaps a 5th out of 20 author position on a paper that their work contributes to somewhere down the road.

There are a lot of ways to organize a lab, and some produce a lot of interim publications while others save up for a deep-dive comprehensive effort. Medical students should not be punished for choosing a lab that produces only seminal literature at a deliberate pace. That doesn't help you, I suppose, if you want to go into a California Rad-Onc program that only takes people with at least two publications or whatever, but most of us at big academic programs are fully aware that this kind of requirement is the very purest of BS, and encourages a scorekeeping approach that absolutely hinders true scientific discourse. That's not your fault, as an applicant.

If there is any good news here for people whose hearts aren't in it, it is that there are plenty of individuals who are happy to sponsor research endeavors that lead to publications in only the basest sense of the word, and so if you just want to play the game then there is usually someone around to enable you.

You don't have to love research to be a good doctor, and I fully recognize that the system is sometimes rigged to favor people who produce certain results. This unquestionably erodes the inherent value of striving to contribute to scientific discourse, but given how low the bar has been set to be granted a peer-reviewed and indexed publication these days, I'd say the genie is out of the bottle. Thankfully, it only takes about 5 minutes in an interview to determine whether an applicant is self-aware about the value and direction of their previous research endeavors.

Ironically, as I typed this post, I received an invitation to submit an article to the Jacobs Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacovigilance. Such an honor! FYI, a link to their "eminent" editorial board returns a 404 error.

 

[NWwildcat2013]

What would happen to me if I just didn't play the game? I have a great Step 1 so what if I kept up the strong work in MS3 but still didn't do research. Would I honestly not match at all in something like plastics or ortho or ENT just because I couldn't fake an interest in research?

Not everyone who matches into these super competitive specialties is interested in research so they lie and say they are to get pubs and when they talk about them on interviews. Yes. They LIE. To faculty and on interviews and those people don't even care that they are being lied to. How messed up is that? That's what the system requires and I can't bring myself to do it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Amygdarya]

It's just an arms race. Now that there are great resources for Step 1 preparation and a good number of students get high Step 1 scores, students looking to apply for competitive specialties and/or residencies (let's not forget that even in less competitive specialties top residencies are still competitive) need to find other ways to stand out. Since there is so much variability in clerkship grading between schools (or even between clerkships within the same school) and it's hardly possible to objectively compare extracurriculars and most other achievements, enter the number of publication as a measure to compare applicants.

 

[Wordead]

What would happen to me if I just didn't play the game? I have a great Step 1 so what if I kept up the strong work in MS3 but still didn't do research. Would I honestly not match at all in something like plastics or ortho or ENT just because I couldn't fake an interest in research?

Not everyone who matches into these super competitive specialties is interested in research so they lie and say they are to get pubs and when they talk about them on interviews. Yes. They LIE. To faculty and on interviews and those people don't even care that they are being lied to. How messed up is that? That's what the system requires and I can't bring myself to do it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Pretty much everyone applying to those subspecialties has a high step, it's more a prereq rather than a stratifier.

You're a big boy now, there's no such thing as "I don't want to play the game". You'll have to play the game for the rest of your life.

 

[NWwildcat2013]

Pretty much everyone applying to those subspecialties has a high step, it's more a prereq rather than a stratifier.

You're a big boy now, there's no such thing as "I don't want to play the game". You'll have to play the game for the rest of your life.

It pains me to admit it but you are right. Im just at a crossroads where I haven't decided whether Im willing to play or not. Its a big decision and has been weighing on me. Even if I do decide to "play the game" Im not sure I'll ever be comfortable with it. At some point it does/can end if you do not continue in academic medicine.

 

[mistafab]

Dang it, people!

Research is the best. Even your POS chart review and "fishing expeditions" are great experiences and should be treated with grace. I feel bad for the PIs out there throwing you bones, helping you get pubs, and doing extra work just to include you on their projects - now so you can get on SDN to rag on research in general.

God forbid you do something you don't like for a few hours of your life. Yes, my rant makes no sense but I feel I have to get it out there. You ninnies need to stop complaining and treat these PIs who put up with your "wonderful ideas" and "academic contributions" with kindness by giving you a pub or two. Newsflash - you suck at research and they put up with you because they were helped when they were useless back in the day.

 

[itsogre]

Dang it, people!

Research is the best. Even your POS chart review and "fishing expeditions" are great experiences and should be treated with grace. I feel bad for the PIs out there throwing you bones, helping you get pubs, and doing extra work just to include you on their projects - now so you can get on SDN to rag on research in general.

God forbid you do something you don't like for a few hours of your life. Yes, my rant makes no sense but I feel I have to get it out there. You ninnies need to stop complaining and treat these PIs who put up with your "wonderful ideas" and "academic contributions" with kindness by giving you a pub or two. Newsflash - you suck at research and they put up with you because they were helped when they were useless back in the day.

hey man I didn't say that all researched sucked - I already worked like hell in basic science research as an undergrad and was productive there and I earned my publications with my mentor with hard work, but I am more concerned that while I'm running Western blots people out there are cranking out all sorts of clinical research pubs and I STILL haven't found a good mentor.

thanks for posting