When Did You Know You Liked Research?

[NoSleepNoProblm]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi everyone-

I have a question regarding research, and particularly determining your commitment to it. I have always been intrigued by many things which I thought applied and directly translated into research. For instance, I am interested in how and why things function, I enjoy reading research papers and my feelings about medicine (based on very limited knowledge and experience) is that the focus should be on doing something better, and not just regurgitating current information. Thus, I had imagined myself doing researcher in my medical career. However, two things have deterred my interest of pursuing the physician scientist route (specifically MD-PhD):

1. I have been working in a lab recently, and have fortunate enough to do a lot of hands-on work from the start. However, for the most part, I don't find the experience that enjoyable or intriguing, and sometimes boring and lonely. I understand that I can't fully grasp exactly what I am doing or why, and that I am not working on a project that is exactly in line with my passions, and that there is the stress of not making a mistake in the procedure, rather than actually learning something. So my question is: is this a representative laboratory experience? I mean, is this typical of an undergraduate lab experience, or if I feel the way I do now about lab work, is it likely that I will feel the same way once I get into graduate school? Is the amount of commitment required by an MD-PhD program (and career) such that if I don't absolutely love being in any lab, I won't be a successful (or happy) physician scientist?

2. The time-split between research and patient care bothers me (and yes, I have seen Jimmy Fallon’s Robert is Bothered). I have heard 80/20 too many times to dispute that if someone is going to be a physician scientist, most of their time will be spent researching. I don't think I could spend most of my time at a lab bench. However, clinical or translational research does intrigue me, as I assume I would have more patient interaction (or at least more work relating to patients) than basic science. How feesible is such a career, and how much say does a medical school have in determining what kind of research you do? Is translational research really that applied, or is it just a slightly more focused version of basic science? As you can see, I’m a little foggy on the different fields of research.

I'm sure this sounds like I should forget a research career and go for the MD (saying just an MD sounds strange). But I have an innate desire to do things better and not just follow the book. So I’m a little torn…

Any advice anyone can give is MUCH appreciated.

 

[nothingman]

I think a lot of people have these questions in choosing their future program; the hardest part is predicting what your future experiences, that will continue to shape what you like and dislike, will hold, while relying on your gut feeling from the past and present.

So my question is: is this a representative laboratory experience?

Yes and no. Representative in the sense that >90% of days for most people doing basic research can be full of robotic drudgery and oftentimes be disappointing. The real question is, are the 1-5% of days where something good to truly excellent happens sufficiently exciting to overcome the rest?

I think generally in grad school you will be expected to have a better understanding of your project than in undergrad (the saying goes, you're ready to graduate when you understand it so well that you predict your PI's mistaken ideas). On the flip side, a PhD project these days almost always will NOT be your idea, and you will NOT be taking it with you when you leave until you're in postdoc to faculty land. It will typically be something you are given by your PI and you can perhaps shape somewhat as you work on it.

if I don't absolutely love being in any lab, I won't be a successful (or happy) physician scientist?

I think the question is, what is any lab. If you find a fantastic mentor and a happy lab environment, you will have a way better experience than if not. These can be hard to find however and are often NOT the research department heavyweights that many people stream to.

I don't think I could spend most of my time at a lab bench.

This is probably a sign that the PhD is not going to be a happy experience for you. Be honest with yourself. To some extent, though realize that these thoughts can heavily depend on what your lab experience is like as opposed to what research is like.

However, clinical or translational research does intrigue me, as I assume I would have more patient interaction (or at least more work relating to patients) than basic science. How feesible is such a career, and how much say does a medical school have in determining what kind of research you do?

Quite feasible. What's nice about this kind of work is it is often more amenable to more flexibility with how much of your time is spent seeing patients and how much is spent doing research (typically less than basic science). Generally speaking, you say what kind of research you want to do, and look for positions offered by universities that match your goals most closely (i.e. physician scientist positions would not be for you if you preferred to do clinical research, but academic clinician or clinician-educator ones may be a better fit).

My thoughts on the distinction between translational and basic research is that basic research focuses on fundamental mechanisms that may be a few steps from the bedside (i.e. we found protein target, others will design drugs). Translational research can often involve clinical data mining correlated with some basic science (i.e. let's see what the genetic changes have been in patient tissue treated with x - generally correlating treatment outcomes with some kind of tissue/biological marker).

I'm sure this sounds like I should forget a research career and go for the MD

Plenty, plenty of non-PhD MDs have research careers in non-basic science fields (writing clinical trial protocols, translational, etc.). Not having a PhD does NOT preclude you from doing research in your career (in fact, you can even return to the basic science track with research experiences in residency and/or fellowship). The PhD arguably gives you better training for the latter, but at the cost of time in years and perhaps creative energy.

Good luck!

 

[ChemMed]

Hi everyone-

I have a question regarding research, and particularly determining your commitment to it. I have always been intrigued by many things which I thought applied and directly translated into research. For instance, I am interested in how and why things function, I enjoy reading research papers and my feelings about medicine (based on very limited knowledge and experience) is that the focus should be on doing something better, and not just regurgitating current information. Thus, I had imagined myself doing researcher in my medical career. However, two things have deterred my interest of pursuing the physician scientist route (specifically MD-PhD):

1. I have been working in a lab recently, and have fortunate enough to do a lot of hands-on work from the start. However, for the most part, I don't find the experience that enjoyable or intriguing, and sometimes boring and lonely. I understand that I can't fully grasp exactly what I am doing or why, and that I am not working on a project that is exactly in line with my passions, and that there is the stress of not making a mistake in the procedure, rather than actually learning something. So my question is: is this a representative laboratory experience? I mean, is this typical of an undergraduate lab experience, or if I feel the way I do now about lab work, is it likely that I will feel the same way once I get into graduate school? Is the amount of commitment required by an MD-PhD program (and career) such that if I don't absolutely love being in any lab, I won't be a successful (or happy) physician scientist?

2. The time-split between research and patient care bothers me (and yes, I have seen Jimmy Fallon's Robert is Bothered). I have heard 80/20 too many times to dispute that if someone is going to be a physician scientist, most of their time will be spent researching. I don't think I could spend most of my time at a lab bench. However, clinical or translational research does intrigue me, as I assume I would have more patient interaction (or at least more work relating to patients) than basic science. How feesible is such a career, and how much say does a medical school have in determining what kind of research you do? Is translational research really that applied, or is it just a slightly more focused version of basic science? As you can see, I'm a little foggy on the different fields of research.

I'm sure this sounds like I should forget a research career and go for the MD (saying just an MD sounds strange). But I have an innate desire to do things better and not just follow the book. So I'm a little torn…

Any advice anyone can give is MUCH appreciated.

Your questions are valid and many people have them concerning research. Research is hard. Your failure rate is high and no one is going to hold your hand when you have a bad day (not that your expecting them to). Ones environment can change how you feel about research as much as it can change anyone's feelings about any career. Good mentors are truly key.

Regarding your questions:

1) Yes your lab experience is typical. Many people who start in undergrad feel like you currently do. Its not about designing the experiments so much as it is about not breaking anything and trying to get the procedure right. In graduate school it is different, you have some free reign (or complete free reign) of your project (depends on the mentor). You are expected to design and execute your experimental plan and if you don't know how to do a procedure you must actively be able to learn how to do it (or find a good core facility who will do it for your). The design of experiments and seeing good results are the high for me. Finding something that no one has ever witnessed before that may be useful is truly a great feeling, but it only happens maybe 1 day out of 60 if your lucky. You don't have to love your lab, you have to enjoy the work that you do and understand the reasons for why you are doing it. Then seek out good mentorship for that work.

2) As a physician there are many ways you can be involved in research. The level that you choose is up to you. If you want to work in the basic sciences though you will be spending a decent amount of your time at it. However, the MD/PhD I work for mostly manages, writes and directs our research ideas toward constructive productivity. At that level (professorship and/or chief of your section) you yourself will most likely not be doing the actual research.