autobioo Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Hi all, So my new biology professor asked me if I would be interested in doing some biology research over the summer. I said yes, and he said to come by his office soon to talk about the possibilities. Now I am curious about how valued is research among medical schools? Especially UBC?! Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m30wc0w Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 To my knowledge, it's very valued. There's still at present the ideology of the Doctor as a Scientist, so having scientist skills shows you have aptitude to be a doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachaso Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Yes, it is an excellent opportunity. Consider yourself lucky that he asked you! Most of the time the student has to contact several professors before one says okay. You should visit him ASAP because alot of research award applications will be due around the end of this month. See if he has funding - if not then you will have to apply for these awards if you want a salary. Also make sure you are actually interested in his research topic. If you aren't it could make for a very dry summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nokia Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 What made him ask you? Do you know him personally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 lol, yeah looks good to md/phds, plus itt's a funny joke when you mention you're a scientist to the neurology md/phd's and they laugh... does ghost writing an article for publication make me scientist... hypothetically speaking of course To my knowledge, it's very valued. There's still at present the ideology of the Doctor as a Scientist, so having scientist skills shows you have aptitude to be a doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 lol, yeah looks good to md/phds, plus itt's a funny joke when you mention you're a scientist to the neurology md/phd's and they laugh... does ghost writing an article for publication make me scientist... hypothetically speaking of course i did get offered a funded msc by a tier 2 research chair after starting a casual convo which lasted two hours once... i had seen him around though, couple years doing research and getting demoted to replace the animal keeper with the paper/stats/subject runner prob means i had some experience... and he did lok at my trans and make me promise to read 2 neuropsych texts... his stuff was cool though, not try to find stuff, more like, there's a reason i'm a full professor at my age, hate pre-meds, have patents... he was more the well, deductive think sort of prof... honestly... if i wasnt on leave i would have took it... yeah, it's funny, he's so awesome... lot better than that neuro who can't even do the minimal be a decent mechanic req of med... u think linking seperate conditions usings research from genetics to epidemiology to cellular and systems neuroscience, animal models, clinical studies... in a couple years can get me published... well rhetorical... u know, that's a given, 350 hours of research means you've got something good... but i have no phd to co-pub with, and idunno if top tier would take a pub from someone without phd or uni research affiliation, and the leading expert im scared off, since its embarassing for someone to solve ur bread in butter for 30 years in 2... maybe i'll go to that neuropsych guy, let him read it over, edit, make sure there are no **** ups... ****... thaty ideology sucks, a scienctist is a good researcher, not precluding a doc from being a good scientist, but not insinuating all docs are good researchers... if they were, well, i don't wanna argue, but lets say the best researchers who enjoy research often skip med... most clinicians view your intellect as redundant because theyre not clever enough to see the ends and that the devil is in the details, and algorithims matter, just like minutia... bidirectional associations are useless if you can't think on your feet, but with a license you still get paid, not as much as those mind boggling patents 150 k a year for a 7 hour work day no stress, saving millions versus a few, and a higher hourly wage... oops, im being a douche again... doing research means you do research, scientist skills means you can think and do science... they're different... see, just like having an md doesn't mean you're a good doctor, you did the degree, like some ppl do science, but then again, others also did, and can think and well, outcomes measures... all i have to say ... ppl make fun of bad phd's who can't get tenure... why the **** should i tax payer pay ****ty docs... oh yeah, they did med school, they're good at doctoring like those ppl who did some science are practically elite scientists... sorry, i forgot To my knowledge, it's very valued. There's still at present the ideology of the Doctor as a Scientist, so having scientist skills shows you have aptitude to be a doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.