Skip to content

Normal Type

We are Normal Type

M.A. or Research Associate?

January 11, 2018 @ 11:12 pm Ted

I’m currently a senior at a small liberal arts college, majoring in integrative sciences, molecular bio, and science studies. I’ve been working in a bioinformatics/molecular genetics lab for the past two years, and will be graduating in May. My school offers a tuition-free 5th year M.A. for those involved in research labs looking to continue their project. I’ve applied to the program and will likely get accepted and receive a small stipend from my adviser to cover housing if I choose to matriculate. I would graduate with an M.A. in Spring 2019.

I’m looking to apply to Ph.D. programs and, frankly, I’d like to have my pick. I want to make sure I’m a top candidate anywhere I apply. I am deciding between doing this M.A. or taking a 2 year Research Associate position at a very prestigious biomedical research institute. My undergrad university is small (~2900 undergrads, ~200 grads), and while the research I am doing is very interesting and I am invested in the project, I can’t help but run into inefficiencies that come from working in a small lab at a primarily teaching-focused institution.

I’d like to pursue jobs in industry after I do a Ph.D. in a field related to genomics, proteomics, or synthetic biology.

I’d like some advice weighing an M.A. vs. the research associate position.

My major pros for the M.A. are (1) the degree, (2) the opportunity to write a thesis and take more classes, and (1) the fact that it would only last 1 year instead of 2. The major cons in my mind for this: (1) lack of productivity, (2) social isolation experience typical of those in the program, (3) relatively lower prestige.

Major pros for the RA position: (1) opportunity to work on translational research, (2) large, collaborative, highly-efficient research-focused environment in one of the major biotech hubs of the country, (3) salary, (4) prestige of faculty/students/postdocs at the institute, (5) opportunity to expand my network before entering a Ph.D. The major cons seem to be: (1) non-academic role, (2) entering a Ph.D. program 1 year later, (3) less opportunity for first/second authorships.

Thanks biotech!

submitted by /u/wabarr14
[link] [comments]

BIO Applauds Support for Innovation in Trump Administration Task Force Report

@ 11:08 pm Ted

Recommendations contained in a newly released report from the Interagency Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity will guide Administration policy in the year ahead, according to the White House, and one of the pillars of that report call for “Harnessing Technological Innovation.”

The report was presented this week to President Donald Trump by Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue during the American Farm Bureau Federation‘s Annual Convention in Nashville, where the President spoke about “putting an end to the regulatory assault” on farmers and their way of life.

“We are streamlining regulations that have blocked cutting edge biotechnology, setting free our farmers to innovate, thrive and to grow,” the President said.

A CNN report highlights the report’s recommendation to improve the quality, nutritional value, and safety of American crops as well as addressing trade concerns:

An improved strategy for research and development of new agricultural technologies will be key, as will be a unified U.S. approach toward convincing our trading partners of the value of safe biotech products.

BIO applauded the support for biotechnology and innovation contained in the report as for the President’s remarks to Farm Bureau convention attendees.

“As the report states, scientific advancements in biotechnology have produced a thriving and successful industrial sector aimed at addressing our world’s most pressing challenges,” added Greenwood. “Further innovations in genome editing technology will unlock even more promises in agriculture production, animal health and welfare, biofuels and renewable chemical development, and biobased manufacturing.”

Greenwood also welcomed recommendations contained in the report, such as the need for policies that promotes economic growth, innovation, competitiveness and job creation.

“As recommended in the report, BIO supports a more harmonized Coordinated Framework for the regulation of biotechnology, a tax code that encourages investment in the biotech sector, and government-backed communications to further public awareness of biotech products,” Greenwood said. “We also need to integrate a recognition for the importance of science and technology into the appropriate Farm Bill titles.”

In April 2017, President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order establishing the Interagency Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity “to ensure the informed exercise of regulatory authority that impacts agriculture and rural communities.”

As Secretary of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue serves as the chairman of the Task Force, which includes 22 federal agencies as well as local leaders.

What CMOs Of Tomorrow Need To Focus On Today

January 10, 2018 @ 11:08 pm Ted

If the ideal CMO needs anything, they need to be ready and willing to embrace change

Whitepaper: Transforming Deviation Management

@ 11:08 pm Ted

http://www.bioprocessintl.com/business/risk-management/transforming-deviation-management-biophorum-operations-group/

Suggested by /u/ghattoy in a previous thread.

Reading this would be like staring directly at the sun for some QA people. Deviations where I work are tracked by initiator, and QA is debating whether to make this tracking public as a way to increase pressure on mfg to increase compliance.

Some people worry that it makes people afraid to surrender bad news quickly. As a compromise, I want to suggest to QA that they display their tracking of only minor deviations and entry errors (spelling, write overs, etc). People in manufacturing only see this tracking as if its an HR type thing to document poor performance. In reality, initiating a deviation is much better than the alternative: deviating but trying to hide or minimize it. Some deviations are inevitable, for example ones that result form a poorly written batch record or SOP. If we are worrying about what HR will think of a deviation, we risk losing sight of what really matters, which is what a patient/ clinician (and after that, regulator/ client) would think of the deviation.

submitted by /u/DasIstMeinPfand
[link] [comments]

“A Transformative Year in Medicine”

@ 11:08 pm Ted

2017 will be remembered as an exciting year for biopharmaceutical innovation. Not only did we experience some tremendous medical breakthroughs that will improve the lives of patients, we also witnessed policymakers take positive steps to help ensure prescription medicines are accessible and affordable for patients.

In an op-ed published by The Hill, BIO President and CEO Jim Greenwood recounts some of the important achievements that took place last year, both in America’s research labs and the halls of Congress. He also explains why any future action on prescription drugs needs to take a “holistic approach,” one that recognizes the unique roles others play within our health care system, including insurers and hospitals. As Jim notes, “Anything less would be misleading and do little for patients at the pharmacy counter.”

To read the full op-ed by Jim Greenwood, click here.

To learn about the responsible steps policymakers should take on prescription drug costs, click here.

 

Anyone involved on the corporate/finance end of things?

@ 5:53 am Ted

Resolve to Focus on What Matters Most About Your Health (It’s Not GMOs)

January 9, 2018 @ 11:08 pm Ted

At this time of year, you see lots of stories about making New Year’s resolutions: losing weight, improving one’s health, and just generally making changes in one’s life.

Whether people can stick with these resolutions is debatable, but one thing that IS true is that there are a lot people putting trendy health claims out there to take advantage of this “New Year, New You” trend that happens every January.

One trend that you DON’T have to worry about is avoiding GMOs. GMOs are just as safe, healthy, and nutritious as any other food that you eat. Sometimes even MORE nutritious!

In a new blog post for GMO Answers, Registered Dietitian Amber Pankonin tells us what you SHOULD focus on, instead of fad diets, scare tactics and just plain woo, in order to have a healthier 2018.

  1. Read the ingredients.

  2. Consider your portion size and cooking method.

  3. Balance your plate.

  4. Know your numbers.

It’s that simple. Follow these steps and you can accomplish those goals.  So, instead of jumping on the latest fad diet or resolving to give up GMOs in 2018, focus on what matters most about your health. We should let science be our guide and not fear-based marketing.

To read Amber’s entire post, please visit the GMO Answers Medium page. And if you have any more questions about GMOs, visit the GMO Answers website to explore and learn the science behind this technology.

Value of sitting on proposal review panels?

@ 5:37 am Ted

I’m an R&D scientist in a small biotech company. My boss asked if I was interested in sitting on grant review panels, and I’m not quite sure. Is it worth it as an industry scientist to sit on proposal review panels? Will this be perceived positively in terms of professional development? For me, it just seems like I’m losing a few days work to sit on a committee that doesn’t directly benefit me or my company. Thoughts?

submitted by /u/fluffykirby
[link] [comments]

Apple investors urge action against child gadget addiction

@ 3:22 am Ted

Two major Apple investors take tech giant to task about its role in curbing smartphone addiction among children as annual CES convention begins. #Tucker

Stephen Miller: ‘Not true’ that I was escorted off CNN’s set

@ 2:56 am Ted

White House senior policy adviser gives insight on President Trump’s priorities on immigration, chain migration, DACA talks with Democrats and the aftermath of his controversial interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper. #Tucker