astaroth27

I didn't start obsessing until my first rejection. Booze sounds like a healthy way to cope with waiting.

My point wasn't that it's useless because you have to pay, it was more that you have to pay for something useless. "What's the point in paying for something useless?" is probably how I should have worded it.

I'm sorry, but at that point I'm with the people outside the arts who are shouting "GET A JOB!" when reading this.

1. I "grew up" in a gene therapy laboratory so that topic has always been my baby. The idea of correcting genes (or inserting correct genes) has always fascinated me. I'm also big on immunotherapy and any form of translational medicine. My PI was a doctor and there was always a clinical side to our lab, so going from bench to bedside is a big deal to me.
 
2.) The three examples you mentioned are all problematic to me. As one poster said, it is annoying to try to research POIs and realize you have little access to their work unless you are on university servers. Money is and will always be an issue. Coming from California, I have seen just how much difference CIRM has made for researchers interested in regenerative medicine, for example. That was a boatload of money that might never have been there if votes had turned out differently. The lack of scientific literacy in the general population is definitely a peeve to me. I wish there was some better way to teach science and get people interested in it. Not knowing basic things like how the body works or how evolution works is, in my mind, tantamount to not knowing how to add or multiply....
 
3.) I guess because of my line of work, I have a particular fondness for E. coli, mice and HIV (the basis for all lentiviral vectors).
 
4.) I love DNA so I've always gotten a kick out of any sort of DNA purification (plasmid, genomic, micro whatever) especially when you do it the old fashioned way of winding it around a glass rod. I also like mouse work.
Any sort of PCR is hard to master. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Quantitative PCR was my specialty and I got pretty good at it. But it's like training a puppy; you constantly have to be on it or it gets out from under you and your data comes out looking crappy if you put that plate in on a day when you were tired... TIP: Careful, slow pipetting can make a HUGE difference....!
 
5.) I was proud of successfully troubleshooting and designing a qPCR based genotyping method for our lab. I always felt pride in passing on knowledge to other students/fellows/whoever. And I was very proud to discover clear cut evidence on a question we were asking that went straight into our paper. I also killed a large Southern blot gel tank once by accidentally pushing it off the shelf onto the bench opposite me. I also got my x and y axes mixed up on some FACs data I was presenting one time. Mortifying when my PI pointed it out and was mad at me afterwards....

Anybody hear back from Johns Hopkins Human genetics?

I didn't start obsessing until my first rejection. Booze sounds like a healthy way to cope with waiting.

1.) I second gene therapy. Huzzah! I am more of a genetics person than an immunology person but both topics fascinate me.
 
2.) Money, definately. However, it is just a symptom of our misplaced priorities in this world. I don't want to go into politics but I think we could all agree here that scientific research is underfunded and dismissed by people who don't understand it.
 
3.) C. difficile! I have never studied a more pervasive organism. Study it at your own risk but good luck getting rid of it when you are done.
 
4.) Favorite: Anything I have never done before. Once I master something I don't have an interest in personally doing it anymore.
Hardest: Plasmid construction. It is a skill I am glad I learned before grad school but I have only recently been able to get a plasmid I made myself to function as a vector.
 
5.) My proudest accomplishment was one of my first. Genetically engineering some bacteria to smell like popcorn butter based on my own experimental design was a proud day. Maybe not the most practical experiment but it made me a gene therapy believer.

You have no right to judge unless you yourself have not made a single ethical compromise. We've all lied, cheated, and stolen before. The difference between you and I is the difference between Master and Slave morality.

So the key is to avoid getting caught working.

My idea was that I should just work at a startup company and code for them while studying for the MS. I know several PhD students who actually have their own companies while studying for a fully funded PhD. As long as I prepare a research project before I begin the MS program, I'd be able to show to my advisor that I'm actually doing some research.. lol. She'll think that I'm having reasonable progress for a first year student.

But thanks for the comments guys. You've really helped me solidify my plans to do this. I promise myself that I WILL do this, IF (1) I don't get admitted with a full-time scholly from an MS program or (2) My employer does not sponsor a part-time MS for me.



That's the thing, I can definitely pull it off when it comes to work load - I worked 42 hours a week during the semester as an undergraduate, and during one summer, I worked 70 hours. Not to undermine the experiences of other people or anything, but all this struggling has made me realize that money's important, and feeling all guilty about ethical ramifications is just for suckers who had it good in life.

But it's unfair to say this, but it's just a generalization.

How difficult would it be to "pull off" this plan?

If a software engineer works for about three years, and decides that he'd like to have a masters degree in order to bypass Human Resource screenings for new recruits, then couldn't he just apply for a fully funded MS/PhD program?

I plan on working like 20 hours a week without the department noticing, and after the MS requirements are finished, I just drop out, saying a PhD is NOT for me. Free masters, additional work experience (probably at a start-up).

It's some kind of arty, theatrical MFA you're applying for, isn't it?
Tell us its title, and we can tell you how stupid we think it is.

Well, leave it to someone in art history to over think it..
 
I don't think i've ever been framed as "perpetrator" before. Fascinating.

This entire thread is clearly part of some elaborate ruse perpetrated by Loric.

Oh.. the funny part really is that you don't realize your statement about it being beyond your ability to count.. just assured me of your inability to count very high.

The answer is beyond my ability to count, as I was born abroad, and lived in two other countries besides the United States, and have been going to museums and historic sites on family trips since birth. But a rough estimate would be 5 different countries, and 40+ museums, regardless of whether or not you're counting "Museum" by ICOM's standards, or the AAM. I would say I remember at least 30 of those trips from childhood until now, but will gladly discount my infant adventures in Europe. I don't care to bother to myself with further listing states, countries, and museums. It's a waste of my time. My current degree is -- shocker -- museum studies. 
 
I certainly feel qualified to discuss how specialized or not my own degree is, given that I'm employed at a museum. Hint: Museum Studies covers botanical gardens, art museums, history museums, national parks, zoos, science museums, youth museums, historic sites and homes, maritime or military museums, arboretums, STEM centers, and aquariums, as well as certain non-profit galleries and conventions. So to specialize in a particular area of art or history doesn't seem odd to me at all. To suggest that someone from my field couldn't easily apply their knowledge to other non-profits, or even related for-profit work is a tad silly. The field, while hyper-competitive, is not non-existent. Cluny is a dream position for said example, not the only acceptable or available position ever. 
 
Do you mean to imply that Medieval studies is a single program in a field, or museum studies? Frankly I'm confused, and both claims are wrong. 
 
 
People who aren't cut out to be astronauts generally do other things. That's not a failure of the process of becoming an astronaut, however. Are there problems with trying to over-train large amounts of people in highly specialized degrees for only one job? Yes. But that doesn't mean the studies themselves are useless, it means we need to rethink who gets graduate degrees, why, and what they are going to do with them. 

GUYS GUYS GUYS I GOT A DARTMOUTH INTERVIEW!!!!

Finally

Liquor and episodes of Archer on netflix.

If we're talking about STEM fields, that money goes to people who are getting paid to do research off of grants, or are teaching. So it's not waste of funding, from the standpoint of the person paying. 
 
IE, if someone spends 5 years doing research and ends up with a MS, the person paying them for those 5 years probably doesn't really care. If they weren't a productive researcher and teacher, they wouldn't have been kept on that whole time. So they were a good employee during their 5 years, and it doesn't really have a negative connotation to end up with an MS, if that's where your life and career are going. 

Wow, you actually prompted me to post again..
 
A) We are not all scientists, thank you very much.
 
Have you MET the people who hang out around here? They live for academia, not because they give even the slightest crap about science, world peace, or anything altruistic. They want gold stars and if someone with a higher rank isn't patting them on the head they don't understand how they can be allowed ti exist. 
 
Frankly, your thread was comforting to see - i'd written pretty much everyone here off as an absolute jack wagon a week or so ago - but it's good to know not EVERYONE is insane or misguided or whatever the heck is wrong with these people and the way they think it's ok to think and place priorities. 
 
A first I thought it was the stress that made people completely unpleasent, but the deeper I dug the more fundamental character flaws were exposed. "I did "broader impact" (aka: community service but for grad school apps) to boost my applications.." - Heaven forbid they do it for.. i dunno.. the sake of helping others. My colleagues were aghast to learn of the nonsense I found in the grad school applicant ranks.. further they were saddened by how rampant it is. 
 
So bravo to you for not being a total douche nozzle. Here's hoping you get in, and they get the serving of reality they seem to desperately need. We know it wont work out fairly like that, but sometimes apparently adcomms do give applicants the "sniff" test and sometimes weed out the ones who seem to be completely full of it.

So.. fun fact..
 
People who take offense to broad statements are those who identify qualities laid out in the statement as being identifiers of self..
 
Just sayin.

Just got my UC Berkeley MCB rejection, not that I was not expecting it...