Cancerbio1001 Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 Hi everyone! I am so excited to start grad school next fall but am faced with a really tough decision!! I am really interested in cancer biology, and would study a wide range of topics within the field. I am deciding between gerstner Sloan Kettering and MIT! Both schools have lots of faculty I am interested in so its difficult to decide, and as you can see I can't seem to think of many cons to either- so I could really use some advice! Here are some pros and cons I came up with: GSK: More translational research, biomedical focus, Manhattan, awesome housing, clinical program, also has cancer immunology MIT: Its MIT, in the center of biotech, broader training, Boston, collaborative across many disciplines, I am interested potentially in doing a some what computationally related project and they have many cancer biologists who do this, an especially intense/intellectually stimulating environment Cons GSK: very cancer bio focused, newer program MIT: Lack of cancer immunology, kind of want to leave boston Thanks so much in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCF10A Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 I'm facing a similar decision (Harvard BBS vs. GSK) so I can totally feel you. I pretty much agree with all of your pros and cons, and just want to add a few points: (1) GSK has many PIs doing comp bio/genomics work too. They recently added a new "computational and systems biology program", and recruited Dana Pe'er from Columbia to be the chair. Those PIs are doing amazing cancer related work (Berry Taylor, John Chodera, Christina Leslie, to name a few). (2) There are several faculty members in MIT Koch doing cancer immunology (their cancer immunology program has 10 faculty members according to the website). Their work might not be as transnational as those done by GSK researchers tho. (3) GSK is not necessarily cancer biology focused. They have a top-notch structure biology department (arguably the best in the nation), and many top-notch scientists doing non-cancer related developmental biology, stem cell biology, immunology and cell biology research. I think at the end of day, the major differences between GSK and MIT Biology are (1) translational vs. basic science research; (2) New York vs. Boston. The whole impression of the GSK program gives me is that they want to train the grad students to be ready to solve the problems in cancer clinics (clinical program, many many researchers doing translational research). Most of the cancer biologists at MIT (both Whitehead and Koch) focus on the deeper mechanism questions about cancer. Scientists at both places are doing outstanding science. Which aspect of cancer research interests you the most? As for New York vs. Boston, I haven't lived in either city, but I think both are awesome cities from my interview experience. The stipend should be similar at both places. The subsidized housing from GSK is a great deal, I don't know whether MIT provides subsidized housing too (Harvard doesn't so that's a big headache) Anyway, both are awesome programs and you really can't go wrong by choosing either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancerbio1001 Posted March 5, 2017 Author Share Posted March 5, 2017 44 minutes ago, MCF10A said: I'm facing a similar decision (Harvard BBS vs. GSK) so I can totally feel you. I pretty much agree with all of your pros and cons, and just want to add a few points: (1) GSK has many PIs doing comp bio/genomics work too. They recently added a new "computational and systems biology program", and recruited Dana Pe'er from Columbia to be the chair. Those PIs are doing amazing cancer related work (Berry Taylor, John Chodera, Christina Leslie, to name a few). (2) There are several faculty members in MIT Koch doing cancer immunology (their cancer immunology program has 10 faculty members according to the website). Their work might not be as transnational as those done by GSK researchers tho. (3) GSK is not necessarily cancer biology focused. They have a top-notch structure biology department (arguably the best in the nation), and many top-notch scientists doing non-cancer related developmental biology, stem cell biology, immunology and cell biology research. I think at the end of day, the major differences between GSK and MIT Biology are (1) translational vs. basic science research; (2) New York vs. Boston. The whole impression of the GSK program gives me is that they want to train the grad students to be ready to solve the problems in cancer clinics (clinical program, many many researchers doing translational research). Most of the cancer biologists at MIT (both Whitehead and Koch) focus on the deeper mechanism questions about cancer. Scientists at both places are doing outstanding science. Which aspect of cancer research interests you the most? As for New York vs. Boston, I haven't lived in either city, but I think both are awesome cities from my interview experience. The stipend should be similar at both places. The subsidized housing from GSK is a great deal, I don't know whether MIT provides subsidized housing too (Harvard doesn't so that's a big headache) Anyway, both are awesome programs and you really can't go wrong by choosing either Thank you so much! I definitely appreciate the extra facts I overlooked! Good luck with your decision as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SysEvo Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 58 minutes ago, MCF10A said: I'm facing a similar decision (Harvard BBS vs. GSK) so I can totally feel you. I pretty much agree with all of your pros and cons, and just want to add a few points: (1) GSK has many PIs doing comp bio/genomics work too. They recently added a new "computational and systems biology program", and recruited Dana Pe'er from Columbia to be the chair. Those PIs are doing amazing cancer related work (Berry Taylor, John Chodera, Christina Leslie, to name a few). (2) There are several faculty members in MIT Koch doing cancer immunology (their cancer immunology program has 10 faculty members according to the website). Their work might not be as transnational as those done by GSK researchers tho. (3) GSK is not necessarily cancer biology focused. They have a top-notch structure biology department (arguably the best in the nation), and many top-notch scientists doing non-cancer related developmental biology, stem cell biology, immunology and cell biology research. I think at the end of day, the major differences between GSK and MIT Biology are (1) translational vs. basic science research; (2) New York vs. Boston. The whole impression of the GSK program gives me is that they want to train the grad students to be ready to solve the problems in cancer clinics (clinical program, many many researchers doing translational research). Most of the cancer biologists at MIT (both Whitehead and Koch) focus on the deeper mechanism questions about cancer. Scientists at both places are doing outstanding science. Which aspect of cancer research interests you the most? As for New York vs. Boston, I haven't lived in either city, but I think both are awesome cities from my interview experience. The stipend should be similar at both places. The subsidized housing from GSK is a great deal, I don't know whether MIT provides subsidized housing too (Harvard doesn't so that's a big headache) Anyway, both are awesome programs and you really can't go wrong by choosing either For the housing part, MIT does... MIT's 1b1b apartment is ~$400 cheaper than Harvard's.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blc073 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 On 3/5/2017 at 5:48 PM, MCF10A said: I'm facing a similar decision (Harvard BBS vs. GSK) so I can totally feel you. I pretty much agree with all of your pros and cons, and just want to add a few points: (1) GSK has many PIs doing comp bio/genomics work too. They recently added a new "computational and systems biology program", and recruited Dana Pe'er from Columbia to be the chair. Those PIs are doing amazing cancer related work (Berry Taylor, John Chodera, Christina Leslie, to name a few). (2) There are several faculty members in MIT Koch doing cancer immunology (their cancer immunology program has 10 faculty members according to the website). Their work might not be as transnational as those done by GSK researchers tho. (3) GSK is not necessarily cancer biology focused. They have a top-notch structure biology department (arguably the best in the nation), and many top-notch scientists doing non-cancer related developmental biology, stem cell biology, immunology and cell biology research. I think at the end of day, the major differences between GSK and MIT Biology are (1) translational vs. basic science research; (2) New York vs. Boston. The whole impression of the GSK program gives me is that they want to train the grad students to be ready to solve the problems in cancer clinics (clinical program, many many researchers doing translational research). Most of the cancer biologists at MIT (both Whitehead and Koch) focus on the deeper mechanism questions about cancer. Scientists at both places are doing outstanding science. Which aspect of cancer research interests you the most? As for New York vs. Boston, I haven't lived in either city, but I think both are awesome cities from my interview experience. The stipend should be similar at both places. The subsidized housing from GSK is a great deal, I don't know whether MIT provides subsidized housing too (Harvard doesn't so that's a big headache) Anyway, both are awesome programs and you really can't go wrong by choosing either Where are you in the GSK vs. BBS decision? Also, I would consider Harvard Housing to be subsidized. They guarantee a cheap dorm room next to the medical school and they have apartments and houses in Cambridge that are cheaper than market price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCF10A Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 12 hours ago, blc073 said: Where are you in the GSK vs. BBS decision? Also, I would consider Harvard Housing to be subsidized. They guarantee a cheap dorm room next to the medical school and they have apartments and houses in Cambridge that are cheaper than market price. Still 50:50 now. It's a tough one. Yeah I learned about HU housing options, but the $900/mo dorm room in Vandy is not as attractive as the $850/mo room in 2b apartment in Uppereast lol, and I want to live close to Longwood in G1. BTW good to see you here, I probably know who you are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blc073 Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 14 hours ago, MCF10A said: Still 50:50 now. It's a tough one. Yeah I learned about HU housing options, but the $900/mo dorm room in Vandy is not as attractive as the $850/mo room in 2b apartment in Uppereast lol, and I want to live close to Longwood in G1. BTW good to see you here, I probably know who you are I believe you do know who I am. You are in a great position right now. Relax and know that whatever decision you make will be the right decision. MCF10A 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now