MIT vs. GSK

[Cancerbio1001]

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!

[MCF10A]

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

 

 

[Cancerbio1001]

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

[SysEvo]

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....

[blc073]

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. 

[MCF10A]

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

[blc073]

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.