Career options for BS Molecular Biology/Genetics/Bioengineering

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of those are tough with just a BS.

Would adding a minor in policy, data/business analytics, or public health to the BS in the said majors make a better option?

How about with a MS as the terminal degree in the above majors? Does it need to be a thesis based MS or coursework based MS?

I am trying to determine the minimum level of education in these majors for a decent starting point in a biotech/pharma career (scientific, not marketing) with a decent career growth.

Your best bet is to go to the careers page for a bunch of pharma and biotech companies and see what job postings they have and what level of degrees they require. Look for positions that are tangential to the science like marketing or program management. Once you have an idea of job titles that are good matches, go to LinkedIn or one of the conglomerate sites and cast a wide search net to see what those requirements are.

[Anonymous]

My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

[Anonymous]

Don’t get a PhD. Go work for pharma or med devices. Get a masters in regulatory science or a law degree. Stay in pharma in regulatory, compliance or legal. $$&&&

[Anonymous]

Patent examiner at the USPTO. Can telework from anywhere in US and Puerto Rico.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of those are tough with just a BS.

Bioengineering?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Patent examiner at the USPTO. Can telework from anywhere in US and Puerto Rico.

Does USPTO pay for a law or graduate program for hires with a BS degree?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patent examiner at the USPTO. Can telework from anywhere in US and Puerto Rico.

Does USPTO pay for a law or graduate program for hires with a BS degree?

No, they stopped that program years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

The timeline to get the right credentials for a bio focused R&D job is so long that it rarely makes sense to take time off. You'll want a PhD, which will take 5-7 years for anything bio-ish, plus you'll likely want 1-2 post docs at 2 years each. Only then can you get a solid R&D job in pharma. If you waste time in your early 20s, then you end up in your 30s without means to buy a house or have kids.

You can get an MS instead, but that flags you as a PhD drop out (even if that's not true) and drastically limits your earning potential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

The timeline to get the right credentials for a bio focused R&D job is so long that it rarely makes sense to take time off. You'll want a PhD, which will take 5-7 years for anything bio-ish, plus you'll likely want 1-2 post docs at 2 years each. Only then can you get a solid R&D job in pharma. If you waste time in your early 20s, then you end up in your 30s without means to buy a house or have kids.

You can get an MS instead, but that flags you as a PhD drop out (even if that's not true) and drastically limits your earning potential.

How about adding a minor, such as a business, data science, public health or policy minor?

[Anonymous]

People on DCUM are nuts. The Bio-Med and Pharma industries are some of the largest, most well established companies in the USA. Many would be regarded as High Quality employers with their benefits, ESPP, and 401K contributions. J&J, Smith Nephew, Zimmer, Stryker, Olympus, are all great companies and employees can easily stay 5-10 years progressing in their careers. OP the first job out of college would be at one of these companies, likely internships too. When an employee understands the product, and a biomed engineer would, they can easily move to other parts of the business if they don’t want to stay in engineering, manufacturing or R&D, for example Sourcing, Compliance, RAQA, etc, Lots of options, and then pursue an advanced degree in the area that they choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

The timeline to get the right credentials for a bio focused R&D job is so long that it rarely makes sense to take time off. You'll want a PhD, which will take 5-7 years for anything bio-ish, plus you'll likely want 1-2 post docs at 2 years each. Only then can you get a solid R&D job in pharma. If you waste time in your early 20s, then you end up in your 30s without means to buy a house or have kids.

You can get an MS instead, but that flags you as a PhD drop out (even if that's not true) and drastically limits your earning potential.

How about adding a minor, such as a business, data science, public health or policy minor?

If you don't want to work in R&D, there are lots of other options. I wouldn't necessarily do public health or policy, which have limited utility to pharma, but anything business-y (marketing, finance, supply chain management) or using statistics would help get you a job on the commercial side of a pharma company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

The timeline to get the right credentials for a bio focused R&D job is so long that it rarely makes sense to take time off. You'll want a PhD, which will take 5-7 years for anything bio-ish, plus you'll likely want 1-2 post docs at 2 years each. Only then can you get a solid R&D job in pharma. If you waste time in your early 20s, then you end up in your 30s without means to buy a house or have kids.

You can get an MS instead, but that flags you as a PhD drop out (even if that's not true) and drastically limits your earning potential.

No the idea is that they work AND get the grad degree at the same time. They will be getting a normal salary this whole time so they don't have the late-to-earnings scenario like you said.

I work with a young woman who was a BS lab scientist and knew she didn't want to do that her whole life. She just got her MS in a field like OP mentioned, and she did it while working. It was a lot. She was very stressed. But she has had a 401k since she was 22. This is in contrast to me, who did the route you mentioned with a PhD and postdoc and then bought a house and had childcare costs, and I wasn't able to max out my 401k until I was in my 30s.

I spoke with her a lot about her degree and why she chose to go back to school, and the years in the lab essentially as a grunt gave her perspective on her future career and she was more dedicated to her masters than if she had gone straight out of undergrad. In her own words, she needed to mature and figure out where her interests laid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

The timeline to get the right credentials for a bio focused R&D job is so long that it rarely makes sense to take time off. You'll want a PhD, which will take 5-7 years for anything bio-ish, plus you'll likely want 1-2 post docs at 2 years each. Only then can you get a solid R&D job in pharma. If you waste time in your early 20s, then you end up in your 30s without means to buy a house or have kids.

You can get an MS instead, but that flags you as a PhD drop out (even if that's not true) and drastically limits your earning potential.

No the idea is that they work AND get the grad degree at the same time. They will be getting a normal salary this whole time so they don't have the late-to-earnings scenario like you said.

I work with a young woman who was a BS lab scientist and knew she didn't want to do that her whole life. She just got her MS in a field like OP mentioned, and she did it while working. It was a lot. She was very stressed. But she has had a 401k since she was 22. This is in contrast to me, who did the route you mentioned with a PhD and postdoc and then bought a house and had childcare costs, and I wasn't able to max out my 401k until I was in my 30s.

I spoke with her a lot about her degree and why she chose to go back to school, and the years in the lab essentially as a grunt gave her perspective on her future career and she was more dedicated to her masters than if she had gone straight out of undergrad. In her own words, she needed to mature and figure out where her interests laid.

You are missing a lot of context.

You can get a coursework-based MS while working, but you can't get a PhD unless you find a PhD program and employer that let you do your dissertation research at work, which is very, very rare. I prefer to discuss realistic options.

An MS in science fields (not engineering) is often viewed as a signal that the person didn't have the intelligence to get a PhD, so your career is capped somewhere not too far above that of a lab tech. It's not a great career choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has a BS in biology with a focus on developmental biology and genetics. He got hired pretty quickly after graduation and works as a lab technician at a biomedical firm. It's not the greatest job in the world but he makes a decent wage--has been able to get his own place and is self-supporting. After spending two years working, he's now looking at PhD or MD programs.
There are lots of jobs as lab techs and research techs/assistants that are open to folks with hard science degrees but they are entry level jobs--as are most jobs straight out of college. Having GLP certification can give a leg up as a candidate (and a little salary boost) but most places will put their new hires through the GLP training.

I like the idea of working for a few years before going back for a grad degree. It gives better perspective on which field/skills/experiences you want to focus on. The people who can swing both - full time job and part time graduate studies - have the best financial situation because they start a real salary early and keep it. Sometimes the company will pay for part of graduate school. But that's a lot to juggle, and the stress will eat away a few years of your life.

The timeline to get the right credentials for a bio focused R&D job is so long that it rarely makes sense to take time off. You'll want a PhD, which will take 5-7 years for anything bio-ish, plus you'll likely want 1-2 post docs at 2 years each. Only then can you get a solid R&D job in pharma. If you waste time in your early 20s, then you end up in your 30s without means to buy a house or have kids.

You can get an MS instead, but that flags you as a PhD drop out (even if that's not true) and drastically limits your earning potential.

No the idea is that they work AND get the grad degree at the same time. They will be getting a normal salary this whole time so they don't have the late-to-earnings scenario like you said.

I work with a young woman who was a BS lab scientist and knew she didn't want to do that her whole life. She just got her MS in a field like OP mentioned, and she did it while working. It was a lot. She was very stressed. But she has had a 401k since she was 22. This is in contrast to me, who did the route you mentioned with a PhD and postdoc and then bought a house and had childcare costs, and I wasn't able to max out my 401k until I was in my 30s.

I spoke with her a lot about her degree and why she chose to go back to school, and the years in the lab essentially as a grunt gave her perspective on her future career and she was more dedicated to her masters than if she had gone straight out of undergrad. In her own words, she needed to mature and figure out where her interests laid.

You are missing a lot of context.

You can get a coursework-based MS while working, but you can't get a PhD unless you find a PhD program and employer that let you do your dissertation research at work, which is very, very rare. I prefer to discuss realistic options.

An MS in science fields (not engineering) is often viewed as a signal that the person didn't have the intelligence to get a PhD, so your career is capped somewhere not too far above that of a lab tech. It's not a great career choice.

I work at a pharma and have been in R&D for 10+ years and have not encountered this assumption about MS degrees ever. However those with an MS do tend to be in business-oriented departments like marketing and product management and clinical project management and not directly involved with research. I've never once heard anyone talk down about someone who didn't have a PhD. My default assumption is they didn't want to deal with all the bullsht of a PhD if they didn't intend on being a principal scientist, which I can completely sympathize with. I daresay the people spending 6 years to do two postdocs are the ones we should be questioning about good life choices.