I have also spent a lot of time assisting other students, but I have to say they seem a lot more appreciative than the person you are talking about as they recognise that I am doing them a favour and it's not a part of my job to help them.

I think I've been lucky in that I have since really needed their help too and they have really gone out of their way to assist me but I understand that not everyone is like this.

Some weeks I have spent at least a day helping others, some weeks I don't have to help at all, so it's really hard to give an average amount of time.

I'm a direct person so if I experienced the situation that you have described I would just make it clear to them that I don't have to be helping them and I am doing it out the goodness of my heart and tell them to understand that I am more than happy to help but it will be on my terms. For example, when it's convenient for me and only if I see them acting on my advice. If people keep asking me the same question, if they are not listening to the feedback I provide or if they are not thinking for themselves and trying to improve, then I will be honest with them and tell them I will only help them if they use my help to help themselves in the future. I've told people directly that they are PhD students not technicians, so they need to come with me with solutions not problems, and then we can work through the solutions together to see if they are suitable.

I think you need to be honest with this person and make them recognise the value of the help you are providing.

I don't think many people on here work in that area. Just search google for the information you're looking for.

If you've only just started your PhD you will have plenty of time to get to know your topic.

What do you mean by you haven't researched or written anything? You must have submitted an abstract detailing work you had done and work to be done in order to apply for the conference?

Failing this, I attended a conference earlier in the year and there were a few PhD students in the early stages of their PhDs who just presented a few results and a lot of background and what they were aiming to do, so it's still possible for you to go.

It's difficult to give advice without seeing the letter! You could post the letter, taking out any specifics if you want to. I'm no expert but I like to think I know a little something about what employers are looking for and I think that can be extrapolated into what supervisors are looking for.

PS This is a great forum. I've been on here on and off for the past 7 years. I love it :)

Yes - depending on the supervisors some will care you have no thesis and some won't. My MSc was similar to yours I think. I did a 4 month computer based research project. I had zero lab experience. I still got a lab-based PhD. This was in the UK though; I doubt I would have got a PhD in the US.

Your supervisors will be expecting to guide you and help you refine your project. That's what they are there for. Don't worry, everyone has these anxieties. You'll get through it :)

I can't answer your questions specifically but I can tell you that all fields are competitive in that they require hard work, long hours and the very best candidates. I would think that immunology or anything to do with infectious diseases is still very topical - I don't think we are close to solving these issues yet! I work in plant health rather than human health though so my opinion doesn't come from studying your field. I've certainly never heard any of my plant microbiology or virology colleagues stating the field is dead though!

I would tell you to do whatever it is that interests you - even if the field is super competitive - someone has to win, may as well be you.

Sounds like a tricky one. I always think honesty is the best policy with supervisors though. You may be surprised to find they are able to help.

Can I ask why the research direction really matters? Most supervisors are there to serve their own agenda in terms of research outputs, and they probably know better than you so have you considered maybe he is right? I think it took me a year to work out what my supervisors intended my direction to be, and this has changed with recent developments in my projects. I just roll with it. It's less stressful and I'll still get a Phd whatever direction it takes.

I meant in terms of entry requirements - any MSc will do in the UK, but obviously a research one is better in terms of experience and hitting the ground running when starting a PhD.

US PhD candidates tend to have a lot of experience and will have probably worked in a lab during term time/summer break. If they have a done an MSc they probably will have already have lecturing experience as well. This can mean it is difficult to compete with them if you are not in a similar position.

I think you mean you are doing a taught MSc rather than a research one. That doesn't make any difference. An MSc is an MSc.

I'm not sure how it works in other disciplines but in molecular biology we often contact random labs and ask for different strains, plasmids etc and mostly get good responses.

I'm not in your position yet, but I will probably be next year. I've had to study for exams etc whilst working fulltime though,

For me, what works is planning ahead. I will pick days and times that I'm going to work on something in the evening and make sure all my other chores are done so there is nothing to distract me. I make my dinner the night before so I don't have to worry about that either. I allow myself 30 mins to an hour to chill when I get home and then I just make a strong coffee and get on with it. I probably get 2 to 3 hours work done an evening.

If I'm working on a weekend then I do the same thing but plan to spend the whole day working, only stopping for an hour for lunch and dinner.

As your submission deadline is so tight, I would also draw up a realistic timetable and try to stick to it. This might take a few days if you are not sure exactly what needs to be done and need to go through the thesis again, but it will be a few days well spent. I think I read somewhere that 70% of writing the thesis should be planning, 20% writing and 10% checking and I think that's fairly accurate.

You can do a MSc whilst working, if that's what you're asking. It will be difficult, but it can be done. Do you mean you want them to hire you based on the fact that you're doing a MSc though, or support you in some other way whilst doing it? That is probably harder.

Why not just stay in your current job, do an MSc, and then look for a PhD if that's what you want? Bear in mind that either qualification might not help you in a future career.

I hope you find something - I share your isolation of being away from your home institution.