Signup date: 17 Oct 2017 at 4:13pm
Last login: 28 Nov 2020 at 8:43pm
Post count: 102
If you are really set on getting a PhD, you could first do an M.Res (Masters by research). That way you'll have 1 (sometimes 2) research projects to demonstrate your research abilities. Do these well and you shouldn't have trouble applying after you've completed it.
You say the experiments were done by your co-authors and analysed by you so you shouldn't be possessive of the results, as you have not produced them, but helped in producing them by your analysis. On the other hand, you have done significant work analysing the results. One has to be mindful that you are working in a team environment. That said, it would not be fair for the post-doc to take all the credit.
When I did my PhD, my supervisor set the research question and I went away and did all the work. When it came to publishing, we published as joint authors, with my supervisor being the corresponding author. The papers listed the contribution of each of us. Your PI should ensure you get placed appropriately in the author list. With conferences it is a bit more tricky. When I presented my work, I put "under the supervision of", to acknowledge my supervisor. When my supervisor presented my/our work, he put his name on top of the slides, but made it clear on the next slide that the results were the outcome of the was doing the work and listed my name. Experienced PIs usually give a short summary at the end of slides and often briefly mention verbally who is doing what in the lab.
Part of the post-docs responsibility is to also present the labs work, and of course, you have a part in that because you're a PhD student (i.e. learning through doing/presenting) and have done a significant part of the work.
I would discuss it with your PI, ask about what the convention is in recognising your work. Be professional in your interaction.
I'm sorry to hear of your viva outcome. In my opinion, just do the corrections and you'll have no reason not to be awarded your PhD. I wouldn't get enticed by going for "procedural irregularities" even if you allege they have behaved unprofessionally, besides it could take years for this process with no guarantee that you could prove this is why you've got R&R. Your PhD is to be awarded on your work, and now you have an opportunity to improve it. Just focus on that and you will be finished quicker.
If your university only has minor amendments or R&R as viva outcomes, then it just means you have some corrections to do. Don't try to catastrophise or imagine how the examiners will judge your changes negatively. Instead, make sure your corrections are good and thorough enough that they can't reject them.
When I was doing my Ph.D. I did about 9 hours of labs and a few hours of marking - often just a weekend day for marking. In my first year and second years about 3-4 of us Ph.D. students would deliver the Java programming labs which were originally a full 5-hour single session with the whole of the undergraduate Computer Science students. I and another student helped deliver the M.Sc Data science labs (large-scale computing stuff, distributed computing, bigdata etc..), designed and marked the coursework. It didn't negatively impact on my own work, but I stopped all teaching during my write-up at which point I recall just marking for just two modules.
Indeed they do AmlTAA. According to the clinical research literature, it has reasonably good results when patients haven't responded to various antidepressants. However, a common side-effect is memory loss, and so it's usually reserved for more serious/recalcitrant cases.
I've been cautious too. Pretty much only going for walks in the local park, food shopping and tennis.
However, that said, I've thrown caution into the wind and started taking advantage of the governments "Eat out to Pig out" aherm, I mean "help out" scheme.
Thanks for the links.
At the end, he rushed over to the medicine cabinet and said "Alright Pharmacy boy....let's test your knowledge". He pulled out some Dantrolene and asked me "wots this for then" as he threw me a BNF across the room to look it up from. I already knew the answer. It's a medicine most pharmacists won't have much contact with, other than perhaps looking up the dosage, as it's used in surgical emergencies. I replied "Dantrolene. Used to treat malignant hyperthermia, and is contra-indicated for patients receiving calcium channel blockers". He replied, "OK, very good". Afterwards we had some normal and somewhat politer academic discussion about the proposed mechanisms of ECT and particularly about it increasing neurotransmitter receptor up-regulation.
I learned a few days later when he didn't turn up to the ward round that he had a motorbike accident, and despite our hostile encounter, hoped he wasn't seriously hurt.
Not to mention at the time, at the hospital I was training in, I had a tutor who worked in Medicines Information and answered the phone like hyacinth bucket from the British TV series "Keeping up appearances": "Helloow....Medicines InforrrrmaaaaAAAYYYYshiiiooon". Oh dear, it was Egotistical characters like this, and the repetitious aspect of a good portion of the job, that led me to escape the profession and pursue my doctorate for which I got an offer shortly after this event.
Masters DegreesSearch For Masters Degrees
An active and supportive community.
Support and advice from your peers.
Your postgraduate questions answered.
Use your experience to help others.
Enter your email address below to get started with your forum account
Enter your username below to login to your account
An email has been sent to your email account along with instructions on how to reset your password. If you do not recieve your email, or have any futher problems accessing your account, then please contact our customer support.
or continue as guest