A question to those who work in any science field.

Hi Justin,
I am a working scientist with a Ph.D. in human genetics. In terms of potential future jobs, your best bet is to stick with subjects with medical or industrial applications. Chemistry is not bad, particularly protein chemistry, as most companies are always looking for good protein chemists. But the bottom line is that if you are interesting in basic research you will struggle like hell. I unfortunately find pure medical research boring (my own prejudice) and have worked on molecular evolution and basic research in virology (with some prion research thrown in for flavor) and I have cost myself at least 6 years and several promotions relative to my colleagues from grad school. You also risk working in a field for a very long time and then not finding employment in science period. The companies and medical researchers will find you are too specialized in a non-applicable field and the number of basic research or higher academic positions are very scarce. With the exception of the UK, europe is a research wasteland. Germany in particular. Stick with the U.S. If you are really up for a career in basic research, prepare to give up a lot and live in constant risk of failing. If you are interested in biotech or medical research, the hours are still long and it can be difficult but you will have much greater opportunities.
Though my tone is negative I don't want to discourage you from trying to make it in the sciences...If you want it, you will make it...but the idea that you will be well supported, respected, and have golden opportunities in the sciences and that every day will bring an exciting new breakthrough is a myth and one should approach this career very carefully and with better planning than I did

quote:

---

A lot of us (myself included) are getting a bit carried with career advice to a high school sophomore.

---

I am not sure I agree with this. When I started grad school, I was constantly told by the various departments that there were simply not enough bio Ph.D.s and that there would be a strong demand for the skills I would obtain through the program. By the time I was half way through I was told (and read in journals like Science and Nature) that there are far too many Ph.D.s and that getting funding, finding a stable job, getting out of postdoc hell would be nearly impossible. It almost seems like every scientist I know is apologetic that it generates for many including myself working conditions you would not tolerate in almost any other profession but is met with "science is great". Of course for a professor, this kind of tunnel vision is extremely important as without the cheap labor of grad students and postdocs they would never get anything done.I think even a sophomore should be made aware that there are tremendous tradeoffs to be made when undertaking a career in science that are usually brushed aside as a trivial problem although only relative few Ph.D.s actually make it anywhere in science. I think that the reward to effort ratio which is disproportionately skewed in favor of effort in science should be general knowledge.If one thinks they can make it despite the odds and are truly interested then by all means they should go for it. But I know I would have personally benefited from being less wide eyed and believing that hard work and great interest would be a sure path to success....even as a sophomore in high school when there was still a lot of time to really think through what I wanted to do in life and what some of the consequences might be.