I aim to self study and find ways to publish independently.
MSR wrote:Unfortunately, I believe that you have a very naive view of what a scientist does. That view is typified by this statement:I aim to self study and find ways to publish independently.
If you are interested in science, you should speak to your science professors and talk to people who work in the field. Publishing anything (at least in a reputable scientific journal) requires a great deal of effort and training. You are very interested in one specific field that may have reached maturity in 10 years. To become a scientist, one should have broader interests that can be explored over the length of a career. Unfortunately, I don't think that self-study could really form the basis for a career in science, or even to be informed at a very high level. If you are serious about science, then do it. If you are not really serious about it, then perhaps you could serve as an advocate for your area of interest.
The end goal for me is to learn the things I'm interested in and be published if I find something novel.
It seems reasonable I can collaborate with those in the field without a PhD, maybe not as well but it could suffice.
MSR wrote:The end goal for me is to learn the things I'm interested in and be published if I find something novel.
How do you expect to find something novel without access to a lab or patients? All that you can do is read novel data published by other scientists and physicians. While you certainly have access to data from across the world through published studies, what you lack is the knowledge and experience to effectively evaluate that data. Do you believe that you have the background to determine if a study is valid and if the data has been correctly interpreted? Where do you expect to publish these novel findings? These factors are what make your amateur biomedical scientist trajectory improbable. However, I certainly think that reading about your interests is good, as is lobbying for funding and resources to study diseases that you find important. What are unrealistic are your (rather lofty) expectations. I'm not trying to be negative, just trying to be frank with you.
MSR wrote:It seems reasonable I can collaborate with those in the field without a PhD, maybe not as well but it could suffice.
What do you think that you would bring to this collaboration? What would make me take you seriously?
Users browsing this forum: David Lathbury and 13 guests