Episode 10: Leading and Receiving Training at NIH

In this episode, we hear from Dr. Kenneth Gibbs on training opportunities at NIGMS, the importance of finding career success, aligning your values, and more. We then hear from Dr. Petria Thompson and Valeria Velez Galiano on being a postbaccalaureate fellow at NCI and the many opportunities at NIH that support your career journey.

Listen and Subscribe to Inside Cancer Careers

Kenneth Gibbs, Ph.D.

Kenneth (Kenny) Gibbs, Jr., Ph.D., is Chief of the Undergraduate and Predoctoral Cross-Disciplinary Training Branch within the Division of Training, Workforce Development and Diversity (TWD) at the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS). In this role, he oversees the institute’s long standing programs to enhance diversity (MARC, U-RISE, G-RISE, IMSD, PREP, Bridges to the Baccalaureate and Doctorate), as well as institutional components of the NIH Common Fund’s Diversity Program Consortium (BUILD, SPAD, DPC DaTA). At NIGMS, he also is a Program Director in the Division Genetics & Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology where leads and administers grants to promote basic research in the area of stem cell biology.

Prior to joining NIGMS, Dr. Gibbs was a Cancer Prevention Fellow at the National Cancer Institute, and an AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow at the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR). Dr. Gibbs completed his Ph.D. in the Immunology program at Stanford University, and received his B.S. in biochemistry & molecular biology (summa cum laude) from the University of Maryland, Baltimore County where he was a Meyerhoff, MARC, and HHMI scholar. Dr. Gibbs has previously served on the committee for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine’s consensus report “Graduate STEM Education for the 21st Century,” on the Board of Directors for the National Postdoctoral Association and he has written about scientific training and diversity issues for Science Careers, and Scientific American.

Petria Thompson, M.D. Ph.D.

Dr. Petria Thompson is currently a Resident Physician in Radiation Oncology at the University of California San Francisco. She obtained her M.D. and her Ph.D. from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and her Bachelor’s degree in Chemistry from Emory University. She is also an NCI Post-Baccalaureate Fellow Alumni.

Valeria Velez Galiano, B.S.

Valeria Velez Galiano received her B.S. degree in Medical Microbiology from the University of Puerto Rico in Arecibo. As an undergraduate student, she gained strong interest in cancer research through research internship positions at the Fred Hutch Cancer Center and University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. This led her to join the team of Dr. Daniel Larson as a postbac student, where she is investigating splicing factor mutations that alter translation regulation in myelodysplastic syndrome stem cells. Outside the lab, Valeria enjoys spending time with family and eating good food.

Show Notes

Episode Transcript

[UPBEAT MUSIC]

OLIVER BOGLER: Hello and welcome to Inside Cancer Careers, a podcast from the National Cancer Institute. I'm your host, Oliver Bogler. I work at the NCI in the Center for Cancer Training. On Inside Cancer Careers, we explore all the different ways that people join the fight against disease, and hear their stories. Today, we're talking to Dr. Kenny Gibbs from NIGMS, who has studied the biomedical career and developed and managed a series of key programs to support early career scientists from diverse backgrounds and shares his perspective on where we are today. After the break, we turn our attention to the NIH Postbac program and learn how participating in research at NCI for a year or two after your bachelor’s can be a great experience and steppingstone. We have two guests: an alum and a current participant. Stick around to the end to hear how you can take your turn and benefit from the suggestions and recommendations made by our guests.

OLIVER: It's a pleasure to welcome Dr. Kenny Gibbs to the podcast today, welcome.

KENNY GIBBS: Thank you Oliver, great to be here.

OLIVER: Dr. Gibbs is the chief of the undergraduate and predoctoral cross-disciplinary training branch of the National Institute of General Medical sciences here at NIH.

He also serves as a program director for a portfolio of awards in the area of stem cell biology within the division of genetics, and molecular, and cellular, and developmental biology. Dr. Gibbs you've been engaged in programs to enhance diversity in the biomedical workforce for some time. And I wonder if we could start with what your assessment is of where we are with this important work in 2023.

GIBBS: Yeah, thank you for the question, Oliver. You know, I got poetic, it was the best of times, it was the worst of times, I don't know if it's necessarily the worst of times. But I think, you know, I'm dispositionally optimistic. And so, I see clear progress on a number of fronts. And so, some of this work I've done and published, but you can look at, for example, where we were as it relates to better engaging the entire population, including those from underrepresented groups, you know, three or four decades ago to now. And there's a clear increase at all levels. Now, there's still also clear gaps between sort of the available talent pool and the talent pool people who get biomedically relevant bachelor’s degrees or research focused higher degrees. And so, in that respect there is progress, we also haven't fully actualized our desire to, or really the imperative to make sure we have all available minds on the playing field, right? Because that's how we identify and then go about solving complex biomedical problems. You know, I just say, through time, you know, there are varying currents and so there are different currents at various levels of government, which I won't elaborate on, where there are both efforts to advance these issues rapidly and then efforts to focus on a vocabulary and other things like that. And so my main work is focusing on continuing the work of ensuring we enable opportunities for promising trainees from all backgrounds, all meaning all. To participate in the biomedical research workforce. And then one thing I'll note is, a number of positive NIH-wide initiatives and one that I've been involved in very recently is the MOSAIC program to promote faculty diversity, which many ICs participate in. And so we've been able to, you know, through that mechanism, really encourage a broader more representative pool of PhD level scientists and postdocs. To come into the K99 pool and many of are going on to great jobs in their own right. So, I'm dispositionally an optimist, I think this line of work requires you to continue to look on the positive, while dealing with some of the challenges, but that's where I say where we are right now. We've made a lot of progress, but still much work to do. But we will make it.

OLIVER: So, you mentioned the MOSAIC and you also mentioned that it's a K99, so maybe just for our audience who may not be familiar with that mechanism. What is the K99 specifically and what is the MOSAIC version of that program that you built?

KENNY: Thank you so much. I've worked with colleagues NIGMS and across NIH on this effort. So, MOSAIC stands for maximizing opportunities for scientific and academic independent careers. And so, my job as you mentioned is chief of the undergrad and predoctoral cross disciplinary training branch. So we lay the groundwork for developing future scientists, innovators. Right, and so we do a lot of work at the undergraduate level, a postbac level, masters, and PhD level to say, let's make sure we're creating an environment where we can enhance institutions and support trainees from all backgrounds representing that recognizing there might be some differences and approach that might need to be taken based on, you know, individual experience. And so, we've done a lot of great work there, but what we realize and I'm a product of some of these programs is that, once you get to the postdoc level a lot of the infrastructure to expand opportunity and broad participation, wasn't as structured. So MOSAIC uses a mechanism that NIH has for a long time. I guess for about 15 years now called the K99/R00. And that says, hey, you're a postdoc, you need maybe two more years of training before you're ready for independence. And so we'll give you an award for those final two years, followed by a three-year award that you could start your independent research career with the R00. You know, NIH had had that award for a long time but, you know, when you looked at who even applied at the parent K99 it was fewer than 7% from, you know, historically underrepresented racial and ethnic backgrounds, like Black or African American, Hispanic, or Latin, American Indian, Alaskan native. And about just a 1/3 were women, across any racial ethnic group. When you consider that women are more than 50% of postdocs, we're saying there were gaps in even who was applying. And so when you have gaps in who applies, you have gaps who gets awarded.

OLIVER: Of course.

KENNY: And so, we said, here it’s, hey let's create a new mechanism that rewards your science and that rewards efforts to enable broader participation at your institution. So, we know that many scientists, especially those from underrepresented groups are often doing additional academic service work even when they're grad students and postdocs to create a better opportunity. We also know those efforts aren't always appropriately recognized in scientific review mechanisms. And, you know, it takes time, and everybody has a certain amount of time. And so that might actually ding your productivity a little bit but, you know, in time if you can sort of say, let's support both of these efforts and recognize both of these efforts, you allow people to persist within the enterprise. So, what this is a K99 award that recognizes science, as well as contributions to enhancing broader participation. And then we also pair them, the individual awardees in cohorts with scientific society partners, to provide additional mentoring networking professional development. Because what I like to say is that everybody needs to the same things. We all need mentors, we all need networks, we all need strong peer groups. Different people are able to get that in the environment by and large and individuals from certain backgrounds, especially those that are underrepresented, often don't get those by the way the environment is structured. So, we're really just creating a parallel structure to support scientists from all backgrounds, including those underrepresented. And progressing into independence.

OLIVER: What you just said there is a recognition that I think is relatively recent right, I mean in historically perhaps NIH has supported the science and the scientific endeavors of people on early career mechanisms. But now we are recognizing that they need more than that, they need support, they need connections, they need some soft skills, all the things that you mentioned.

KENNY: Yeah, and networks, peer groups, you know, I think broadly, right, when you think about it, for everybody, right, the postdoc is sort of the first educational training stage where you kind of go in as an independent person. Right, because K-12, undergrad, grad school, you enter as a cohort postdoc, enter as a singleton, similar with a faculty career. But you don't stop needing peer groups, and support, and mentoring, and networking. And so, yeah, it's really just saying, let's just use what we know and use it to continue to support folks that we supported earlier. A number of them had been previously supported by you know, F31's, including the diversity version, diversity supplements, some of have been supported by, you know, the sort of mainline T32 training programs, R25s, which is the alphabet soup of mechanisms if you're not familiar. But what we're saying is that people that we supported earlier are finding an additional on ramp and we've been able to attract a number of people who've not previously had any level of NIH support. And so I think it's great and we see the pool of people who was applying, more than three quarters of them have been women. About that same number have been from historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. And so, then of course when we have more diverse pool, we have much more diverse set of awardees. And so, it's been a delight to be able to work on that with my colleagues in NIGMS, as well as many colleagues across NIH.

OLIVER: So, of course you have many other programs, you mentioned already I think in passing that you've focused a lot on the phases that come before undergraduate and so on. So, can you tell us a little bit about the programs that you lead there for NIGMS?

KENNY: Yeah, I get to work with a great team of program officers and so there's a lot of programs, but mainly they are at the undergrad, postbac, masters and then PhD level. At the undergrad level we start at the community college level. A program called Bridges to the Baccalaureate. And so that supports partnerships between community colleges and four-year institutions. Again, allowing those who are starting at the community college level to be then in a structured program, to allow them to transition to a four-year institute and then hopefully, graduate with a STEM degree. MARC and U-RISE, are sister programs, they're at different institution types based on the amount of NIH funding they have. But really those takes sophomores, juniors and seniors who have a clear interest in getting a research-focused higher degree, like an MD PhD or a PhD. And again, provided a nice, structured training program, an environment thinking about, peer group, how do they help develop their identity, self-efficacy, provide opportunities for research both at their institution and at external institutions. And again, those programs are great and they, you know, provide kind of a starting ground for the next generation of scientists. Then we move to the postbac level. And so, we have there our candidates who finished their undergrad degree. They're interested in their PhD. And they either, sometimes, you know, haven't yet had the level of research experience that they would want to be competitive and so they get a year, sometimes two, but a year structured activity, where they spend most of the time in their lab and then, again, these networking cohort activities. And then they move on, I think it's the last analysis was like 75% of them move on to get a PhD, which is great. We also have another bridge program at the master’s level and so some people use the postbac route, some people use the master’s route to get the additional skills they want as they prepare themselves for the PhD. So again, that's a partnership between a master’s degree granting institution and an institution that offers biomedical PhD's. And then finally at the PhD level, so NIGMS is well known for our discipline area, our basic biomedical T32 program. So those provide training within the discipline, like genetics, chemistry and biology interface, molecular medicine, biostatistics, things like that. What these programs are, IMSD and G-RISE are cross-disciplinary. So, what they're really aiming to do is to provide additional, to strengthen the research training environments. And to really enable broader participation and so thinking about, you know, are there people within these disciplines for whatever reason who might be more likely to have challenges in acclimating and feeling that they fully belong in the environment. And then how do we create some additional wrap-around activities and structures, so they have what we know that everybody needs, a peer group, a set of strong mentors and things like that. So, I feel really fortunate to be able to, you know, do the work that I do and work with people that I work with. Because I think it's just, really important and, you know, we can see alumni from these programs doing all sorts of great things, a number of them have been, you know, gotten NIH research project grants, R01, R35's, whichever alphabet you want to use. Have gotten other prestigious awards from foundations and even a number of them have gone on to, you know, be Howard Hughes investigators and things like that. And so, these programs have been going for a long time, I mean some of these are older than me, at least in some versions of them, there was an early version of the MARC program. And so, I feel privileged to be able to steward this legacy and the last point I'll mention is that I actually first was an NIH funded person through the MARC program. And so, an early version of the MARC funded me a few decades ago, when I was an undergrad at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. And so, it's just, you know, it's kind of wild to go from being supported by the program to then overseeing that program and a number of other ones. But I just feel privileged and blessed to be able to do what I'm doing.

OLIVER: It's certainly an interesting trajectory yeah. So, beyond what your work at NIGMS thanks for sharing that with us. You also work with the NIH common fund and have helped develop programs there. Before we go into the programs can you tell us a little bit about what the common fund is?

KENNY: Oh, that's a great question. The common fund is, really as I think about it, it is funds used by the NIH director to address critical, scientific, and biomedical problems. Or opportunities, if you will, that are beyond the span of one or just a few institutes. And so, all institutes and centers at NIH pay into the fund and then there's an elaborate process which I'm not fully a part of, or aware of how it happens. But then you know, a number of concepts come out to really tackle in an evidence-informed approach to really tackle some of these NIH-wide, problems that are of NIH-wide importance that no single institute might have the resources to or really should be tackling on its own, it should have NIH-wide partnership and leadership in moving it forward.

OLIVER: So, what are the programs in the common fund that you've been engaged with?

KENNY: Yeah. So, we have, at NIGMS we have for the last I guess nine years managed what's called a Diversity Program Consortium. And what this is intended to do is really take an evidence-informed approach to both developing the future scientific workforce, developing faculty, and developing institutional capacity. And so, there's a number of different components called BUILD, which focuses again on those three levels, a number of different, you know, approaches at ten different institutions, ten different sites. Thinking about, what are different approaches that we could take to developing students, faculty, institutions, and that can be the University Alaska, Fairbanks, using a one health model to try to integrate indigenous ways of knowledge into biomedical research training. Keeping Morgan State, trying to use an entrepreneurial model to better engage. The BUILD programs also focus on, you know, developing faculty capacity to be mentors who have the skills, because again, mentoring is a skill set that individuals can learn to be able to be more effective for a wide variety of students and to develop the skills to more successfully compete for NIH competitive research support, as well as the institution. How does the institution develop the facilities and other capacity to sustain these efforts? There's also the National Research Mentoring Network, which has a number of different projects on the science of mentoring, as well as a number of different projects around how to best equip trainees with the skills they need to be able to effectively navigate the workforce. And then there is the CEC, which is the Coordination and Evaluation Center. Which really takes an approach to harmonizing these various projects under a shared set of hallmarks of success. And evaluating the impact of these projects, you know, broadly across the consortium. Because again, it's a consortium, not just you did this one thing, you did this one thing. But as we take these different approaches, how do we then move forward and again using a rigorous evidence-informed approach, to say, well what works for whom and where? And then how can we, importantly, because it’s the common fund, then use that to inform the training programs across the NIH institutes and centers.

OLIVER: Really trying to, yeah, and including NCI, right, really trying to affect system change.

KENNY: Exactly, yeah, through these experiments. Right, we always note that these, like every other common fund program it's not going to, quote unquote, solve the problem. Right, a ten-year program at a few different sites is not going to, you know, shift everything that that has happened for the last 40 or 400 years depending on how you're counting. That said, you know, it can and is being used to then inform how we evaluate our own programs going forward and how, I think if you even ask applicants to further articulate as they're designing the programs, they have to train the next generation, expand opportunity, etcetera.

OLIVER: So I'm curious about your path. You're clearly working now on a variety of

different venues and I'm sure you've had experiences of your own that inform what you're doing today, but I'm curious about your own path. How did you first get interested in science?

KENNY: Very interesting question. Yeah, and so, you know, when I was a kid, I was really into meteorology. Some may say I still have my head in the clouds. But I was really interested in how the world works. I will set my story in a broader story, so I'm descended from enslaved Africans here in America. And so, you know, my family lived through slavery. My grandparents grew up in the Jim Crowe South, my grandfathers have fourth and eighth grade educations. My parents were able to go to college in the '70s through a program called Upward Bound, which is designed to help promising students from low-income backgrounds transition and succeed in higher education. And so, public investment changed the trajectory of their lives and by virtue of me being their child, changed the trajectory of my life. Because then I showed up and my parents was like, you know, you'll go to college. So, I remember being four talking about going to college, didn't know what it was, but I knew I was going to go there. And they also, I grew up in a Christian home and so big on the idea of to whom much is given much is required. And so, it's like, you know, you've gotten a lot, Kenny, like use what you have for service and so those were sort of the big points that oriented my world view. I also liked science and it was, quote, unquote was good at it. But, you know, if you're good at science then your attracted towards being a medical doctor, because that's a way to help people. But I had a number of teachers, and I grew up in Durham, North Carolina, so I actually had black science teachers in middle and high school. And they saw promise and so they encouraged me to do some precollege research programs. But because I grew up in Durham my high school jobs were working in labs at Duke and UNC.

OLIVER: Nice.

KENNY: And so, one of the speakers said, you know, if you're a medical doctor you'll likely treat 10,000 patients in your lifetime. The person who discovered penicillin has treated billions on every continent for the last six decades. And I was like, whoa, I can do use science to help people, I was 15, so I said I will cure cancer. I have a more complicated view of how that works but, you know, I was like we're going to go forth. And so yeah, that set me trajectory, I was at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. With the support from, well, the university's Meyerhoff Scholarship program, which is a national model for, again, enhancing broader participation in the biomedical research workforce, actually in STEM broadly. I also had support from MARC program that I mentioned earlier, NIH, NIGMS and Howard Hughes. And then, yeah, I was on my way. So, I did cancer immunology work as an undergrad. Did my PhD in immunology at Stanford. And again, there I was looking at stem cells in the blood during normal blood development and during leukemia, or blood cancer. So, always been with this nexus. And I would just say, you know, I written about this kind of going from pipette to policy. You know, the further my training progressed I felt farther from the reasons that I went into science, because my reasons were using science for public benefit. And by public meaning all the public. But I wasn't seeing that before me, in the miles before me and it's not a knock on anybody, it was just sort of the value systems of the institutions that I saw weren't really about that, they were about, you know, kind of building your own little fiefdom and making yourself best known for a very focused area of science. Which is, that wasn't exciting to me. And then I also saw my friends, who had also gone through these training programs and three of my friends who were very accomplished black women scientists at institutions that had publications in the fancy one-word journals. A number of them were leaving science, because they had such bad experiences in grad training. And one said, you know, I'll stay in science, but I'll never do academia, I thought well this is kind of a waste, this is a tragedy for them and a waste for all of us because we can't benefit from their perspectives. And then I saw some of my other colleagues who were white guys also leaving and I was like, well what is happening, why did everybody making the decisions that they're making? I said that just because so much of the effort has been on getting, especially if you talk about underrepresentation, get folks interested early and support them early. With the idea being that once you get the degree –

OLIVER: Everything's good.

KENNY: All the challenges that existed until then go away. And I am of a generation like these programs that kind of maturity and I was like, no, we have PhD's from, you know, Stanford, and all peer institutions and publishing in Science Cell Nature. No, like we can do it, you're not creating an environment where people with choices feel like that, they should choose that. So anyways, I came to DC as an AAAS Science Technology Policy Fellow. I said, you know, maybe I can try to fix it. I figured I'd do a one-year thing and then go back to my postdoc at Harvard, and I had it all, you know, the very well-known stem cell lab, the 30 postdocs, I like might be one of the three to get the brass ring out. But I worked at the National Science Foundation, the director for education and human resources, now called STEM Education. And really there I was able to work with a colleague, Kim Griffin, to, who's now the Dean of Education at the University of Maryland School of Education. Then she was an assistant professor. But I worked with her to really start to study, why do PhD's make the career decisions they make. And I tell people, I was like, this can sound esoteric, but we spend a lot of money trying to shape the career decisions of PhDs specifically to both generate, you know, develop the people, and then shape the choices they want to make. And I hadn't, I'd seen a lot of literature, K12, some undergrad, some grad. And some when you become a faculty but not in that, as I call it PhD to j-o-b land. Where, we worked and we got a number of different papers published. And interestingly, the very first weekend when I was an AAAS fellow, I met Neil Freeman from the NCI intramural. And so, his wife was an AAAS fellow with me. I met him at a picnic. And he described the Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program to me. And so, I just got to DC, but I said, if I ever do a postdoc that's probably the one I would do, because it's the only people who probably take me given all my varied interests. And so, you know, a year later and I in an AAAS fellowship I needed to figure out what I wanted to do. I had met my now wife, then girlfriend and I was like, okay, I think I should stay in the area. Just hit ten years, yay! So, …

OLIVER: Congratulations!

KENNY: Thank you! And so, I had applied for the cancer prevention fellowship, which allowed me to move in this direction of, I called it policy science, so thinking about, because my PhD training trained me to think about things rigorously at a kind of individual level. That allowed me to think more population systems level. And then, long story short, continued to publish on the work that I was doing. And then applied for a position at NIGMS, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, where I am now in the data and policy office. Was there for a year, published some more and then, you know, moved in the direction of program officer mainly because I thought I could have an impact on shaping how, you know, understanding it better I thought I would now move towards shaping how the money is spent and what we think about that. And I've had a great time there, been very fortunate, the director John Lorsch, the Division Director Alison Gammie and everybody has been very supportive of me. And so, the program officer had different roles and now I'm a branch chief, meaning I oversee a team of program officers and a team of programs.

OLIVER: Amazing breadth of experiences that you've had I have to say. I'm jealous, you really followed your passion. I want to pick up one thread though, so you mentioned that you observed peers and friends who were very accomplished, getting great papers, doing their graduate work at fantastic institutions, deciding to leave science because of the environment, and that seems to me is a direct line from there to what you've been working on and you told us a little bit earlier, which is to develop programs that support diverse scientists when they come into research environments. It's not enough to attract their attention and recruit them, then you have to really work hard to support them. Is that correct?

KENNY: Correct. Yeah, totally, right this is basic human nature. And sometimes, we live in America, we've had slavery, a civil war, Jim Crowe, and we continue to have challenges making sure all of us, meaning like literally all of us can fully participate in any sphere of life here and both contribute and benefit from the great aspects that come here. So, it also happens in science in America. Around the world too, but I'm just focusing here. And so, yeah, it's totally correct in thinking about, you know, how we can actually move forward, which for me, because sometimes, especially when I was publishing more, but even now, you know, and I’d say especially in 2020, after George Floyd was murdered, without exaggeration I got like 25 speaking invitations to help institutions, scientific societies, like how do we fix it? I was also home with my kids during COVID, I was like I do not have time to talk. I have written about this. But, you know, what I wrote at the time, and I still think holds is sort of listen to people. Because there are variations on a theme, but some environments might be doing well on some aspect but no other aspects, right? So, listening means like understanding what’s happening and listening to the people who are there, about the challenges that they are dealing with. Acknowledging what they are saying. Which can come with discomfort, because, my observation is that many scientists want to, many, not all, but most of the people in the field want to do well. Most want to support all the trainees and most don't want to be perpetuating any forms of individual and systemic bias. But acknowledging means that, we sometimes make mistakes, right? Like my good intentions are not the same as a good outcome. And this happens in every relationship context. And then after you listen, acknowledge, you have to act. Right? Which is where we sometimes fall short, because like just, you know, like hearing people and feeling sad is not enough. You have to actually then use the resources that are available to create an environment that will then help our articulated values to become enacted values. And again, I don't say it as the person who has it all figured out or pointing my finger, because in every context I'm in I'm like, oh, here are things I'm messing up, I didn't realize that. But I try to say, hey, let me act. And so, I think that's what is, but you have environments. And again, you can tell our racial, ethnic underrepresentation, which again, I think is one of the hardest problems we've had to deal with. Because usually people say, oh we just need more, get more folks interested. And I say, okay well let's look at gender in science. And so, you see women have been more than 50% of PhD's for two decades now, and still about a third of the new investigators. So, I was like if you have a gap when you have more than half the population, maybe it's not numbers. Maybe it's how people are experiencing both science and science within the sociological context of the different systems that you have so. Yes, I'll stop there. But I, you have to actually support people, the actual people that are there, that you're looking at and like listen to what they need. Which also means, not presuming what they need, but just actually asking.

OLIVER: Right, right. Actually yeah.

KENNY: Because everyone's like, I know you need that and I'm like, no, I don't, I'm good on this, I need you to do this thing. So.

OLIVER: Supporting in the way they need to. I want to take a small pivot, we've talked about all different kinds of career stages. And you mentioned that you're focused right now in your current role is a little bit earlier. But you've also had a passion for postdoc training right, you lead NIGMS's postdoc research associate training program.

KENNY: Mm-hmm.

OLIVER: You served on the board of the National Postdoc Association. I feel that the postdoc phase of the biomedical career is in a particular moment, you know, today in the summer of 2023 as we speak. I wonder what your take is. Where is postdoc training today?

KENNY: Yes. I agree, we're having a moment. Yeah, some of us, you know, like the postdoc apocalypse. You know, and I'm not saying that to be cavalier, it's just like those are some of the headlines you read and then sometimes I'll take to investigators and say, you know, I can't now find the 20 postdocs that I use to be able to find. Which can cause the question, did you need 20 postdocs? But the market has changed, and I think science is a passion for many. It's also a vocation. And so, when I think about sort of broader labor market changes and these are things that I don't have an answer to and this is just me as an observer and not as an official of the NIH, right. But you've seen students and postdocs striking across the country saying, we need better working conditions. And that's sort of a broader movement of people organizing in labor. So that's a moment that's happening. There are additional opportunities as it relates to moving directly from PhD to career. Whereas a number of organizations would say, hey, you do a postdoc for a few years before you apply, now a number, particularly in the private sector are taking people right out of grad school. So that the alignment or misalignment between the number of postdocs and the number of the types of faculty positions that mean those postdocs wants continues to be an issue. And I mean, this has been talked about, you know, I graduated more than a decade ago, I was a postdoc a decade ago and this is conversation we were having then. And when I was doing my work at NSF I looked at publications from the '90s and the '60s. There was something called the invisible university. Right? And so, so in some ways I say, hey, you know, there's nothing new under the sun. And there's new attention, but there are new opportunities for people. And so, I think it'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out. I know the NIH central is doing a sort of study on what's happening with postdocs and so, have a panel. So, we look forward to hearing what NIH announces how institutions move forward and then how individuals are able to move forward. And I think at the same time that you're having all this structural issues, you still have issues of, we want postdocs from all backgrounds to be able to move forward, and especially those who have been, from underrepresented groups to, if interested have the pathways to move forward. Right, and so you have oftentimes these cross currents, or you have this sort of structural aspect, or also continuing to focus on longstanding issues of, for example, underrepresentation in the workforce. So, yeah, it's hard right, like we think about postdoc life of course. I had my first kid when I was a postdoc. And so that does, it does focus the mind a bit, it focuses the mind and the finances, especially in the DC area, where childcare is exceptionally expensive. And so, you know, I have sympathy for people when they're trying to navigate because you hit, you know, life course. People in their late 20s to mid to late 30s, which is the bulk of people in postdoc. Like, there's life, there's family formation, there's all these other things that are happening that pull on people so, yeah. If you're a postdoc listening, keep up the good work, we're cheering you on. And, you know, always reach out, there are ways that we can be helpful and help you navigate. And be even aware of what they actually try to help navigate. Because sometimes people don't know. Oh, I can get this kind of supplement, I can get this sort of thing so. Yeah.

OLIVER: That's great advice. And I mean I think you put your finger on it when you said that being a scientist is a passion, it's a vocation, right, it's a calling in that sense and I think, it's, probably not often enough talked about, that that is something incredibly valuable to society, as well as important to the individuals. So, we need to think of ways of focusing our attention and then nurturing that in people.

KENNY: Yeah. I want to say that like don't say, because sometimes people say, oh it's your passion and it's like, yeah, I got to eat, I got to like pay my bills. And so sometimes people like, oh but you get to do your passion, I was like, I understand it's difficult for people to pursue a passion if they don't feel that they have, you know, kind of was in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Right, if you don't feel like you can meet your basic sort of financial and then by implication, relational needs, you know, particularly if you're any sort of relational context, whether it's, you know, whether it's partner, a child, parent, a grandparent, a sibling. Like people have all sorts of things going on in their lives right? And so it's a passion but it's a vocation, meaning like it's a, there's a job and people need to be able to have appropriate remuneration for what they're contributing.

OLIVER: Yeah, thank you, thank you for pointing that out. I certainly, didn't mean that because it's a passion that you should do it for free.

KENNY: No, I know you don't, but I've heard that.

OLIVER: People, yeah, no that's –

KENNY: It's like, oh your passion and it's like, no, folks got to eat. Right?

OLIVER: Exactly. So, in closing then Dr. Gibbs, I wonder what advice you would give to someone who's listening, who might be thinking about a career in biomedicine, might be earlier on. What's your advice given all that we've talked about?

KENNY: Yeah. I'd say there are a lot of opportunities, right? And so, if you're interested, I mean think about what we're doing now. We've had a COVID vaccine in less than a year. We're CRISPering all sorts of things, right, like there are new treatments for cancers, new fundamental discoveries on any number of various, you know what I'm mean, stem cell biology grant, like oh look at this is very interesting at how you can think about developmental plasticity. So, what I say is that there are a lot of opportunities. There are challenges, but the thing is, there's challenges everywhere. Right? And so, one of my friends is always saying, you know, the grass may be greener on the other side, but you still have to mow and water. Right? And so like, every field, whether it's, you know, academia, industry, government has things that are wonderful about it, and things that are challenging. And so, my thing is, and I think it's really important to understand what the options are. And then and I wrote about this with Kim Griffin about a decade ago, really think about your values, because a lot of literature that, in the context where you can make choice about your career, to the extent that you can align the work you're doing with your own values, like what's important to you. Then you will very likely sort of find the career success and find longevity. Right, and so if you say, this is what I really want to do, whether it's being able to do discovery that I can hopefully just direct, being able to work on the cutting edge of pharmaceuticals, being able to work with students. Being able to pay my bills, like, I struggle, I don't want to struggle, I don't want my family to struggle. Right? As long as you are clear on what your values are, then you can make choices that are informed and align with those values. And when I managed the intramural postdoc program, I know one of the scholars he said to me like, I've never actually been asked to think about my values, right, I added the question on the individual development plans like, what is it important to you? Think about it. Does a career you say you want to pursue, allow you to pursue the things that important to you. If not, you should at least be aware of that tension, because it will come up and, so, I think this values piece is really important and it's often under-discussed. There's a lot of opportunity, know your values and then finally network, network, network. It's really, really important. Because what you know helps you get through, you know, helps you stay there, but who you know helps you get in the door. So, I think that's good, I'll leave it there. About ten years ago I wrote something in Science Careers, I'll send it to you, or you can look in the show notes, called Planning a career in today's landscape. And there it has some tips that I think still are resonant, but, yeah networking is one and then go for it. Actually, I'll stop there, because my mother, Laura Gibbs, would always say, never self-eliminate, make other people tell you no. And so, you know, I just kind of go for it. A lot of people do say no, but enough people say yes and so keep going for it, you know, rejection is part of life. The only people who don't experience it are the people who don't try anything. And so, yeah just go for it.

OLIVER: Thank you so much Dr. Gibbs. Thank you for sharing all these insights and this breadth of experience and knowledge. It's a really valuable information, thank you very much.

KENNY: Thank you.

OLIVER: And Dr. Gibbs actually mentioned the show notes, so we're going to put a lot of stuff that you've heard about, lots of touch points in this conversation into the show notes so you can check out the links there. Stick around, after the break we're talking to two scientists about the NIH's postbac program and how it can give you a chance to experience research and prepare you for your next steps towards a career in biomedicine.

[UPBEAT MUSIC]

OLIVER: The NCI is the US federal government's principal agency for cancer research and training and conducts a broad range of research in its Intramural Research Program. If you are interested in gaining research experience and training at NCI there is a great first step, you can take. Here with me to tell you about that is Chanelle Case Borden, Associate Director of Training Programs in our Office of Training and Education.  

CHANELLE: Thanks Oliver! We are talking about a webpage called Future Fellows where you can submit your CV or resume if you are interested in a postdoctoral, doctoral, or postbaccalaureate fellowship here at the NCI. And that’s at both, the master level and post-college level. We will put the link in the show notes, but you can find the webpage by searching for “future fellows NCI.” At the site, you can tell us about your research interests and also indicate a division or center that you would like to work in.

OLIVER: What happens once someone has submitted their material at the site, Chanelle? 

CHANELLE: Once you are in the database, any research team leader at NCI can see your application for the next six months. If they have an open position that fits your indicated interests, they will contact you directly to arrange an interview. A question we commonly get is when are positions available. And generally, most postbac and postdoc positions are available on a rolling basis. However, the fall and the winter is generally a time where we see a lot of postbac hiring and that usually begin the following summer. Internally, we are always promoting the use of Future Fellows to our investigators and staff to fill their open positions. So, if you are considering completing training at the NCI, I encourage you to submit your information.

OLIVER: Great, thanks Chanelle. So that’s Future Fellows on the NCI’s cancer.gov website – check it out and submit your info today. You never know where it might lead. 

Welcome back. Now, we're turning our attention to NIH's Postbac program, formally known as the Postbaccalaureate Intramural or Cancer Research Training Award. It provides recent college graduates who are planning to apply to graduate or professional school, like medical, dental, pharmacy, nursing or veterinary, an opportunity to spend one or two years performing full-time research at the NIH. Postbacs work side by side with some of the leading scientists in the world in an environment devoted exclusively to biomedical research, a great way to see if science is for them. I'm delighted to welcome two guests to the pod to talk about their experiences in the Postbac program. Dr. Petria Thompson is currently a resident in radiation oncology at the University of California San Francisco. She obtained her MD and her PhD from Vanderbilt University and her BA from Emory University. She is an alum of NCI's Postbac program. Welcome.

PETRIA THOMPSON: Thank you so much for having me.

OLIVER: Also with us is Valeria Velez Galiano, who is a current Postbac in the Laboratory of Receptor Biology and Gene Expression in the NCI’s Center for Cancer Research. She obtained her bachelor's degree from the University of Puerto Rico in Arecibo. Welcome.

VALERIA VELEZ GALIANO: Hi, thank you for having me.

OLIVER: Petria, let's start with you. I'm curious what first sparked your interest in science and medicine?

PETRIA: A long-winded story, but I entered undergrad thinking that I was going to go to divinity school, actually. And in that process, I was taking a psychology class, and we were having long discussions around, you know, behavior and what influences behavior. But there was also a segment where we were talking about receptors and serotonin and dopamine and how all those things work. And I realized that the majority of the class was more focused on the chemistry and the biology behind behavior, and that kind of sparked an interest into, "Hmm, I wonder what this is all about." So, after about a month or so into my undergraduate experience, I'd say probably by the second semester, I ended up reaching out to one of our chemistry professors and started working on a project, not really related to behavior but related to chemistry in general. And that kind of sparked what has been a long journey that will not end anytime soon into science. Yeah.

OLIVER: Interesting. Valeria, how about you?

VALERIA: Yeah. So, during high school, I had the opportunity to volunteer at a veterinary clinic. And, you know, it was mostly, like, cleaning and that kind of stuff, but this day, like, a rescue puppy came in. And so they were, like, doing a bunch of tests, and I was around. And they were like, "Oh, come join us," and "Come and see this." So, they, like, took a blood sample to check the puppy's health. And they were, like, "Oh, look through the microscope." And that was just so eye-opening that I was able to see, like, the red blood cells and everything. And then there was, like, this little weird, like, darker spots, and they were like, "Oh, those are parasites." And I was like, "What? This is just so cool that you can just, like, right now, just taking, like, the blood out of the puppy." And so that really sparked an interest and then it led me to, like, do my undergraduate degree in microbiology, too. So, that was, like, really cool for me.

OLIVER: So, now, Valeria, you're working at the NCI. You're doing cancer research. Why cancer?

VALERIA: Yes. So, like, starting my undergrad, cancer research wasn't really an interest for me. I was doing mostly research on bioremediation, like, more environmental kind of stuff. But then, like, the diagnosis of a loved one, like, really sparked that interest, and so I started, like, doing more research about it and reading about it, and then having that day-to-day, like, experience with my loved one, like, really motivated me. And so, I ended up shadowing an oncologist. And then I also had the opportunity to be an intern at Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center for a summer, and so that was an experience all by itself because, firstly, it was after COVID. So, it was, like, back in-person experience and also a bunch of research that I hadn't had the opportunity to really experience, mostly, again, being in person and doing stuff in the lab. And then just a different campus, and it was just eye-opening, and I really, really fell in love with it. And I was like, okay, I really want to try and do this, give it another shot. And I guess that's what also led me to do a postbac because -- Again, because of COVID, we had a bunch of labs that were just online, and it didn't give us, like, the space to actually do the research. It was like just giving you data, and you're, like, doing, like, simulations about it. And so, I wanted more actual research time, so that's why I thought, like, a Postbac program would be, like, the right fit for me. And yeah, that's really what led me to be here, today.

OLIVER: Petria, you turned to cancer and you're combining, now, patient care with research in radiation oncology. What made you take that particular direction?

PETRIA: I am thinking back to two moments in particular. The first moment was in the weeks before I came to the NCI. One of the first oncologists that I shadowed was a breast surgical oncologist at Grady Memorial in Atlanta, Georgia. It was the first time I was in an OR. I spent a couple of days with her, just seeing different breast cancer patients. And I was just really moved by their stories, really moved at the place that she played and role that she played in their lives at that moment in time. To be quite honest, when I started at the NCI, I actually didn't know what I wanted to do in terms of science, whether that be clinical, seeing patients, or getting a PhD. And at the NCI, at the time when I was there as a postbac, there was a program where you can shadow the oncologist in the cancer center. And what was really cool about that program is, I think this was around the time they were developing some kind of, like, tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. I don't remember all the details. But as a postbac, I would see the patients that were at the cancer institute with the physicians and then also go to almost like a tumor board-like environment, where they were discussing, you know, current treatments that are in clinical trials that were developed at the National Cancer Institute. And I think -- If this was a lightbulb moment in my life, I think that was one of them, where it's like, "Oh, wow. There are people here who are working in a lab, trying to develop new therapeutics, but also see patients." So, really getting the gratification of being with people during their most vulnerable times but also getting the gratification of really tinkering and thinking through problems and critically assessing, you know, what are the needs at the, you know, this bench side to, bench model. What are the needs, and being able to be at both sides of that fence. Those two moments definitely, you know, started solidifying that idea or the process of pushing me towards becoming, like, a physician scientist.

OLIVER: Yeah. So, you've both already touched on how the postbac experience influenced your paths. I want to go a little deeper in that. So, Petria, did you finish undergraduate, and you were then not entirely sure what to do next or you were focused -- I mean, how did you even hear about the Postbac program?

PETRIA: I was in my senior year of undergrad. I think it was in the fall time. And at that time, I was working as an honors thesis student in Edward Morgan's lab. And he asked me, "Well, what are your plans after graduation?" And I said, you know, I really don't know. He said, "Well, you should look into, you know, are there postbac opportunities? You're free to stay here but, you know, look into what opportunities are available." So, I kind of had honestly stumbled across this program on Google and submitted an application. It was a lot of serendipity there. But honestly, one of the best decisions that I made. At that time, they fly you, you interview with multiple different PIs. I was just, like, overwhelmed in a good way with that experience. I ultimately interviewed with Dinah Singer, and I remember during that interview, she's like, "You know, typically I want my postbacs to be here for at least two years." And at first, I was hesitant. Even though I didn't know what the next step was in terms of higher training, hesitant for, you know, saying I'm going to take two years, quote on quote, off from my life to work with her in her lab. But honestly, the best decision. She was very invested in making sure that I matured as a scientist but also making sure I had opportunities to explore different avenues while I was there. If it wasn't for that experience, I don't think I would have pursued a PhD or even the MD-PhD combination. Her lab was really diverse. Some of my closest friends are postbacs or postdocs from that lab that I still keep in touch with. Between the three postbacs that run the lab at that time, I think one is doing, like, public policy, another is an emergency medicine physician, and myself, and you know, we still keep up pretty close. And then Chanelle Case, who is still working at the NIH, also a really close mentor. And so, you know, it's both, like, the development of becoming a scientist but you also develop these relationships that end up years later -- I think we're, like, almost ten years out -- really impacting you in more ways than you, you know, you could have even imagined.

OLIVER: Yeah. That's really interesting. And I should disclose that Chanelle is part of my team in the Center for Cancer Training, a close colleague, and Dr. Singer, one of the deputy directors of NCI, is actually my boss. So. But that's fantastic. So, Valeria, you already kind of told us you were, after the pandemic or as the pandemic was easing off, if you will, were keen to get your hands back sort of in the game, so to speak, to do practical science. So, tell us what is the postbac? What is your day like as a postbac?

VALERIA: Oh, my day like as a postbac? I guess I spend most of my day in the lab. I just plan out my experiments for the week, you know, like my objectives, my goals for the week, what I want to, like, try to accomplish. So, some days, it's more data analysis. Some other days are actual heavy bench work, and I guess it alternates between that. Some days, I do have meetings with other postbacs, and that's really fun. So, I guess it depends, really. So -- But a lot of time in the lab.

OLIVER: But it's focused on research. You're not necessarily taking any courses or anything like that. It's really a break from the undergraduate life. Right?

VALERIA: Yes. But you can also take classes. Like, the NIH offers a bunch of classes. So I took a class back in January, and that was very nice. It was like introductions to the hallmarks of cancer, so it was like a good refresher and, like, a good thing to relook at and also get back into, like, a steady curriculum. It was very nice, and I think the professors were also super great and encouraging. They always gave, like, really good feedback. So, that was, like, really fun.

OLIVER: Petria, when you were a Postbac, did you take any classes?

PETRIA: I was just going to say, Valeria, thank you so much for reminding me of those classes. Yeah, as a postbac, I did take some classes which was a good, you know, bridge between being a student and not being a student. I took an immunology course as well as a biostats course. Both really helpful. I probably don't have my notes from my biostats course but the immunology course, I used a lot in my day to day and also really formed a foundational understanding of immunology for me. So, yeah. Those courses were absolutely wonderful, and also there were some other opportunities there. I don't know if Valeria's done any of these but opportunities to, like, present your work to other postbacs, so kind of like a postbac seminar. there was, like, a career development office that helped with CV and resumes and personal statements. And I also did, like, a mock interview with them, actually, before going off for my medical school interviews. So, a lot of really good resources there for sure.

OLIVER: Yeah. Thanks for mentioning that. I mean, a lot of the postbacs -- I don't have the exact number, but it's many of them -- as I said in the intro, are aspiring to go to professional schools, medical school, other kinds of schools, or graduate schools. So, there are programs to help with that, right? You just mentioned an interview preparation and things like that, CV preparation. Valeria, are there other professional development things that you've had a chance to engage with?

VALERIA: Yeah. They always have a bunch of seminars every week for the postbacs and also, like, spaces for, like -- They have this thing called mindful meditation. So, there are, like, groups to, like, help you develop, and if you're, like, feeling stressed or anything, you can go and talk to them. So, they also have those kind of spaces for the postbacs. But, yeah, a lot of professional development seminars and, as she mentioned, like, mock interviews, CVs, and everything. They do that. I haven't done it yet but will take advantage of that because that's just part of it. But yeah. I know of -- I have a bunch of friends that have done it, and they just really like it.

OLIVER: So, Valeria, what has been the major impact of being a postbac? I think you're coming towards the end of your first year, is that correct?

VALERIA: Yes, that is correct. My postbac experience was supposed to be one year. In January, I made it official for two years since I kind of, like, really like it a lot and have seen, like, my progress overall, and I think I really want to stay for another year. Also give myself a little bit more chance to actually decide what I want to do afterwards.

OLIVER: -- What are your next steps? If you have any ideas. This is not a commitment. I won't hold you to it.

VALERIA: Yes, so, I feel like it depends. Some days I'm like, "Oh, yeah. I want to do a PhD," and then other days I'm like, "Oh, I just want to do an MD." So, I feel like I got, like, both sides of it, but I think mostly I'm inching towards the MD. So, we'll see how that goes, prepping for that, and obviously, my time here is really helping a lot.

OLIVER: Petria, same question for you. You've already kind of indicated that at the NIH during your postbac, you kind of got the spark for research and for medicine. Tell us more about that.

PETRIA: You know, being a physician scientist was a long road. Although the initial spark happened during my time at the NIH, I think there are a lot of transition points both, you know, during the medical school, graduate school training here in residency and then after residency. So, I think I find myself oftentimes returning back to that initial childlike, you know, really idealized version of the career before I started out. I think as you progress through this, you realize that mentorship and sponsorship is going to be really important. That relationships are really important. Understanding what questions are important and how to answer those questions is something that kind of started at the NCI and NIH but continues even to this day. I'm in a bit of a transition period right now. I'm in my first year of residency as a radiation oncologist. I did an intern year before this, so not a lot of time at the bench during these two years, and so trying to figure out what that next bench is, who that next mentor is, what the next question is, is kind of the point in my life that I find myself right now. I think, broadly, still obviously interested in cancer and, you know, I'm training in a field where I tell my parents that I am learning head-to-toe cancer, from, you know, birth to grave. And so that really does afford an opportunity to really be exposed to a lot of clinical, interesting scenarios and questions. And hopefully, you know, will really push me forward and as I continue on this journey, yeah.

OLIVER: You mentioned, Petria, earlier, I think, as one of the learning experiences you had as a postbac was sitting in on tumor boards. What is a tumor board?

PETRIA: Ah, yeah. So, a tumor board is a multi-disciplinary event that happens -- I can give you an example. Right now, I'm on a prostate cancer rotation. So, the physicians that come to that tumor board are a pathologist, that look at gross and microscopic anatomy for our patients; radiologists that review scans for our patients; and then the physicians that would be involved with either surgery, systemic therapy, or radiation therapy. So, that would be your medical oncologist, your surgical oncologist, and your radiation oncologist. So, cases or patients are presented with their clinical and pathology and imaging data. And then you, you know, as a team, make decisions in terms of what is the next best step of care. And it can be a combination of all three of us, two of us, just depending on, you know, the stage and circumstances of their tumor. Seeing that as a Postbac student, I thought, was a really cool opportunity. Not a lot of people get to sit in on those unless, you know, they're already shadowing an oncologist and they're tagging along. But I think what's a little bit more unique with the NIH experience is that there are also scientists at those tumor boards as well, so they can speak to the data in terms of things that are up and coming, or things that are currently in the lab that they will, you know, like to try for these patients.

OLIVER: Valeria, you've indicated that you might be leaning towards medical school. Have you had a chance to sort of interact with any of the clinical activity on the NIH campus during your postbac?

VALERIA: Yes, I have. So, here at the lab, they have, they're part of a clinical trial so I get to join in on some meetings with clinical doctors and then you also have the scientists, and it's very interesting to see their discussion about the patients and how you get both sides of, like, the actual medical doctors and then the scientists, and it's very interesting to see how they work things out.

OLIVER: My last question to you, Valeria -- What advice would you give to people who are listening who might be thinking about participating in the Postbac program? What's your advice?

VALERIA: To always ask questions. Just ask questions. Have a conversation. And don't be afraid. I feel like that. I have to apply that to myself a bunch of times because I feel like I get more, not scared but just timid to ask. But, yeah. Just be upfront. Like, talk to people. Everyone is super, super nice, and you're not going to regret it.

OLIVER: Petria, same question for you. If our listeners are interested in the Postbac program, what's your advice?

PETRIA: I really like Valerie's comments on maintaining curiosity and not being afraid. I think I would add to that and say, you know, it is an opportunity or a transition point to explore and not to be afraid of exploring. You know, as I think about, like, the group of postbacs that I, you know, went to the NCI with and the various different things that they're doing even if you leave the program not being a scientist, not being a physician, not being, you know, a dentist, whatever may have you, I think, you know, understanding the process of science, being around people who are, you know, leaders in the field is like a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. So, use that time to, you know, really explore and, you know, decide, you know, what your next steps are and utilize resources there to get to that next step.

OLIVER: Well, thank you both very much for sharing your experiences and your insights.

VALERIA: Thank you for having me.

PETRIA: Thank you so much.

OLIVER: If you're interested in the Postbac program, check out the links in our show notes. On the NIH and NCI web pages linked there, you can see all the info on how to apply, including some recorded webinars with great advice. For NCI, consider entering your information into the Future Fellows website. Again, there will be a link.

Now, it's time for a segment we call Your Turn because it's a chance for our listeners to send in a recommendation that they would like to share. If you're listening, then you're invited to take your turn. Send us a tip for a book, a video, a podcast, or a talk that you found interesting, inspirational, or amusing. You can send these to us at nciicc@nih.gov. Record a voice memo and send it along. We may just play it in an upcoming episode. Now, I'd like to invite our guests to take their turn. Let's start with you, Dr. Gibbs.

KENNY: Thanks, Oliver. The thing I will recommend, and this is not endorsement of the service, but are all the new Star Trek… [Giggle]

OLIVER: [Laughs]

KENNY: …iterations that are on Paramount Plus. And so, we got it because when Covid was running through my house, I needed to allow my children some digital reprieve. And so, some movies that they liked were only on Paramount Plus. But then I realized they had Picard, which is a second take on the Star Trek Next Generation series, which I loved as a kid. And so, Picard, season three is excellent. So, if you have any positive feelings for the Next Generation and 90s Star Trek, I highly recommend Picard, especially season three. And I've gotten really, really into Star Trek: Discovery. It's just -- And, you know, all of these, it's just a large level of complexity. Discovery is great. It's great as it relates to representation, but also it's really mind bending as it relates to space time, multiverses, all the good things. So Star Trek: Picard, season three, and Star Trek: Discovery. I just finished season three, and I'll start season four soon. [Giggles].

OLIVER: That sounds like a lot of fun. I'm going to check those out myself.

KENNY: Yeah.

OLIVER: Thank you.

KENNY: All right. Thanks.

OLIVER: Petria.

PETRIA: I would recommend play in all its various forms, especially for adults. So, for me, my play right now is ceramics so making mugs, bowls, plates, plate bowls on a wheel. And it really gives me an opportunity to lose track of time, build a community outside of what I do, practice and patience, a little bit of resilience when things don't go right but also something that's -- I don't have to take too seriously but still enjoy. So, play, whatever that means for you, is my recommendation.

OLIVER: Well, thank you. I think it's a great recommendation. Valeria.

VALERIA: I would recommend that this podcast that's called Ordinarily Extraordinary. So, it's a podcast about women in STEM and their journey through their career paths. And I think it's very interesting just to get motivation from other people and just see how their life has been and how it's different for everyone.

OLIVER: Thank you. So that presumably you can get anywhere you listen to podcasts, right?

VALERIA: Yes.

OLIVER: All right. We'll dig out a link and put it in the show notes. Well, thank you both for those recommendations. I'd like to make a recommendation as well. It's a book called Misconceiving Merit, Paradoxes of Excellence and Devotion in Academic Science and Engineering. It's by Mary Blair-Loy and Erin Cech. Based on a study of STEM faculty that these two investigators did at a top research university, they address the paradox that these fields, the STEM fields, are meant to be a meritocracy, that women and some racial and sexual minorities remain underrepresented in them nevertheless, often feel unwelcome and devalued. My opinion, it convincingly shows that dominant cultural beliefs in STEM are responsible for this underrepresentation, and the authors provide some really good insights as to how this may be addressed. As always, we'll put a link in the notes.

That’s all we have time for on today’s episode of Inside Cancer Careers! Thank you for joining us and thank you to our guests.

We want to hear from you – your stories, your ideas and your feedback are always welcome. And you are invited to take your turn to make a recommendation we can share with our listeners. You can reach us at NCIICC@nih.gov.

Inside Cancer Careers is a collaboration between NCI’s Office of Communications and Public Liaison and the Center for Cancer Training.

It is produced by Angela Jones and Astrid Masfar and Edited by Janette Goeser.

A special thanks to Lakshmi Grama and Sabrina Islam-Rahman.

Join us every first and third Thursday of the month when new episodes can be found wherever you listen – subscribe so you won’t miss an episode. I'm your host Oliver Bogler from the National Cancer Institute and I look forward to sharing your stories here on Inside Cancer Careers.

If you have questions about cancer or comments about this podcast, email us at NCIinfo@nih.gov or call us at 800-422-6237. And please be sure to mention Inside Cancer Careers in your query.

We are a production of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. Thanks for listening.

Episode 10: Leading and Receiving Training at NIH

Listen and Subscribe to Inside Cancer Careers

Show Notes

Segment 1: Leading Training at NIH

Segment 2: Receiving Training at NIH

Your Turn: Guest Recommendations

Episode Transcript