#323 – Following the Why: Building a Career at the Intersection of Science and Care

Hello Friends 👋

In this episode of At the Bench, Drs. Misty Good and Betsy Crouch welcome Dr. Amélie Collins, an R01-funded neonatologist and associate professor at Cincinnati Children’s. A classically trained immunologist turned hematopoietic stem cell biologist, Dr. Collins shares her journey from philosophy major at the University of Chicago to leading a research program focused on fetal myelopoiesis in the context of maternal inflammation.

She discusses her training path through MD/PhD at NYU, her formative time in the labs of Dan Littman and Emmanuelle Passegué, and the critical mentorship moments that shaped her career. Dr. Collins offers an honest look at the challenges and joys of long training, pivoting research directions, and starting an independent lab. She reflects on the intersection of science and clinical care, grant writing as a creative exercise, and the importance of celebrating effort and submission, not just success.

We also dive into her Cell paper on the extrinsic regulation of emergency myelopoiesis in the fetus, the role of maternal IL-10, and how her lab is exploring how hematopoietic stem cells mature and retain memory of early-life exposures.Dr. Collins leaves listeners with powerful advice: “Do it because you love it. This career demands a lot, including your time, energy, and weekends. But if you love it, it’s worth it.”

Link to episode on youtube: https://youtu.be/XFpQee0v16A

----

Short Bio: Dr. Amélie Collins is an attending physician in the Division of Neonatology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and an Associate Professor in the UC Department of Pediatrics. She earned both her PhD (2009) and MD (2011) from New York University School of Medicine. Dr. Collins completed her pediatrics residency and neonatal-perinatal medicine fellowship at Columbia University/New York Presbyterian Hospital.  

Her research focuses on the development and function of the hematopoietic system in early life, particularly how early-life exposures influence immune responses in neonates. The Collins Lab investigates mechanisms regulating hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) during the perinatal period, aiming to understand their role in neonatal susceptibility to inflammation and infection.

----

The articles covered on today’s episode of the podcast can be found here 👇

1.Maternal inflammation regulates fetal emergency myelopoiesis. Collins A, Swann JW, Proven MA, Patel CM, Mitchell CA, Kasbekar M, Dellorusso PV, Passegué E. Cell. 2024 Mar 14;187(6):1402-1421.e21. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2024.02.002. Epub 2024 Feb 29.PMID: 38428422

2.Inflammatory signaling regulates hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell development and homeostasis. Collins A, Mitchell CA, Passegué E. J Exp Med. 2021 Jul 5;218(7):e20201545. doi: 10.1084/jem.20201545. Epub 2021 Jun 15.PMID: 34129018.

3.Why are preterm newborns at increased risk of infection? Collins A, Weitkamp JH, Wynn JL. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2018 Jul;103(4):F391-F394. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2017-313595. Epub 2018 Jan 30.PMID: 29382648.

4.Eomesodermin and T-bet mark developmentally distinct human natural killer cells. Collins A, Rothman N, Liu K, Reiner SL. JCI Insight. 2017 Mar 9;2(5):e90063. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.90063.PMID: 28289707

----

The transcript of today's episode can be found below 👇

Betsy Crouch Hi everyone, we're so pleased to be back with you today. My name is Dr. Betsy Crouch. I'm a neonatologist at UCSF and an assistant professor. This is the At the Bench segment of the Incubator podcast. I'm here with two of my dear friends and colleagues. Dr. Misty Good, would you introduce yourself, please?

Misty Good Yes. Hello, everyone. I'm Misty Good, and I'm a neonatologist scientist and division chief of neonatology at UNC Chapel Hill. I have the absolute pleasure of introducing our guest today, Dr. Amélie Collins, who's an R01-funded neonatologist and associate professor at Cincinnati Children's. She recently moved within the last year, so she's going to talk about her journey there. She studies fetal myelopoiesis in the setting of maternal infection to improve neonatal outcomes. Amélie, would you like to introduce yourself and briefly explain your research focus?

Amélie Collins Sure. First off, thanks so much for having me—this is truly an honor, and I'm really excited to be here. As you said, my name is Amélie Collins, and I'm a neonatal physician-scientist. I recently moved to Cincinnati Children's to start my own independent lab. My background is in immunology—and I like to remind people that hematopoietic stem cells are actually the stem cells of the immune system, so I haven't really left immunology. I study hematopoietic stem cells specifically in the fetus and neonate. I'm trying to understand how the unique biology of those cells during development contributes to the distinct hematopoietic and immune landscape that babies have, and how that might explain why they're more susceptible to infection.

Betsy Crouch I'm so excited to talk about all of this today. Thank you for joining us! We can't wait to hear you help solve the mystery of why our babies are uniquely susceptible to infection.

Amélie Collins Spoiler alert: I don’t know the full answer—but it’s why I have a job, to help figure that out!

Betsy Crouch Yeah, I’ll bet you have some unique insights that our listeners will really appreciate. So why don't we get started digging into that topic. We'd love to hear more about your career as a physician-scientist—maybe your early days in a lab, what inspired you to become the scientist you are now, and if there were any clinical observations that drove you on that path.

Amélie Collins Sure. I didn't grow up knowing I wanted to be a physician or a scientist. Actually, I was a philosophy major in college. But I went to the University of Chicago, which has a robust core curriculum. Everyone had to take a bit of everything. As a freshman, I had to take a biology class and ended up in what was essentially “rocks for jocks” or “immunology for philosophers”—not the actual course title, but close!

It was taught by a pediatric oncologist who framed immunology through the lens of pediatric leukemias and how discoveries in immunology helped us understand childhood cancers. That just captivated me—it made science feel so human. That was it. I was hooked.

Misty Good That was during undergrad? Wow, that’s amazing.

Amélie Collins Yeah, freshman year of undergrad. It was my favorite class. The way it connected science to real human problems just made it all click. It showed me the intersection of basic research and clinical medicine and how they can interplay. That’s what got me into science.

At the time, I thought being interested in biology meant I was pre-med—because that’s what everyone around me was doing. But I also wanted to join an immunology lab. So I cold-emailed Dr. Anne Sperling, who was at UChicago, and said, “I love immunology—who knew? Can I volunteer in your lab?” I didn’t want pay—I just wanted to be there.

She took me in, and I worked in her lab for three years as an undergrad and then a full year after graduation as a technician. I kept doing pre-med classes too, thinking that was just what you did. At one point, she said, “You know, some people do both.” That’s when I was introduced to the concept of the MD/PhD and being a physician-scientist. From the outset, it was the science that drove me to pursue that path.

Immunology is everywhere—it touches every system and disease. That made it hard to decide what direction to take. I was lucky to go to NYU for my MD/PhD and did my PhD with Dan Littman. His lab was huge—mostly postdocs, and for a while, I was the only grad student. But it was an incredible place to learn rigorous and aspirational science. There were no limits to the types of questions we could ask or answer.

Betsy Crouch We’re also really interested in mentoring, so I’m curious—what did that look like for you on a day-to-day basis?

Amélie Collins I had a really good mentorship experience. Dan is wonderful. He gave his people a lot of autonomy. As the only grad student among postdocs, there were moments when I wished for a bit more hands-on guidance, but I wouldn't trade the experience. That autonomy helped me grow.

Misty Good Yeah, I think that probably pushed and drove you toward your discoveries. I also give a lot of autonomy, but I tell people upfront—I’ll rescue them if I see them going down a rabbit hole.

Amélie Collins That's exactly what I wanted in my next training experience. So when I did my main postdoc with Emmanuelle Passegué at Columbia—who is an incredible hematopoietic stem cell biologist—I intentionally sought out a more hands-on mentor. I wanted that different experience because I had already had so much autonomy.

Starting my own lab now, I think a lot about mentorship style—balancing being intentional with being adaptable and not so rigid. Each mentee is different. Mentorship really shapes how you see the possibilities, how you do the work, and how you carry yourself as a researcher. I've had very different but excellent mentors, and it's been valuable to learn what fits my own personality.

Misty Good Totally. When I was a trainee, I just wanted a protocol—tell me what to do and I’ll do it. I didn’t want to reinvent the wheel. But then I learned that tweaking and improving protocols is part of what makes science fun.

Amélie Collins Absolutely. That’s one of the paradoxes of physician-scientist training: learning to be a scientist often means learning to fail, or at least how to navigate failure. That doesn’t always align with the rigidity of clinical training. Figuring out your own path, your own question, and your own method is critical.

I’ve also been fortunate to have long training periods. In Emmanuelle’s lab, I stayed for seven years. I was an assistant professor in title that entire time, but that duration gave me the space to make mistakes and figure out my scientific question. There were times it felt frustrating, but now that it’s over, I wouldn’t trade it for anything. I now know what I know—because I’ve done it all, including the mistakes.

Misty Good I loved what you said about letting people flail a little but not drown. That balance is hard—knowing when to let them struggle for growth, but also when to step in so they don’t lose hope. Trainees aren’t supposed to know everything, and building resilience is part of the process.

Speaking of resilience—you mentioned seven years as an assistant professor. Can you talk about your funding journey during that time? I think it would be really valuable for early-career folks listening.

Betsy Crouch Can we go back a bit? Let’s finish your training chronology. We got to your PhD at NYU, then your postdoc, and then your time with Emmanuelle. Can you fill in more of that timeline and share some of your findings too?

Amélie Collins Sure. When I finished my PhD, I wasn’t even sure I wanted to do residency—I loved bench science that much. But after going back to clinical rotations, I realized I really did want to be a physician too. I loved pediatrics for a few reasons: the fascinating developmental biology, the culture, and the lack of rigid hierarchy—it suited me. My other favorite rotations were psychiatry and surgery, oddly enough! But I matched at Columbia for peds residency. I didn’t initially plan to fast-track, but I ended up doing that—shortening residency from three years to two, fulfilling core requirements, and moving straight into fellowship.

I was lucky to be in the NICU by September of my intern year—early enough that I wasn’t overwhelmed and could make an informed decision. I just knew I belonged there. I loved the acuity, the physiology, the team. It was obvious. I told my residency program director that my favorite part of residency was research grand rounds. She said, “We need to get you back to a lab pronto.” That’s how I learned about fast-tracking.

During residency, I started working with Steve Reiner at Columbia, studying early-life NK cell development. That was my first postdoc or in-between phase. It helped me figure out what questions I wanted to ask—not just what my mentor was interested in, but what I wanted to explore. That’s when I realized I wanted to look at the whole immune system, not just one part, and I needed to study hematopoietic stem cells. I was in his lab for 4 years.

Steve was great. When I said I wanted to become a hematopoietic stem cell biologist, he said, “Great—how can I help?” So after fellowship, I started in Emmanuelle’s lab. While it might’ve been easier to start there from the beginning, I don’t regret the winding path. When I landed in her lab, I knew exactly what I wanted—to study hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells in the fetus and neonate, and to do it rigorously. I wanted the best.

I became an assistant professor at Columbia. Rich Polin hired me, even though I was essentially starting over in a new lab. For those seven years, I was an attending clinically, but still very much like a post-doctoral fellow and a mentored researcher in the lab.

Regarding funding—I applied for a K08 and didn’t get it on the first try.

Betsy Crouch: If I could interrupt you again—for all of our listeners—Amélie and I have had a couple of fun intersections during our careers. But I think one anecdote we didn’t tell is that she was a cross-covering fellow, I believe, when I was a medical student sub-I in the NICU at Columbia.

Amélie Collins: I was just trying to remember if I was a fellow or a resident, because I don’t think our timelines are that far apart. But yes, maybe I was a first-year fellow.

Betsy Crouch: I think you were a fellow. I remember I had a great group of residents with me, and the on-service fellow was another outstanding woman. But yes, we did meet then. And I also want to give a shoutout to Dr. Polin, who I think ran that NICU for a long time with equal parts vision and care. When I interviewed with him, he just wanted to support and encourage me. He even gave me two of his books as additional resources, knowing how excited I was about becoming a neonatologist. But he looked at me and said, "These are not a bribe," which I thought was really funny. The man was also a realist. I just wanted to share that anecdote—a story of leadership and someone who, when you said, “Hey, I want to do this other thing,” would say, “I’ll support you.” That’s really wonderful.

Amélie Collins: Yeah, that’s so rich. He’s one of a series of people I’ve been lucky to have in my career—people who really valued what I wanted to do.

Betsy Crouch: It’s heartwarming to hear about leaders like that—supporting a superstar in the making.

Misty Good: That’s nice. Can I ask you—because you pivoted—when did you determine it was the right time to pivot? Did you drop a project or complete it first? Obviously, the time when you became a faculty member is a natural time to pivot, but maybe you can talk to our listeners about that process.

Amélie Collins: Yeah, the time to pivot…I almost feel like you're asking me, “When’s the right time to have a baby?” There’s never a perfect time. For me, it was when I intellectually knew I needed to do something different. I did finish the project I was working on with Steve. His lab had made an interesting observation about what they thought was prenatal versus postnatal maturation of certain natural killer cell subsets in mice. I joined the lab thinking: immunology, pre/postnatal development—this fits perfectly with the developmental window I’m interested in. The goal was to explore that question, but I also thought, “We should check if this happens in humans.” I ended up never touching a mouse. Instead, my entire project became about establishing a small human fetal tissue biobank to study whether a similar maturation restriction point existed in humans. It didn’t—we could see both subsets prenatally. It turns out this was more about tissue specificity in mice that coincidentally straddled birth.

So I wrapped up that project, described the findings, and was fortunate to publish. During that time, I also had my daughter. That naturally paused my scholarly activity. While I was on leave and wrapping up the project, I started having conversations with Steve about pivoting intellectually and needing a new kind of mentorship. I realized I wanted to learn from someone who was an expert in hematopoietic stem cells. Emmanuelle came to Columbia right as I was ready to make that shift, and I reached out to her and said, “I’d love to learn from you, but I want to focus on a developmental window you don’t work on—can I do that?” And she said yes.

I joined her lab six months before finishing fellowship, knowing I’d be staying at Columbia as faculty. Switching labs that late in fellowship isn’t ideal unless you're staying at the institution, which I was. So I essentially started over scientifically while also starting my attending career—a double new beginning. For anyone out there thinking about a pivot: there’s never a right time but there’s also never a wrong time. It takes a little guts and a lot of luck—and you can’t plan for luck.

Misty Good: Yeah, it’s a lot of hard work. But if you’re passionate about it, it doesn’t feel like hard work.

Amélie Collins: It was fun! In Emmanuelle’s lab, I got to build a program for myself that I could take with me. I was lucky she gave me both the resources and autonomy to do that. And because I was an attending physician—the breadwinner for my family—I had the financial ability to pursue that. That kind of flexibility matters, especially when you have a young baby at home. I knew I could be a postdoc for seven more years without financial consequences. So yes, I worked really hard—but I love it, so most of the time, it didn’t feel like work.

Betsy Crouch: One of the joys of interviewing you is getting to talk to physician scientists at earlier stages of their careers. We’ve had some giants in the field on this podcast, and that’s been an honor—but it’s equally exciting to hear about how you're building your own program. Exactly. There's a special kind of energy and stretch involved in this stage. You're following your heart, and you're clearly doing the hard work too. You’ve had great mentors, you’re following your passion, and you’re doing science that gets you out of bed in the morning. But also—you’ve done the work. Your CV is phenomenal. So yes, there was luck and support, but you also wrote the manuscripts, got the feedback, and got things across the finish line. That productivity matters when people are deciding who to invest in.

You took every opportunity and turned it into something you could put on your CV—which is exactly what we encourage.

Amélie Collins: Thank you. I appreciate that. When I was a grad student in Dan’s lab, all the postdocs wrote fellowships—that was the norm. So when I was with Steve, I did the same thing. I wrote a bunch and got none of them. It was demoralizing, but I realized not everyone else was doing that, so I kept going. Someone once told me that you submit an average of six grants before you get your first one. So I got my "failures" out of the way early.

I enjoy grant writing. It’s so different than paper writing. It’s exciting, but you have to be very factual. When I joined Emmanuelle’s lab, I wrote more grants, and one of the first I received was the internal Gerstner Award at Columbia. That was my first-ever grant, and I’ll always be grateful. Then I submitted my first K08 career development award after about two and a half years with Emmanuelle, and I didn’t get it. But that was actually the best experience I’ve had. The feedback was on point, critical, and extremely helpful. All I wanted was to be taken seriously and get meaningful input—and that’s exactly what I got. It helped me learn how to write a grant and talk about feasibility, impact, and vision. I resubmitted on March 12th 2020, just days before the pandemic hit, and it was funded.

That gave me a little breathing room to develop my research program further. Being K-funded comes with protections and formal recognition of your research path. Eventually, as I wrapped up my work in Emmanuelle’s lab, we submitted our paper, and I started thinking about independence and next steps.

I submitted an R01 in December 2023 through a special RFA on fetal immune ontogeny—it just felt like it was written for me. I didn’t expect it to get funded, but I got to dream and I wanted the feedback. And while it didn’t get funded initially, it was discussed and got a good score. The critiques were all reasonable and fixable—not about the idea being weak, just that more preliminary data was needed.

Then—three days after starting my job at Cincinnati Children’s—I got word that the R01 was going to be rescued with end-of-year budget funds. I had to resubmit everything from Cincinnati, but the folks here were incredibly supportive. So I landed here and three days later had an R01 in hand.

Misty Good: Probably your lab wasn’t even ready yet, right? You were like, “Where’s my space again?”

Amélie Collins: Exactly. I didn’t even have an protocol at that point—I had nothing. But I wrote that mouse protocol like nobody’s business. It was approved faster than I thought possible.

Betsy Crouch: That’s a great way to tackle those administrative challenges head-on.

Amélie Collins: Yeah, just rip off the band-aid. It felt really good. Now I’m planning my first “real” R01. I feel incredibly lucky to be at Cincinnati, where I get to ask my own questions—and even more, that people here are excited about those questions too. That made the intimidating transition feel empowering.

Betsy Crouch: Starting a new job with an R01 is like a Marvel superhero move. Congratulations—that’s amazing.

Misty Good: And your division chief must be thrilled. You’re already making them look good right out of the gate.

Amélie Collins: I was really happy to be able to send off that message and say, “Thanks so much—and by the way…”

Betsy Crouch Well, and you're in a really fruitful environment there too. Do you want to take a minute to talk about your fabulous colleagues and the neonatal physician-scientists there at Cincinnati?

Amélie Collins Yeah, I mean, I came here for them. I came because I wanted to be part of a group of people who were doing science that mattered to babies. What I love about the group here is that there's all different kinds of research. There are a few basic scientists like myself, and that was really important to me—that there be other basic science neonatal physician-scientists. But then there are also lots of folks doing amazing clinical research, clinical trials, and patient-based work, which is totally out of my wheelhouse. So the first month or two that I was here, I realized, “Huh, all this stuff I'm doing in mice would be really cool to look at in humans.” And there were three colleagues who immediately said, “Oh, I can help you with that.” That’s great because I know my lane—my lane is mice—but I’m happy to travel with people who can do other things.

I felt really excited to come to an institution where there are lots of physician-scientists, not just in the Division of Neonatology. Honestly, one of the biggest draws for me was the hematopoietic stem cell group—the experimental hematology group. I’m also in the immunology/immunobiology division, which has some amazing researchers. So, for all the spheres of science or clinical medicine that I do, there was a group here that I felt privileged to be a part of. And for all three of those groups to be in the same place felt incredibly lucky.

I remember—after living in New York City for 23 years—thinking, “Cincinnati Children’s, that’s like my dream job. Too bad it’s in Cincinnati.” And then I realized, wait, why am I putting that barrier up? My husband’s from Indiana. I went to high school and college in Chicago. This is silly. We became New Yorkers, but I love what I do, and I was fortunate that my family was willing to come with me. So yeah, it was really intentional when I was thinking about starting my own lab and transitioning to independence. I asked myself, “Where am I most likely to succeed?” And this place was very high on the shortlist of places I would’ve been thrilled to land. And I did. So, thanks.

Misty Good Congratulations. That’s such a great story. Just hearing about your transition to a new place is really inspirational. It sounds like you made the move really easy and your colleagues were super helpful, which is always important.

Amélie Collins It’s hard—and important—to address this for younger people who are thinking about it. Physician-scientist training is long. Unlike some careers, nowadays we have other obligations in life. We have spouses, children, networks of friends, and families. By the time you’re making this transition, most of us are a bit further along in life and have ties and obligations that make it not so simple to just pick up and leave.

My parents were academics. We moved around a lot when I was younger because my dad was a professor, so I always assumed I’d need to move for the best job. Maybe that perspective made it easier for me, but it's still hard.

I believe there’s a right place for each person, and that right place is different for everyone. Timing is really important too. Opportunities are few and far between—this is a tough career path. And then if, on top of that, you're constrained—well, “constrained” isn’t the right word—maybe if you have the privilege of a child who needs to be in a certain place, or a family network in just one region, it’s a lot. It can be hard to have the freedom to jump at an opportunity like I did.

I was lucky. Even though we had an incredible network of friends and my husband is a musician—leaving New York City was not his first choice—he still came with me. So yeah, I was able to look around and ask, “Where will I be most successful?”

I once heard this piece of advice, and it’s never rung truer than when I made this transition: “Find the place where there are as many people who are smarter than you as possible—and go there.” That was definitely a guiding principle for me.

Misty Good That's awesome advice. And you've had a lot of success since you’ve been there. You had a beautiful Cell paper last year. Maybe you could talk about that—your recent studies and next directions scientifically.

Amélie Collins Sure, I’d love to. And we have seven more hours, right?

The Cell paper—I was really lucky to have my work published in such a high-profile, high-impact journal. That definitely opens doors in terms of visibility and collaboration. But for me, it was foundational because I was trying to establish what the hematopoietic stem and progenitor hierarchy looks like in fetal and neonatal time points in the mouse, using the most cutting-edge and rigorous assays the field uses.

One of the best pieces of advice my mentor, Emmanuelle, gave me—and this was very intentional—was, “You want a big paper. You’re trying to establish yourself and a field of research. Don’t sell your efforts short. Let’s build something foundational.”

With all the pressure to be productive—which often means “publish as much as you can”—there were moments during those seven years where I questioned whether that was the right strategy. But again, I was lucky. I had a K award, which protected my time. I had an attending physician position, which gave me the luxury to build that program.

The Cell paper focused on hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells in the fetus and neonate—defining them phenotypically and functionally—and began to ask why those cells contribute to neonatal susceptibility to infection. One area we focused on was myelopoiesis—how myeloid cells are generated. There’s steady-state myelopoiesis, the baseline production of short-lived cells, and then there’s emergency myelopoiesis, which happens in response to inflammation or infection. In adults, emergency myelopoiesis is a hallmark of the immune response. It starts at the hematopoietic stem cell level. I believe the hematopoietic stem cell is an integral part of the immune system from the myeloid cell perspective.

What we found was that this doesn’t seem to happen in the fetus. Initially, we thought fetal stem cells might be intrinsically unable to engage in emergency myelopoiesis. But that wasn’t the case. You can get adult-like myeloid production from fetal stem cells, but only outside the fetal environment—in a dish or in an adult recipient. We discovered that fetal stem cells can engage in emergency myelopoiesis, but don’t in vivo due to extrinsic restriction. We identified maternal IL-10 as one such extrinsic factor. I picked IL-10 for various reasons, including its long history as a crucial pregnancy cytokine, setting the stage for maternal immune tolerance.

When we removed IL-10 in the mother, we saw a partial restoration of emergency myelopoiesis in fetal stem cells—even though inflammatory cytokines in the fetus barely increased. So, one big next step for the lab is figuring out how the fetus senses maternal inflammation and what signals are transmitted. I don’t think IL-10 itself crosses the placenta. We see no increase in IL-10 in the fetus following maternal inflammation. But the fetus is not ignorant to the stress that mom is feeling. So I think it’s being transmitted some other way, so we’re exploring other metabolites and signals.

Another big question: How does a hematopoietic stem cell “grow up”? When and how does it transition from the fetal to adult state? What do we do in the NICU that might disrupt that process—and what are the consequences? Can we boost maturation in certain cases?

And the third area: How do hematopoietic stem cells remember their experiences in the perinatal window? I’m not talking about antigen-specific memory, but we know cells retain a memory of prior exposures—via the epigenome or in their differentiation pathways. Adult HSCs are influenced by prior exposures. I want to explore how maternal, fetal, and neonatal exposures imprint the hematopoietic system and affect function across the lifespan. That’s the third major focus of the lab.

Misty Good Yeah, that’s fantastic. We’re excited to see what you find out, for sure. For our next segment, we like to close with something fun about our guests or their research team—favorite music, fun team traditions. We did have a pre-discussion about how you’re a new driver and don’t listen to music while driving, so that’s okay! But anything your team likes to do together?

Amélie Collins I was thinking about this question and realized—we don’t have any fun traditions yet. I need some! When I was leaving the lab, Emmanuelle asked, “What will the Collins Lab tradition be?” and I thought, “Oh my god, so much pressure!” I care deeply about lab culture. I’m careful about who’s in the lab, that they align with how I like to do science. But you can’t impose that from the outside. We don’t have traditions yet, but I’m open to suggestions. I do think every lab should celebrate successes—like submissions, not just awards. Submitting a grant is itself an accomplishment.

I’ve told my team: everyone should submit grants. Getting them is just one reason—it’s also about developing the skill. As for traditions, my answer to Emmanuelle was: “I don’t know what they’ll be yet, because I don’t yet know who the Collins Lab is.” I expect my team to contribute to that—it’s their lab too.

Misty Good Then maybe instead, could you leave our listeners with a pearl of advice for early career investigators?

Amélie Collins I think, ultimately, you have to do this because you love it. If you don’t love it, find something else that’s worthy of your time, your sweat, your tears, your weekends, and yes—even your daughter’s dance recital you might have to miss. Whether or not this is the right thing is another conversation, but this career demands a lot—personally and professionally. You have to know that, acknowledge it, and fight to make it better and more balanced and fair so that more people can do this work. We’ve got a long way to go.

But the reality is, it’s hard. You have to work really hard. And if you don’t love it, there’s just no way. A lot of us, especially during training, are told that being a physician-scientist is prestigious. But if you don’t like it—don’t do it.

You know what else is awesome and important? Taking care of babies. Or doing research. So do it because you love it. That won’t make it easy—but it’ll make it easier.

Betsy Crouch I've been so inspired by our conversation. You and I have known each other a long time—but thank you. I have so many hashtags for this podcast: immunology for philosophers, we do science to make people feel better, what’s the why, development in action.

With that, we’ll wrap up. Thank you so much, Dr. Collins, for spending time with us and sharing your journey. We hope our listeners enjoyed it. Feel free to share your thoughts—and we’ll see you next time. Take care.