Hi all. Thank you for your answers. I precisely did an MSc by research at the University of Kent, which was 1 year of research from day 1, and without a taught component. On my diploma, its written MSc, not MRes.

Moreover, you say if you have an MSc. it's good enough, but even in the case of a position I was told I was "almost" shortlisted for, it was my undergraduate grades that mattered to them instead of the fact that I worked at one of the best labs in Karolinska and had a great reference from a professor. I thought demonstrating the ability to do research was important, but apparently I am still competing with the grades of fresh graduates irrespective of my experience. It makes no sense. It hurts more when they take the position and publish nothing during their PhD. I don't know. I am not saying grades don't matter, because they do to a certain extent. I am just frustrated I guess because of how it all works. One of you asked how many applications I sent. To be honest, because of my really low self esteem and 1–2 negative answers, I sent approximately 12 PhD applications in the last 9 years, 9 of which was in the past month. So I guess that says something about how much confidence I lack. I am scared to even send out applications thinking they will reject me anyway and every application I submitted in the last month resulted in panick attacks during and soon as I clicked the submit button. Who knew a 2.2 could do that to someone....I am almost 33, still with the same (if not more) passion to pursue research at the academic level as I had when I completed my MSc at the age of 22, yet I am scared of a 2.2 as almost all PhD positions ask for undergraduate transcript. It's crazy....

I am 32 years old. And that's all I seem to think of these days when I think of making a PhD application. Here's the deal.

I graduated with a 2.2 in Biomedical Sciences (but actually it is a 2.1, because I simply had to resit for 1 class out of 3 years because of personal circumstances and no matter what my grade is for that class, they just put the lowest passing grade of 40 there, which actually made all the difference between a 2.1 and 2.2- what a ridiculous educational system is it that no matter what grade you get it has to be 40 because you resit). Anyway, with this 2.2, certainly I could not apply for a PhD so I did an MSc. But I was so smart, that I just did an MSc. by research instead of a taught MSc., and there was no course requirement, just a year of research. Therefore, despite it was no problem for me to finish this MSc. at all, still I have no grades to show so everything goes back to undergraduate grades. Of course, I didn't stop there, I have acquired some research experience but sadly only one second author publication that is under review for Nature communications (and frankly i lost hope as it has been under review for 1 year now).

Still, it is my damn undergraduate grades I have to upload every time I send a PhD application and I have no more grades to show. It is simply disgusting that despite I have great references from a Professor and 2 post-docs in a top research institute in the world, I still can't get a PhD position. I once remember someone said a 2.2 and an MSc. is equivalent to a 2.1. Is that right? And what on earth does one have to do to get a PhD position? I really need some advice here guys because I am losing it.