Scientific Consultant for NGS Microbiome Biomarker Validation

Overview We are a pre-launch consumer health company building a full-spectrum shotgun metagenomics testing service. Our platform goes significantly beyond standard 16S amplicon sequencing — we report across multiple biological kingdoms and generate functional gene pathway analysis alongside taxonomic profiling. We need a Ph.D.-level microbiome scientist to independently stress-test our existing scientific framework before launch. Specific category details, report architecture, and database stack will be shared under NDA after an initial screening call. The Role We have built a comprehensive internal scientific framework. We are not looking for someone to build from scratch — we are looking for someone rigorous enough to find the holes in what we have already built. You will be given access to our complete framework under NDA and asked to stress-test it across five dimensions: • Evidence integrity — verify that every biomarker claim is supported by peer-reviewed human data and flag anything that overstates the evidence • Reference ranges — verify or provide appropriate reference ranges for functional gene families from published healthy cohort data • Evidence tier classification — stress-test our confidence levels across all associations using a defined four-tier framework (established RCT / observational + mechanistic / emerging / mechanistic) • Gap analysis — identify health associations detectable from shotgun metagenomics data that our framework does not yet capture • Consumer language review — stress-test patient-facing descriptions for scientific accuracy, appropriate certainty framing, and correct use of mechanisms The full scope and deliverables will be outlined in a detailed brief provided under NDA. We estimate 40–80 hours for a qualified candidate. Required Qualifications • Ph.D. in Microbiology, Microbial Ecology, Human Microbiome Science, Bioinformatics, or closely related field • Minimum 3 years of research experience specifically in human gut microbiome • Direct experience with shotgun metagenomics — not exclusively 16S • Working knowledge of functional gene annotation — HUMAnN3, UniRef90, MetaCyc, or equivalent • Independent scientific judgment — this role requires the confidence to challenge existing frameworks, not validate them • Ability to communicate complex science clearly to a health-literate lay audience Strongly Preferred • Familiarity with publicly available microbiome reference databases • Experience with consumer or clinical microbiome product development • Knowledge of the current consumer microbiome testing landscape • Experience advising on health claims language in a regulated context • Publications in relevant journals — Cell Host & Microbe, Gut, Microbiome, ISME Journal, Nature Microbiology What This Is Not This role is not suitable for a generalist biologist, nutritionist, or researcher whose microbiome experience is limited to 16S amplicon sequencing or probiotic research. We are working at the functional gene and metabolic pathway level. Candidates without direct shotgun metagenomics research experience will not be considered. The ideal candidate is someone who has spent years in this field, knows where the consumer microbiome space overclaims, and is not afraid to tell us our framework is wrong. Engagement Project-based contract. Path to ongoing scientific advisory relationship for the right candidate. Start within 2 weeks preferred. To Apply Include the following — proposals without all four elements will not be reviewed: 1. Your specific gut microbiome research background in 3–4 sentences — what you actually worked on, not a CV summary 2. One example of a consumer microbiome health claim you believe is currently overstated in the literature and why 3. Your direct experience with shotgun metagenomics vs 16S — be specific 4. Availability and estimated hours for a 40–80 hour scope Shortlisted candidates will be contacted for a 20-minute screening call before NDA and full brief are shared. The line “the ideal candidate is someone who is not afraid to tell us our framework is wrong” is doing real work — it signals intellectual honesty and attracts exactly the kind of rigorous scientist you want while filtering out people who will just tell you what you want to hear.