Any doctors in the house?

[kate_g]

---

Members do not see this ad.

If I go to vet school, I'll be a "doctor" before I attend my first class - a Ph.D., that is. Anyone else in the same boat?

I had been (arrogantly?) assuming that having a Ph.D. would put me way above everyone else. But over in the "nontrad" forum which is mostly human-medicine people, someone suggested that med schools basically view graduate work at best as an extracurricular activity ("fun, but not so relevant to medical school") and at worst it counts against you ("obviously you haven't been 100% committed to the idea of being a physician since birth").

From what I read on this forum, it seems like vet schools have a much higher percentage of people who worked for a while after graduating, got a master's, started a family, or various other things that are considered wildly nontraditional for med schools. So now I wonder whether my Ph.D. will be a bonus, of not much consequence at all, or a black mark on my application. Thoughts?

(Side note: No matter what, I think it will be fun to put "Dr." in the "title" blank of the application forms. I wonder if they even have that option...)

 

[tygris]

Well, from what I understand, the difference between human med and vet med admissions is that... quite simply... vet med admissions is quite a bit more competitive for the most part There is a very large portion of prospective vet students that don't get in anywhere on their first round of applications, and this is sometimes due to blemishes in academic transcripts. Because of that and other reasons, pre-vets will often start up graduate programs or get jobs to improve their applications to vet school, depending on individual variation in why one's application may be weaker than others. Since many prospective vets expect to apply 2-3 times before getting in, graduate school is a frequent back-up plan (or just something to do in the meantime because it interests you).
So having a PhD may not necessarily put you "ahead" of other vet students per se - but it might make your application look more appealing to some programs. And being a current grad student, I hardly think that grad school is a leisure activity 😛

 

[adenovirus]

Dr. Kate, what is your area of study? Where have you been accepted? Just curious.

Adeno

 

[keppsu1]

My two cents.....

I have an M.S. and if I don't get in this year off the one alternate list I'm on I will most likely be starting a PhD program. I ultimately want to go to vet school, but I have to consider plan B with my ultimate goals. I agree with tygris. Many vet schools look highly upon graduate degrees because there is a shortage of veterinary researchers.

 

[kate_g]

Dr. Kate, what is your area of study? Where have you been accepted? Just curious.

The "Dr." part is a little premature... My research is in computational psych/neuro stuff. Lotsa math, not at all clinical, nothing you'd expect for someone considering vet school. The trouble with being interested in everything is the inability to be satisfied with any one thing. (-:

Not sure what you mean by the second question, I was accepted at, and currently attend, UC Berkeley. I'll be done the PhD (fingers crossed) Spring '07. I was also accepted to UCSD, UIUC, and UPenn. To some extent I regret not going to Penn and trying for the VMD/PhD program - I was in-state then, and I think tuition was like $10,000/yr. But at the time I thought I wanted to be a "real" scientist and I liked the research at Berkeley better. Oh, and I was rejected from MIT, but never called to ask why b/c I wasn't so keen on them anyway and Berkeley's program was ranked higher so I didn't feel like a failure.

I haven't applied to vet schools, so there's nothing to tell there as far as acceptance goes.

 

[tygris]

But at the time I thought I wanted to be a "real" scientist and I liked the research at Berkeley better.

Well I don't really think having a PhD makes you a "real" scientist, nor do I think having a DVM implies that you are not a "real" scientist.
From your posts, it does seem like you have a rather arrogant view of yourself, which may or may not be deserved but certainly won't be looked fondly upon by admissions committees if you manage to portray it.
Since you have not yet applied to vet schools, if it turns out that vet school is what you want to do I would suggest that you contact the schools you want to apply to directly. Ask to speak to an admissions counselor, and then describe your situation. Get feedback from the schools directly.
Also, you should probably erase the concept of school rankings from your brain if you are going to do the vet school thing. As most of us know, rankings mean very little in the grand scheme of things with vet schools
Good luck!

 

[friesian02]

Well I don't really think having a PhD makes you a "real" scientist

Just curious. If having a PhD in neuroscience isn't qualification enough...then how does one become a real scientist?

Also. I think vet admissions will be quite interested in your research, kate_g. Even my simple undergrad research project elicited lots of interest in all my interviews. And mine was a philosophy project. Even less relevant to vet med than your work!

My $0.02

 

[chickenboo]

In response to the original post, I think having a PhD can only help your application. Unlike what the non-trad pre-meds were saying, I found that having explored other career options was a huge plus for me when I applied. I had been wavering between vet med and human med for a little while, explained all about my decision and decision-making process in my apps, and got a lot of comments/questions about it in my interviews. Everyone I spoke with seemed to view it positively--they could tell I had really thought about it, taken the time to explore other options; basically that I *wasn't* going into vet med because it was "what I always wanted to do". So in that respect, I think as long as you can tie in your PhD experience as helping you in your decision to go with vet med, it'll be a huge bonus. And if you apply to a research-oriented school, it's a HUGE plus. Vet schools are becoming anxious about who's going to replace all the aging faculty that's planning on retiring in the next 20 years or so...

That being said, I also wouldn't say you wanted to become a "real" scientist before going to vet school. I'm sure that's not what you meant, kate_g, but I think a lot of DVMs would bristle at not being considered "real" scientists...I know in Davis's mission statement, for example, it says they are training "veterinarian-scientists", not just veterinarians. It's a real point of pride with them, and I'm sure with all the other vet schools as well.

 

[kate_g]

Oh, there's a lot of arrogance in academic science, it's very much part of the culture. I'd say there's equivalent arrogance in just about any specialized field. (And equivalent inferiority complexes - both academics-bound and pre-vet undergrads get defensive about premeds, right?) I just need to get over my particular varieties of arrogance and try to adopt the correct culture for the veterinary field before I go to any interviews. 🙂

Sorry friesian, tygris is right: a PhD won't make me a "real" scientist any more than a DVM will make you a "real" vet - it takes determination, experience, and perhaps some inborn personality traits to actually succeed and become respected in either field. (I was actually being jocular, acknowledging the prejudice in academics about what qualifies as "real" science. That's why the "real" part was in quotations.) Anyway... I'm glad to hear the situation isn't as dire as the medical people suggested.

FWIW Davis says it admitted 1 PhD and 83 master's in their 2005 class (122 total), so there were actually more people with master's degrees than with undergrad only! (The years before that, though, they admitted 12 and 7 master's, so clearly things fluctuate quite a bit.) Plus, the average age of the class was 26 for the past three years, which makes me feel a little better on the "am I too old for this" front.

 

[tygris]

Just curious. If having a PhD in neuroscience isn't qualification enough...then how does one become a real scientist?

I was not saying that a PhD in neuroscience isn't qualification enough. I was simply saying that getting your PhD does not necessarily qualify you as a "real" scientist. Similarly, it is not the case that only PhD's are "real" scientists that exist.
I believe I'm perfectly justified in expressing my raised-eyebrow to someone who first asks for opinions about going to vet school, then later says that they opted to do a PhD initially because that was the path to a "real" scientist - implying that a DVM is not.

 

[tygris]

FWIW Davis says it admitted 1 PhD and 83 master's in their 2005 class (122 total), so there were actually more people with master's degrees than with undergrad only! (The years before that, though, they admitted 12 and 7 master's, so clearly things fluctuate quite a bit.) Plus, the average age of the class was 26 for the past three years, which makes me feel a little better on the "am I too old for this" front.

First of all, I do apologize if I sounded too harsh and attacking in my response before. As you said, there is the natural tendency towards defensiveness in any field, and I'm certainly no exception to that. I should have seen the quotations as an indication of your jest - sorry for the misunderstanding.

About the numbers of M.S. versus PhD's... I actually noticed that for Michigan's acceptance, too. Significantly more M.S. degree-holders than PhD's. I'm assuming that this is due to people getting into vet school on their 2nd and 3rd tries, so doing a 1-2 year grad program makes more sense to fit into that time frame. Perhaps there are some students who enrolled in a PhD program in which first you get your M.S... and then dropped out after admission to vet school, but already had their M.S. when that happened.

I would speculate that there are more students whose goal from the start of grad school was to go to vet school than there are students who decide towards the end of their grad programs that vet school is the place for them. So to me it makes sense that there are more M.S. folks than PhD folks in the applicant pool. But I certainly don't think that has any implication to an M.S. having a greater chance than a PhD - I just think that fewer PhD's may apply, and if folks WANT a PhD, they may often do the whole DVM/PhD thing.

I agree with what chickenboo said, though, that you should prepare to explain why you've been doing what you're doing and now have decided that vet school is a good fit. If you can convince them that you've thought out your decision thoroughly and have looked into vet med as a career in depth, I'm sure you'll have no problems getting in.

 

[kate_g]

Heh. Sorry guys, I really ought to watch my mouth. 😳 Things never come across quite the way you want them to in writing, you know?

Clearly there are loads of real scientists with DVM (and not PhD) degrees. There are certainly loads of people with PhDs in science fields that I don't consider real scientists. When I said 'I thought I wanted to be a "real" scientist' I was intending for you all to read that as all of us knowing full well that the academic viewpoint is arrogant and narrow. Clearly that's not the way it came across.

So... yeah. Sorry. I'm totally interested in hearing more about what people think of going to vet school after getting a PhD, but we can drop the conversation about the "real scientist" quip - I have learned the lesson that one should not make value judgements like that, even jokingly, and will not do so at any point during the application process. 🙂

 

[tygris]

You know I just thought of something...
Maybe the reason for the lack of PhD's as 'accepted students' into DVM programs is that when a PhD candidate is accepted, he or she may not yet HAVE his or her PhD... Like, perhaps they applied during their last year of their PhD, therefore technically did not have their degree upon admission.
I say this because I'm finishing my M.S. as we speak and will have my degree by the summer, but I don't think I technically count for Michigan's stats as an admission of someone with a Master's degree. So maybe there ARE more 1st year DVM-ers that HAVE their PhD's... just not when they got in. Who knows, just a pure speculation but it made sense in my head... it's making less sense now that I'm trying to articulate it
Because I'm curious - what *is* your motivation for wanting to go to vet school? As you've mentioned, your PhD interests wouldn't necessarily point to someone saying "hey I bet she wants to go to vet school!" So care to share your 'life story' so to speak, or at least why you're thinking of vet school? 🙂

 

[adenovirus]

Ooooh this thread is right up my alley. Having worked in academia for two years towards my MS and then working for a year in the pharmaceutical industry as an individual who's title was "research scientist," I understand kate_g when she says "real scientist" - which we all know now she didn't mean to imply DVM's (or DO's and MD's for that matter) are not.

I feel qualified to speak on what constitutes a "real scientist," at least in the eyes of pharmaceutical industries, as I helped interview a few and, though not specifically involved in the final decision, was involved in many-a-conversation around the water cooler. The main criteria are:

- having an advanced degree (MS) in a hard science
- having been published, preferably as a 1st or 2nd author, in peer-reviewed journals
- experience (lots of this can sometimes offset lack of advanced degree(s))
- Professional degrees (MD, DO, DVM, PhD) - these degree holders have great potential in big pharmaceutical companies. Anything less than this and most executives won't take what you say seriously. I have seen this to be true first hand.

I know many scientists with just an MS degree that I consider to be very good scientists. Unfortunately, these people, until they get one of the aforementioned "big 4" degrees, will have a hard time advancing in industry anyway, and I suspect in academia as well.

Adenovirus

 

[kate_g]

Like, perhaps they applied during their last year of their PhD, therefore technically did not have their degree upon admission.

Then again, people applying straight out of undergrad don't have a bachelor's degree yet. Davis accepted 79/122 people on their first try last year. Yet the total of bachelor's + master's + PhD added up to 122. So either they count you as the degree you'll have at matriculation, or not a single first-time straight-from-undergrad applicant was accepted to last year. I suspect the latter is not true. If you were dropping out of your MS program to go to vet school, I guess that would be a different story.

So care to share your 'life story' so to speak, or at least why you're thinking of vet school? 🙂

Lessee... I was more or less raised to be a scientist (dad's a chemist, I'm his first child, showed early interest and aptitude, and parental expectations just blossomed from there). I was a molecular bio undergrad. DNA replication, metabolism, immunology, yay! Did loads of really intense labs and research and loved the science but hated what I was actually doing day in and day out, which was pipetting tiny drops of one clear liquid into tiny tubes of another clear liquid. Dabbled in genetic engineering of plants with some undergrad research but was not terribly interested in going into franken-foods. I was never interested in human medicine from the point of view of wanting to be a practicing physician - I just don't like sick people all that much. Lacking inspiration, I failed utterly to make plans for grad school as I was finishing my degree, took a job as a lab tech (more pipetting) for a couple years to decide what I wanted to do with my life. In the mean time I got a cat. I'd had fish and hamsters before, but man, a cat was cool. Development, reflexes, behavioral training... I started reading. And got two more cats when their stray mom had a litter in our garage. I decided I wanted to know how the brain works. Applied to grad school, got in, quit the crummy job, moved to California. (Giving up a spot at UPenn, as mentioned, where I would almost certainly have tried for the VMD/PhD program, so it's really not that I have just started thinking about this.) But I've come to realize that as great as mathematical models are, I need a little more hands-on application to really be satisfied. And I miss biology. Computational neuroscientists are an amazingly un-biologically-inclined group of people. I've kept a foot in vet med along the way (volunteering at a shelter, continued reading, obsessive watching of the "emergency vets" TV show, observation of my cats and treatment of their medical problems - obesity and urinary trouble in one, flea allergy and overgrooming in another, and gastritis caused by hairballs caused by extreme fuzziness and finicky eating in the third). It's one of those things that, looking back on it, seems kind of inevitable. It's obvious this is where my heart has been all along. FWIW I'm not intending a 100% career change, here. I'm considering getting the clinical education of a DVM so that I can combine that with my research training and put them together into something that will satisfy my big-picture-science-y self and my hands-on-practical-application self.

How does that sound for a personal statement? 🙄

 

[tygris]

I'm considering getting the clinical education of a DVM so that I can combine that with my research training and put them together into something that will satisfy my big-picture-science-y self and my hands-on-practical-application self.

How does that sound for a personal statement? 🙄

Haha, I think you'll have to work on it a bit before putting it on your applications 😉 Sounds like you have it pretty well thought out. I'm sure you've already thought about this, but as far as interviews go, you might want to make sure you know exactly HOW your research training is going to combine with your vet training in the future... and how you'd LIKE it to. Interviewers are generally very interested in knowing exactly what you plan to do with your DVM, at least in my experience they've wanted to know. I think they prefer you to be quite specific, otherwise they may think you don't have a good grasp on what career options are available to you as a DVM... and therefore are not actually committed 🙂

So... where are you thinking of applying? UC Davis, I imagine. Are you going to put your application in this year?

 

[wishes]

I'm not intending a 100% career change, here. I'm considering getting the clinical education of a DVM so that I can combine that with my research training and put them together into something that will satisfy my big-picture-science-y self and my hands-on-practical-application self.

I was a chemistry undergraduate and definitely thought seriously about a Ph.D. in biochemistry/organic chemistry before realizing that veterinary school is really where I belong and ultimately I am not meant to spend my life at a lab bench. I also considered getting my M.D. and going on to become a pathologist.
I am sure that you have thought about this, but since you have an interest in science you should consider applying to veterinary schools that are strong in research. Many schools have plenty of paid spots for veterinary students with an interest in research. Research on this level is not reserved only for the Ph.D/DVM dual degree students, and it might spark your interest in an area that could ultimately be the perfect career for you. Also, with your background, you might find a spot in academia where you could split you time between clinical work/teaching/research.
In interviewing I found that Cornell, U. Penn, and Minnesota are all very strong research schools with plenty of opportunites for DVM student research. Washington State and Tufts also have research opportunities. I'm sure that there are lots of other schools too, those are just the ones I visited that really stood out to me.

 

[chickenboo]

...but as far as interviews go, you might want to make sure you know exactly HOW your research training is going to combine with your vet training in the future... and how you'd LIKE it to. Interviewers are generally very interested in knowing exactly what you plan to do with your DVM, at least in my experience they've wanted to know. I think they prefer you to be quite specific, otherwise they may think you don't have a good grasp on what career options are available to you as a DVM... and therefore are not actually committed 🙂

I don't know about this, actually. I mean, I had heard that too before I applied, but my experience was somewhat different. I still don't know what I want to do with my DVM...practice or research. I kind of went into it leaning toward research, but clearly stated in my personal statement and in interviews that I really don't know, and could still see myself ending up as a practitioner...or doing both! Maybe not at the same time (I WOULD like to have a life outside vet med, after all 😉 ), but practicing for awhile and then going back and getting a PhD or something like that. All my interviewers seemed totally fine with that answer...quite a few were even nodding along as I outlined my possibilities, and mentioned that it was fairly common for DVMs to start out practicing and then go back to school later (this is what my last boss did, too). So I definitely think it's OK to say you don't know what you want to do for sure, that you're open to changing your mind in vet school. I think that they just want to make sure, like you said, tygris, that you're committed. That is, that if you change your mind about what you want to do, that it's still within the scope of vet med. And that you've thought about different career paths you might take and why. On the other hand, I'm speaking from only 2 interviewing experiences (Davis & Kansas State), and 1 school that admitted w/o interviewing (Colorado)--but they must've been OK with me not having made up my mind definitively or I'm sure they wouldn't have admitted me. Just wanted to give another perspective. 🙂 I'm sure there are schools that take the more hard-lined approach that tygris is talking about, so just do your research, I guess! 🙂

And kate_g, in response to your post about arrogance in research--lord do I know what you're talking about!! I work in a lab in the UCD med school's department of neurology, and I'm always suprised all the PI's egos can fit in the same building. My boss especially is a nightmare--but that's a story for another post (or 10). 🙂 The attitudes in academic research have, sadly, really turned me off to it...one of the reasons I've been thinking more and more about practicing lately.

 

[snowyegret]

I'm sure you've already thought about this, but as far as interviews go, you might want to make sure you know exactly HOW your research training is going to combine with your vet training in the future... and how you'd LIKE it to. Interviewers are generally very interested in knowing exactly what you plan to do with your DVM, at least in my experience they've wanted to know. I think they prefer you to be quite specific, otherwise they may think you don't have a good grasp on what career options are available to you as a DVM... and therefore are not actually committed?

From my interviewing experiences, I found that it was not that important that I had a very exact or specific plan for life with a DVM. I agree with part of what tygris said above, that showing how your research training can combine with what you want to do with vet med. I think what interviewers liked was that I could find ways to combine aspects of my non-bio background, master's degree and six years of research into what I think I MIGHT like to do as a clinician in the future. IMO, it's good to show adcoms that you're the kind of person that won't throw everything you've learned from in the past once you get the DVM. If you have a master's or PhD, then it's fine that you don't want to go back into research after the DVM....just make a convincing argument that there are things that you've learned as a researcher that you can bring to whatever side of vet med you think you are interested in. Otherwise, it may look like to them that there's no guarantee that you'll find out in four years that you want to drop everything and become a basket weaver!

 

[tygris]

I agree with part of what tygris said above, that showing how your research training can combine with what you want to do with vet med.

chickenboo and snowy - I think I should have clarified that as the more important part of my suggestion - that kate_g knows she should be prepared to explain why it might make sense for her to go to vet school considering her background.
I also shouldn't generalize about schools as far as them wanting to know exactly what you want to do with your DVM. In some of my interviews, when those questions were asked, I had a pretty straight answer - and I got offers. But that doesn't mean that those WITHOUT clear-cut answers are not considered! 🙂

 

[kate_g]

Haha, I think you'll have to work on it a bit before putting it on your applications 😉

Oh, man... I thought after six years of research if nothing else I'd mastered the art of sounding really compelling while conveying no actual information. 🙄

Yeah, maybe just Davis for now. Unfortunately I've fallen prey to the pemanent romantic entanglement situation, and to go anywhere else would mean what we call in academics "solving the two-body problem". So if I go for it this fall - and I think I might, I just need to re-take the GRE (agh!) because my scores are too old - I'll probably just throw in an app to Davis and see what happens. If I don't get in I'll know before graduation and still have time to line up post-doctoral work while I regroup.

I'm always suprised all the PI's egos can fit in the same building.

While I know exactly what you mean and agree 100%, I've also spent time listening to all of the snotty things a Penn vet had to say behind the back of a Cornell vet about suture technique, pack contents, diagnosis, prescribing meds, and on, and on... And then later listened to the Cornell vet say the same things about the Penn vet. Those two literally couldn't fit in the same building; we *never* scheduled them to be in the hospital at the same time.

 

[verbal_kint]

kate_g, how do you like UC Berkeley? What lab are you working in?