Biochemistry vs. Medicine

[alir]

Hello,
I have applied for biochemistry in over 7 universities in the UK and US and got offers from Edinburgh and four other UK universities (you can only apply for 5), as well as one US university so far and another declined, and I do not plan on going to the US as I applied for backup purposes. Though for medicine, I applied to RCSI which I literally just received an invitation to a video interview and will apply to a local university here in the UAE, which two doctors suggested I go to (one of which studied in RCSI).

I am hesitant between medicine and biochemistry. I have a strong fervour for chemistry and biology, as well as psychology (but not as a career), but choosing between these two careers is very difficult for me. If I study medicine, I plan on specialising in surgery as for biochemistry, I will obtain a MSc in what I find interesting during the three/four years I will be studying.

What I do not really like about medicine is the length of the university course as well as the efforts that must be put when practicing, like keeping up to date on all medical news and studying even further about new methods and whatnot. Also, the work commitment is immense as patients will be calling you in your sleep or you will be called to work, but I do not really mind that and would do whatever it takes to help out the patients.

If you could please guide me as I seriously cannot make a decision. I kindly request for you not to be biased if you are a MD and please look into both career paths equally.

Thank you in advance for your help. You will do me a great favour in deterring my future career, which I will be grateful for for the rest of my life.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Patros]

Um, where to begin.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but you are an international student applying to UK masters and MD programs. This forum is largely meant for US allopathic medical schools, which is completely unrelated to the admissions processes for schools in the UK or UAE. I am not sure if there are many knowledgeable people about those programs on this forum.

Second, understand that there is no comparison between a clinical career of a medical doctor, and the research career of someone with a MSc. A more reasonable comparison would be a research career of an academic physician, and the research career of a PhD. At least in the US however, a master's degree is not enough for you to become a primary investigator (that is, someone who leads a research lab). You will be a laboratory technician and eventually a lab manager, or perhaps you can get a job in a pharmaceutical company.

Third, we can give you no advice on what is correct for you. Do you have any research experience in a laboratory? If you don't, then what do you intend to do with a MSc? Do you have medical experience? If not, why medicine (or surgery)? There is no "better" career when comparing research and medicine, it depends largely on what interests you.

However, I will say that 4 years for a master's degree is ridiculous. I am pretty sure UK schools award PhDs in 4 years, so that's a really bad deal for a master's degree.

 

[alir]

Um, where to begin.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but you are an international student applying to UK masters and MD programs. This forum is largely meant for US allopathic medical schools, which is completely unrelated to the admissions processes for schools in the UK or UAE. I am not sure if there are many knowledgeable people about those programs on this forum.

Second, understand that there is no comparison between a clinical career of a medical doctor, and the research career of someone with a MSc. A more reasonable comparison would be a research career of an academic physician, and the research career of a PhD. At least in the US however, a master's degree is not enough for you to become a primary investigator (that is, someone who leads a research lab). You will be a laboratory technician and eventually a lab manager, or perhaps you can get a job in a pharmaceutical company.

Third, we can give you no advice on what is correct for you. Do you have any research experience in a laboratory? If you don't, then what do you intend to do with a MSc? Do you have medical experience? If not, why medicine (or surgery)? There is no "better" career when comparing research and medicine, it depends largely on what interests you.

However, I will say that 4 years for a master's degree is ridiculous. I am pretty sure UK schools award PhDs in 4 years, so that's a really bad deal for a master's degree.

Well this is my first time on this website and I did not know about that. Apologies if I infringed any clauses but this is very important to me.

I thought I was clear with what I said but apparently I wasn't. I am currently a high school student due for first year undergraduate admissions in September/October. For RCSI (and UK in general), you do not need to do four years of pre-med and for international students applying to RCSI, they do not need to write any exams for admittance and it is solely based on the application and video interview, while other UK universities require extremely high grades and the MCAT exam for all students as well as interview, yet it is still very competitive.

If I will study biochemistry, I will obtain the BSc then go for MSc with whatever interests me, so if I go to Edinburgh (Scotland) it will take me 4 BSc + 1 MSc years, and universities in England are for 3 years for BSc plus 1 year for MSc.

I do have some experience with laboratory as I conducted numerous experiments in both biology and chemistry in IB in school, so I have some knowledge about various equipments and processes. However I have not truly experienced medicine but have job-shadowed a doctor for 3 days in 2012, and have had a passion for medicine for over 4 years until now when I applied for universities.

In your perspective, the two careers (medical doctor and biochemist) may be incomparable though in my perspective, I believe they are comparable to some extent. Any guidance would be appreciated.

 

[Reckoner]

You'll have better luck with the specifics of a UK medical vs. scientific education in this sub-forum: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/forums/uk-ireland.142/

Regarding this statement:

What I do not really like about medicine is the length of the university course as well as the efforts that must be put when practicing, like keeping up to date on all medical news and studying even further about new methods and whatnot. Also, the work commitment is immense as patients will be calling you in your sleep or you will be called to work, but I do not really mind that and would do whatever it takes to help out the patients.

Many of the things you do not like about medicine are also true in science. An MSc isn't going to open many doors in biochemistry - you'll need a PhD/DPhil if you want to run a lab. Although universities in the UK do a better job of keeping the graduate training short than in the US, the total time spent in school will still be comparable to medicine. If you choose a career in science, you will likely spend more of your time keeping up to date on the literature than a physician does. Have you ever talked with a PI about how they spend their time? It's mostly grant-writing and reading/thinking about literature. Almost all scientists have to do a post-doc (or three) before they find a position and start their own lab, and the time commitment expected of successful post-docs is enormous, especially if they want to get ahead in today's abysmal funding environment.

My advice is this: talk to PIs, post-docs, and grad students about what they actually do. Especially PIs. Does this sound like the only career you can imagine yourself being satisfied with? If yes, go into science. If no, choose medicine and never look back.

 

[alir]

Many of the things you do not like about medicine are also true in science. An MSc isn't going to open many doors in biochemistry - you'll need a PhD/DPhil if you want to run a lab. Although universities in the UK do a better job of keeping the graduate training short than in the US, the total time spent in school will still be comparable to medicine. If you choose a career in science, you will likely spend more of your time keeping up to date on the literature than a physician does. Have you ever talked with a PI about how they spend their time? It's mostly grant-writing and reading/thinking about literature. Almost all scientists have to do a post-doc (or three) before they find a position and start their own lab, and the time commitment expected of successful post-docs is enormous, especially if they want to get ahead in today's abysmal funding environment.

If that is the case, then I do not think I will mind with keeping up with the literature. I actually love reading about new stuff but I guess this is the case for not only biochemistry and medicine and will be found in all other careers. No one can live without looking at what's new. Now that I come to think of it, I take back my remarks about that.

I actually do not know a PI so I have to find one in my country and I am pretty sure a local company will help me out with that. I think that's the only solution really. I do not mind getting PhD's because it'll take almost the same time as getting a MD degree and I'm totally fine with that. What I do not really like about studying medicine is that it will take me approximately 10 years to finally work in a hospital. 5-6 years for MB BCh BAO plus 1 year for MCh and additional years. I'm not entirely sure of how the system works but it'll definitely take me more than 7 years (without training) compared to 6 years for a PhD when studying biochemistry. I don't really think I will take more than 2 PhD's if I opt for biochemistry.

My advice is this: talk to PIs, post-docs, and grad students about what they actually do. Especially PIs. Does this sound like the only career you can imagine yourself being satisfied with? If yes, go into science. If no, choose medicine and never look back.

Thanks for the advice. I will start working on that tomorrow because I really need it. That's my problem. I am satisfied with both biochemistry and medicine.

Thanks very much for your prompt response!

 

[Muffinho]

Finishing a PhD provides (generally speaking) a less concrete career plan than finishing an MD. You'll have to do at least 1, probably more post-docs or fellowships after finishing your PhD, so the timeline is probably consistent with doing an MD. PhD programs in North America are usually funded (meaning you'll get a stipend for your personal expenses). MDs are not funded. I'm not sure if this is the case in the UK, but finances should always be considered.

You can also consider MD/PhD programs (their equivalent in the UK). Also, many MDs go into research. I'm assuming the UK equivalent can also go into clinical research.