Discussion Topic: Interest in science, not people

[Endoxifen]

---

Members do not see this ad.

What is everyone's opinion on those more interested in the science than in the people? I've heard a lot said about the need for altruism in an application, but it seems to me that research, with a healthy dose of idealism, can be, or seem (to the individual), just as altruistic as helping those in need. Is there a place for these kinds of people in medicine?

To be clear, I am just attempting to start a discussion. I do not necessarily share this perspective.

Thanks everyone!

 

[Pusheen]

Why not do a PhD in a science instead then?

 

[Endoxifen]

Why not do a PhD in a science instead then?

There are some people who really love science but hate bench work. Medicine still allows them to work with and apply science , outside of a lab.

 

[Goro]

Medicine is a service profession. Not all patients are nice people either. Thus, you have to be a people person, or you'll slit your wrist when your next obese patient comes in with a 300 cholesterol and looks puzzled when you ask them if they've cut out the soda and McDonalds from their diet.

What is everyone's opinion on those more interested in the science than in the people? I've heard a lot said about the need for altruism in an application, but it seems to me that research, with a healthy dose of idealism, can be, or seem (to the individual), just as altruistic as helping those in need. Is there a place for these kinds of people in medicine?

To be clear, I am just attempting to start a discussion. I do not necessarily share this perspective.

Thanks everyone!

 

[TheBiologist]

There are some people who really love science but hate bench work. Medicine still allows them to work with and apply science , outside of a lab.

yess

 

[Pusheen]

There are some people who really love science but hate bench work. Medicine still allows them to work with and apply science , outside of a lab.

Can a PhD do clinical research? I would think so, at least some forms of it.. Others can chime in if they know

 

[TheBiologist]

Can a PhD do clinical research? I would think so, at least some forms of it.. Others can chime in if they know

I think you would need an M.D. along side to prescribe/recommend experimental medicine but other than that you can do clinical research

edit: there is also the (highly competative) M.D./Ph.D. for this very reason

 

[WedgeDawg]

You could do medical school, deal with clinical year, and then do radiology/pathology

If you want to do research, do MD or MD/PhD --> try to get a research gig, but that's generally difficult and you're probably going to have to supplement the research with some clinical work.

Honestly the best path for this hypothetical person is probably MD --> pathology --> clinical work (don't really have to deal with patients) + possible research

 

[eteshoe]

If you don't like bench research it'll be hard to convince a MD/PhD adcom to let you in since the program is geared towards having physician scientists with strong biomedical science training. Now some folks of course choose to do clinical research but the PhD is almost certainly going to be on a bench research topic, engineering, or comp bio/bioinformatics.

 

[Endoxifen]

So here's a question that I have been wondering. If you were this kind of person, should you embrace it when talking to an interviewer/on the personal statement, or should you just toe the line?

Again, to be clear, I am not really this kind of person, but I have been thinking about this kind of thing for some time.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

If people aren't your thing, you should be doing a PhD in science or public health field.

You don't just stay at the bench with such careers, just as you don't have to do family practice if you go to medical school.

You should not consider medicine a good fit.

 

[Dr.Sticks]

Sheldon Cooper is smart but I wouldn't want him as my doctor.
Those are my thoughts
If you don't like working with people it is going to suck and make you hate life when you have to wake up at 2:25 for an Emergency or miss your kids football practice for an Emergency or whatever..

That just doesn't apply to medicine either I would say someone would hate life if they hate people and worked in any service related job.

 

[Endoxifen]

Sheldon Cooper is smart but I wouldn't want him as my doctor.
Those are my thoughts
If you don't like working with people it is going to suck and make you hate life when you have to wake up at 2:25 for an Emergency or miss your kids football practice for an Emergency or whatever..

That just doesn't apply to medicine either I would say someone would hate life if they hate people and worked in any service related job.

That makes a lot of sense for a true misanthrope. But what about someone, for whom people aren't their focus or passion. I think that would be a more accurate representation of the kind of person I am thinking. I've met several of these kinds of people in my college and at hospitals and medical schools. Clearly the later group were successful, but I can't decide if it's because they convinced adcoms that they weren't that way, were straight with adcoms, or became that way over time.

 

[Conflagration]

You know, OP, there's several options for this person. They could work as a Ph.D and they could actively do things while they conducted their research (I know more about math Ph.Ds than BCPM ones, but even us math people can do pretty well with experimental design or math bio/chem/med, those are pretty good team player fields that still let you do cool stuff). They could lead talks about their field, or teach if they wanted that kind of relationship with other people.

I think the issue is this- if you don't go in with at least some form of idealism or some form of altruism, you very quickly become that jaded misanthrope. Why would you wake up every day at 4 AM for rounds as a resident, to tell people the things that are killing them now are the same things that were killing them six months ago, if you didn't at least have some hope in the human condition or some interior motive to bring good in this world? Why would you subject yourself to all the things being a doctor entailed unless you had some notion that you could be the difference, or at least enough of a difference for your patients?

Why devote your life to curing people if people consistently prove themselves to be making the same stupid mistakes over and over again? The idealist holds on to those who they helped along the way, and strives always for improvement. The altruist derives satisfaction of being there for the people while they were sick, to be doing something positive for their fellow man. If you don't have either to hold on to, why are you there in the first place?

 

[Endoxifen]

You know, OP, there's several options for this person. They could work as a Ph.D and they could actively do things while they conducted their research (I know more about math Ph.Ds than BCPM ones, but even us math people can do pretty well with experimental design or math bio/chem/med, those are pretty good team player fields that still let you do cool stuff). They could lead talks about their field, or teach if they wanted that kind of relationship with other people.

I think the issue is this- if you don't go in with at least some form of idealism or some form of altruism, you very quickly become that jaded misanthrope. Why would you wake up every day at 4 AM for rounds as a resident, to tell people the things that are killing them now are the same things that were killing them six months ago, if you didn't at least have some hope in the human condition or some interior motive to bring good in this world? Why would you subject yourself to all the things being a doctor entailed unless you had some notion that you could be the difference, or at least enough of a difference for your patients?

Why devote your life to curing people if people consistently prove themselves to be making the same stupid mistakes over and over again? The idealist holds on to those who they helped along the way, and strives always for improvement. The altruist derives satisfaction of being there for the people while they were sick, to be doing something positive for their fellow man. If you don't have either to hold on to, why are you there in the first place?

I think that perspective is too limited. I think a desire to solve problems and treat disease could be just as powerful as a drive to help humanity. Fundamentally, the former drive is purely pragmatic and goal oriented and, maybe more importantly, your drive maybe protected indefinitely because it is not being tested constantly. A person who draws their motivation from their faith in humanity is constantly having their moral core tested by the people that they are meeting. I can easily see someone that that, a true idealist, losing faith in later years. A person who is interested in the practice and the science won't have those problems, provided that they are patient.

 

[ScottTenorman54]

So here's a question that I have been wondering. If you were this kind of person, should you embrace it when talking to an interviewer/on the personal statement, or should you just toe the line?

Again, to be clear, I am not really this kind of person, but I have been thinking about this kind of thing for some time.

No way, nope, never. It's way too easy for it to be misinterpreted in the few words or seconds you get to describe it. If it pervades your persona, so be it, but otherwise it's shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[Endoxifen]

No way, nope, never. It's way too easy for it to be misinterpreted in the few words or seconds you get to describe it. If it pervades your persona, so be it, but otherwise it's shooting yourself in the foot.

The same thing could be said about one's primary driver being altruism. I think any argument critiquing the "quality" of motivation, without an account for intensity is facile. Fundamentally, you're right, it needs to make up your entire identity.

Maybe the real question should be, in the opinion of adcoms, is there room for any other type of drive besides altruism?

 

[LizzyM]

I know someone IRL who talked a good game and matriculated at a school that was aimed at training primary care docs for our state's residents. He had no interest in that type of work according to his sib who I've known since childhood. He became an endocrinologist, got an academic job that was 80% lab, 20% clinic and left for a position in big pharma that was 100% lab-based in a lab with all the bells and whistles he asked for.

So, yes, people not interested in patients can sneak into medical school and get out and then do as they please. I know some others who might have had an interest in medicine but for whatever reasons ended up in business consulting.

There are some people who do care about people but who become burnt out over decades of practice. They are sad and I feel sad thinking about them.

 

[Dr.Sticks]

That makes a lot of sense for a true misanthrope. But what about someone, for whom people aren't their focus or passion. I think that would be a more accurate representation of the kind of person I am thinking. I've met several of these kinds of people in my college and at hospitals and medical schools. Clearly the later group were successful, but I can't decide if it's because they convinced adcoms that they weren't that way, were straight with adcoms, or became that way over time.

Plenty of people like that; It isn't that hard to convince someone or check boxes for volunteering with those not as privileged as you.
Also I don't think you need to love clinical work to be a doctor. Maybe a primary care doc, but at an academic hospital where you research a lot and have residents and what not it isn't provably that patient intensive. When I was a patient I saw the resident and fellow more than the attending
I saw the attending one time the entire day to be exact.

 

[libertyyne]

Depending on your aversion to people you could go to a procedure heavy specialty. Most of the heavy proceduralists deal with people but it is a smaller portion of their jobs in comparison to a Primary care Doc/IM/EM/OB. IR / Interventional Cards/Gas/ GI/ folks tend to spend a lot of time doing procedures with limited clinic time that they may or may not pawn off on their mid levels. Rads and Path are an extreme there is a happy middle to be found in some other specialties.

As far as the science is concerned most areas are full of the stuff and it is wonderful and interesting just to read the stuff let alone engage in research.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

@Endoxifen, my question is:why would this person be considering medicine to begin with?
They enjoy science a lot.
They are not majorly driven by altruism.
There are many specialties in medicine they would be miserable in.
There are many other careers that would be more fulfilling.

WHY are they even thinking of medicine? The prestige? That's the only thing i can come up with. Afraid of working hard as a PhD?
People (in this thread even) talk about how useless it is to get a PhD for research and how getting an MD instead is better...but that's not really true. If you are spending the years of training it takes to become a clinician doing research instead...guess who will be better at research at the end? The problem is that PhD admissions are not as stringent as MD so a lot of crappy grad students get admitted (because they can perform slave labor).

I see no reason for this person to be so interested in medicine. If you can't go into medical school happy as a PHYSICIAN and not focused on specialties, you will likely be very miserable.

 

[Lucca]

If you don't want to treat patients then don't go to medical school. Major in CS and work for a company. Get a PhD and go to industry, doesn't have to be basic science. Become a pharmacist. Become a vet if you love animals. Become a Dentist and get paid to run a legal torture chamber. Become a science writer for a publication. Go to grad school for statistics and do consulting for people that need your skills if you don't like academe. Literally a million ways to find a career "in science" (broadly construed) without wasting your time on a degree you don't plan or have any desire to seriously use.

Just as an aside, about 1/3 of Stanford med grads don't go to residency according to an article 2 years ago in the LA Times. A lot of them go into business. But if you don't like regular people, why the hell would you like business people?

Why would such a person set themselves up to fail?

 

[Dr.Sticks]

If you don't want to treat patients then don't go to medical school. Major in CS and work for a company. Get a PhD and go to industry, doesn't have to be basic science. Become a pharmacist. Become a vet if you love animals. Become a Dentist and get paid to run a legal torture chamber. Become a science writer for a publication. Go to grad school for statistics and do consulting for people that need your skills if you don't like academe. Literally a million ways to find a career "in science" (broadly construed) without wasting your time on a degree you don't plan or have any desire to seriously use.

Just as an aside, about 1/3 of Stanford med grads don't go to residency according to an article 2 years ago in the LA Times. A lot of them go into business. But if you don't like regular people, why the hell would you like business people?

Why would such a person set themselves up to fail?

Wow; Interesting
Do you know of any med graduates who go on to become a famous cowboy on the rodeo circuit?
That's what I would do over anything but not super realistic.. Lol

 

[Lucca]

Wow; Interesting
Do you know of any med graduates who go on to become a famous cowboy on the rodeo circuit?
That's what I would do over anything but not super realistic.. Lol

Plenty of the options i listed are fairly realistic. Science writing is a really hard place to find steady work as with all writing but the rest is reasonable i think

 

[efle]

I disagree a bit with Lucca above and the SDN hivemind in general on this issue. I think medicine is vast and there are happy little niches for a lot of people that are neutral about patient contact and don't see any big appeal in forming long term bonds and caring about people over many years, etc.

Maybe you love science, enjoy hands-on procedural work, and want a very stable high paying career. You might be extremely happy in an academic GI clinic where you talk to patients for 30 seconds before the CRNA knocks them out and spend 99% of your time on doing fancy tricks with an endoscope and design and analysis in clinical research studies.

Even if you actively dislike working with most patients, you might be happy and valuable as a radiologist or pathologist or working in device design or other research. Maybe you are a people person depending on the type of people, and would be an excellent teacher to med students.

In fact, I'd guess one of the groups most likely to end up disappointed and jaded would be the idealistic, altruistic people who say things on these boards like "if you wouldn't do this job in a ghetto or rural town for free, you have no place being pre-med" (I exaggerate...barely).

 

[Lost In Transcription]

I disagree a bit with Lucca above and the SDN hivemind in general on this issue. I think medicine is vast and there are happy little niches for a lot of people that are neutral about patient contact and don't see any big appeal in forming long term bonds and caring about people over many years, etc.

Maybe you love science, enjoy hands-on procedural work, and want a very stable high paying career. You might be extremely happy in an academic GI clinic where you talk to patients for 30 seconds before the CRNA knocks them out and spend 99% of your time on doing fancy tricks with an endoscope and design and analysis in clinical research studies.

Even if you actively dislike working with most patients, you might be happy and valuable as a radiologist or pathologist or working in device design or other research. Maybe you are a people person depending on the type of people, and would be an excellent teacher to med students.

In fact, I'd guess one of the groups most likely to end up disappointed and jaded would be the idealistic, altruistic people who say things on these boards like "if you wouldn't do this job in a ghetto or rural town for free, you have no place being pre-med" (I exaggerate...barely).

But going into medicine to hopefully get into a specialty that does not have patient contact is a major gamble and possible waste of years and money. If you are going to be going to medical school, you should be happy becoming a physician, not one type of special physician, because that's a bad bet.

Additionally, my point still stands: what motivation is there for going into medicine besides enjoying healing patients, altruism, and etc related reasons? If these don't exist in said person, would they not be happier in some other field?

I feel from experience and from a rational standpoint that if you don't like people, don't want to treat patients, and don't want to be in 90% of physician jobs, then you most likely are wanting to go into medicine for the wrong reasons: some sort of twisted assurance that research will be easier with an MD, desire for prestige, a false assuredness about salaries, etc.

I don't see a point in arguing if a person CAN go to medical school if they don't want to treat patients. I want to know WHY that person would ever even consider applying.

 

[ChymeofPassion]

I disagree a bit with Lucca above and the SDN hivemind in general on this issue. I think medicine is vast and there are happy little niches for a lot of people that are neutral about patient contact and don't see any big appeal in forming long term bonds and caring about people over many years, etc.

Maybe you love science, enjoy hands-on procedural work, and want a very stable high paying career. You might be extremely happy in an academic GI clinic where you talk to patients for 30 seconds before the CRNA knocks them out and spend 99% of your time on doing fancy tricks with an endoscope and design and analysis in clinical research studies.

Even if you actively dislike working with most patients, you might be happy and valuable as a radiologist or pathologist or working in device design or other research. Maybe you are a people person depending on the type of people, and would be an excellent teacher to med students.

In fact, I'd guess one of the groups most likely to end up disappointed and jaded would be the idealistic, altruistic people who say things on these boards like "if you wouldn't do this job in a ghetto or rural town for free, you have no place being pre-med" (I exaggerate...barely).

Sdn in a quote

 

[efle]

But going into medicine to hopefully get into a specialty that does not have patient contact is a major gamble and possible waste of years and money. If you are going to be going to medical school, you should be happy becoming a physician, not one type of special physician, because that's a bad bet.

Additionally, my point still stands: what motivation is there for going into medicine besides enjoying healing patients, altruism, and etc related reasons? If these don't exist in said person, would they not be happier in some other field?

I feel from experience and from a rational standpoint that if you don't like people, don't want to treat patients, and don't want to be in 90% of physician jobs, then you most likely are wanting to go into medicine for the wrong reasons: some sort of twisted assurance that research will be easier with an MD, desire for prestige, a false assuredness about salaries, etc.

I don't see a point in arguing if a person CAN go to medical school if they don't want to treat patients. I want to know WHY that person would ever even consider applying.

Something like path is an extremely feasible target. If you're scraping the bottom end of the stats ranges on your way into a primary care-focused mission driven school, yeah sure, maybe think twice if you'd hate your life as an FM doc. But the average MD admit? Could easily find a practice that is not primarily patient care, especially if your idea of a good time is nerding out with textbooks and microscope slides in a room alone. Similarly from what I understand you can pretty reasonable match rads if you're targeting the lower end of residencies and not the big academic feeders.

What motivation is there? The job prospects with an MD blow PhD out of the water (outside of a few of the top graduate institutions for biomed). Honestly the risk of getting a PhD in a saturated bio field and being trapped for decades as a staff scientist/postdocc is a lot greater than the risk of being forced into something like FM/Peds. People talk about making bank in pharma and industry as if anyone with a PhD can do that, but its not really some easy backup alternative target.

Edit: Oh not to mention you might love procedural/surgical stuff. Won't be doing that as a PhD. Can be doing that as an MD without loving interacting with patients (like the interventional GI example, you get the call that some inpatient is turning yellow and needs a stent, you talk to them for 30 seconds to sign consent and then its all about you and the scope).

If you could take a survey that got deep down into the heart of hearts of all the specialized MDs out there, I think the number that truly took this path in life because of overwhelming desire to heal and cure will disappoint you greatly. Being neutral about patients still leaves an MD very desirable and does not mean you won't still be great at what you do.

 

[Dr.Sticks]

I disagree a bit with Lucca above and the SDN hivemind in general on this issue. I think medicine is vast and there are happy little niches for a lot of people that are neutral about patient contact and don't see any big appeal in forming long term bonds and caring about people over many years, etc.

Maybe you love science, enjoy hands-on procedural work, and want a very stable high paying career. You might be extremely happy in an academic GI clinic where you talk to patients for 30 seconds before the CRNA knocks them out and spend 99% of your time on doing fancy tricks with an endoscope and design and analysis in clinical research studies.

Even if you actively dislike working with most patients, you might be happy and valuable as a radiologist or pathologist or working in device design or other research. Maybe you are a people person depending on the type of people, and would be an excellent teacher to med students.

In fact, I'd guess one of the groups most likely to end up disappointed and jaded would be the idealistic, altruistic people who say things on these boards like "if you wouldn't do this job in a ghetto or rural town for free, you have no place being pre-med" (I exaggerate...barely).

Yes; However your track in Medicine really depends on your step scores and how you do.
So in general the idea that you should be okay with primary care is true,you might bomb med school and only be able to match into FM.
Sh*** happens, and it doesn't take much to screw up..
Of course, you can do family med in L.A but you won't get paid much. (So that is where the undesirable locations factor comes in)
6 figure in debt, an FM salary in LA won't cut it.(living cost is a huge factor)

 

[libertyyne]

Working with physicians you realize some are better at dealing with patients then others some enjoy spending time with patients and others do not , some truly love the science and people others just think of it as a job. Some are concientious others not so much. Physicians are people too, and have a whole spectrum of personalities underlying qualities. Some are altruistic vs business minded in their practices. Liking science more than liking people does not make one unfit to practice medicine.

Plus OP didn't say they hated people rather only that they like science more than people.

 

[libertyyne]

I know some introverts that are in medicine who find social interaction taxing,laborious and awkward at times. These same people love the science and work in specialties where they interact with people a whole bunch. And each one of them still loves what they do, they enjoy the science the puzzles the feeling of discovery and mastery of a subject. The interaction piece is a small price they pay to engage in the mental activities of medicine.
I hope none of you naysayers hate beurocracies or mundane tasks because medicine is overwhelming full of nonsense that is not medicine/altrusim/patient care/science related in my mind that is probably a larger factor in not choosing medicine.

There are very few people that are altruistic. And even fewer who are altruistic and qualified to go to medical school. And even a smaller subset of people that are altruistic/ qualified and want to go I to medicine for the "right" reasons. I'd rather have a person who loves the science than someone who just wants a paycheck and newsflash there are plenty of people who just want a paycheck.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

Something like path is an extremely feasible target. If you're scraping the bottom end of the stats ranges on your way into a primary care-focused mission driven school, yeah sure, maybe think twice if you'd hate your life as an FM doc. But the average MD admit? Could easily find a practice that is not primarily patient care, especially if your idea of a good time is nerding out with textbooks and microscope slides in a room alone. Similarly from what I understand you can pretty reasonable match rads if you're targeting the lower end of residencies and not the big academic feeders.

What motivation is there? The job prospects with an MD blow PhD out of the water (outside of a few of the top graduate institutions for biomed). Honestly the risk of getting a PhD in a saturated bio field and being trapped for decades as a staff scientist/postdocc is a lot greater than the risk of being forced into something like FM/Peds. People talk about making bank in pharma and industry as if anyone with a PhD can do that, but its not really some easy backup alternative target.

Edit: Oh not to mention you might love procedural/surgical stuff. Won't be doing that as a PhD. Can be doing that as an MD without loving interacting with patients (like the interventional GI example, you get the call that some inpatient is turning yellow and needs a stent, you talk to them for 30 seconds to sign consent and then its all about you and the scope).

If you could take a survey that got deep down into the heart of hearts of all the specialized MDs out there, I think the number that truly took this path in life because of overwhelming desire to heal and cure will disappoint you greatly. Being neutral about patients still leaves an MD very desirable and does not mean you won't still be great at what you do.

I can agree with a lot of this, but going into medicine for just a career prospect when one loves science (and presumably, research) seems ridiculous and will most likely be apparent to adcoms.

People who are competitive for medschool are not going to be the grad students who will fall "endlessly" into postdocs. And that is only to get one type of job anyway with a PhD- a professorship. You can go to industry, you can do policy, you can do etc many other things. You are much more limited to being JUST a physician for a LONG time by: your experience (I hear a lot of residents' first job IS residency lmao), the student debt that you HAVE to pay back so you are forced to be a hospitalist, etc. And if you are not enthralled by the actual practice of medicine, why tf would anyone do that?

Prestige and "job security" don't seem like solid enough reasons, given what you can do with a PhD. Or an MPH. Or other fields.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

I know some introverts that are in medicine who find social interaction taxing,laborious and awkward at times. These same people love the science and work in specialties where they interact with people a whole bunch. And each one of them still loves what they do, they enjoy the science the puzzles the feeling of discovery and mastery of a subject. The interaction piece is a small price they pay to engage in the mental activities of medicine.
I hope none of you naysayers hate beurocracies or mundane tasks because medicine is overwhelming full of nonsense that is not medicine/altrusim/patient care/science related in my mind that is probably a larger factor in not choosing medicine.

This has been the biggest push for me away from medicine back to research. I would love to be a physician (for both scientific and altruistic reasons), but the damn bureaucracy definitely has pushed me away, and that seems to be getting worse and worse.

When I shadow, I don't see the type of work that inspired me to the field in the first place (McCormick, etc). I see a bunch of BS work, a field decades behind scientific advances, etc.

 

[mistafab]

Like most, my answer would be "it depends."


You don't have to love people to be a doctor. You do have to like treating patients enough. You do not have to have a 'burning passion for saving people' to be a happy doctor, but hey some of those people i've met late career have loved it. Some of these burning passion folk were burned by people who they can't help, or are frequent flyers or drug seekers.

 

[piii]

If I found this out about you during an interview or application cycle, I'd instant reject you. You don't belong in medicine and it shows you don't know what it is about. Go get a phd.

 

[efle]

People who are competitive for medschool are not going to be the grad students who will fall "endlessly" into postdocs.

I see this kind of thinking a lot - people who could get an MD would of course have great success in research, business, etc. I don't think it holds that well. If you are truly that person who is smart, hardworking, has the skills for research, and loves science, even then your best bet is MD/PhD over PhD alone, unless the science you are passionate about is on the level of electrons or black holes instead of biomed. But that kind of person probably isn't the one considering MD due to pay, security, and interest in the work.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

I see this kind of thinking a lot - people who could get an MD would of course have great success in research, business, etc. I don't think it holds that well. If you are truly that person who is smart, hardworking, has the skills for research, and loves science, even then your best bet is MD/PhD over PhD alone, unless the science you are passionate about is on the level of electrons or black holes instead of biomed. But that kind of person probably isn't the one considering MD due to pay, security, and interest in the work.

I don't think the end result of MD/PhD supports this thinking, though. Not to mention the additional ~8-10 years you miss out on research when your PhD peers are getting professorships and you are ready to begin a postdoc. Also, some schools do not have good PhD projects/mentorship for the MSTP students, and they come out of a 3 year PhD knowing about as much as a well trained postbacc.

So many people do MD/PhD and it is a big mistake/not what they wanted/not what they needed. Unless you plan on running a clinical lab or need extensive experience-based physiology knowledge, there's no necessity to become an MD/PhD.

I see no reason to believe that a PhD is a lost cause in biomed. Do well in school, get connections, and go to an Ivy League or another good school.

 

[efle]

So many people do MD/PhD and it is a big mistake/not what they wanted/not what they needed.

This is not the case because MD/PhD struggles to get a lab/funding more than a straight PhD. They might regret for other reasons, but not that one. If what you're claiming was true, why would anyone, ever, get a MD/PhD, let alone those programs be the most competitive type of graduate ed in the country?

I agree PhD in biomed still makes sense for a handful of superstars that just want to do research all day. But that wasn't the original question anyways. For someone that doesn't mind or love people, wants to have a very steady, very high income starting in their 30s, likes research, finds medical topics and reasoning fascinating, and/or would enjoy hands on procedure work, MD absolutely can still make sense. Telling such a person they should just go get a PhD because they aren't altruistic enough doesn't hold water.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

This is not the case because MD/PhD struggles to get a lab/funding more than a straight PhD. They might regret for other reasons, but not that one. If what you're claiming was true, why would anyone, ever, get a MD/PhD, let alone those programs be the most competitive type of graduate ed in the country?

I agree PhD in biomed still makes sense for a handful of superstars that just want to do research all day. But that wasn't the original question anyways. For someone that doesn't mind or love people, wants to have a very steady, very high income starting in their 30s, likes research, finds medical topics and reasoning fascinating, and/or would enjoy hands on procedure work, MD absolutely can still make sense. Telling such a person they should just go get a PhD because they aren't altruistic enough doesn't hold water.

I mean big mistake because of time and energy and being behind in your field. The MSTP program is fantastic for people who are doing a certain kind of science/medicine, but i think people- too many people- choose to apply to it because "Well I like research and I want to be a doctor" along with other side motivations, such as: I was raised to be/am ultracompetitive and want to get into the hardest program, etc. In my experience, most people can definitely pick one or the other.

I agree that it wasn't the OQ. I guess my tangent was to point out that OP should REALLY figure out if they want to ACTUALLY be a doctor or not, then figure out the MD/PhD side. If they really enjoy science a lot...then they should work to become a "superstar".

 

[eteshoe]

I will point out that that the dual degree pathway is not for everyone but if you don't mind the pain and have a good PhD mentor it can be quite an experience.

 

[Lost In Transcription]

I will point out that that the dual degree pathway is not for everyone but if you don't mind the pain and have a good PhD mentor it can be quite an experience.

I agree.