Doing MPH/PhD in Epidemiology without a professional degree

[Aletheia]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi,

I just wanted to know if most people who do an MPH degree or a PhD in Public Health (such as Epidemiology) also have a professional degree--DO, MD, etc--as well. Are there a lot of students that go into MPH with just an undergrad or is this not common? Do such students find successful positions? Are these positions definitely research based--such as in Epidemiology--or are they hospital administrator type positions?

Thanks for any help you can provide.

 

[jkmph]

Hi,

I just wanted to know if most people who do an MPH degree or a PhD in Public Health (such as Epidemiology) also have a professional degree--DO, MD, etc--as well. Are there a lot of students that go into MPH with just an undergrad or is this not common? Do such students find successful positions? Are these positions definitely research based--such as in Epidemiology--or are they hospital administrator type positions?

Thanks for any help you can provide.

Traditionally the MPH was a complimentary professional degree for physicians. This is rapidly changing and most of the SPH schools across the country now offer the MPH to applicants without an MD or DO degree. There are still exceptions, such as Harvard I believe, that do not let undergrads apply strait into their program. However that is becoming the exception to the norm. Public Health is a rapidly growing field...

 

[Stories]

The vast majority of MPH students do not come in with another professional degree. Many are coming straight from undergrad to the MPH program. Graduates go on to many different types of fields, depending on field. Some will go into research, although most will probably go into some form of public health practice.

For PhDs, competitive applicants generally already have a MPH or MS in a public health related discipline. Generally, PhD applicants do not possess another professional degree as the focus of a PhD is research. Nearly all PhD graduates will enter some form of research (as that is what the degree prepares them to do) whether it is academic, governmental, or industry.

 

[Aletheia]

Okay. Thanks for that info! An MPH is something I've been considering. I'm not sure if that will be coupled with a professional degree or at all. It seems extremely interesting, from what I've learned so far, but if I had to pursue it on it's own, it would be good to know that I have other paths I could take. Do any of you happen to know whether an MPH is a good step towards doing a PhD in another field. For ex, if you wanted to do a PhD in Microbiology and wanted to work in a hospital? The question comes up because the Yale MPH program offers a focus into microbial disease (which seems super cool, but is very far from me) but most of their profs seem either microbiologists or public health people so I'm not sure where a degree like that fits in?
Edit: the programs I've looked into are Canadian, and none (as far as I know) are accredited. I'm not sure what that means in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Stories]

Okay. Thanks for that info! An MPH is something I've been considering. I'm not sure if that will be coupled with a professional degree or at all. It seems extremely interesting, from what I've learned so far, but if I had to pursue it on it's own, it would be good to know that I have other paths I could take. Do any of you happen to know whether an MPH is a good step towards doing a PhD in another field. For ex, if you wanted to do a PhD in Microbiology and wanted to work in a hospital? The question comes up because the Yale MPH program offers a focus into microbial disease (which seems super cool, but is very far from me) but most of their profs seem either microbiologists or public health people so I'm not sure where a degree like that fits in?
Edit: the programs I've looked into are Canadian, and none (as far as I know) are accredited. I'm not sure what that means in the grand scheme of things.

You're referring to the Microbial Disease track. I honestly don't know much about the program at a MPH level, but what I know is that it prepares you to do public health work related to vector borne diseases and genetics. It is lab focused, so you'll get a good deal of the public health core curriculum + the laboratory component.

As for working in a hospital: most PH people working in hospitals enter on the management side (health management). I suppose folks from the EMD program at Yale might work in a microbio lab in a hospital, although I'd think that wouldn't be the first stop of employment for most folks from that track (I'd guess they go on to work in pharma, but that's just me).

As for PhD stuff, a MPH probably would be a waste of time if you want a biochem or molecular biology PhD because the classes won't necessarily translate over and there could be overlap if your research interests pertained to clinical and population-level work. But if your biological interest isn't at that stage, then the MPH would be of no use to you. Just go straight for the PhD. You could always take a class or two in epidemiologic methods (all medical schools will offer at least a few courses in epidemiology).

 

[Aletheia]

The microbial track of the MPH is exactly in my interests. If I went down this path, I would do an MPH and probably apply at Yale for a PhD. There is no such program where I am though (or close to where I am) and the program at Yale (from what I've seen) is quite expensive. I wouldn't do a straight PhD as doing a master's seems more secure—I'm not sure how I'll feel in a couple of years. I think medical microbiology/infectious diseases are super interesting and I'd like to do that somehow through public health, if that is at all possible. My goal in pursuing an MPH degree would be to do work with the CDC, WHO or a similar organization. I can also see myself in a leadership role/teaching. My reasons against molecular biology/microbiology and similar programs is because I'm not as interested in the specifics of proteins, genes, etc. I find researching info to do experiments painful. I think disease mechanisms are fascinating, how diseases work, how they cause problems with the human body and, from my experiences, that is not what research is like. My research has been very focused on the small and detailed experiments that may contribute to a specific disease, but I don't get to learn about different diseases at all. I enjoy the more broad and interaction with people and I've always felt that was missing in my research experiences. This is why an MPH seemed like the better way to go. I would get to do the parts of research I enjoy—thinking about new problems, potentially designing experiments, potentially teaching, etc—while doing it in a field that's much more encompassing than the specifics of a particular protein/gene. I'm not sure if my reasoning is quite why people go down this route, however. Anyway, Stories, since you have tons of info I'd love to hear of your experiences in the field so feel free to PM me or respond on here! Thanks. 🙂

 

[Stories]

The microbial track of the MPH is exactly in my interests. If I went down this path, I would do an MPH and probably apply at Yale for a PhD. There is no such program where I am though (or close to where I am) and the program at Yale (from what I've seen) is quite expensive. I wouldn't do a straight PhD as doing a master's seems more secure—I'm not sure how I'll feel in a couple of years. I think medical microbiology/infectious diseases are super interesting and I'd like to do that somehow through public health, if that is at all possible. My goal in pursuing an MPH degree would be to do work with the CDC, WHO or a similar organization. I can also see myself in a leadership role/teaching. My reasons against molecular biology/microbiology and similar programs is because I'm not as interested in the specifics of proteins, genes, etc. I find researching info to do experiments painful. I think disease mechanisms are fascinating, how diseases work, how they cause problems with the human body and, from my experiences, that is not what research is like. My research has been very focused on the small and detailed experiments that may contribute to a specific disease, but I don't get to learn about different diseases at all. I enjoy the more broad and interaction with people and I've always felt that was missing in my research experiences. This is why an MPH seemed like the better way to go. I would get to do the parts of research I enjoy—thinking about new problems, potentially designing experiments, potentially teaching, etc—while doing it in a field that's much more encompassing than the specifics of a particular protein/gene. I'm not sure if my reasoning is quite why people go down this route, however. Anyway, Stories, since you have tons of info I'd love to hear of your experiences in the field so feel free to PM me or respond on here! Thanks. 🙂

Leadership and teaching are two very different things. If you wish to teach at the college level, you must do a PhD. However, you must also be very interested in research, otherwise you'll never cut it as a faculty member.

As for MPH -> PhD, that's a common route, but for Yale's EMD, most folks who come into EMD come straight from undergrad sciences. This isn't true of the other divisions such as CDE, EHS, HP where most folks come in with a MPH already. Mainly because the PhD and MPH in EMD is very different, whereas the MPH from to the other divisions translate over quite nicely. I urge you to compare the curricula of the MPH to the PhD program in EMD as you'll notice they're quite different.

EMD is still focused at the molecular level. It just happens to incoroprate that information into a population framework. Just to give you an idea of what research some of the current doctoral students are doing, here are the titles of their projects:

-Differential gene expression by trypanosoma brucei in the tsetse vector
-A novel approach to identify a small, transmembrane protein inhibitor of the HIV co-receptor CCR5
-Identification of Polymicrobial and genetic factors in otitis media patholgenesis

The only problem what you described in it's entirety (your interests) have all already been discovered and elucidated in the literature. Very few completely new diseases are emerging that need to be identified and mapped. What we're all piecing together (at the least the direction public health is headed) is the gene-environmental interaction that lead to disease. This goes for all fields of public health (minus policy since that's not applicable to this kind of analysis). And unfortunately, when you're talking genomics, you're also then talking about a few proteins which are altered in shape that contribute to whatever disease you're looking at.

The broad picture has already been solved for most diseases. The little pieces all need to be put into place so we have the entire picture. That's what research is currently leading to and will be headed in the future.

 

[Aletheia]

Research certainly has aspects that interest.

The topics of research sound very much like graduate studies in Microbiology programs. Thanks for that info!

Yeah. That is a problem. Some of the research experiences I have loved have been very detailed projects, but working on a really applicable therapy, for example, so you never lost sight of the big picture, if that makes sense. Public health seemed interested because you get to do important research in the context of a population which is very applicable and interesting. How has your MPH experience been, thus far?

 

[Stories]

Research certainly has aspects that interest.

The topics of research sound very much like graduate studies in Microbiology programs. Thanks for that info!

Yeah. That is a problem. Some of the research experiences I have loved have been very detailed projects, but working on a really applicable therapy, for example, so you never lost sight of the big picture, if that makes sense. Public health seemed interested because you get to do important research in the context of a population which is very applicable and interesting. How has your MPH experience been, thus far?

I finished my MPH back in '08 (at BU)--I'm now on my PhD (at Yale). Research is always going to be very specific to a very small area: that's the nature of research. It's adding information to the general knowledge. You eventually have your sights on broad impact, but as a researcher, it's not your job to bring that element from your research.

The broad picture is what a public health practitioner does. These are generally government employees that will be implementing rules and regulations to apply whatever research has indicated would be a good thing to do (eg. ban on trans fats in restaurants).

As for the MPH versus PhD distinction, I want to do the research that adds information to the field. I'm fascinated by gene-environment interaction, and that's where my research is headed. That's why I'm doing the PhD because I'll attain the skills I need to do work in that area. The MPH was useful for getting a broad sense of how public health is and the skills to perform investigations and make sense of the research.