Don't Want to Be PI - Still Need MD/PhD?

[geeyouknit]

Hello,

I feel like I may have seen this topic around, but I didn't know what to search for based on the title of this thread.

I am thinking about MD/PhD, but after talking with some PIs of labs, it seems like most of them do more funding/grant-writing work than actual lab/bench research. At this point, I really don't see myself in a career of trying to find funding/grant-writing. I'd much rather do bench work.

Should I still go for MD/PhD? Is it necessary?
I imagine to be doing bench work, I would at least need to be a post-doc.
If there are other threads like this that you know of, I would appreciate a link to those as well.

Thanks for your help.

 

[Neuronix]

If you want to do bench research for the rest of your life, in my opinion the best path is to get a master's and become a career lab tech.

You're correct in that PhD, and in particular the PhD training as part of a MD/PhD program, are training for leadership positions as investigators. They supervise, but do not perform experiments on a day to day basis. Their role, as you point out, is to review literature, manage a lab, obtain funding, present data, etc...

 

[solitude]

You're correct in that PhD, and in particular the PhD training as part of a MD/PhD program, are training for leadership positions as investigators. They supervise, but do not perform experiments on a day to day basis. Their role, as you point out, is to review literature, manage a lab, obtain funding, present data, etc...

I agree with you. But I would like to point out that these programs do not actually include any real training in leadership. In fact, for most PhD students there is relatively little training in any of those skills you listed. It's basically sink or swim. In my opinion, this is why so many PIs are great bench scientists but incompetent PIs.