Going into an MD/PhD with an MS...

[benman49]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey everyone,

There seems to be a lot of knowledgeable people on this forum so I decide to ask my question here, thanks in advance for taking a look at it.

I'm entering a physics MS program this fall (typically a 2 year program) and am currently doing the MD application process. I am interested in applying for MD/PhD programs as well, with the PhD portion being in physics.

Basically I have 2 main questions:
1) Will any MD/PhD programs grant "advanced standing" for the PhD portion of the program to someone who already has an MS in the same field (similar to how standalone PhD programs will often grant this status to people entering with an MS)?

2) Do you know of any MD/PhD programs that allow for the PhD part to be in physics (I know that Harvard and MIT have a program called Health Sciences and Technology where you do research during your MD and can do PhD in any field, but I think Harvard would be beyond my grasp with my grades/MCAT).

My questions may seem to lack direction, but my eventual interest is to participate in the human space flight arena (perhaps do the MD/PhD with a residency in radiology).

If my stats will be of help,
MCAT: 34
GPA: 3.5 (I would add the statement about difficult courses here but apparently no medical schools care about that, which is absurd IMO)
2 years research
Couple of summers of clinical experiences (medical assistant, EMT).

Thanks again for taking the time to read all of that, and for any advice (it is very appreciated).

 

[swamprat]

I'm not completely familiar with MD/PhD but 34 I believe is on the low side for mcat but obviously still very possible from what I've read on sdn over the years... and idk if there are any funded mstp's that offer phds in non-biomedical science related fields, maybe someone else knows?

 

[IvyHopeful20]

I don't think a PhD in physics is necessary to do what you want. If you mean biophysics, than I think many schools offer that. Pure physics? I'm not sure if MSTP schools would do it. I'd go to the websites and check and/or call. It's a very unusual decision so I don't think many people can speak from personal experience.

Generally, for a PhD program, you do have to fulfill all the requirements for that program and if you go straight into a Physics PhD program, most times they won't count your MS and give you advanced standing - so I bet you won't get that. You'll have to do the full two years of coursework in Physics most likely, in addition to two years of MD coursework, plus physics research and plus clinicals. It could very likely be 10 years until you graduate med school.

I am not sure if it's worth it. I don't see any potential career choice outside of being an astronaut where a PhD in physics is worth the sacrifice. If you do want to be an Astronaut, get a PhD in mechanical/aerospace/electrical engineering from MIT. Or if you want to be a pure physicist. In which case, the MD is kind of pointless. If you really feel physics knowledge is essential, an MS would be more than enough.

If you want to work for NASA or something, a PhD in biology with research in the effects of low gravity or some other type of biomedical tie in would probably be looked at much more favorably than doing a PhD in physics and then applying to be a physician. They have physicists - pretty good ones too 😛, they don't need an MD who dabbles in physics. Now a MD/PhD whose research is also in effects of spaceflight and/or other items related to space/aeronautical science...that is certainly a much more attractive candidate.

 

[familyaerospace]

If you are going to work in human spaceflight and want to do human factors (which with a physics degree would be the closest thing I could really think of), the best bet would be to get a degree in Engineering which has the potential to be useful, although the engineers would suspect the MD side.

I was advised by an aerospace doctor (I also have an MS but not in Physics) that the smartest thing for me to do if I want to go into aerospace medicine would be to just get an MD and not bother with a PhD. That's the only way I can continue to work in my field, which was officially human factors in space operations, although I simply said it is aerospace medicine because that was what it ended up being and it was the aerospace doctors I ended up working with.

I suggest ignoring the person who said get a PhD in Biology and do work in low gravity, while that would in theory be a great idea, there are very few graduate schools that will train you to really go into that area. The scientists themselves are few and far between. I know, I know many of them. Most of them are not affiliated with universities and do not accept students and those that do, generally have no money. Also, it is much harder to work with NASA than many might think. My work had to be through RSA, ESA, and JAXA because NASA wasn't interested in free labour.

 

[IvyHopeful20]

I suggest ignoring the person who said get a PhD in Biology and do work in low gravity, while that would in theory be a great idea, there are very few graduate schools that will train you to really go into that area. The scientists themselves are few and far between. I know, I know many of them. Most of them are not affiliated with universities and do not accept students and those that do, generally have no money. Also, it is much harder to work with NASA than many might think. My work had to be through RSA, ESA, and JAXA because NASA wasn't interested in free labour.

It was just as suggestion if he is set on a PhD. I think it'd be more useful than a PhD in Physics. I don't think not having one would really hurt.

You seem to have more knowledge in this topic and your advice makes sense.

 

[benman49]

Thanks for your responses,

I was under the impression that it was possible to enter with advanced standing for a physics PhD, but perhaps it is harder than it seems.

My rationale for potentially pursuing the pure physics PhD plus MD is the possibility to combine medicine and physics (superconductors, particle physics) knowledge to work on new medical imaging devices.

I guess it does seem like a pure physics PhD would be preferred over an MD with some physics knowledge, but I suppose I was thinking that the MD/PhD would have some advantage in that he would be knowledgeable about the human body (and its weaknesses in space/ on other planets) as well as the physics of technologies such as imagine devices, and therefore might think of new ways to help them survive for extended periods in outer space. (Maybe I'm just trying too hard to justify this).

I suppose two more questions arise,

1) Are there any medical schools that will grant an MD in less than 4 years? (I have never heard of any but then again there are a lot of things that I haven't heard of)

2) Are there any radiology residencies that are shorter than 4 years?

Thanks again for your help

Edit:

Just read the last two responses, I will look into the engineering possibility, that does sound like it might make more sense. Also, I have not read about "human factors" but I will look into that too.

 

[dmblue]

MD/PhD forum: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/forumdisplay.php?f=32

Most schools don't give you any advanced standing unless you go to the same school you went to for undergrad.

You come off as a pretty average applicant for MD/PhD. 34 will get you in the door, but it's on the low side. Same for a 3.5 and for your research experience (i'm only speaking about time in lab, i can't say anything about the quality which may increase or decrease it's value)

You can definitely do MRI and imaging research at many schools. It would probably be an engineering degree though. Go to the mstp forum and you can talk to people there who know more.

You can't do an MD in less than 4 years.
I don't think you can do radiology in less than 4.

 

[brooklynblunder]

im in a mstp

1. physics mstps are just rare as ****, you better know what you want to do, what disease you want to tackle. if you want to do engineering thats totally different

2. no advanced standing probably. unless you join the lab that you got your masters from

less than 4 years? not really. there are 3 + research year (like duke) and programs that develop pcps that im unfamiliar with

rad residency - no clue

there is a aerospace medicine fellowship i believe

 

[braggable]

.

 

[familyaerospace]

You are trying too hard to justify it.

If you are going to pursue a PhD just to understand new technologies, it would be better for you to just get a job for a year or two at a technology transfer company and learn hands on. It would be more useful.

After I earned my MS in Space Studies where I concentrated in Human Factors and Space Life Sciences, I worked for 1.5 years for a tech transfer company building a foundation in learning about how to develop new technologies (we were contracted to the NIH and CDC). After that is when I went off to finish my premed requirements since I now have the foundation to develop technology, patent it, and get grant money for it's development. Those skills will be useful if I do not return to aerospace medicine or would allow me to do a two way consulting position for space tourism companies.

I also don't understand why you are looking into radiology. If your goal is something like NASA, you should be considering a residency which would lead to Aerospace Medicine. Those residencies are Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, Neurology (this just became acceptable), or Emergency Medicine. IM is the most common route. You can do a joint Internal Medicine/Aerospace Medicine residency in 5 years.

There are a few DO schools that are supposed to be moving on to 3 years, but I think they are trying to get people to go into primary care.