HST-MD vs. MD/PhD

[chirurgino]

I think when you are dealing with something as absurd as turning down JHU or UCSF MSTP for Harvard HST (or even NP?) only, you clearly have someone whose overriding concern is prestige. There is just no rational justification for someone interested in research to choose an unfunded Harvard MD over a fully-funded MD/PhD at ANY top 30-40 school, much less places like JHU or UCSF. Career goals point to the latter; financial considerations point to the latter. The only reasonable justification I could see for this choice would be strong location considerations (family or spouse in Boston) but if such considerations were so strong, one would think the choice would come down to BU or Tufts MD/PhD vs. Harvard HST.

Easy there cowboy. I promised myself I wouldn't get dragged into this thread, but I think that the arguments are getting a little off-base. What people haven't been talking about is that a SIGNIFICANT fraction of HST'ers end up doing the PhD second cycle--so you're not really talking about spending the money for going to med school and NOT doing research vs. going somewhere for free and doing research. It's more like paying for 2 years of med school AND doing the research. Granted, second cycle is NOT a guarantee, but I can tell you that several friends of mine (at least 6-8 I can think of right away) from HST got funding through second cycle, and I don't know anyone who got rejected.

Second--it's easy to hate on people for picking "the big H" for "just the name." It's probably the same reason why people hate the Yankees, etc. etc. etc. But it's also worth thinking a little about the research choices that "the big H" provides--you choose among the faculty at HMS, the faculty at MGH, BWH, Children's, BIDMC, AND the Harvard main campus MCB/chemistry/physics/history/whatever -- AND, if that weren't enough-- MIT chemistry/biology/math/physics/whatever. So I'm sorry, you can't make the argument that number 30 or 40 med school MSTP (whatever that might be) provides the same opportunities. It just doesn't, and if you think that's true, you're kidding yourself. You could turn your argument on its head and say that if you REALLY CARE about your science, you would be willing to pay for 2 years of med school to go to a place offering those opportunities.

Now if you're talking about JHU or UCSF MSTP vs. HST + second cycle...the choice is harder. In my personal opinion, I think one can make a rational argument that JHU and UCSF MSTPs are every bit as good as Harvard MSTP, depending on what you're interested in, but I would maintain that the depth and breadth of the choices at HST/HMS are pretty much unmatched. Obviously, if you know that you *absolutely* have to work on protein X and that PI is somewhere else, that place will be the best fit for you--but then I wonder if you should have even applied anywhere else.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Easy there cowboy. I promised myself I wouldn't get dragged into this thread, but I think that the arguments are getting a little off-base. What people haven't been talking about is that a SIGNIFICANT fraction of HST'ers end up doing the PhD second cycle--so you're not really talking about spending the money for going to med school and NOT doing research vs. going somewhere for free and doing research. It's more like paying for 2 years of med school AND doing the research. Granted, second cycle is NOT a guarantee, but I can tell you that several friends of mine (at least 6-8 I can think of right away) from HST got funding through second cycle, and I don't know anyone who got rejected.

This is not a guarantee, and only makes sense if there is a very good chance of getting in 2nd cycle and if its a choice between Harvard HST and a school the opportunities of which are far, far fewer in the field of interest, or there is no well-defined interest. For the schools previous posters were discussing, such as JHU, UCSF, UPenn, etc. it is an absurd choice to make.

Second--it's easy to hate on people for picking "the big H" for "just the name." It's probably the same reason why people hate the Yankees, etc. etc. etc. But it's also worth thinking a little about the research choices that "the big H" provides--you choose among the faculty at HMS, the faculty at MGH, BWH, Children's, BIDMC, AND the Harvard main campus MCB/chemistry/physics/history/whatever -- AND, if that weren't enough-- MIT chemistry/biology/math/physics/whatever. So I'm sorry, you can't make the argument that number 30 or 40 med school MSTP (whatever that might be) provides the same opportunities. It just doesn't, and if you think that's true, you're kidding yourself. You could turn your argument on its head and say that if you REALLY CARE about your science, you would be willing to pay for 2 years of med school to go to a place offering those opportunities.

Now if you're talking about JHU or UCSF MSTP vs. HST + second cycle...the choice is harder. In my personal opinion, I think one can make a rational argument that JHU and UCSF MSTPs are every bit as good as Harvard MSTP, depending on what you're interested in, but I would maintain that the depth and breadth of the choices at HST/HMS are pretty much unmatched. Obviously, if you know that you *absolutely* have to work on protein X and that PI is somewhere else, that place will be the best fit for you--but then I wonder if you should have even applied anywhere else.

Harvard may have all of those opportunities and more. In fact, it may have more opportunities in science and specifically biomedical science than any other institution in the world. However, if you think about medical school and graduate school, can you really say that 10,000 vs. 5,000 excellent PIs (I really have no idea how many PIs Harvard or other schools have) makes a difference in terms of getting a PhD? You can only work with one of them (or at best a small collaboration). Are you really going to say that if you are interested in a neuroscience PhD it will make a big difference whether you're at Harvard, Hopkins, UCSF, UCSD, or Columbia? What difference will it make in your PhD in immunology if you attend Harvard, Yale, JHU or Stanford? All of these are superb programs with superb PIs, and you can only work with one of them, so why would you choose to pay money to go to Harvard HST with no guarantee that you can work with ANY PI to get a PhD, vs. going to schools with equally excellent (although fewer in number, perhaps) PIs, where your PhD is guaranteed and you are fully funded. It just makes no sense.

 

[Shatterstar17]

I usually don't participate in this (perennial, and somewhat boring and breathless) debate because I didn't even apply to HST, but to me it would boil down to a wasted $50,000. Maybe if you have that kind of money lying around it's not a concern, but even so, I still think $50,000 properly invested for the 15 or so years it'll take you until you get your own lab will be more useful in seed cash than the name! 😀

 

[greg12345]

Is there really any difference in terms of prestige between Harvard, UCSF, and Hopkins among people that matter (i.e. the dept chairs that will be scrutinizing your junior faculty application)? Sure, your grandma knows about Harvard and probably thinks UCSF is equivalent to Fresno State, but really anyone in science knows that there is not really a drop off in terms of "quality" from Harvard to UCSF/Hopkins (in my opinion). Go where the best research is for what you want to do. Go where you will get paid. 50,000 is a lot of money to have in loans hanging over your head for the extended amount of training you will go through...and guess what, when you finally get a job academic medicine is not exactly a cash cow anyways.

 

[chirurgino]

Is there really any difference in terms of prestige between Harvard, UCSF, and Hopkins among people that matter (i.e. the dept chairs that will be scrutinizing your junior faculty application)? Sure, your grandma knows about Harvard and probably thinks UCSF is equivalent to Fresno State, but really anyone in science knows that there is not really a drop off in terms of "quality" from Harvard to UCSF/Hopkins (in my opinion). Go where the best research is for what you want to do. Go where you will get paid. 50,000 is a lot of money to have in loans hanging over your head for the extended amount of training you will go through...and guess what, when you finally get a job academic medicine is not exactly a cash cow anyways.

I agree that there isn't a huge difference between Harvard and JHU/UCSF/Stanford in terms of respect in science and medicine, and I mentioned that in my post. I would say those programs are all in the top 5. Obviously whatever PI you choose will have the biggest influence on your career.

My point is simply that if you aren't sure of what you want to do your PhD in, or if you change your chosen field of interest before your PhD (like I did!), you may want to consider the fact that Harvard offers more good options ACROSS ALL FIELDS. Again, what I reacted to in the previous post was the claim that number 30 or 40 MSTP (NOT number 2 or 3 MSTP) was better than doing HST + second cycle, especially in terms of the choice issue if you are serious about your science. Don't ask me where the "break even" point is, though...

 

[gbwillner]

I agree that there isn't a huge difference between Harvard and JHU/UCSF/Stanford in terms of respect in science and medicine, and I mentioned that in my post. I would say those programs are all in the top 5. Obviously whatever PI you choose will have the biggest influence on your career.

My point is simply that if you aren't sure of what you want to do your PhD in, or if you change your chosen field of interest before your PhD (like I did!), you may want to consider the fact that Harvard offers more good options ACROSS ALL FIELDS. Again, what I reacted to in the previous post was the claim that number 30 or 40 MSTP (NOT number 2 or 3 MSTP) was better than doing HST + second cycle, especially in terms of the choice issue if you are serious about your science. Don't ask me where the "break even" point is, though...

Why not split the difference? Let's make it at a top 20.

 

[AtmaWeapon]

how about harvard PhD program versus "bottom tier" funded MD/PhD programs (non-MSTP program). although if you can make harvard PhD you can probably do a little more (take MCATs/clinical work) to make top MSTPs but just hypothetically speaking 😛

remember you *could* get a MD after the PhD...although it won't be funded unless you get a scholarship.