making the PhD/MD decision

[ekculy]

I just finished my undergraduate junior year and I am starting to realize that post-graduation plans aren't just a fuzzy thought far in the future (i.e. I need to start applications as soon as possible).
I have been interested in doing research for several years and through labs and other experiences have become familiar with the MSTP/ PhD/MD programs. As decision/application time gets closer and closer I am becoming more hesitant about 8+ year programs.
I have a few questions and was hoping that someone who has completed or is currently on this academic path could provide come incite.

1) I took the MCATs the August after my Sophomore year and did not do poorly, but did not get an amazing score. I am currently considering (and have been doing so for almost a year) retaking the test, but the thought of opening a review book makes me cringe, not to mention the day of testing. Is a 33 worth retaking?
2) If I had to choose, I would get a PhD over an MD, but I have a very strong interest in doing medical research...not being a clinician, however. Is the combined degree a substantial advantage? Is it worth the extra years/competitiveness of the application process...etc?
3) Right now, genetic research is where I would like to find myself in x years. Are there any schools I should know about that have either good programs in this area, or have awful programs?
Thank you for the help.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Adcadet]

My impression is that if you don't want to see patients, then the MD would largely be wasted. I know that there are many PhDs who do great biomedical research.

On the other hand, you can do an MD/PhD program and go straight to a post-doc, foregoing your medical license. Again, this seems like a big waste to me. Or you can do an internship (first year of residency) to get your medical license, and move on to industry or a post-doc. Again, this seems like a big waste to me. Or you can do a residency and then a post-doc or whatever. But this means spending 3+ years seeing patients. If this makes you cringe as much as opening an MCAT review book, maybe the MD isn't right for you.

I would not retake the MCAT with a 33.


Those are just my thoughts. Take then for what they're worth.

 

[jmed]

Hey ekculy-

I was in sort of the same boat as yourself- I knew I wanted to do bench research first and foremost, and would choose a PhD over an MD if I had to choose. I did have to choose, because I was not really happy with my options for MSTP, so I am going for the PhD, perhaps with the option to transfer into an MSTP eventually, or to attend medical school when I am finished with graduate school. here is why I want to go to medical school even though I don't want to see patients too much: 1) first and foremost, I want the breadth of education in biomedical science and knowledge of how to apply it to clinically-relevant problems, even if I will not be conducting research at a clinical level; 2) it is my understanding that the MD opens up some new funding opportunities as a principal investigator; 3) I have been told by other researchers with MDs (who were geneticists, as a matter of fact) that they are not at the mercy of collaborating MD colleagues for obtaining tissue samples from patients- they can just get them themselves. I do not think it is necessary to have an MD to be a successful biomedical researcher, I just feel that, for me, medical training will be very gratifying and may provide some advantages in my research not enjoyed by PhD researchers.

Re: genetics- the genetics department at UNC-Chapel Hill is up-and-coming and is host to a great director (Terry Magnuson) and several new faculty that are doing some interesting work. It is also one of the newer NIH-supported MSTPs; i.e. a 33 on the MCAT shouldn't keep you out, all else being equal. A bit more competitive to gain admission, but great for genetics, are the University of Washington (in Seattle), Stanford (although their MSTP has suffered some bruising on our network of late), and MIT via the option through Harvard MSTP. Unless you are a godling in the other areas of MSTP evaluation, you may want to consider upping your MCAT score to apply to these last programs to be competitive with other stellar applicants. There are other threads in this forum that have discussed the wisdom of re-taking the MCAT when facing merely-above-average scores... I did it with a 34 and squeaked out a couple of extra points, but I don't know if it was really worth the effort for those extra points in the end...

 

[jmed]

Originally posted by ekculy
I have been interested in doing research for several years and through labs and other experiences have become familiar with the MSTP/ PhD/MD programs.

By the way, if you want to apply to MSTP you may want to consider foresaking MCAT round 2 and get to doing some research- without a substantial research experience under your belt when you apply, you will generally not be competitive for MSTP admissions regardless of how high you scored on the test! A lot of people take an extra year to focus on research before applying. If I misunderstood your post and you have already been doing research outside of class, nevermind!

 

[Primate]

Hey Jmed,

When did Terry Magnuson move to UNC? Knew him in the way-back and just curious.

On to the post:

I know of a few who've done the MD after the PhD and viewed it as a 4 year post-doc in physiology. They've gone on to careers that suited them well.

However, I think (opinion warning light flashing) that the 4 years spent and considerable debt incured (you won't be eligible for MSTP funds) going this route would make it less than desirable. The combined degree is indeed a great combination for those so inclined, and for many of the reasons you suggest. Obtaining the degrees serially, however, may present many more drawbacks than advantages (the 4 years of post-doc you could do instead would take you a LONG way towards writing a KO8 or likely an RO1, whereas med school would NOT). Something to consider if you're really much more interested in working at the bench exclusively. If you're smart, you can pick up the physiology that's relevant to your field in more efficient ways.

I also agree that retaking the MCAT is likely not a great idea. You'd have to add quite a few points to make it worth it, and those are tough to come by.

Just my tupence.

P

 

[jmed]

Hey Primate-

I think Terry moved to UNC from CWRU just last year- he was spoken of as very new when I was there in January.

Re: cost of attending med school after your PhD- yeah, I really doubt I would fork out ~100G's to go to med school after getting out of grad school. I have heard that there are programs out there that finance med school for researchers looking to do translational research- I'll cross that bridge when I come to it! At least I would like to think that I can trim it down to a long three years in med school by applying my graduate education to 'placing out' of a few basic science courses and taking a couple of med classes as my grad electives, but I may not be so lucky...

 

[Sonya]

the extra MD would ofcourse be helpful, but not much.
Do you forsee yourself doing "bench" research? If so, that's all the more reason the PhD would be better. A lot of PhD can and DO medically relevant research.

If you have over a 3.8, i would definetly not retake the MCAT.
If you have below a 3.6, yes you probably need to do excellent in the MCAT.
Having just taken the April mcat, i will warn you it is EXTREMELY difficult to go from a 33 to a 35. It is like going from an A to A+ in a class, it takes perfection and then some. Blindly practicing isn't always enough. (My scores were consistenly 33 for a month before the MCAT. and even after a month of solid MCAT, scores of 34 or 35 were still rare).

 

[doc05]

Originally posted by ekculy
I just finished my undergraduate junior year and I am starting to realize that post-graduation plans aren't just a fuzzy thought far in the future (i.e. I need to start applications as soon as possible).
I have been interested in doing research for several years and through labs and other experiences have become familiar with the MSTP/ PhD/MD programs. As decision/application time gets closer and closer I am becoming more hesitant about 8+ year programs.
I have a few questions and was hoping that someone who has completed or is currently on this academic path could provide come incite.

1) I took the MCATs the August after my Sophomore year and did not do poorly, but did not get an amazing score. I am currently considering (and have been doing so for almost a year) retaking the test, but the thought of opening a review book makes me cringe, not to mention the day of testing. Is a 33 worth retaking?
2) If I had to choose, I would get a PhD over an MD, but I have a very strong interest in doing medical research...not being a clinician, however. Is the combined degree a substantial advantage? Is it worth the extra years/competitiveness of the application process...etc?
3) Right now, genetic research is where I would like to find myself in x years. Are there any schools I should know about that have either good programs in this area, or have awful programs?
Thank you for the help.

Yes, the MD/PhD route is better than just a PhD because it gives you more options. If you are strongly interested in MEDICAL research, the best education would combine medicine with the PhD component. Medical school will provide a far broader knowledge base, and the clinical experience will of course make it all relevant. And while you may not want to be a clinician, don't forget about the possibility of residency in pathology: right now there are many pathologists heavily involved in research.

 

[pathdr2b]

Originally posted by doc05
And while you may not want to be a clinician, don't forget about the possibility of residency in pathology: right now there are many pathologists heavily involved in research.

Obviously, I'll have to agree

The other great aspect of a pathology residency is that some programs require a research year so with a PhD you'd already have that covered.

 

[dphoenix]

As an MD/PhD myself, my advice to you is that you need to carefully think about what you really want to do with your life, not just in 10 years, but during the next 10 years too. Med school, is by far, a sacrifice of time and social life, and if you do decide to go to medical school, you may regret spending the better half of your 20s on the wards and in a library for the purpose of just getting a "broader" education. My opinion is that if you are 100% sure that you do not plan on going to residency or seeing patients, medical school is a very very painful way of broadening your education or beefing up your resume. Spending some spare time taking classes or doing your own reading will broaden your education sufficiently.

However, if you are considering being some sort of doctor with a heavy interest in research (remember though, you will be a doctor), then MD/PhD may be a great way for you to go. You definitely have more options in terms of that you have the option of being a physician (which as a PhD you obviously cant), and you do have higher earning potential (only by practicing medicine, not by research) which is important to most people.

All in all, think about how you want to spend your 20's, not where you will be when you're 30. Believe me, if you do not even LIKE being in a hospital, going to medical school will be the worst experience of your life (not that it won't be anyways). For instance, just to give you a taste, I am now going to take the USMLE Step 1 next week, and preparing for this is about 100 times worse than the MCAT. I'm not kidding. Seriously.

All in all, do what feels right to you, not what you rationalize to yourself. In 10 years you probably will end up at the point where you imagined yourself, its just how you get there is what matters.

Good luck.

PS. Don't retake the MCAT unless you think that both a) you can get a 40+ next time, and b) you enjoy torturing yourself.

 

[Fixed Gear]

"2) If I had to choose, I would get a PhD over an MD, but I have a very strong interest in doing medical research...not being a clinician, however. Is the combined degree a substantial advantage? Is it worth the extra years/competitiveness of the application process...etc?"

Don't go into an MSTP program. Period. There are PhD programs where you can get a very good medical background (Hopkins' "human genetics" for one). If you don't want to be a clinician, you don't need an MD.

 

[Vader]

I would just echo the last two posters. Clearly, if you do not see yourself practicing medicine in any way, shape, or form, the MD/PhD is really not the best pathway for you. The reasons you provided for going the MD/PhD route are good ones, but not sufficient to warrant the years of medical school (I just took the USMLE step I a few months ago and I can verify how much more painful the whole experience was than the MCAT, just as dphoenix described).

If you wish to gain a biomedical background, as FG mentioned, there are PhD programs available that were designed to train biomedical researchers. UCSF also has one, the Biomedical Sciences training program (www.ucsf.edu/biomed). I highly suggest you look into these programs, as they are much better suited for those with a strong interest in biomedical research, but without an interest in clinical medicine.

 

[PublicHealth]

Vader,

Is your screen name a reference to the Polish death metal band Vader?

PH

 

[Vader]

Nope... just a tribute to my favorite movie trilogy of all time (Episode I & II don't count).

 

[psyuk]

33 is not a bad score. btw whats your gpa? is the "70" rule (mcat score + (gpa x 10) >70) still in effect for pre-meds these days?