- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
I got my Ph.D. in Physics 10 years ago and since then have been doing research in MR imaging (specialty pediatric neuroimaging). I have over 40 PubMed-indexed publications in the field, with 10 or more as first author, with a few more accepted/in press. I currently have a career development "K" award from the NIH.
But I'm seriously considering med school at this stage anyway because I feel I do not have the necessary knowledge to bring my career to where I want it to go. I sit on an NIH review panel and we reject countless applications which are simply technologies in search of applications. It's necessary to be more than a technological "whiz kid" these days, especially in the current funding environment.
And, finding productive collaborations with those with the necessary knowledge (e.g. MDs) has been an exercise in futility. In my experience they all talk glowingly about the importance of research, but when you get right down to it, research will always be the baby sister, and I don't see the situation improving anywhere in the near future. There is a dearth of MD-driven research. The physicians have to take pay cuts to participate in research due to the NIH salary cap, and the department doesn't want to make up the difference. It's clinical, much more than research, that brings in the big $$$ for the institution, and, like it or not, physicians are graded on how much clinical $$$ they bring in. Finally, many of the MDs lack the necessary training in how to conduct research (e.g. methodology, statistics, etc.), which makes it an exercise in hand-holding from start to finish, and frankly, many of them simply don't like research in the first place. (This is not really intended as a knock or a criticism, just stating things the way they are. One who is a excellent clinician but a lousy researcher should obviously spend his time and effort in the best way possible to improve patient outcome, which in his case is not in the laboratory.)
But med schools seem to be pretty rigid. I talked with a dean some time ago and she told me it was pretty much "matriculate or bust" in terms of taking courses there. But she tried to encourage me to "go for it" anyway, but obviously it's a big commitment and I wasn't sure I was ready for it then. Although, there does seem to be lately more and more acceptance of "non-traditional" students. (Other graduate programs, like Ph.D. programs, are much more flexible.)
My bosses at my lab are supportive though, and I'm sure we could work out some kind of financial arrangement, which of course is a major plus - they need someone to fulfill a "medical director" type role.
And, I'm not exactly sure how my application is going to look. I haven't taken any of the UG prerequisites (except for physics and math, obviously). As a physics major, I obviously never took biology or chemistry. Fortunately, the place I plan on applying does not have rigid pre-req requirements (they are different then most other institutions in this regard, as I have seen from scanning websites). I won't complain if they insist I take biology, and I'm planning on taking it either this summer (if I can fit it in my schedule) or over the next academic year. But chemistry 101, really; I don't need to learn about valence shell electrons, s, p, d orbitals, hybridization, the ideal gas law, latent heats of fusion/vaporization, etc., etc., all of which are amply covered in the physics that physics majors get.
And, my UG GPA is hardly stellar (3.3 I think; it's been ages since I even looked at my UG transcript). This was due to a couple reasons; I was an immature teenager at the time (I received my B.S. at age 17) and I was double-majoring in music (piano performance). Graduate GPA is much better (3.8 or thereabouts) and graduate coursework in physics is pretty much the hardest coursework there is in a university.
But, I did do well on the MCATs last month (38Q: 14 PS; 10 VR; 14 BS) even despite not having taken the UG coursework. That's because one has to able to quickly assimilate information from different fields to succeed in research; a lot of brain researchers, for instance, know quite a bit about genetics, as there are strong genetic influences on brain structure and function.
So any thoughts as to whether I am crazy or not would be appreciated. I haven't posted much on this forum as yet but I have been lurking around for quite awhile and have been much impressed with the breadth of experience and expertise from all the other posters.
But I'm seriously considering med school at this stage anyway because I feel I do not have the necessary knowledge to bring my career to where I want it to go. I sit on an NIH review panel and we reject countless applications which are simply technologies in search of applications. It's necessary to be more than a technological "whiz kid" these days, especially in the current funding environment.
And, finding productive collaborations with those with the necessary knowledge (e.g. MDs) has been an exercise in futility. In my experience they all talk glowingly about the importance of research, but when you get right down to it, research will always be the baby sister, and I don't see the situation improving anywhere in the near future. There is a dearth of MD-driven research. The physicians have to take pay cuts to participate in research due to the NIH salary cap, and the department doesn't want to make up the difference. It's clinical, much more than research, that brings in the big $$$ for the institution, and, like it or not, physicians are graded on how much clinical $$$ they bring in. Finally, many of the MDs lack the necessary training in how to conduct research (e.g. methodology, statistics, etc.), which makes it an exercise in hand-holding from start to finish, and frankly, many of them simply don't like research in the first place. (This is not really intended as a knock or a criticism, just stating things the way they are. One who is a excellent clinician but a lousy researcher should obviously spend his time and effort in the best way possible to improve patient outcome, which in his case is not in the laboratory.)
But med schools seem to be pretty rigid. I talked with a dean some time ago and she told me it was pretty much "matriculate or bust" in terms of taking courses there. But she tried to encourage me to "go for it" anyway, but obviously it's a big commitment and I wasn't sure I was ready for it then. Although, there does seem to be lately more and more acceptance of "non-traditional" students. (Other graduate programs, like Ph.D. programs, are much more flexible.)
My bosses at my lab are supportive though, and I'm sure we could work out some kind of financial arrangement, which of course is a major plus - they need someone to fulfill a "medical director" type role.
And, I'm not exactly sure how my application is going to look. I haven't taken any of the UG prerequisites (except for physics and math, obviously). As a physics major, I obviously never took biology or chemistry. Fortunately, the place I plan on applying does not have rigid pre-req requirements (they are different then most other institutions in this regard, as I have seen from scanning websites). I won't complain if they insist I take biology, and I'm planning on taking it either this summer (if I can fit it in my schedule) or over the next academic year. But chemistry 101, really; I don't need to learn about valence shell electrons, s, p, d orbitals, hybridization, the ideal gas law, latent heats of fusion/vaporization, etc., etc., all of which are amply covered in the physics that physics majors get.
And, my UG GPA is hardly stellar (3.3 I think; it's been ages since I even looked at my UG transcript). This was due to a couple reasons; I was an immature teenager at the time (I received my B.S. at age 17) and I was double-majoring in music (piano performance). Graduate GPA is much better (3.8 or thereabouts) and graduate coursework in physics is pretty much the hardest coursework there is in a university.
But, I did do well on the MCATs last month (38Q: 14 PS; 10 VR; 14 BS) even despite not having taken the UG coursework. That's because one has to able to quickly assimilate information from different fields to succeed in research; a lot of brain researchers, for instance, know quite a bit about genetics, as there are strong genetic influences on brain structure and function.
So any thoughts as to whether I am crazy or not would be appreciated. I haven't posted much on this forum as yet but I have been lurking around for quite awhile and have been much impressed with the breadth of experience and expertise from all the other posters.
,
