MD and PhD Separately?

[NoSleepNoProblm]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi everyone,

I was talking to a doctor who works at my university today about medical research, and he feels that an MD/PhD program isn't necessarily a good idea. While that may not be my opinion, he did have a few goods points, which were:

1. MD/PhD programs tend to overwork their students beyond that of single MD or PhD programs, essentially to the point of the students "burning out". This might be a consequence of the reduced time it takes to get both degrees.

2. After a student has defended his or her dissertation, the following two years of medical school and subsequent residency tend to remove them far enough from their research such that when they return to research in the future, they are "rusty" or "out of tune" with the field they were previously studying.

He said the best route was to do the MD and the PhD separately. While I am not going to accept someone's opinion automatically, I would like to know what all of your thoughts and experiences about this subject. Please don't criticize too harshly; he was only trying to be helpful.

Thanks!!!!!

 

[StIGMA]

I feel that an MD/PhD program is not necessarily a good idea. If you want both degrees, it is a great idea because the program is integrated and funded. If you do not want both degrees, the program is a bad idea. If you know you want both degrees, but decide to do them separately, then at some point you likely made a decision that you could have avoided if you had previously decided to make a good decision. There are disadvantages to MD/PhD programs (such as extended time between significant research possibilities), but the same drawback occurs if you do the degrees separately (PhD before MD). Doing a full PhD after your MD or after your residency is 'not necessarily a good idea' either.

The real alternative to an MD/PhD program for having a clinical+research career is the MD + fellowship/post-doc. You do not need a PhD to do research, but you still need PhD training to conduct R01-level research. Many MD's do this by conducting research projects before/during medical school, then doing their significant career preparation in a project during/after residency training and using this research as a basis for their startup grants for an assistant professorship.

To reiterate, the best options for a combined clinical + research career are either an integrated MD/PhD program or an MD followed by research training (that is not a PhD program). To do a PhD program at this stage would increase your coursework (waste of time), significantly lower your salary, needlessly postpone your loans, take years longer than you would like, and strangle you with unnecessary graduation requirements.

Edit: The idea that you will be out of touch with your field is a moot point. Fact of the matter is that you are going to change fields/subfields from your PhD to your career, and this is almost invariable. You are more likely to bridge your post-doc work into a startup grant, and as an MD/PhD completing a research-based fellowship, that is the research you will likely use as the basis for your first grants, not what you did as a PhD years ago. Switching fields is commonplace, and in most categories of research (engineering, molecular biology, epidemiology...) your skills will transfer to different projects / fields within these categories.

I hope that helps.

 

[Neuronix]

1. MD/PhD programs tend to overwork their students beyond that of single MD or PhD programs, essentially to the point of the students "burning out". This might be a consequence of the reduced time it takes to get both degrees.

This is somewhat true. But you burn out and go into private practice and make a ton of money with no med school loans. It is abbreviated training essentially because you work harder. You spend more time in lab as an undergrad, you spend your time in lab when you're not doing med school coursework, and then you try to finish your PhD as fast as possible. So would you rather work harder and get done sooner or work more relaxed but take longer to get done? Different people feel differently on this.

2. After a student has defended his or her dissertation, the following two years of medical school and subsequent residency tend to remove them far enough from their research such that when they return to research in the future, they are "rusty" or "out of tune" with the field they were previously studying.

A year or two is one thing. How are you going to do separate MDs and PhDs? The PhD first? Then you're out of research for 4 years during medical school. The MD first? No way you can keep up on your clinical skills during the PhD. So doing them separately to me makes no sense given the person's argument.

 

[ChemMed]

If its what you want to do then don't do it separately. I'm on the PhD to physician route right now and if you can avoid it then do. If you can be happy with one then do that. If your like me well then your happily screwed. 🙂

I'm actually really happy that I am doing this route, because it will give me what I want in the long run. I figured out my life in graduate school though. I also really, really like research, but I also really, really like medicine. Its a happy curse and one I fought but I lost.

The separate degrees also means that you have to apply to both separately and get accepted to two different schools to obtain your goals. This just makes your life harder in the long run.

 

[gstrub]

My first reaction to this thread title was "only if you're f'ing ******ed" would you do this (note if you are already in a PhD program it makes sense if you are interested in medicine...I am talking about out of college). After reading your post, I understand a bit better, but I will give you my advice.

Your first point is completely program dependent. I never felt overworked, at least any more so than the regular MD or PhD students. I think that I had it easier than some of the straight PhD students, in that the unwritten expectations on them (amount of time total in lab, number of primary pubs) were higher than on me. This is just my own personal experience, but I think in my program I speak for the majority. I would go so far as to say that if the program you are in overworks its MD/PhD students, they will show no less mercy on the straight PhDs. This also comes down to selecting a lab that is familiar (and friendly) to the unique situation of MD/PhD students. Remember, the straight PhD students are going out into the workforce...they NEED several papers in their field to land a good post-doc etc. You do not need that, unless you are planning to forgo residency training for a post doc, in which case you should just throw yourself over a cliff now and rid the world of your gene pool.

Your second point makes the assumption that you will continue to work in the very specific field (and even on the same type of project) that you did during your PhD. This brings up a fundamental point that I think the majority of senior MD/PhD students understand. The subject of your project, indeed the entire field that you study, is not necessarily what you will study in the future. You will gain the tools and knowledge to pursue a scientific career in ANY specialty, at least that should be your goal. Do you think I will continue to study sphingolipid biochemistry as an otolaryngologist? Hell no. However the training I received (thinking like a scientist, experimental design, comfort with cells/mice/computers, etc) will help tremendously when I do find a scientific niche to fill in my clinical field.

The third, and most practical point, is that to do both would require much more time and money. Your PhD, if you're extremely lucky, will take you 5 years. Your MD will take 4, and will cost you a bundle. Believe me, you do NOT want to do this.

Just my opinion,
G

 

[ChemMed]

Here let me give you a taste of what my future holds if I actually become an academic physician scientist funded by the NIH:

4 years PhD (I got through fast. I was lucky/good. It takes both to get done in that amount of time.)
1 year postdoc (I'm doing this now.)
4 years medical school
3-4 years residency
2 year postdoc (You have to get back into the game at some point if you want to do research.) Taking a break makes you rusty and the front line of research is ALWAYS moving.
Apply for a K award (a grant that helps you transition into a faculty position.
Become a professor (on a tenure track)
Work your *** off for 4-6 years to obtain tenure (Seriously you will be eating, sleeping and breathing your job)
Finally become a tenured faculty member at some university and continue to be eating, sleeping and breathing your job, but you have the option of more freedom and schools generally give you great benefits.

This is masochistic and I want to do it. Don't get me wrong, I think that if I could have been happy doing anything else then I would not be doing this. Be realistic make this path as easy as possible if you can. I spent a serious amount of time contemplating this and searching other options before I applied to medical school.

 

[Neuronix]

I never felt overworked, at least any more so than the regular MD or PhD students. I think that I had it easier than some of the straight PhD students, in that the unwritten expectations on them (amount of time total in lab, number of primary pubs) were higher than on me. This is just my own personal experience, but I think in my program I speak for the majority. I would go so far as to say that if the program you are in overworks its MD/PhD students, they will show no less mercy on the straight PhDs. This also comes down to selecting a lab that is familiar (and friendly) to the unique situation of MD/PhD students. Remember, the straight PhD students are going out into the workforce...they NEED several papers in their field to land a good post-doc etc. You do not need that, unless you are planning to forgo residency training for a post doc, in which case you should just throw yourself over a cliff now and rid the world of your gene pool.

We had slightly different experiences it sounds like. I took graduate school courses on top of medical school during the basic science portion of medical school. I did a lab rotation before I came (optional) and a lab rotation between first and second year (mandatory). This made medical school more work for me than for my classmates, especially since I mostly didn't take seminar courses, but serious grad courses. As a PhD student, my program required prelim defense at the end of first year and thesis committee meetings every six months. These were somewhat brutal, and I felt like I was under additional scrutiny because I was MD/PhD. In any case, the normal PhD students often did their prelim defense later and had thesis committee meetings yearly.

During my thesis I wanted to get done quickly because of the long road, but my lab was absolutely not going to give me what they considered to be a sub-par PhD. I was helped being excused from a few graduate school requirements, and I also switched grad departments to one that had fewer requirements. I thought I was ready to defend after 3 years (with a grant, 2 pubs, 1 in review, 2 patent submissions, a couple oral conference presentations, a bunch of poster presentations, and a young investigator award at an international conference), but my thesis committee was being very obstructionist to letting someone finish their PhD this quickly. A similar committee let someone go in 5 years with 0 pubs recently, but the idea of having a MD/PhD graduate extremely quickly was not good to them. I was told in no uncertain terms that I needed 3 publications ON THE TOPIC OF MY THESIS (as the one in review was not on my thesis), and so I fought my way out of lab with the help of my MD/PhD program director.

When all was said and done, I didn't defend in time to return to medical school. I couldn't have deposited an edited thesis by the time I needed to return to medical school late (a program policy). Further, I had the data for two additional pubs, but needed to work on the manuscripts. I was really burned out after all the 16 hour days, weekends, etc I put in in grad school. Nobody else in my lab came close to how much I worked. They went out to happy hours as a lab almost every day, but I worked roughly noon - 2AM every day (evenings/late nights being great because I could use the shared equipment).

When I came back to medical school, it was the last rotation for all the other medical students, and my first in 4.5 years. Nobody had any sympathy for me, and I had to work really hard to catch up. I was told in no uncertain terms that if I was going to match in any of the specialties I was interested in (all extremely competitive due to my personal high tech specialty bent), I needed to honor just about everything when I came back because I had always been a pretty middle of the road med student. So I did. But it was a heck of a game of catch up. This leaves off a few other minor concerns, like how I got less time to study for step 1.

Would I say I worked harder than a PhD-only student? You bet--at least in my area of research. Harder than a MD-only student? Somewhat.

 

[gstrub]

Neuro,
You got the shaft bro. First, your lab set higher expectations on you because, if I guess correctly, your PI held you to the same standards as a PhD student only under a shorter timeframe (hence the 16hr days, multiple pubs, etc). For me, it was clearly discussed between my PI, my MD/PhD director, and our medical school dean (who is a MD/PhD) that we would not have to complete the graduate school coursework and should be out of the lab in 4 years, with a minimum of one first author paper. This discussion took place the summer before I started. You also did not have your committee on board (did you select the members?) as you say they were uncomfortable with a 3 year PhD. 3 primary publications? Really? If you chose these members, you chose poorly, and if you were not allowed to choose them, then your program is not advocating for its students. Being comfortable with a "fast-track" PhD was the primary requirement for members getting on my committee in the first place! Many of my constituents have finished in 3 years with one paper and gone back.

Second, rotating into the last group sounds awful. Was it impossible for you to wait for the new crop? I couldn't imagine doing that. Either way, 3rd year is the same 3rd year for everyone. Some of my MD/PhD counterparts have said it is difficult in the beginning, but the learning curve is steep for everyone.

I think the take home message here is that it varies from program to program. I had it easier, way easier, than the PhD students in my lab. I was the one at the happy hours while they toiled away until 2am doing blots. My PhD is anything but "sub-par;" I ended up with 5 1st author publications (2 basic science from lab, 3 clinical in ENT), one review, and 3 co-authorships in Nature and Science (read: right place right time). And it took me 4 years, but only because I elected to stay on an extra 6 months at the end to help with other papers (and coming in during the winter would make it impossible to schedule away rotations, etc). Not having to complete the graduate coursework required for PhD students gave me an extra year of productivity as well (I should add I completed a MS before entering MD/PhD, so actually I did complete the required year of graduate coursework, but if I had come in directly it would not have been required). Also, my committee let me graduate before my 1st paper was accepted, again only because of the unique MD/PhD timeframe. It worked out in the end.

Either way, I think we agree that applying for a PhD with the intention of then applying to medical school is the wrong idea.

 

[gstrub]

Here let me give you a taste of what my future holds if I actually become an academic physician scientist funded by the NIH:

4 years PhD (I got through fast. I was lucky/good. It takes both to get done in that amount of time.)
1 year postdoc (I'm doing this now.)
4 years medical school
3-4 years residency
2 year postdoc (You have to get back into the game at some point if you want to do research.) Taking a break makes you rusty and the front line of research is ALWAYS moving.
Apply for a K award (a grant that helps you transition into a faculty position.
Become a professor (on a tenure track)
Work your *** off for 4-6 years to obtain tenure (Seriously you will be eating, sleeping and breathing your job)
Finally become a tenured faculty member at some university and continue to be eating, sleeping and breathing your job, but you have the option of more freedom and schools generally give you great benefits.

This is masochistic and I want to do it. Don't get me wrong, I think that if I could have been happy doing anything else then I would not be doing this. Be realistic make this path as easy as possible if you can. I spent a serious amount of time contemplating this and searching other options before I applied to medical school.

I have to ask...did you apply to medical school first unsuccessfully and and up doing research, or did you actually conceive the above plan from scratch? Did you never consider the combined degree? I got a MS before this but good Lord...

 

[Neuronix]

our PI held you to the same standards as a PhD student only under a shorter timeframe (hence the 16hr days, multiple pubs, etc).

The shorter time frame was entirely self-imposed. As long as you're productive, labs are happy (too happy...) to keep you around. As for the cast of characters in that drama, it's a long and complicated story that I can only tell through my biased perspective.

Second, rotating into the last group sounds awful. Was it impossible for you to wait for the new crop?

There's a complicated answer to this, but we'll just say not really. This situation is true for many of the MD/PhDs at my program. This is the downside of doing 6 months of rotations before the PhD. You only have 6 months when you return and you typically don't start with the fresh med students. That being said, there's some positives to that system as well.

Either way, I think we agree that applying for a PhD with the intention of then applying to medical school is the wrong idea.

Agreed. Though I will stand by one of my earlier quips:

"MD/PhDs: we do it longer, faster, and harder!"

 

[ChemMed]

I have to ask...did you apply to medical school first unsuccessfully and and up doing research, or did you actually conceive the above plan from scratch? Did you never consider the combined degree? I got a MS before this but good Lord...

Medical school wasn't even on my radar when I started graduate school. Before I started I was an academic based technician that worked on the discovery of novel drugs for cancer from natural resources. I loved it and decided to move forward with it.

What I had not fully realized at the time is that I loved it because of its potential to help vast numbers of people. In graduate school, life hit me with an eye opener at the reality of an industrial job. I was looking around and discovering what one would really be like and became extremely disenchanted. Working in academics was and is attractive but something was seriously missing. The scientist in me was happy but there was another part of me that I had ignored and at the time I had no idea what it was. I just knew I had to explore it to find out. So I did.

I met a few people who did tox and started going to rounds. Then I found I was giving them presentations on the chemical composition and toxicity of certain natural resources. Soon I was helping on cases. At that point it all came together for me. What I had missed so severely was the one on one with patients. I wasn't being delusional either, I was a certified nursing assistant for 4 years. That was the dirtiest and best job that I ever had.

I still love research though, and when I started to explore what it would take to do both or if I would have been okay with only doing one I found out some interesting things about myself I had never expected. I was also extremely happy that I still had a shot at the big dream. The real one with all the guts, hard work and reality involved. My path was the PHD to physician in a prayer that I can be both. I couldn't be happier.

 

[peanut11]

Neuro,
You got the shaft bro. First, your lab set higher expectations on you because, if I guess correctly, your PI held you to the same standards as a PhD student only under a shorter timeframe (hence the 16hr days, multiple pubs, etc). For me, it was clearly discussed between my PI, my MD/PhD director, and our medical school dean (who is a MD/PhD) that we would not have to complete the graduate school coursework and should be out of the lab in 4 years, with a minimum of one first author paper. This discussion took place the summer before I started. You also did not have your committee on board (did you select the members?) as you say they were uncomfortable with a 3 year PhD. 3 primary publications? Really? If you chose these members, you chose poorly, and if you were not allowed to choose them, then your program is not advocating for its students. Being comfortable with a "fast-track" PhD was the primary requirement for members getting on my committee in the first place! Many of my constituents have finished in 3 years with one paper and gone back.

Second, rotating into the last group sounds awful. Was it impossible for you to wait for the new crop? I couldn't imagine doing that. Either way, 3rd year is the same 3rd year for everyone. Some of my MD/PhD counterparts have said it is difficult in the beginning, but the learning curve is steep for everyone.

I think the take home message here is that it varies from program to program. I had it easier, way easier, than the PhD students in my lab. I was the one at the happy hours while they toiled away until 2am doing blots. My PhD is anything but "sub-par;" I ended up with 5 1st author publications (2 basic science from lab, 3 clinical in ENT), one review, and 3 co-authorships in Nature and Science (read: right place right time).
Either way, I think we agree that applying for a PhD with the intention of then applying to medical school is the wrong idea.

Way to rock the publications!

Agreed that it varies from program to program. The program I'm in will more or less let you design your schedule. So you can make it as rough as you want.

 

[sublm128]

So I will never be able to go to a US med school with my stats. Theyre just....well, abysmal. Everything else in my app is great and I have plenty more stuff.

Im doing a masters right now, which can be converted straight to a PhD in my school. I would have just 40 more credits, 16 of which would be dissertation. Therefore, in just two more years I could have a Ph.D. (AND yes I know that it would be two years cuz my lab does not jerk me around and try to use me as slave labor)

Do you think its a viable track? Cuz I have to decide before my masters is done this semester and i really want to go to med school. If not Ill always have a career in research.

The alternative is that Im at least somewhat competitive for DO schools, but i often question if I want to become a DO vs. and MD. I know im gonna get jumped for bringing up the DO vs. MD business. But i know that there are little things that my may constitute a big deal down the road. Im applying to both MD and DO in this country, and Im gonna get shredded at MD schools, but I dont know if i want a useless masters and go to DO school. I certainly want to do research in the future as a physician scientist, but I dont know if that means I have to have an MD/PhD.

I wonder if a Ph.D. and then an MD constitutes the same thing as an MD/Ph.D. I know its a stupid question, but someone brought up that its different.

Last question: if I only had an amcas gpa of 2.3-2.5 and a science gpa of 2.8 for undergrad, but maintained a 3.7 throughout my Ph.D. (72 credits) what kind of impact would that have on me getting in? I know med schols consider grade inflation, after all

I wanted to ask people who are doing this, instead of the stupid people in other threads that would not ever understand.

What should I do???????? Im so lost!!!!

 

[PfNO22]

So I will never be able to go to a US med school with my stats. Theyre just....well, abysmal. Everything else in my app is great and I have plenty more stuff.

🙁.
Hey, you don't have to do things just because they help a med school app, so volunteer and stuff just because it is the right thing to do.

Therefore, in just two more years I could have a Ph.D.

Good!!

Do you think its a viable track? Cuz I have to decide before my masters is done this semester and i really want to go to med school. If not Ill always have a career in research.

Take a look at the non-traditional forum.... it's never too late......

The alternative is that Im at least somewhat competitive for DO schools, but i often question if I want to become a DO vs. and MD.

DO schools want to make primary care physicians, not necessarily researchers, but hey if your research is good then whatever.

I wonder if a Ph.D. and then an MD constitutes the same thing as an MD/Ph.D.

YES! and this is not at all uncommon.

Last question: if I only had an amcas gpa of 2.3-2.5 and a science gpa of 2.8 for undergrad, but maintained a 3.7 throughout my Ph.D. (72 credits) what kind of impact would that have on me getting in?

Sounds low to me but I have no idea really.

 

[pseudoknot]

So I will never be able to go to a US med school with my stats. Theyre just....well, abysmal. Everything else in my app is great and I have plenty more stuff.

Im doing a masters right now, which can be converted straight to a PhD in my school. I would have just 40 more credits, 16 of which would be dissertation. Therefore, in just two more years I could have a Ph.D. (AND yes I know that it would be two years cuz my lab does not jerk me around and try to use me as slave labor)

Do you think its a viable track? Cuz I have to decide before my masters is done this semester and i really want to go to med school. If not Ill always have a career in research.

The alternative is that Im at least somewhat competitive for DO schools, but i often question if I want to become a DO vs. and MD. I know im gonna get jumped for bringing up the DO vs. MD business. But i know that there are little things that my may constitute a big deal down the road. Im applying to both MD and DO in this country, and Im gonna get shredded at MD schools, but I dont know if i want a useless masters and go to DO school. I certainly want to do research in the future as a physician scientist, but I dont know if that means I have to have an MD/PhD.

I wonder if a Ph.D. and then an MD constitutes the same thing as an MD/Ph.D. I know its a stupid question, but someone brought up that its different.

Last question: if I only had an amcas gpa of 2.3-2.5 and a science gpa of 2.8 for undergrad, but maintained a 3.7 throughout my Ph.D. (72 credits) what kind of impact would that have on me getting in? I know med schols consider grade inflation, after all

I did a PhD and then an MD.

I would probably try for the DO route if I were you, although I'm not sure how feasible that would be with your numbers. I'm just not as familiar with their admission process.

However, I don't think you'd have a chance at any US MD program even with the PhD. It would help a little (some here will say not at all, but I think it at least helped me to get interviews) but it will not make up for any substantial deficits elsewhere. As far as the graduate GPA, no one in med school admissions cares about that in the slightest. It could be 4.0 and it wouldn't do a thing for you. The best way to make up for a bad undergrad GPA is to do a special master's program where you take med school classes or similar. This too can be a high risk endeavor since these classes are not easy and I think it kind of closes the door if you take them and do poorly.

 

[QofQuimica]

So I will never be able to go to a US med school with my stats. Theyre just....well, abysmal. Everything else in my app is great and I have plenty more stuff.

Do you have any clinical experience and/or community service?

Im doing a masters right now, which can be converted straight to a PhD in my school. I would have just 40 more credits, 16 of which would be dissertation. Therefore, in just two more years I could have a Ph.D. (AND yes I know that it would be two years cuz my lab does not jerk me around and try to use me as slave labor)

No, you don't know this, at least not if you're truly doing original research. There is no way for your lab to control how long it takes for a project to be completed, because research doesn't follow a rigid schedule like that. Most people, myself included, go down a dead end or two during grad school. That's just the nature of the beast. If you're coming in already having an MS, I would plan on taking three more years, unless you're going to be doing a canned project with all the major kinks already worked out for you. (In that case, we can argue about whether you're really doing PhD-level research, but that's an argument for another thread.)

Do you think its a viable track? Cuz I have to decide before my masters is done this semester and i really want to go to med school. If not Ill always have a career in research.

Why do you want to go to med school? Please don't feel like you need to justify it to me, but you'd better be able to articulate that reason clearly for yourself and for your apps.

The alternative is that Im at least somewhat competitive for DO schools, but i often question if I want to become a DO vs. and MD. I know im gonna get jumped for bringing up the DO vs. MD business. But i know that there are little things that my may constitute a big deal down the road. Im applying to both MD and DO in this country, and Im gonna get shredded at MD schools, but I dont know if i want a useless masters and go to DO school. I certainly want to do research in the future as a physician scientist, but I dont know if that means I have to have an MD/PhD.

No, it doesn't. You can most definitely do research as a DO/PhD. There are even a few DO/PhD combined programs. MSU has the biggest one. You can go read about it on their website if you're interested. You can also talk to ChemMed, who is a PhD-to-DO getting ready to start her first year of med school. Other options that allow you to do research include MD/MS, DO/MS, MD-only, DO-only, and PhD-only. If you don't have graduate training (which you already will), then you would need to do some type of research fellowship. People who are MD-only or DO-only researchers will do this.

I wonder if a Ph.D. and then an MD constitutes the same thing as an MD/Ph.D. I know its a stupid question, but someone brought up that its different.

Different in what sense? It's a longer training path to do them separately. You don't have the support structure like you would in an MD/PhD program. You will probably have to pay for your MD or DO. Once you're done with school, there really isn't a difference anymore. My hospital badge says MD/PhD on it just like the combined program grads' badges do. The only way people will know the difference is by looking at my CV or me telling them.

Last question: if I only had an amcas gpa of 2.3-2.5 and a science gpa of 2.8 for undergrad, but maintained a 3.7 throughout my Ph.D. (72 credits) what kind of impact would that have on me getting in?

Not much, for two reasons. First, everyone who finished grad school has to maintain at least a 3.0. If you don't, you get put on academic probation and kicked out of grad school. So no one comes out of grad school with low grades. Second, most med school applicants don't go to grad school. In order to compare apples to apples, adcoms have to look at the things that *all* applicants have. What do they all have? They all took the four prereqs. They all have undergrad science GPAs and overall GPAs. They all took the MCAT. Therefore, those are the main stats we look at.

I know med schols consider grade inflation, after all

We do for grad school. As I said before, all grad school grades are inflated, because passing is a B. For UG grades? Nope, not at all, at least not at my med school.

I wanted to ask people who are doing this, instead of the stupid people in other threads that would not ever understand.

Maybe you don't mean it the way it came across here, but this attitude sucks. You are not smarter or better than other premeds just because you are going to have an MS or maybe a PhD. And the majority of those "stupid people" have run rings around you in the college classroom. As for understanding, there is nothing special about your situation. It is very common for med school classes in all med schools to have a PhD or two in them. There were two of us in my class.

What should I do???????? Im so lost!!!!

Yes, you are, which again is why you should watch it with the "stupid people" talk.

Ok, so where to start. Start by defining your goal. What kind of career are you looking to have? Do you really need an MD or DO, or can you reach your goal with just a PhD? The main reason why you would absolutely need an MD/DO is so that you can see patients. So, do you want to see patients at least part time? How do you know? If you haven't spent any time in a clinical setting, that's where you need to start. See if you can find a physician or two to shadow. Any specialty will do. Spend some time with them and see what their days are like. See if you can find an MD/PhD to shadow.

As for whether to leave your current program with an MS or to stay for a PhD, there isn't an inherent right or wrong answer to this question. It depends on how things are going in your current situation and how well what you're doing now fits with your goals. Do you feel like you're being productive in the lab? Do you like your field and want to do research for another few years in it? Is your PI mentoring you well? If you do leave with the MS, do you have a plan for what you will do instead for the next 2-3 years minimum before you might be able to start medical school?

If you work through all of these issues and decide that you do need an MD/DO to achieve your career goals, then you need to remediate your UG grades, which, as you said, are way too low for a competitive medical school application right now. You basically have the options that you laid out for MD and DO schools. DO schools can be a good choice for someone in your situation because you can replace your low grades by retaking those classes. This allows you to raise your GPA up to a reasonable level relatively quickly, possibly in a year or less. MD schools will not allow you to do this grade replacement. Some schools, including mine, will look at GPA trends over time. So if you have low old grades and good recent grades, we would take that into account. But what you need is a string of As in upper level *undergrad* classes, not grad school classes. Alternatively, you could look into doing a Special Masters Program. These are programs intended to help students with low grades get into med school. However, this is an expensive and high risk, high reward path to take.

But first things first. Before you can figure out what path to take, you need to know where the heck you're trying to go. Once you formulate your goals, you will have a much easier time planning on how to reach them. Hope this helps, and best of luck. 🙂

 

[sublm128]

Do you have any clinical experience and/or community service?


No, you don't know this, at least not if you're truly doing original research. There is no way for your lab to control how long it takes for a project to be completed, because research doesn't follow a rigid schedule like that. Most people, myself included, go down a dead end or two during grad school. That's just the nature of the beast. If you're coming in already having an MS, I would plan on taking three more years, unless you're going to be doing a canned project with all the major kinks already worked out for you. (In that case, we can argue about whether you're really doing PhD-level research, but that's an argument for another thread.)


Why do you want to go to med school? Please don't feel like you need to justify it to me, but you'd better be able to articulate that reason clearly for yourself and for your apps.


No, it doesn't. You can most definitely do research as a DO/PhD. There are even a few DO/PhD combined programs. MSU has the biggest one. You can go read about it on their website if you're interested. You can also talk to ChemMed, who is a PhD-to-DO getting ready to start her first year of med school. Other options that allow you to do research include MD/MS, DO/MS, MD-only, DO-only, and PhD-only. If you don't have graduate training (which you already will), then you would need to do some type of research fellowship. People who are MD-only or DO-only researchers will do this.


Different in what sense? It's a longer training path to do them separately. You don't have the support structure like you would in an MD/PhD program. You will probably have to pay for your MD or DO. Once you're done with school, there really isn't a difference anymore. My hospital badge says MD/PhD on it just like the combined program grads' badges do. The only way people will know the difference is by looking at my CV or me telling them.


Not much, for two reasons. First, everyone who finished grad school has to maintain at least a 3.0. If you don't, you get put on academic probation and kicked out of grad school. So no one comes out of grad school with low grades. Second, most med school applicants don't go to grad school. In order to compare apples to apples, adcoms have to look at the things that *all* applicants have. What do they all have? They all took the four prereqs. They all have undergrad science GPAs and overall GPAs. They all took the MCAT. Therefore, those are the main stats we look at.


We do for grad school. As I said before, all grad school grades are inflated, because passing is a B. For UG grades? Nope, not at all, at least not at my med school.


Maybe you don't mean it the way it came across here, but this attitude sucks. You are not smarter or better than other premeds just because you are going to have an MS or maybe a PhD. And the majority of those "stupid people" have run rings around you in the college classroom. As for understanding, there is nothing special about your situation. It is very common for med school classes in all med schools to have a PhD or two in them. There were two of us in my class.


Yes, you are, which again is why you should watch it with the "stupid people" talk.

Ok, so where to start. Start by defining your goal. What kind of career are you looking to have? Do you really need an MD or DO, or can you reach your goal with just a PhD? The main reason why you would absolutely need an MD/DO is so that you can see patients. So, do you want to see patients at least part time? How do you know? If you haven't spent any time in a clinical setting, that's where you need to start. See if you can find a physician or two to shadow. Any specialty will do. Spend some time with them and see what their days are like. See if you can find an MD/PhD to shadow.

As for whether to leave your current program with an MS or to stay for a PhD, there isn't an inherent right or wrong answer to this question. It depends on how things are going in your current situation and how well what you're doing now fits with your goals. Do you feel like you're being productive in the lab? Do you like your field and want to do research for another few years in it? Is your PI mentoring you well? If you do leave with the MS, do you have a plan for what you will do instead for the next 2-3 years minimum before you might be able to start medical school?

If you work through all of these issues and decide that you do need an MD/DO to achieve your career goals, then you need to remediate your UG grades, which, as you said, are way too low for a competitive medical school application right now. You basically have the options that you laid out for MD and DO schools. DO schools can be a good choice for someone in your situation because you can replace your low grades by retaking those classes. This allows you to raise your GPA up to a reasonable level relatively quickly, possibly in a year or less. MD schools will not allow you to do this grade replacement. Some schools, including mine, will look at GPA trends over time. So if you have low old grades and good recent grades, we would take that into account. But what you need is a string of As in upper level *undergrad* classes, not grad school classes. Alternatively, you could look into doing a Special Masters Program. These are programs intended to help students with low grades get into med school. However, this is an expensive and high risk, high reward path to take.

But first things first. Before you can figure out what path to take, you need to know where the heck you're trying to go. Once you formulate your goals, you will have a much easier time planning on how to reach them. Hope this helps, and best of luck. 🙂

Sorry about the "stupid ppl" comment. It wasnt intentional and I was referring to some of the people who were still premed and didnt know what they were talking about. i was getting disheartened by all the people who told me that I might as well give up (not just on sdn) I wasnt referring to residents and adcomms (who are the people i actually want to hear from).

Its also disheartening that I took classes that were difficult (not much inflation) while i worked in the hospital and researched simultaneously, and while I was studying for my mcat. I have also had about 300 hours of shadowing. Just started volunteering though.

I need either an MD or DO (i want to work with patients). My aacomas gpa is about 3.2 since it lumps my masters with my undergrad, and with my 30R im somewhat competitive for that. I guess i dont mind, but i dont want to look back and wonder if there was any way I could have done it as an md.

Im researching too right now and I have about 2 years of research experience with a 1st author review paper and two posters (1st author on one). Its really novel research and certainly not cookie cutter, but it if I stay for Ph.D its probably gonna be another 3 years at least.

I will have a primary research publication with a 1st author later this year.

Regarding your last statement, i have a string of A's in my final year, followed by grad school. If I did a postbacc, wouldnt my gpa be mixed in with my undergrad? What if my total gpa still doesnt pass cutoff at that point? If I do a postbacc and shell out 30k for that, then I want to be able to be competitive for like ...GW or VCU MD programs. Is this feasible?

Oh one last note. I have a rather unique life experience. I lost 115 lbs over 18 months, through diet and exercise. If i can relate this to my clinical experience and how my view on patient care has been influenced, do u think this will help?

Thanks for your thoughts Q

 

[PfNO22]

Sorry about the "stupid ppl" comment. It wasnt intentional and I was referring to some of the people who were still premed and didnt know what they were talking about.

Hi, stupid ppl here. I'll try only to talk about things I know about.

i was getting disheartened by all the people who told me that I might as well give up (not just on sdn) I wasnt referring to residents and adcomms (who are the people i actually want to hear from).

My advice, why keep it hypothetical? Make an appointment and go talk to the admissions director at your local medical school! I was amazed at how available she was at my local medical school even though she had thousands of Apps to look at. You can even send an email and ask to speak by phone, you have specific questions about the application process!

Oh one last note. I have a rather unique life experience. I lost 115 lbs over 18 months, through diet and exercise. If i can relate this to my clinical experience and how my view on patient care has been influenced, do u think this will help?

I wasn't interested in sharing THAT much personal information but your story could be framed in a way that relates it to future clinical experience and certainly I think your story in particular shows tremendous discipline and perseverance. But I don't know anything about that.

 

[QofQuimica]

Sorry about the "stupid ppl" comment. It wasnt intentional and I was referring to some of the people who were still premed and didnt know what they were talking about. i was getting disheartened by all the people who told me that I might as well give up (not just on sdn) I wasnt referring to residents and adcomms (who are the people i actually want to hear from).

I was referring to the premeds. Don't look down on them, especially while you're still one of them yourself. Everyone starts out kind of clueless about this process, and we all ask questions that seem dumb to the people who are further along in the process. I can tell you that as a nontrad applicant (I was 31 when I started med school), I got a lot of help from some of the premed UG students I taught and who worked in the lab. One girl in particular got me in touch with the right people who could help me, including the diversity office at the med school. Another former student told me about SDN. A third helped me find someone to shadow. They took the time to try to help me with my questions, and even if some of the answers weren't always right, they could at least point me in the right direction to figure things out. I wrote in my PS about how some of my mentees were becoming my mentors in this context. 🙂

When people are telling you to give up, it's usually because they know how difficult getting into med school is for even the most academically competitive applicants, and they can't imagine trying to climb out of a sub-3.0 GPA hole. Having spent enough time working with nontrads, many of whom have low old GPAs, I can tell you that it is possible, but there's no doubt that it's difficult. Depending on how bad the original grades were and how important it is for the applicant to go to an allo school, it often takes one or two year of solid coursework before they're reasonably competitive to apply. Even then, as you pointed out, their overall GPA may still be low enough that they get screened out by schools that don't take trends into consideration.

Its also disheartening that I took classes that were difficult (not much inflation) while i worked in the hospital and researched simultaneously, and while I was studying for my mcat. I have also had about 300 hours of shadowing. Just started volunteering though.

I need either an MD or DO (i want to work with patients). My aacomas gpa is about 3.2 since it lumps my masters with my undergrad, and with my 30R im somewhat competitive for that. I guess i dont mind, but i dont want to look back and wonder if there was any way I could have done it as an md.

Im researching too right now and I have about 2 years of research experience with a 1st author review paper and two posters (1st author on one). Its really novel research and certainly not cookie cutter, but it if I stay for Ph.D its probably gonna be another 3 years at least.

I will have a primary research publication with a 1st author later this year.

This is all great news. You are already in much better shape than it seemed like from your previous post. I think it's completely reasonable for you to apply to DO schools this year. Have you shadowed a DO? Some of these schools require a LOR from a DO. But you probably already know this since you've reached the point of filling out AACOMAS.

Regarding your last statement, i have a string of A's in my final year, followed by grad school. If I did a postbacc, wouldnt my gpa be mixed in with my undergrad?

Yes, although we can see a separate postbac GPA on AMCAS as well as the overall GPA, and AMCAS also breaks down your GPA by college year. So if you had a great senior year, we'd be able to see that. But you still won't be competitive for schools that care more about overall GPA than GPA trends.

What if my total gpa still doesnt pass cutoff at that point?

If it's a screening school that requires a 3.0 minimum GPA (which is what my state schools in FL do), then you will be screened out presecondary. There's not much point for you to apply to screening schools because of your GPA.

If I do a postbacc and shell out 30k for that, then I want to be able to be competitive for like ...GW or VCU MD programs. Is this feasible?

You'd need to talk to the admissions people at those schools to find out specifically what they would want you to do to make yourself more competitive for their program. But FWIW, you don't necessarily need to do a formal postbac program. A lot of the nontrads who are trying to overcome poor grades do an informal do-it-yourself postbac where they simply take upper level science classes. It is often much cheaper to go this route.

Oh one last note. I have a rather unique life experience. I lost 115 lbs over 18 months, through diet and exercise. If i can relate this to my clinical experience and how my view on patient care has been influenced, do u think this will help?

I think it would be interesting to read about in an essay, yes. Obesity is a major issue in this country, and particularly if you're interested in obesity research, it would be a good segue for you to explain your interest in medicine from both a patient and a research perspective.

Thanks for your thoughts Q

I feel like you're really struggling with the idea of being a DO because you're concerned that it might be looked down on as an inferior degree. FWIW, it's not. My dad is a DO, as is my brother-in-law, as were some of my med school profs and preceptors, as are some of my attendings now. The only way you'd know the difference is to read their ID badge. It *is* true that DOs are less likely to do research, but a lot of DOs don't want to do research, so there is quite a bit of self-selection there. Most MDs don't do research, either.

If it were me in your shoes, I would apply to DO schools, hopefully start med school next summer, and never look back. Either degree would get me where I wanted to go in the end, and spending an extra couple of years to rehabilitate my grades just to change the letters after my name wouldn't be worth it to me. But you're not me. If having the MD really matters to you, and you feel like you'll regret not trying to get into an allo school, then maybe taking the extra time for grade remediation is what you need to do. You're young enough that a couple of extra years won't be the end of the world. If you do decide that you'd rather try for an MD school, then again, I suggest you contact the schools you mentioned and ask them what they'd like to see you do to improve your application. You probably won't be competitive to apply this year, but see what they tell you.

 

[sublm128]

I was referring to the premeds. Don't look down on them, especially while you're still one of them yourself. Everyone starts out kind of clueless about this process, and we all ask questions that seem dumb to the people who are further along in the process. I can tell you that as a nontrad applicant (I was 31 when I started med school), I got a lot of help from some of the premed UG students I taught and who worked in the lab. One girl in particular got me in touch with the right people who could help me, including the diversity office at the med school. Another former student told me about SDN. A third helped me find someone to shadow. They took the time to try to help me with my questions, and even if some of the answers weren't always right, they could at least point me in the right direction to figure things out. I wrote in my PS about how some of my mentees were becoming my mentors in this context. 🙂

When people are telling you to give up, it's usually because they know how difficult getting into med school is for even the most academically competitive applicants, and they can't imagine trying to climb out of a sub-3.0 GPA hole. Having spent enough time working with nontrads, many of whom have low old GPAs, I can tell you that it is possible, but there's no doubt that it's difficult. Depending on how bad the original grades were and how important it is for the applicant to go to an allo school, it often takes one or two year of solid coursework before they're reasonably competitive to apply. Even then, as you pointed out, their overall GPA may still be low enough that they get screened out by schools that don't take trends into consideration.


This is all great news. You are already in much better shape than it seemed like from your previous post. I think it's completely reasonable for you to apply to DO schools this year. Have you shadowed a DO? Some of these schools require a LOR from a DO. But you probably already know this since you've reached the point of filling out AACOMAS.


Yes, although we can see a separate postbac GPA on AMCAS as well as the overall GPA, and AMCAS also breaks down your GPA by college year. So if you had a great senior year, we'd be able to see that. But you still won't be competitive for schools that care more about overall GPA than GPA trends.


If it's a screening school that requires a 3.0 minimum GPA (which is what my state schools in FL do), then you will be screened out presecondary. There's not much point for you to apply to screening schools because of your GPA.


You'd need to talk to the admissions people at those schools to find out specifically what they would want you to do to make yourself more competitive for their program. But FWIW, you don't necessarily need to do a formal postbac program. A lot of the nontrads who are trying to overcome poor grades do an informal do-it-yourself postbac where they simply take upper level science classes. It is often much cheaper to go this route.


I think it would be interesting to read about in an essay, yes. Obesity is a major issue in this country, and particularly if you're interested in obesity research, it would be a good segue for you to explain your interest in medicine from both a patient and a research perspective.


I feel like you're really struggling with the idea of being a DO because you're concerned that it might be looked down on as an inferior degree. FWIW, it's not. My dad is a DO, as is my brother-in-law, as were some of my med school profs and preceptors, as are some of my attendings now. The only way you'd know the difference is to read their ID badge. It *is* true that DOs are less likely to do research, but a lot of DOs don't want to do research, so there is quite a bit of self-selection there. Most MDs don't do research, either.

If it were me in your shoes, I would apply to DO schools, hopefully start med school next summer, and never look back. Either degree would get me where I wanted to go in the end, and spending an extra couple of years to rehabilitate my grades just to change the letters after my name wouldn't be worth it to me. But you're not me. If having the MD really matters to you, and you feel like you'll regret not trying to get into an allo school, then maybe taking the extra time for grade remediation is what you need to do. You're young enough that a couple of extra years won't be the end of the world. If you do decide that you'd rather try for an MD school, then again, I suggest you contact the schools you mentioned and ask them what they'd like to see you do to improve your application. You probably won't be competitive to apply this year, but see what they tell you.

Q,

I have not shadowed a DO yet but I will very soon.

I think a lot of my misconception on the disparity arises from one of my family members, who is old school MD. Even if there is a disparity, after researching I feel that DO would fit me well too because in addition to the basic medical curriculum I would also have alternative medicine techniques under my belt.

I really think that this is the most helpful advice I've gotten thus far - not to say that others have not been helpful, but it clearly shows you want to help just based on all the info that you put down. At this point I think I'll take your advice about going to DO school, though im not sure how they'll react to my institutional action for plagiarism from 5 years ago (I think i pissed off a lot of people by asking 🙁🙁). I think if I demonstrate how much Ive learned since then, I might be forgiven for it. I mean, personally I think having published speaks volumes on learning how not to plagiarize, lol.

Anyway Ill let you know how it goes.

Thanks again for all your help 🙂

 

[QofQuimica]

Q,

I have not shadowed a DO yet but I will very soon.

I think a lot of my misconception on the disparity arises from one of my family members, who is old school MD. Even if there is a disparity, after researching I feel that DO would fit me well too because in addition to the basic medical curriculum I would also have alternative medicine techniques under my belt.

I really think that this is the most helpful advice I've gotten thus far - not to say that others have not been helpful, but it clearly shows you want to help just based on all the info that you put down. At this point I think I'll take your advice about going to DO school, though im not sure how they'll react to my institutional action for plagiarism from 5 years ago (I think i pissed off a lot of people by asking 🙁🙁). I think if I demonstrate how much Ive learned since then, I might be forgiven for it. I mean, personally I think having published speaks volumes on learning how not to plagiarize, lol.

Anyway Ill let you know how it goes.

Thanks again for all your help 🙂

This story keeps getting more and more complicated. 😛

Knowing now that you have an IA, I can't say how much that will affect your app. But you should definitely be prepared to discuss it on your secondaries and during interviews. Don't make excuses, and do accept responsibility. It's obviously not good to have an IA, but as you suggested, it's better that it was a (relatively) long time ago as opposed to having just happened. I like the idea of discussing how your experience with being an author yourself has given you a better understanding of avoiding plagiarism, and hopefully also with the problems caused by plagiarism.

As far as your "old-school" family member goes, see if you can find out what this person's concerns and experiences with DOs are, and maybe you can address them. Like I suggested before, you may also want to PM ChemMed, since she just went through this whole app process and will be a DO/PhD. Sometimes it helps to know that you're not alone.

Best of luck, and please do keep me posted. 🙂

 

[Danlee07]

So the general consensus is look at the programs that offer the MD/PhD and compare them to the PhD track? I'm struggling to decide my path as well.

 

[Vivara]

Just: I think it's worth noting that in countries with no combined MD/PhD degrees, the medical degree and residency training is done first. (In most cases anyway.) To get attending in Ireland, it's very common, in fields like psychiatry, neurology and cardiology, to gain your PhD after, and then jump back to hospital/teaching work. I'm not entirely sure how it works, anyone from the UK or Ireland should be able to explain it a bit better.

Of course, they also have the opportunity to do an MD degree, which is a research doctorate for medical graduates (the primary medical degree is not an MD as in the US). ASFAIK, this is also accepted in place of a PhD for attending posts. The key thing with this degree is that doctors must have five years of postgraduate work (residency training) completed.

 

[Danlee07]

So a continuation of this... I've seen some pure MDs at different schools while searching for research interest topics of faculty. The research interest they state and a few publications make it seem like they're doing primary research with R01 (i'm not sure about this)... I thought you needed PhD for it, so does that mean pure MDs are limited to clinical research??? Also, doing a PhD first, I'd be 4 years out of it if I pursued MD. When choosing a research based residency/fellowship, does this at all hinge on my time away from PhD, thus lowering chances of someone recruiting for a mainly research oriented position??

 

[Hemichordate]

I'm not sure if anyone's done this, but is it possible to do your PhD after your clinical/academic fellowship (following residency)? Could a person do their fellowship, then just tack on the years needed for their PhD onto the end of that fellowship? And since you're getting a job immediately after you get your PhD, I think the benefit would be much greater than if you got your PhD during med school.

Again, I don't know if anyone's done this before, but is this something that would be possible if one wants to get both degrees, but doesn't like the long years needed to get the PhD?

 

[StIGMA]

Danlee: MD's can absolutely apply for R01 funding. Doing a PhD prior to medical school is much less favorable than a combined MD/PhD program. First, you are not funded for the MD. Second, you are out of research longer prior to looking for a faculty position. Third, your combined training is on average longer (take 5-6 years PhD + 4 years MD vs 7-8 years for most students in a combined program). Before looking for a faculty position, you will need to pursue further research to acquire startup funds- and this will be the same in both paths.

Hemichordate: The main disadvantage to completing a PhD after residency is that most people are burdened with medical school loans. The combined MD/PhD programs are fully funded. While the PhD would be funded-- staring hundreds of thousands of dollars of student loans in the face with the ability to immediately secure a higher paying job than any research gig... and you don't see many people pursuing PhD's post-residency. The duration of the PhD would not be abbreviated anymore than during an MD/PhD program, so I am not sure what you mean by disliking the timeline of a PhD.

There are also a few programs that combine a PhD with residency (see http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=333133).

 

[atsai3]

I'm not sure if anyone's done this, but is it possible to do your PhD after your clinical/academic fellowship (following residency)? Could a person do their fellowship, then just tack on the years needed for their PhD onto the end of that fellowship? And since you're getting a job immediately after you get your PhD, I think the benefit would be much greater than if you got your PhD during med school.

Again, I don't know if anyone's done this before, but is this something that would be possible if one wants to get both degrees, but doesn't like the long years needed to get the PhD?

I'm not sure I understand your question, but I think you are referring to a situation where a clinical fellowship entails a substantial research component. One of my friends began a PhD during his fellowship. She completed IM residency and then an ID fellowship in which year 1 was predominantly clinical (i.e., consults day in and day out -- not much time for research) and in which years 2-3 were predominantly research (i.e., clinic one afternoon a week, the occasional call). During the second year of her fellowship, she began taking some MPH classes and then decided she wanted to complete a full PhD. The PhD will still take 4-6 years to complete (depending on how hard and how efficiently she works), but she "saves time" in that the years in which she would have spent doing research anyway (i.e., years 1-2 of ID fellowship) she can apply towards a PhD.

 

[Hemichordate]

I'm not sure I understand your question, but I think you are referring to a situation where a clinical fellowship entails a substantial research component. One of my friends began a PhD during his fellowship. She completed IM residency and then an ID fellowship in which year 1 was predominantly clinical (i.e., consults day in and day out -- not much time for research) and in which years 2-3 were predominantly research (i.e., clinic one afternoon a week, the occasional call). During the second year of her fellowship, she began taking some MPH classes and then decided she wanted to complete a full PhD. The PhD will still take 4-6 years to complete (depending on how hard and how efficiently she works), but she "saves time" in that the years in which she would have spent doing research anyway (i.e., years 1-2 of ID fellowship) she can apply towards a PhD.

Thank you, that's exactly what I was asking in my question. Do you know how common it is to get your PhD this way?

 

[Danlee07]

Well, does this scenario work as well?? If you get into a graduate school PhD program, then you complete master's coursework, but apply in the 2nd/3rd year to Med school, you get accepted and attend all four years, can you finish up the actual PhD part with this link you gave??? I'm seriously trying to figure out what direction i really want to take to obtain my goal...so i'm contemplating all routes.
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=333133

 

[atsai3]

Well, does this scenario work as well?? If you get into a graduate school PhD program, then you complete master's coursework, but apply in the 2nd/3rd year to Med school, you get accepted and attend all four years, can you finish up the actual PhD part with this link you gave??? I'm seriously trying to figure out what direction i really want to take to obtain my goal...so i'm contemplating all routes.
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=333133

You would need buy-in from your PhD committee to do something like this.

It's possible that, once enrolled in the PhD program and after you have spent 2 years getting to know people there, they would allow you to do this. But it's not a guarantee.

I think it's unlikely that they would give you permission to do this if you told them before enrolling that this is your plan. After all, it's effectively 4 years off from your PhD studies. They may as well choose another equally qualified candidate who isn't going to take 4 years off.

 

[Velocity]

Im doing a masters right now, which can be converted straight to a PhD in my school. I would have just 40 more credits, 16 of which would be dissertation. Therefore, in just two more years I could have a Ph.D. (AND yes I know that it would be two years cuz my lab does not jerk me around and try to use me as slave labor)

Do you think its a viable track? Cuz I have to decide before my masters is done this semester and i really want to go to med school. If not Ill always have a career in research.

The alternative is that Im at least somewhat competitive for DO schools, but i often question if I want to become a DO vs. and MD. I know im gonna get jumped for bringing up the DO vs. MD business. But i know that there are little things that my may constitute a big deal down the road. Im applying to both MD and DO in this country, and Im gonna get shredded at MD schools, but I dont know if i want a useless masters and go to DO school. I certainly want to do research in the future as a physician scientist, but I dont know if that means I have to have an MD/PhD.

Your situation sounds similar to mine, and you might even be doing your Master's at the same institution that I did mine at.

As PnFNO22 mentioned, most osteopathic programs seem more interested in training primary care doctors than they do about training doctors for academic medicine. I had one osteopathic school interview (others screened me out - don't get cocky, if you're not competitive for MD schools, you may be barely passable for DO programs) and there was basically a question about what I wanted to do with the osteopathic medical degree. I was totally honest, and said academic medicine. The school accepted me straight out. It was a big surprise to me; I thought that my emphasis on academic medicine would be a turn-off to them (but I'm too poor a liar to say anything but the truth in those situations).

I shadowed a DO at the institution that I did my Master's in (an allopathic institution). I asked him about the barriers to academic medicine and research he faced as a DO. He admitted that it was a bit more difficult to get in as a DO, but that once you were in, you were set. He said that nobody questioned him or cared that he his degree was a DO instead of a MD. You'll need to utilize connections and show a commitment to research that MD holders might not need to, but it's possible. I also know of another research-heavy DO... it may not be terribly common compared to MDs, but I wonder if that's due to a bias against DOs in academia, or if most DOs simply aren't the type to be interested in academic medicine?

At the end of the day it's up to you, but otherwise I followed Q's mindset: they took me, MD programs didn't, and it isn't worth it to me to go through the emotional toll, expense, and time of reapplying to simply change the "O" to an "M" and invert the letter order of the degree I'll receive. There are people who engage heavily in research with "only" a MD (and probably DO-only also exists, but I haven't seen that yet), and there are MD/PhDs who don't do any research at all. Just having the degree after your name doesn't mean you'll be doing that sort of work. If you want to do that type of work, you'll push to get into that type of work with a DO, an MD, and any combination of other letters afterward.

 

[Danlee07]

I'd probably ruin my bridge with the original PhD committee, but it'd be after enrollment since I wouldn't be completely positive. Then I'd join an entirely different PhD after residency. So this would work... And the vibe I'm getting is... I just need to get the post-baccalaureate degree and can still participate in whatever field...

 

[pseudoknot]

Well, does this scenario work as well?? If you get into a graduate school PhD program, then you complete master's coursework, but apply in the 2nd/3rd year to Med school, you get accepted and attend all four years, can you finish up the actual PhD part with this link you gave??? I'm seriously trying to figure out what direction i really want to take to obtain my goal...so i'm contemplating all routes.
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=333133

 

[QofQuimica]

, and I agree.

Premeds, if you want both degrees, you should do everything humanly possible to get yourself into an MD/PhD or DO/PhD program. Barring that, you should aim to get into an MD-only or DO-only program, and ideally at a school that might let you transfer into their combined degree program later. Barring that, you should work on strengthening your app further so that you can gain admission to a medical program. You would then either take time off during med school to do the PhD or do the PhD after your MD/DO. Coming into grad school with the intention of trying to gain admission to the affiliated medical school is *not* a good plan, and will give you the lowest odds of success of all the options given. The only reason to do PhD-only is if you want to be a PhD-only researcher. I really can't spell it out any simpler.

 

[Neuronix]

Again, I don't know if anyone's done this before, but is this something that would be possible if one wants to get both degrees, but doesn't like the long years needed to get the PhD?

If you don't like the long years needed to get a PhD, don't get one. It sounds like you're just looking for a way to get a PhD faster? That's just kind of silly. You can easily take this to an extreme--you pay some money to a website and I'm sure they'll give you a PhD. What you're really looking for is the training to become a majority researcher, not just a degree. This takes time.

There are those out there who argue that getting the PhD during residency/fellowship/post-doc isn't a bad path. This is more common in other countries. In America medical school debt and clinical pressure makes it less common, but possible. I will leave it by saying--if you know you want MD/PhD to start, go MD/PhD. If you can't get into MD/PhD or change your mind late in med school/residency, well make a new thread in a few years and we'll talk about MD->research pathways. I don't want to talk about this now because it is very complicated and people have strong opinions both ways. Do a search in this forum (and on google for that matter) and you will find threads where this has been discussed in the past.

Also just to reiterate what's being said--applying to MD or MD/PhD during grad school is extremely unadviseable. That is very rarely successful.