MD/PhD easier?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Probably. Existing MD/PhD students will be dropping like flies, reverting to MD-only. If you're proactive you can position yourself to slide into one of their spots.
 
What makes you say that MD/PhD's are "dropping like flies?"

To the PO, I think it depends on the program. At my program, they try to take 1 MS1/year into the MD/PhD class, so if you can perform very well during your first semester, you may have it easier. Certainly you will have overcome the hurdle of getting into medical school...you will just have to demonstrate a commitment to research.
 
NCF145 said:
As an MS-1 would it be any easier to get into the MD/PhD program at my school?
Click to expand...
I've investigated this path myself, and it is possible to do this. It depends on how your school is run. Every department depends on funding, and some are so tight that you'd have to wait for a MD/PhD student to drop out before you could apply to take their spot. Some are more pay-as-you-go, or they are more flush with $$$ so it isn't as much of an issue.

With respect to Gut Shot's comment, it is true. They used to have a huge problem with dropouts. Especially when the programs were structured with the MD degree 1st, and then the PhD 2nd. People would get to year 4, be tired with school, see their buds go off to internship, and drop the PhD. Its a long haul, and even with the funding (free/partial MD), it only just breaks even with a solo MD.
 
I think "dropping like flies" is a bit (or a lot) of an overstatement, but every program does have some attrition and that may be in your favor since you are kind of already "in the system." However, you will still have to show a serious commitment to research on par with other MD/PhD applicants.
 
How would I go about showing a commitment to research? In undergrad I did 1 semester of literature research on c-myc and its relation to Burkitt's lymphoma (I don't even know if this counts), 1-2 months of cell cytotoxicity studies for cancer drugs and 1 year of research on licorice and its correlation to the generation of hypertension (this included a lot of work in the lab). My hypertension research was for my Honors thesis. I haven't had anything published, but am interested in trying to get my thesis submitted. Would I need to do anything else?

After going through almost 1 semester of med school I thought it would be more intellectually stimulating (although it is only the 1st semester). I find the stuff fascinating and absolutely love what I am studying, I just feel that I could be doing more with my time...especially when I have all of these opportunities literally at my doorstep.

I haven't made up my mind to do it or not. I am just toying with the idea right now. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
 
NCF145 said:
I find the stuff fascinating and absolutely love what I am studying, I just feel that I could be doing more with my time...especially when I have all of these opportunities literally at my doorstep.

I haven't made up my mind to do it or not. I am just toying with the idea right now. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

If you want to be doing "more" with your time, then get through med school as quickly as possible. Don't get sidetracked into a bottomless pit of churning out data so some guy can submit another R01.
 
gstrub said:
What makes you say that MD/PhD's are "dropping like flies?"
Click to expand...

Also my experience, many people I know have reverted to just MD. I have asked all the MD/PhDs I know the same question: "would you do it all over again?"

Invariably is the answer is no.
 
Gut Shot said:
If you want to be doing "more" with your time, then get through med school as quickly as possible. Don't get sidetracked into a bottomless pit of churning out data so some guy can submit another R01.
Click to expand...
:laugh: Grad student abuse, anyone?

OP - I have similar thoughts. I also have thought/still think about going the MD/PhD route. I'd get to do tons of fun stuff, make neat discoveries, and so on.

But then I remember defending my MS and how much of a bear that was in getting everything and everyone together, getting the data written up into a coherent thesis, and convincing everyone that it was enough.

There's several advantages to going straight through residency and then doing research (as a fellow) - you will bill for you time as an attending, the techniques you learn will still be relevant when you do you own research (as opposed to 5 years out with a MD/PhD), and your pay will be better.

These are just my thoughts why I don't go MD/PhD. Make your own decision after investigating it at your school. There is definitely a place for MD/PhDs.
 
MSTP programs track attrition very closely, and if a program starts loosing people left and right, they will lsoe their status with the NIH and either have to close down completely or become a non-MSTP program thats has other sources of funding for its MD/PHDs.

I disagree that we are "dropping like flies." Average MSTP attrition is around 10-15%.
 
wanabdoc said:
Also my experience, many people I know have reverted to just MD. I have asked all the MD/PhDs I know the same question: "would you do it all over again?"

Invariably is the answer is no.
Click to expand...

invariably, i'm sure

OP, this has been asked before. Try searching the Physician Scientist forum also.
 
Well, at my program, if you don't finish (i.e. dropout or do MD only) you have to pay back every penny they have given you (in my case out of state tuition + stipend = over $50,000/yr) at 8% interest, effective immediately, so we are quite motivated.

Plus our program is only 6 years (2MD+3PhD+1MD) and you're done, provided you can get your research done. I've done the math money wise, and it was smarter this way for me financially (I would have over $300K in debt otherwise).

In my experience, if you have research experience (you do, OP) and do well your first semester, you have a good shot at a spot. Of course as someone mentioned this is program dependent.
-G
 
My program is not NIH, but is fully funded. I agree it would be tempting as hell to just do the MD after getting the full ride!
 
My school has a non-NIH funded MD/PhD program. I have not heard of much attrition at my school in spite of the program not providing tuition waivers to all MD/PhD students during the MD portion of their education.
 
NCF145 said:
I haven't made up my mind to do it or not. I am just toying with the idea right now. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that a physician (MD-only) has quite a lot of research opportunities. You should probably talk to some MD-only researchers and see if they think if a PhD would be worthwhile. You could save yourself a lot of time if you found out that the route you like most only requires an MD rather than both.
 
TheProwler said:
Don't forget that a physician (MD-only) has quite a lot of research opportunities. You should probably talk to some MD-only researchers and see if they think if a PhD would be worthwhile. You could save yourself a lot of time if you found out that the route you like most only requires an MD rather than both.
Click to expand...

my feeling is that MDs will think you don't need a PhD to do research (we're talking basic science here, i'm assuming). not sure about what the MD/PhDs will say tho my feeling is they'll think the PhD helped them become a lot . otherwise there's no point to the combined degree. it'll probably come down to whether the PhD was the best use of time. certainly you don't NEED a PhD just like you don't NEED to play organized sports at a young age to be a star later (e.g. Tim Duncan).

my gut feeling is that the additional stuff you learn in your PhD years and even in your MD years (seminars, journal club, etc) teach you how to think like a scientist. for me, i started in june and already i'm appreciating basic science articles so much more. in journal club we rip apart almost all the articles (and they're almost always Nature or Science) we read...finding things they should have done, could have done better, why they didn't do this simple experiment, etc. and remember you're being trained with other people who will all motivate you, either directly or indirectly. but that's my bias. i'm definitely a "scientist" type (i.e. why, how not what)

with that said, this thread is very biased against MD/PhD training. try the Physician Scientist forum for another perspective.
 
bubbachuck said:
...with that said, this thread is very biased against MD/PhD training. try the Physician Scientist forum for another perspective.
Click to expand...
:laugh: Well, the thread is located in a place where most of the informed responses will come from those who chose not to go MD/PhD. :laugh: I actually think it's gone better than if it had been placed in the MD/PhD forum...

I had years of medical research experience before starting my MD. For the sort of career I want (clinical with some research), I feel the experience I have is sufficient. It's a calculated risk. Most folks in MD/PhD programs don't want the same career mix I do, (mostly research, little clinical component,) nor do they have years of prior experience, so they go the whole hog. The choice to go MD or MD/PhD is much more dependent on what you want to do and where you are in life. There is no right or wrong answer, just options that fit a particular person's goals.
 
As of now (and I don't see it changing since I have wanted to do it since elementary school), I am interested in pursuing neurosurgery. I definitely want to do research, but I want to focus more on practicing. I also want to be involved in the academic side of the specialty. So what it is looking like is that getting the PhD would be more work than is necessary to accomplish what I want. Am I correct in this assumption?
 
I remember NS residencies having research years built in. Check it out. There's also a number of research residencies out there. They are mostly IM, Path, and Peds, but there are others. Also look at research fellowships (usually 2 yrs training beyond residency).

Many of these options are listed on the American Physician-Scientist Assoc. website.
 
bubbachuck said:
(we're talking basic science here, i'm assuming)

with that said, this thread is very biased against MD/PhD training. try the Physician Scientist forum for another perspective.
Click to expand...
I don't know if the OP knows if s/he wants to do basic research or not, so it would be worth the time now to figure out what exactly s/he would like to do.

For those who want an MD/PhD, they have a lot of respect from me, but as you're well aware, it takes even more time from an already lengthy career path. I just noticed that the OP wants to do neurosurgery. I've got a friend in our MSTP, and that's what he wants to do. He took one year off after high school, but other than that, it's straight through for him. He'll be 38 before he starts practicing, and that's assuming he gets his PhD in a timely fashion.
 
To the OP, FYI, a buddy of mine from my program matched at UCSF (1st choice) for Neurosurgery 2 years back, and in his email to our students, said the PhD was a HUGE help.
 
gstrub said:
To the OP, FYI, a buddy of mine from my program matched at UCSF (1st choice) for Neurosurgery 2 years back, and in his email to our students, said the PhD was a HUGE help.
Click to expand...

Sure, but for most of us mere mortals it's akin to swatting a fly with a Buick.
 
I suppose you are right...if you are looking to go into a competitive specialty that has a research component (NSG, ENT, Rad Onc, even plastics RADS and GS) and want to go to a top program (UCSF, Stanford, Hopkins, etc), being a MD/PhD will be a HUGE help.

If you want to do EM at your local podunk program, it won't make any difference.

You never know what you will decide to do with your life during medical school. The MD/PHD will NOT hurt you.
 
Ice Nine said:
...I personally think that mudphud money would be better appropriated to a combined research/clinical residency path rather than interrupting medical school...
Click to expand...
It's a good idea, and you may be right. One argument I have is that residency is where you specialize. In that scheme, the lion's share of the $$$ would go to IM, Peds, and Path. Physician scientists are needed in all fields.
 
bubbachuck said:
my feeling is that MDs will think you don't need a PhD to do research (we're talking basic science here, i'm assuming). not sure about what the MD/PhDs will say tho my feeling is they'll think the PhD helped them become a lot . otherwise there's no point to the combined degree. it'll probably come down to whether the PhD was the best use of time. certainly you don't NEED a PhD just like you don't NEED to play organized sports at a young age to be a star later (e.g. Tim Duncan).

my gut feeling is that the additional stuff you learn in your PhD years and even in your MD years (seminars, journal club, etc) teach you how to think like a scientist. for me, i started in june and already i'm appreciating basic science articles so much more. in journal club we rip apart almost all the articles (and they're almost always Nature or Science) we read...finding things they should have done, could have done better, why they didn't do this simple experiment, etc. and remember you're being trained with other people who will all motivate you, either directly or indirectly. but that's my bias. i'm definitely a "scientist" type (i.e. why, how not what)

with that said, this thread is very biased against MD/PhD training. try the Physician Scientist forum for another perspective.
Click to expand...

I graduated with my MD last year, and not knowing exactly what I wanted to do, decided (was talked into it by my MSTP buddy who needed someone he trusted doing the grunt work while he finishes 4th year) to do a year of basic science research. I love it, but the learning curve for EVERYTHING in the lab is much steeper for me than it is for someone who has gone through a PhD, especially data analysis and experimental design.

I would personally say that if a person KNEW they wanted to stay primarily as a researcher, then get the PhD, otherwise just showing up and being eager and willing to learn can go a long way. Also, like someone else pointed out there are research specific tracks in a few specialties (most are 2 years clinical 2-3 years research), I looked into UAB's research track, but I can't convince myself I want to be more of an researcher than a clinician.

The PhD seems to help about everywhere designated "competitive top programs" in any specialty when it comes to getting interviews and probably matching. Most places though will probably not care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kanye's Psychiatrist
  • Locked
MD hbjknbhljknlm
Replies
6
Views
1K
Kanye's Psychiatrist
Kanye's Psychiatrist
S
SDN Article: 20 Questions: Frank Douglas, PhD, MD, Neuroendocrinologist
Replies
0
Views
664
Sarah Brubaker
S
C
  • Question Question
MD .
Replies
1
Views
470
AJS59
AJS59
F
MD WAMC IM Safety Schools
Replies
0
Views
38
FakeHegel
F
E
Salary as an MD vs. PhD
Replies
3
Views
4K
mistafab
mistafab
Top