1.) MD/PhD loses money in nearly every case, especially with better paying specialties. Even more so if get trapped in academia. Financially, MD/PhD is a honey coated poison pill.
2.) True, but at the same time, that's a hell of an investment for marginal benefit. You can be competitive for every specialty from any medical school as long as you excel. To do a PhD just to be marginally more competitive for a specialty is foolhardy.
3.) This is something that could be fulfilled by going MD/PhD, but absolutely not required. Clinical research is a far cry from basic bench work, which is what most PhD programs trains you for.
4.) MD/PhD helps, but again, not required.
5.) Okay, but for 10 years, you will be balls-deep in the hospital. More so if your priorities change. If you don't like clinical medicine, get out now. Your 3-4 year stint as a PhD researcher will be a distant memory by the time you're done with all your training. Do you really want to get into your residency and then realize you can't stand the thought of doing clinical work for one more day? Like it or not, money is a pillar of medicine and certain departments in the hospital enable other departments to be around. You will need to bring revenue into the system, regardless of how much distaste that leaves in your mouth.
6.) This is a poor and frankly immature reason to do a PhD. Spending 3-4 years to get a degree because you might get along better with your colleagues? Give me a break.
You really need to do some introspection and figure out what your goals really are. To me, you're all over the place. You won't survive the bull**** you need to swallow to become a clinician and you aren't gutsy enough to go for just a PhD if that's where your true passion lies.
I'm way too bored tonight, and I have some time off now, so I'll respond to this. I work with a lot of MD/PhDs so I can at least share what I've learned from them. Most of the original post seems misinformed, but maybe I can do rehash what I've learned this year.
1) This is 100% correct. I've done the calculations specifically, and MD/PhDs take a big loss. The only reason a stipend is given is because without it no one would do these programs. Not wanting to deal with loans is a stupid reason to lose out on tens of thousands and 4 years of life.
2) I think I'd much rather commit myself to it and basically life like a hermit for four years than spend an extra 4 years just to get a competitive edge.
3) MD/PhD is NOT what you want for clinical research. MD/PhD is what you should do if your goal is to run a lab doing bench work. Basically, only do MD/PhD if you absolutely can't stand the thought of beakers and cell culture no longer being part of your life.
4) You can do this with an MD. In fact, it's often easier to do this than it is to get a job in private practice. Really, as long as you have a decent pedigree this isn't all that hard.
5) This is kind of legit. I could see a good argument here in that you want the variety, but yeah, you're gonna have to like the clinical work. Your PhD will
not be a distant memory after training. If you have an MD/PhD, you'll do bench work during your training if you choose to pursue it. My PhD bosses hire MD/PhDs in their residencies to take on projects all the time (although they complain about them because they take longer to complete them).
6) This is a terrible reason to
pick what you do, but it's a real thing. Still, even if there is a trend here, and you
tend to like PhDs more, it will come down to a few people who you like or don't like. I've definitely met both MDs and PhDs that would tempt me with murder if I had to work with them all day.
If you don't see yourself running a lab doing basic science research
primarily, please do everyone a favor and don't lose your own money/time while simultaneously eating up the funding someone could have used for what it was intended for.
Real reasons to pursue an MD/PhD
1) You want to do basic lab research, but you're a sensible human being and realize that the job market for life sciences PhDs is abysmal and that MD/PhD is a much better option financially.
2) You enjoy clinical medicine, but aspire to create change on a more fundamental level rather than on a case-by-case basis. A doctor treats a single patient at a time, but a researcher can notably
improve the treatment of millions if he/she helps develop a new drug/therapy or the knowledge base that leads to new drugs/therapy.
3) You're primarily a researcher who wants to inform his/her research with clinical experience, thereby increasing your efficiency by properly addressing the needs of the field.
4) It can be easier to get research funds as an MD/PhD than as a PhD. This is a noted phenomenon, and PhDs absolutely hate it, but the NIH is pushing their own agenda, so you'd be fool not to take note and follow the funding trail.
5) You've always done the hardest things and been admitted to the hardest programs and been told you were the best and you'll be damned if some other idiot is going to have a degree you don't and look smarter than you on paper.