Medical Technology

[Roley7405]

Does anyone know what a Medical Technologists is? If so, how come every pre-med student wouldn't choose this as there major before going to med school, its seems to have more relevant classes compared to the pre-med/bio majors.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gls5377]

OH MY GOD! YOU HEARD OF IT...I DIDN'T KNOW THOSE TECHS STILL EXIST . No, I'm just kidding. I am in fact a medical technologist and it is an awesome field. Absolutely important and as important to the field of medicine today as is a nurse, PA, or physician. They work in the laboratory of hospitals in all fields; hematology, chemistry, micro, and blood banking. They analyze blood, urine, tissue, etc., aiding physicians in diagnosis and treatment.

To answer your question, my guess is that people are unaware of the field and if they are aware, it is much easier to major in biology instead of medical technology. Med Technology usually requires upper level chemistry and a 12 month rotation in a clinical setting as a fourth year of college. In my opinion that is more difficult. Also in my opinion, pre-meddies, not all, but a lot of them, take the easiest route to medical school. That means the easiest courses that allows them to obtain an A sticking with the sciences. However, even though the bio major is easier, I have never met a med tech that has been rejected by a medical school.

I am sorry if I went off I a tanget, but I feel that the field is so important and underrepresented. It is a shame. I would love to see all the practioners react if a 600 bed hospital staged a walkout in the lab. It wouldn't happen because too many people would die and that should emphasize the significance of the field.

You may ask, if you love it why are you leaving it? My answer is that you have no patient contact and I need that. Also, I want to continue learning more medicine and I feel as a med tech I have exhausted that part of it already.

I hope I anserwed your question. Thanks for listening.

 

[mshheaddoc]

I'm actually in the process of changing my major because I feel it would be a great clinical opportunity for me (and a backup plan if I don't get into school right away).

I have been warned against it though. Why I don't know .... some say it doesn't get you into med school any easier. I'm not looking for that, but I feel an MT is a more clinically relevant job than a biochem degree. It might be harder to find a job without any training.

 

[Scottish Chap]

Does anyone know what a Medical Technologists is? If so, how come every pre-med student wouldn't choose this as there major before going to med school, its seems to have more relevant classes compared to the pre-med/bio majors.

I think it's because med tech training is vocational, specifically equipping the graduate with skills that are needed for ancillary health service rather than preparing you for medical school. If you're qualified, it's a great way to earn money part-time will in medical school. Most clinical labs in the U.S. run 24/7.

 

[mustangsally65]

I signed up for a one-semester phlebotomy course which I started in January. We did 4 weeks of classes/labs, and now we're starting clinical rotations next week (yikes!). I had initially thought it would be good for 3rd/4th year and also residency, but I discovered that you learn a lot more than just drawing blood samples. I've learned a lot about why certain tests are ordered, what the results can mean, and what the different departments of the hospital lab do. I've applied to the MLT program for the fall in case I don't get in to med school this year, and I think it will be great.

It's turning out to be a very good experience so far.

 

[relentless11]

I have been warned against it though. Why I don't know .... some say it doesn't get you into med school any easier. I'm not looking for that, but I feel an MT is a more clinically relevant job than a biochem degree. It might be harder to find a job without any training.

Med schools don't care what your major is, in fact most schools encourage non-science/health majors to apply. Biochem, Bioengineering, MT, or Pathology can be as clinical relevant as you make it. I was a biochem major as an undergrad, and bioengineering for post-bacc. Through all that, I did clinical research. Now doing my PhD in pathology, which requires me to take general/systemic pathology with the med students and have found that my biochem/bioeng foundation paid off more because of all the classes I took. That is essentially the first 2 years of med school. My clinical background merely helps me diagnose patients for my PhD thesis, but the core science still plays a big role even when I'm seeing patients.

So like I said, it is clinical relevant as you make it. Not trying to downplay MT, since it is a perfectly fine major and job.

Therefore in regards to the OP, if it sounds good to you then do it. The MT programs are pretty interesting, and the students are very bright. Do it because you like it, not because of how relevant it may be to med school or whatever. Because the point of med school is to teach you all that clinical stuff anyway .

 

[mshheaddoc]

Med schools don't care what your major is, in fact most schools encourage non-science/health majors to apply. Biochem, Bioengineering, MT, or Pathology can be as clinical relevant as you make it. I was a biochem major as an undergrad, and bioengineering for post-bacc. Through all that, I did clinical research. Now doing my PhD in pathology, which requires me to take general/systemic pathology with the med students and have found that my biochem/bioeng foundation paid off more because of all the classes I took. That is essentially the first 2 years of med school. My clinical background merely helps me diagnose patients for my PhD thesis, but the core science still plays a big role even when I'm seeing patients.

So like I said, it is clinical relevant as you make it. Not trying to downplay MT, since it is a perfectly fine major and job.

Therefore in regards to the OP, if it sounds good to you then do it. The MT programs are pretty interesting, and the students are very bright. Do it because you like it, not because of how relevant it may be to med school or whatever. Because the point of med school is to teach you all that clinical stuff anyway .

Thanks for the post. I'm going to do it anyways because I feel it will help me, but I was curious as to why people would look down upon it. There are english majors that get in ... and the classes you take for clinicals still are science classes ...

 

[DrBowtie]

Well specialized health science majors score the lowest on the MCAT and have the lowest (35%) acceptance rate. Why this is the case? Who knows.

Source: http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2005/mcatgpabymaj1.htm

 

[etown]

I was a med tech for a year - low pay, fairly monotonous work, on your feet all day. My mother was a med tech for >20 years. She'd tell you the same. That being said, if you're not planning on staying in the field long term, it can be fairly interesting, but I'd major in something you're really interested in.

 

[mshheaddoc]

Well specialized health science majors score the lowest on the MCAT and have the lowest (35%) acceptance rate. Why this is the case? Who knows.

Source: http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2005/mcatgpabymaj1.htm

Is it considered a specialized health science major?

Ours is a science major ... you have to take 4 years of science, and I'm only a few classes short of a double major of biochem.

 

[mshheaddoc]

I was a med tech for a year - low pay, fairly monotonous work, on your feet all day. My mother was a med tech for >20 years. She'd tell you the same. That being said, if you're not planning on staying in the field long term, it can be fairly interesting, but I'd major in something you're really interested in.

what was the difference between med lab techs and then the medical technologists? Were they just supervisors or what?

 

[DrBowtie]

Is it considered a specialized health science major?

Ours is a science major ... you have to take 4 years of science, and I'm only a few classes short of a double major of biochem.

Nursing and other techs. is what it is defined as.

I dunno about your specific school's program though. If you have specialized clinicals, I would lump it in with it.

 

[mshheaddoc]

Nursing and other techs. is what it is defined as.

I dunno about your specific school's program though. If you have specialized clinicals, I would lump it in with it.

Ok I'm not talking about an Associated degree for medical lab technician, I'm talking about a BS in medical technology. They are two different degrees that I think some people use interchangably. The BS requires biochem, at least 4 micro classes (Including micro, immuno and 2 other classes), chem I and II, upper level chemistry (ochem/analytical chem) and obviously biology I and II. Then you have a year of 30 credits in clinical hematology, immunology, microbiology, and a few others. At least at my school.

 

[etown]

what was the difference between med lab techs and then the medical technologists? Were they just supervisors or what?

The MLT (medical laboratory technologist) program is often completed at a community college whereas the MT (medical technologist) has the BS. My local hospital will only hire the certified MTs, whereas the public health lab will hire MLTs and MTs; I'm sure different facilities have different guidelines (e.g. I think another nearby hospital will hire MLTs as well). So being a certified MT gives you more flexibility...but the MLTs/MTs were at the same level and had the same titles with slight variation in pay based on experience.

 

[DrBowtie]

Ok I'm not talking about an Associated degree for medical lab technician, I'm talking about a BS in medical technology. They are two different degrees that I think some people use interchangably. The BS requires biochem, at least 4 micro classes (Including micro, immuno and 2 other classes), chem I and II, upper level chemistry (ochem/analytical chem) and obviously biology I and II. Then you have a year of 30 credits in clinical hematology, immunology, microbiology, and a few others. At least at my school.

AAMC does indeed include medical technology in specialized health sciences.
Specialized Health Science
Hospital Administration
Medical Technology
Nursing
Occupational Therapy
Optometry
Pharmacy
Physical Therapy
Public Health
Premedical

Source: http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/char97.pdf
Appendix A

 

[mshheaddoc]

The MLT (medical laboratory technologist) program is often completed at a community college whereas the MT (medical technologist) has the BS. My local hospital will only hire the certified MTs, whereas the public health lab will hire MLTs and MTs; I'm sure different facilities have different guidelines (e.g. I think another nearby hospital will hire MLTs as well). So being a certified MT gives you more flexibility...but the MLTs/MTs were at the same level and had the same titles with slight variation in pay based on experience.

cool, thanks for the information! can I ask you a few more questions? How does MT/MLT interact with doctors (such as pathologists)? Do both of them ever interact with patients at all?

Brett ... thanks for the list!!!

 

[diosa428]

cool, thanks for the information! can I ask you a few more questions? How does MT/MLT interact with doctors (such as pathologists)? Do both of them ever interact with patients at all?

Brett ... thanks for the list!!!

I don't know if this will help at all, but my friend (and housemate) is a MT. She has very little interaction with the pathologists, but she also works second shift (3-11:30, when the pathologists aren't around). She does interact with the doctors that she has to call to give values to. She never interacts with patients, but this may depend upon the hospital. The hospital that she works at hires phlebotomists, so she doesn't have to draw blood or anything.

 

[relentless11]

cool, thanks for the information! can I ask you a few more questions? How does MT/MLT interact with doctors (such as pathologists)? Do both of them ever interact with patients at all?

Brett ... thanks for the list!!!

For the most part the MT's in our blood gas lab get blood samples from patients, and spend most of their time running the blood samples on the instruments. The head of the department overseeing the MT's would be a physician, but for the most part, MT's will speak to the MT supervisor more than the MD in charge. At least this is the case at our hospital.

I recently taught a 2hr lecture to MT-students from a local university, and it is definately a BS degree for them. I was not even aware that they had an MLT since our hospital does not hire them either. Most of them spend their time rotating through different labs that they can work in, and taking classes that would be similar to what is covered in clinical pathology. On that note though, most of our MT's have RN's too. So they have a lot more clinical knowledge than a standard MT.

Nursing, and even Pharm programs seem to have more patient interaction at the undergrad level compared to MT.

 

[mshheaddoc]

diosa428 and relentless11 - Thank you all for the information, if anyone has any other information or stories, PLEASE share.

 

[Scottish Chap]

diosa428 and relentless11 - Thank you all for the information, if anyone has any other information or stories, PLEASE share.

When I was a fellow at a large hospital in Baltimore, MTs interacted with docs all the time--usually just over the telephone and only directly if there was something wrong with a specimen (misidentified, clotted etc). If the MT could not answer their question or if the docs were being mean to them, they would page one of the fellows (an M.D. or a Ph.D.) to intercede. The MTs also ran most of the lab-based education for the pathology residents and fellows in various branches of clinical pathology: clinical chemistry, medical microbiology, hematology, diagnostic immunology. MTs know a lot and they work very, very hard. Sadly, many professional medical staff undervalue them…..

 

[etown]

Interaction with doctors/patients really depends on the facility and specifics of the position. At the public health lab, there is no interaction with doctors and patients; the serum and other samples are shipped in and the MTs do the testing and report out results. At hospitals, it is mostly behind-the-scenes lab work, but as others have indicated, there can be some patient contact (some MTs are asked to do phlebotomy on occasion, for example), and there is some doctor contact (relaying results). Neither is really extensive and I would still recommend shadowing (this may give you a good way to link up with docs to shadow) and volunteering.

We had students shadow in the lab for a day or two; if you are seriously considering doing this for an extended period of time, you might want to check it out for yourself. I'd say it's a rather thankless job and most of the MTs I know, in different settings, see it as such - a job that they don't really enjoy but have to do. I know an MT that works part-time at a hospital, and she enjoys it, but when she was full-time she was miserable. But, different strokes for different folks.

 

[FutureDocDO]

I signed up for a one-semester phlebotomy course which I started in January. We did 4 weeks of classes/labs, and now we're starting clinical rotations next week (yikes!). I had initially thought it would be good for 3rd/4th year and also residency, but I discovered that you learn a lot more than just drawing blood samples. I've learned a lot about why certain tests are ordered, what the results can mean, and what the different departments of the hospital lab do.

I'm currently working as a phlebotomist and I must say I love it. I draw about 40 patients a day. I get to learn a lot about what's ordered and sometimes you can tie in your undergrad knowledge with clinical cases. For example, I drew blood for an Erythropoietin test the other day... I thought the patient might be anemic but turned out he has too much RBCs... which also make sense. You can start harden yourself up when nurses/patient care tech/others yell at you because they made a mistake and think you don't know shiat. Good practice for residencies/rotations.

 

[Lindyhopper]

I investigated the BS MT program at CUNY Hunter. It seemed like good rigourous science learning. Lots of applied physiology, micro, & biochem.

But it seemed like people on the job felt sort of trapped in repetitive lab tasks with limited opportunities, limited social interaction, & lowish pay. (Just my impression from talking to several professors & practioners) Still some people like it, & understanding the tests gives great insight into the biology.

It's good to have a medically related cash generating skill, but perferrably one with more patient contact. I chose EMT. The 120 hr training is interesting but taught at sort of a high school level. But the volunteer & paid oppportunites are alot more interesting.

Although the MT courses seemed like good med school prep; A pure science degree may offer a certain broader view & more exposure to the spirit of new knowledge creation.

The relative lack of success of allied health student in applying to med school is probably mostly a function of the people entering the programs. I TA in our school of health sciences. I know (& like) alot of allied health students. Many are excellent students, but a significant number are people who, for whatever reason, sort of tracked themselves into the ultimate goal somewhere short of med school. (Which is fine.)

 

[Jaider]

Hey. I've been working full-time as a medical technologist (not a technician) for a year now and will continue until I start my MD this fall. I have a Bio/Chem BS instead of an MT degree and no certification but my company hires "trainees" like me and helps them get certification. I work for a national reference lab that's ranked in Fortune's Top 100 companies to work for. It's a great company, a great job, but I would NEVER be satisfied doing this as a career, for the same reasons that others have listed so far: repetition, little/no patient contact. I enjoy the pathology and technology and I like using my hands, but beyond occasional trouble-shooting, this job doesn't allow me to use my brain very much. I have zero contact with patients in my lab (just their body fluids ) and the only contact I have with physicians is an occasional phone call-- sometimes we have to answers their technical questions about an assay and sometimes they call with questions like: "What do you MEAN my patient tested negative for Parvo???!!" That's it. The company's medical directors are MDs, but we only call them to consult on difficult cases. The biggest advantage, perhaps, for having this job has been the money. I've earned far more than I could have working as a lab monkey (technician), in retail, or any other typical pre-med job.

So... there you go. A few thoughts from my experience, for what it's worth.

 

[DrBowtie]

The relative lack of success of allied health student in applying to med school is probably mostly a function of the people entering the programs. I TA in our school of health sciences. I know (& like) alot of allied health students. Many are excellent students, but a significant number are people who, for whatever reason, sort of tracked themselves into the ultimate goal somewhere short of med school. (Which is fine.)

This might explain why there are so few applicants but why do they have a harder time converting to acceptances?

Too specialized curriculum? Seems like a good route for the clinical experience side of things.

 

[Jaider]

This might explain why there are so few applicants but why do they have a harder time converting to acceptances?

Too specialized curriculum? Seems like a good route for the clinical experience side of things.

Anecdotal:

The company I work for has a ton of employee turnover from folks like me that leave to go to med school. Out of the 12 people who work in my division, 3 of us are leaving for MDs this year. (Some stay on part-time, but I think that's craziness-- who has time?!). There's also a ton that leave to enter nursing, PA, and PhD programs.

 

[Lindyhopper]

This might explain why there are so few applicants but why do they have a harder time converting to acceptances?

Too specialized curriculum? Seems like a good route for the clinical experience side of things.

Yea, I probably was trying to not offend anyone, & ended up making an inaccurate statement. But I still think the average "innate" academic ability pool of allied health students is the overriding factor. Although they're great people, many of the allied health students wouldn't be able to 30+ on the mcat if they had virtually unlimited prep time.

I SUSPECT that if one controlled for average SAT scores, allied health majors turned med school applicants do about as well as anyone else.

Still medicine is an applied science. I don't think it is enriching to also study a related applied science as an undergrad major.

 

[Jaider]

Hmm... you're not offending me because I'm not a true MT, I'm more of a standard BS premed who happens to work as an MT in the interim. So, your comments about innate academic ability don't apply to me.

But really-- what are you saying? I'm not sure I'm following you. Sorry if I'm misinterpreting, I *am* very tired tonight. Are you suggesting that people who choose the MT are MD wannabes at heart but can't cut the mustard? That's pretty offensive, and there are many who could prove you wrong.

But I do agree with your last statement. Given the chance to do it over, I would definitely stick with my liberal ed studies. There's plenty of time to learn applied medical information later in one's academic career.

Yea, I probably was trying to not offend anyone, & ended up making an inaccurate statement. But I still think the average "innate" academic ability pool of allied health students is the overriding factor. Although they're great people, many of the allied health students wouldn't be able to 30+ on the mcat if they had virtually unlimited prep time.

I SUSPECT that if one controlled for average SAT scores, allied health majors turned med school applicants do about as well as anyone else.

Still medicine is an applied science. I don't think it is enriching to also study a related applied science as an undergrad major.

 

[Lindyhopper]

But really-- what are you saying? I'm not sure I'm following you. Sorry if I'm misinterpreting, I *am* very tired tonight. Are you suggesting that people who choose the MT are MD wannabes at heart but can't cut the mustard? That's pretty offensive, and there are many who could prove you wrong.

Well I seem to be offending people, which is not intention my intention at all.
First of all I'm generalizing. Every individual is different. But pools of people have on average different talent levels. Compare the average math SAT score of physics majors vs. nursing students.

I'm accepting as fact, the assertion that on average allied health majors are the least successful group of medschool applicants. I'm speculating that if one controlled for SAT scores, allied health majors turned med school applicants do about as well as any other group.

PS My mother was nurse. She's so great.

 

[packerfan]

I have a MT degree from 1984. We joked then that it was an empty dgree (MT) since it was phased out as a bachelor's degree at the University I went to and in fact most of the people working in my state at the time were not degree holders. I worked briefly and for me it was a repetive job involoving maintenance of equipment and lots of samples. No patient contact. Later I had a very interesting job in open heart surgery involving the labs necessary to take a pt off and on the pump. All in all I did it because the classes were interesting, Would I go that route again? I doubt it. My last year was practicum not really anything that allowed you time to interview or get ECs.I have been told that this degree makes you less interesting as a canidate and that a degree reflecting a broader interest in the sciences or even liberal arts makes for a well rounded applicant. Remember this is coming from a nontraditional point of view.

 

[mshheaddoc]

Thanks for all your informations again. As someone considering the MT for personal reasons to have a "set job" when they graduate (I'm a non-traditional student, 2nd degree candidate) I think it would work for me. I already have a BA in econ (low GPA in college which is why I'm going for a 2nd degree to boost my GPA up over 3.0), MBA, and now I'd like to change from Biochem (pre-med) major to a MT with microbiology minor. I was just looking for a job once I finish and starting to apply and this job seemed great because they are needed apparently in volumes in the city I live in, additionally there were positions part-time and various hours which would help with flexibility.

I hear its boring work after awhile, but I guess with an interest in being in a lab (I'm volunteering in a med school lab this semester/summer) and an interest in pathology, I'm just looking for a little more insight on how things work. I thought this job would be great b/c unlike a biochem degree, this gives you skills for a position. And if I end up going back for a masters degree, I have all the basic sciences need to obtain that degree (would I?)

 

[Scottish Chap]

I work for a national reference lab that's ranked in Fortune's Top 100 companies to work for. It's a great company, a great job, but I would NEVER be satisfied doing this as a career..........

Yeah, ARUP really is a great place, and in a nice location, too.

 

[Jaider]

Yeah, ARUP really is a great place, and in a nice location, too.

I'd agree with you if I hadn't just now finished my 80 hour work week. God that sucks everytime.

 

[Scottish Chap]

I'd agree with you if I hadn't just now finished my 80 hour work week. God that sucks everytime.

 

[Chronic Student]

Just my .02:

My MT degree was a real-world disappointment.

I enjoyed learning all the material, but was not blown away by the lab work itself.

No patient contact, very repetitive and without a doubt, not appreciated by many.

Just to get some patient contact I became an EMT and later decided to go to PA school. Currently I am 6 months short of graduating.

I cannot say what percentage of the things learned in Medical school are learned in PA school, having not been to Med school. However, our training is in the 'medical model' and I suspect that we learn a fair percentage of it (don't pin me down on a number, some folks will just get pissed-off).

I know that the amount of time spent on laboratory testing in PA school is inadequate and I suspect the same is true of Medical school. This is not a criticism of either school, it is simply a time issue. They have a very short amount of time to teach everything there is to know about something as complex as the human body and all that we do to treat disease (and no, I'm not equating the two schools here).

In my case the MT background has helped me a tremendous amount and, by extrapolation, I would expect it to help me a great deal in Medical school.

There are countless lab tests and just having some idea of what tests can be done, what they mean and when they are irrelevant has been very important. Not to mention that the MT degree is, in large part, physiology and pathophysiology.

Here is an example:

I have been fortunate enough to correctly diagnose several cases of post-streptococcal glomerulonephritis while doing my clinicals. In one instance I had a patient come in with back pain that seemed to be muscular in nature.

However, I have been taught not to jump to a diagnosis and to keep my differentials in mind to keep myself out of trouble. With this in mind I questioned the patient about accidents/injuries, prior kidney or urinary tract symptoms and prior infections.

She casually mentioned that she had a sore throat the week prior and looked at me like I was crazy for asking her about it and what the hell does that have to do with my back pain.

I explained in laymans terms that the bacterial antigen and the antibodies that we make can form a complex that gets deposited in the kidneys and that the body starts to attack it with a substance called 'complement'.

I always think of complemnt as a shotgun, as it damages surrounding tissues as well as the specific target (innocent bystander mechanism, thinking of Dick Cheney here). I went on to explain that this also damages the part of the kidneys that filter your blood and that she might start having blood and protein in her urine.

To make a very long-winded story a little-bit shorter, her rapid strep test was positive and her UA showed 3+ blood and 1+ protein.

I knew about the condition, the lab tests to do and the pathophysiology from being an MT and in addition I was able to explain it to the patient because I actually understood the process not from what I had been taught in PA school, but because of my lab background.

I do not intend to make this next part critical of our other students, as the laboratory training they get is marginal at best. However, I presented this case to some of our other students and just gave them the minimum amount of info (what I had when the patient walked into my room) and it took 6 of them quite a while to get to this diagnosis.

This is just one example of how it has helped me.

However, unless you're really intrested in it, you will most likely just get very pissed off. The people who gravitate toward the lab tend to be very anal and human relations/communication tend to be a struggle for some of them. There is also a tendency to focus on minutiae, which is incredibly important to them and may not seem so important to others.

Thank god that we have them though, it is not a job I would have wanted to do for any length of time.

I suspect that if you really want to get into Medical school, than it won't really matter what you do before you get there and as mentioned by others

and by the 'digital underground', Do whatcha like!

It is the surest way to get what you want.

-Mike

 

[Lindyhopper]

My MT degree was a real-world disappointment.

I enjoyed learning all the material, but was not blown away by the lab work itself.

No patient contact, very repetitive and without a doubt, not appreciated by many.

Just to get some patient contact I became an EMT and later decided to go to PA school. . . .

Interesting post. When I investigated MT programs I concluded; Interesting education, great background, leading to a repetitive job with limited patient or coworker interaction .

Is your PA program a master's or BS program? I'm wondering if there is much precedent of PAs going to med school. It's an interesting route.

 

[mshheaddoc]

Just my .02:

My MT degree was a real-world disappointment.

I enjoyed learning all the material, but was not blown away by the lab work itself.

No patient contact, very repetitive and without a doubt, not appreciated by many.

Just to get some patient contact I became an EMT and later decided to go to PA school. Currently I am 6 months short of graduating.

I cannot say what percentage of the things learned in Medical school are learned in PA school, having not been to Med school. However, our training is in the 'medical model' and I suspect that we learn a fair percentage of it (don't pin me down on a number, some folks will just get pissed-off).

I know that the amount of time spent on laboratory testing in PA school is inadequate and I suspect the same is true of Medical school. This is not a criticism of either school, it is simply a time issue. They have a very short amount of time to teach everything there is to know about something as complex as the human body and all that we do to treat disease (and no, I'm not equating the two schools here).

In my case the MT background has helped me a tremendous amount and, by extrapolation, I would expect it to help me a great deal in Medical school.

There are countless lab tests and just having some idea of what tests can be done, what they mean and when they are irrelevant has been very important. Not to mention that the MT degree is, in large part, physiology and pathophysiology.

Here is an example:

I have been fortunate enough to correctly diagnose several cases of post-streptococcal glomerulonephritis while doing my clinicals. In one instance I had a patient come in with back pain that seemed to be muscular in nature.

However, I have been taught not to jump to a diagnosis and to keep my differentials in mind to keep myself out of trouble. With this in mind I questioned the patient about accidents/injuries, prior kidney or urinary tract symptoms and prior infections.

She casually mentioned that she had a sore throat the week prior and looked at me like I was crazy for asking her about it and what the hell does that have to do with my back pain.

I explained in laymans terms that the bacterial antigen and the antibodies that we make can form a complex that gets deposited in the kidneys and that the body starts to attack it with a substance called 'complement'.

I always think of complemnt as a shotgun, as it damages surrounding tissues as well as the specific target (innocent bystander mechanism, thinking of Dick Cheney here). I went on to explain that this also damages the part of the kidneys that filter your blood and that she might start having blood and protein in her urine.

To make a very long-winded story a little-bit shorter, her rapid strep test was positive and her UA showed 3+ blood and 1+ protein.

I knew about the condition, the lab tests to do and the pathophysiology from being an MT and in addition I was able to explain it to the patient because I actually understood the process not from what I had been taught in PA school, but because of my lab background.

I do not intend to make this next part critical of our other students, as the laboratory training they get is marginal at best. However, I presented this case to some of our other students and just gave them the minimum amount of info (what I had when the patient walked into my room) and it took 6 of them quite a while to get to this diagnosis.

This is just one example of how it has helped me.

However, unless you're really intrested in it, you will most likely just get very pissed off. The people who gravitate toward the lab tend to be very anal and human relations/communication tend to be a struggle for some of them. There is also a tendency to focus on minutiae, which is incredibly important to them and may not seem so important to others.

Thank god that we have them though, it is not a job I would have wanted to do for any length of time.

I suspect that if you really want to get into Medical school, than it won't really matter what you do before you get there and as mentioned by others

and by the 'digital underground', Do whatcha like!

It is the surest way to get what you want.

-Mike

Mike,

Thank you for your detailed post. GREAT POST! You have no idea how much you have helped me. Hearing others experience of being MT is exactly what I'm looking for. You have helped me solidify my decision that I need a job after school (with decent money and flexible), while I apply, and MT can be valuable. Pretty much I want to do it for the learning experience.

How long did you do it for?

 

[synapse lapse]

Hmm... you're not offending me because I'm not a true MT, I'm more of a standard BS premed who happens to work as an MT in the interim. So, your comments about innate academic ability don't apply to me.

But really-- what are you saying? I'm not sure I'm following you. Sorry if I'm misinterpreting, I *am* very tired tonight. Are you suggesting that people who choose the MT are MD wannabes at heart but can't cut the mustard? That's pretty offensive, and there are many who could prove you wrong.

But I do agree with your last statement. Given the chance to do it over, I would definitely stick with my liberal ed studies. There's plenty of time to learn applied medical information later in one's academic career.

I think that he's saying, and I agree with, that theaverage intellectual capacity for the general population of the field is lower, much as it is for many occupations. This doesn't mean their are none in the field that fall outside of the curve, but statistically the curve is left shifted in terms of intelligence and/or academic ability. I think this is emperically obvious. I also think bias could come into play in admissions decisions, perhaps doctors work with allied health professionals and don't see them as a good fit if they are biased, or perhaps they are biased against losing a person in the health field (i.e. you trade one for one instead of gain one in terms of health field workers, so the net loss is one). I am sure they don't concisously decide these things, but psychological/sociological bias could be a factor.

 

[Chronic Student]

mshheaddoc posted:

Mike,

Thank you for your detailed post. GREAT POST! You have no idea how much you have helped me. Hearing others experience of being MT is exactly what I'm looking for. You have helped me solidify my decision that I need a job after school (with decent money and flexible), while I apply, and MT can be valuable. Pretty much I want to do it for the learning experience.

How long did you do it for?

I was an MT for two years and I specialized in blood banking. If you think it's for you, then go for it.

My only caution would be that if you are worried about your GPA and are uncomfortable with hard-core science, then you should run away from this degree as fast as possible. The science involved in the laboratory can be quite abstract at times and you have to be able to wrap your mind around concepts that you cannot lay your hands on.

If you have any other questions, feel free to PM me. There are a lot of people who have helped me along the way and it is only fair and right that I do the same for others.

Lindyhopper posted:

Interesting post. When I investigated MT programs I concluded; Interesting education, great background, leading to a repetitive job with limited patient or coworker interaction .

Is your PA program a master's or BS program? I'm wondering if there is much precedent of PAs going to med school. It's an interesting route.

I could not have summarized it any better!

As for my PA program, it is a Master's degree and I was going to ask the same question myself about PA's getting into medical school.

I have a number of thoughts on the subject. On the one hand I could see how an institution would like a clean slate to start with and on the other hand I could see how having clinical experience would be extremely beneficial for a student.

I suspect that it varies from institution to institution and from one interviewer to the next. You know, if an adcom let some obnoxious A** like myself get into medical school and then I acted like a know-it-all and strutted around undermining the profs authority then they might look unfavorably upon PA's and I would think the reverse would be true.

I'm working on it now and I'll let you know how it works out for me.

As it stands now, I have these things in my favor:

1. I will be a PA and will have a fair amount of clinical experience, by the time that interviews roll around.
2. I was an MT for several years.
3. I was a surgical technologist for six or seven years.
4. I am an EMT-B. (Yeah, I know, I can give O2 and drive like hell. Seriously though I've learned a lot doing it).
5. I have a decent GPA (3.55 with lots of courses, especially in the sciences).
6. I was fortunate enough to do some fairly minor research at a time when it happened to be an important topic. I was able to get it published and my boss graciously allowed me to be first author.
7. I generally interview pretty well, as long as I keep my feet out of my mouth.

All this will, most likely, be balanced by less than stellar MCAT scores, as I have a lot of obstacles in that direction:

1. I'm in the middle of my clinical rotations and don't have very much time to study.
2. I have not yet taken physics or organic II and am many years removed (not a decade yet, but close) from my genchem, organic I and biochem classes.
3. I generally don't do well on standardized tests.

Yes, I can see the look on your face.

You don't do well on standardized tests, eh.

Well thank god you've only got the MCAT, steps 1,2 and 3 and countless other tests to go through if you want to be an MD.

In addition, I am older, short and overweight, as well as the fact that I'm a high school droput.

We'll we see how it goes, stranger things have happened.

-Mike

 

[mshheaddoc]

Thanks Mike. I'm getting some more information together and I will definitely take you up on your offer though!

Anyone else out there with MT experiences?

 

[LabMonster]

The MLT (medical laboratory technologist) program is often completed at a community college whereas the MT (medical technologist) has the BS. My local hospital will only hire the certified MTs, whereas the public health lab will hire MLTs and MTs; I'm sure different facilities have different guidelines (e.g. I think another nearby hospital will hire MLTs as well). So being a certified MT gives you more flexibility...but the MLTs/MTs were at the same level and had the same titles with slight variation in pay based on experience.

There is usually a significant difference in pay and MLT's cannot aspire to management positions. I disagree with the pay scale, since all of the MLT's I have worked with have been competent laboratorians.

 

[LabMonster]

Yea, I probably was trying to not offend anyone, & ended up making an inaccurate statement. But I still think the average "innate" academic ability pool of allied health students is the overriding factor. Although they're great people, many of the allied health students wouldn't be able to 30+ on the mcat if they had virtually unlimited prep time.

I SUSPECT that if one controlled for average SAT scores, allied health majors turned med school applicants do about as well as anyone else.

Still medicine is an applied science. I don't think it is enriching to also study a related applied science as an undergrad major.

Actually most MT students are quite intelligent. The program I went through was quite rigorous. And I scored a 30 on the MCAT without studying my junior year through the program.

 

[Law2Doc]

Does anyone know what a Medical Technologists is? If so, how come every pre-med student wouldn't choose this as there major before going to med school, its seems to have more relevant classes compared to the pre-med/bio majors.

I know nothing about this major. However the goal in undergrad shouldn't be to take medically relevant classes. Med schools teach you everything you need to know, and then some. It benefits you to take OTHER things in undergrad (plus, of course, the necessary prereqs). Med schools support this notion by giving at least equal consideration to non-science backgrounds, and sometimes are more intrigued by more unusual and diverse majors. Thus the question shouldn't be why wouldn't any premed student choose a relevant class, but why any premed would want to focus in on medicine exclusively, so early in what will be a long career filled with this stuff. This is the time to make yourself well rounded. Good luck.

 

[LabMonster]

Thanks Mike. I'm getting some more information together and I will definitely take you up on your offer though!

Anyone else out there with MT experiences?

What would you like to know Mushy?

I started at a state school as a Micro major when my advisor told me I would have extremely limited career opportunities (this is 1997 I think.) So a few years later, messy personal issues etc, I begin college again - this time for a BS in Allied Health - Medical Technology.

The typical path parallels a bio major for the first two years. After that you begin to specialize into the MT disciplines: Immunohematology, Microbiology (Paarasitology+Mycology+Virology+Bacteriology), Hematology, Immunology, Clinical Chemistry, Urinalysis, Molecular Diagnostics and Phlebotomy.

The third year (in my program) builds and build then culminates with summer session. In other words, you learn the bookwork, then in the summer session you are immersed in more advanced theory while actually doing testing in labs. Third year morphs into 4th year - internship. We had classes at the university, but the majority of your time is spent offsite at clinical locations learning the actual business of clinical laboratory science. It's 8 hours a day - slave labor plus exams. I think it's a great preliminary for medical school!

In addition to a BS, you'll have to get certified. Most states require either ASCP (American Society of Clinical Pathology) or NCA (National Credentialing Association of Laboratory Personnel) for laboratory practice. State mandated certification is also gaining popularity (esp on the west coast.) The advantage is that you get to write more letters after you name; like me, LabMonster MT (ASCP). If you choose to stay in the field you need to stay current with your certification.

The job will differ depending on where you work. Someone mentioned monotony - true if you work at a big reference lab, or system-central lab. I worked at the main lab I did my internship through and got plenty used to monotony - I also saw more disease states and rare findings than I thought possible. I then switched to working at smaller laboratories where I got tons of patient contact, earned a great rep with nurses and docs, and did in fact work with pathologists in determining patient treatment and diagnosis.

The main MT workforce is 45-60 year old women, and they will all be retiring shortly. The field will experience a major shortage within the next 10 years (we are already short of qualified personnel.)

When I started working, I was making a paltry 16.50 an hour, but it was raised to 18.50 within two months to match market demand. But I have made over 55000 in the past few years just doing this (and going to school and taking the MCAT etc etc.)

If you are good, you can juggle multiple jobs, full-time/part-time/pool to match whatever demands you require. There are always tech jobs due to the current shortage, and you should be able to tailor a schedule that fits your future plans - I did.

Whew. If anyone has any other questions let me know. I've been doing this for 5 years now - I thought it would be a great Plan-B if I didn't like medicine and didn't want to apply to medical school. I've learned a great deal about medicine in general and forged some great relationships along the way.

Ok I'm done.

 

[LabMonster]

I know nothing about this major. However the goal in undergrad shouldn't be to take medically relevant classes. Med schools teach you everything you need to know, and then some. It benefits you to take OTHER things in undergrad (plus, of course, the necessary prereqs). Med schools support this notion by giving at least equal consideration to non-science backgrounds, and sometimes are more intrigued by more unusual and diverse majors. Thus the question shouldn't be why wouldn't any premed student choose a relevant class, but why any premed would want to focus in on medicine exclusively, so early in what will be a long career filled with this stuff. This is the time to make yourself well rounded. Good luck.

On the other hand- you'll know the in's and out's of laboratory medicine - so you won't screw up ordering tests (as much) or won't have trouble interpreting the results; yes, physicians sometimes don't know how to interpret tests, order tests, or direct their patients accordingly - but this field moves pretty fast...

Major in what you love - but an MT won't hurt you.

(I minored in Philosophy)

 

[Law2Doc]

Major in what you love

This part I agree with. I was just put off by the OP's suggestion that anyone going into medicine should major in the most medically related undergrad major. It's too one dimensional thought. And sad, really.

 

[LabMonster]

This part I agree with. I was just put off by the OP's suggestion that anyone going into medicine should major in the most medically related undergrad major. It's too one dimensional thought. And sad, really.

In retrospect, the MT gives you a great marketable pre-med degree - and I'd do it all over again. But that's probably because I've always loved human medicine and human pathology- so it's a great diving board.

Hell, law was a great diving board for you!

Threads with polls have been started about "What Major are You?" but perhaps the poll should have been: "If You Were Not So Concerned With Medical School Acceptance, What Major Would You Have Picked?" I'll bet you'd see more BA types cross trained in orgo/bichem/physics....

 

[mshheaddoc]

What would you like to know Mushy?

I started at a state school as a Micro major when my advisor told me I would have extremely limited career opportunities (this is 1997 I think.) So a few years later, messy personal issues etc, I begin college again - this time for a BS in Allied Health - Medical Technology.

The typical path parallels a bio major for the first two years. After that you begin to specialize into the MT disciplines: Immunohematology, Microbiology (Paarasitology+Mycology+Virology+Bacteriology), Hematology, Immunology, Clinical Chemistry, Urinalysis, Molecular Diagnostics and Phlebotomy.

The third year (in my program) builds and build then culminates with summer session. In other words, you learn the bookwork, then in the summer session you are immersed in more advanced theory while actually doing testing in labs. Third year morphs into 4th year - internship. We had classes at the university, but the majority of your time is spent offsite at clinical locations learning the actual business of clinical laboratory science. It's 8 hours a day - slave labor plus exams. I think it's a great preliminary for medical school!

In addition to a BS, you'll have to get certified. Most states require either ASCP (American Society of Clinical Pathology) or NCA (National Credentialing Association of Laboratory Personnel) for laboratory practice. State mandated certification is also gaining popularity (esp on the west coast.) The advantage is that you get to write more letters after you name; like me, LabMonster MT (ASCP). If you choose to stay in the field you need to stay current with your certification.

The job will differ depending on where you work. Someone mentioned monotony - true if you work at a big reference lab, or system-central lab. I worked at the main lab I did my internship through and got plenty used to monotony - I also saw more disease states and rare findings than I thought possible. I then switched to working at smaller laboratories where I got tons of patient contact, earned a great rep with nurses and docs, and did in fact work with pathologists in determining patient treatment and diagnosis.

The main MT workforce is 45-60 year old women, and they will all be retiring shortly. The field will experience a major shortage within the next 10 years (we are already short of qualified personnel.)

When I started working, I was making a paltry 16.50 an hour, but it was raised to 18.50 within two months to match market demand. But I have made over 55000 in the past few years just doing this (and going to school and taking the MCAT etc etc.)

If you are good, you can juggle multiple jobs, full-time/part-time/pool to match whatever demands you require. There are always tech jobs due to the current shortage, and you should be able to tailor a schedule that fits your future plans - I did.

Whew. If anyone has any other questions let me know. I've been doing this for 5 years now - I thought it would be a great Plan-B if I didn't like medicine and didn't want to apply to medical school. I've learned a great deal about medicine in general and forged some great relationships along the way.

Ok I'm done.

LabMonster! Thank you so much for the information. What I exactly wanted to hear actually. Quite detailed although the program that I'm in only requires upper level micros (micro, adv micro, and one other class which I'll be taking pathogenic micro). When were training in phelbotomy b/c I wonder if that will happen in my internship? Its from June-June (clinical chemistry I/II, clinical micro, clinical hemo, and a few other lab classes so I'm guessing its within that year)

I figure its a great way to make a living while I get experience as well as get my masters in micro or something like that.

 

[jbone]

Anyone else out there with MT experiences?

I feel your pain. As a non-trad student myself, I was stuck with the conflict of graduating from college and not being able to find a well paying job (if I didn’t get into medical school). So I changed my major from Zoology to Clinical Laboratory Science and graduated with my MT license. I have been working as a Med. Tech at a Children’s Hospital (Core Laboratory) now for the last 2 years (at work right now) and I absolutely love it.

I feel the knowledge I have gained from my work experience here has been fantastic, and I get paid well while doing it. I am fully involved with hematology, UA, blood gases, coag, chemistry, drugs, and micro. You can’t tell me this isn’t valuable information for medical school and your career as a physician. Remember that 80% of a doctors decision is based upon the laboratory results. You MUST be competent in understanding and implementing these values or you will struggle in med school and as a physician.

I had 9 interviews and every one of them was very complementary about my choice to go into medical technology. And I have the comfort of knowing that if I didn’t get into medical school (which I did), I would have a great paying job as a back up. Hell, why my friends have been working odd jobs since graduating with biology or zoology degrees making very little, I have been making a pretty decent salary for the last two years while building my knowledge of medicine/healthcare.

Anyway, sorry to babble. You can’t go wrong. I do leave one warning though, my courses in CLS were very difficult and time intensive. Many jump into the major hoping to breeze by and get slammed hurting their GPA etc. The chemistry, hematology, immuno-hematology, medical micro etc. is very deep and demands your full attention. However, you will feel better prepared for the MCAT and med school because of it. Good luck. PM me if you have any questions.

BTW jaider/chap, ARUP is a great place to work. Work w/ them.

 

[mshheaddoc]

Thanks for the info jbone!!!