MS in Cell Biology or MPH?

[doctorg113]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello all,

There is a program at my university where juniors can graduate with a combined bachelors and masters degree by the end of their senior year. I am a junior Molecular and Cell Biology major, and I am in the process of applying to this program. The only problem I am having is deciding between an MPH and an MS in cell biology. I am really interested in both degrees...but of course I can only get one. Other related information is that this is my second year in the same research lab and I plan to stick with it until graduating with a bachelors and a masters degree in 2013. Is one degree "better" than the other?" As I said before, I am having trouble deciding between the two and wanted to know what I should consider about each program before making my final decision. Thank you for your help! 🙂

 

[theWUbear]

If you end up in bad shape GPA-wise when it comes down to application time and you need to boost your GPA when you start the masters portion, the Cell Bio masters will help - the MPH will not. Assuming you are going to do well enough in school GPA-wise, go where your heart desires

 

[doctorg113]

I currently have a 3.9 and am in the Honors program at my university, if that helps at all.

 

[theWUbear]

Do what you want to dude (or dudette)! Cell Bio will probably be more relevant to a couple of your basic science courses in MS1 (stuff that will be a small part of STEP I), but either is fine - perhaps the MPH will give you a good background in statistics to help you analyze future research projects

Another thought: theses are scary D= And you do them for an MS. Perhaps you will have to in your MPH program as well. That being said, many SDNers and other people have finished a thesis with no problem

 

[raltima07]

I would go with MPH - it might help in terms of residency. Wait, that MS might help too. Or they both would be a wash.

I second WuBear - do what your heart wants

 

[doctorshateher]

I would go for the MPH because I think it would be much more interesting. That's just me though - go for the one you are more interested in. I think the effect of either would be about the same so pick the subject that won't make you want to stab your eyes out.

 

[1TB4RKSB4CK]

MS because it will help more in med school.

 

[sha15]

im in an MS program right now and have spent a lot of money on applications this cycle; i've been informed by many schools i must complete my degree by july....pressure's on, can you dig it?

 

[Brachyury]

In terms of your future career, and MS is a near-worthless degree: an MS does not give you any unique skills that most physicians do not already have; an MPH gives you a unique set of skills that you can use for your own research or use in other people's research. In 2011, few universities still offer MS's in research, and there's a reason why. If you have to earn another degree, an MPH would be the better investment

 

[Status Sciaticus]

In terms of your future career, and MS is a near-worthless degree: an MS does not give you any unique skills that most physicians do not already have; an MPH gives you a unique set of skills that you can use for your own research or use in other people's research. In 2011, few universities still offer MS's in research, and there's a reason why. If you have to earn another degree, an MPH would be the better investment

actually this isnt true.
an MPH is the degree most associated with epidemiology and public health administrators.

an M.S. will open you up to research based experiences and you might or might not have to write a thesis.

Neither really helps more than the other in terms of adcoms since a traditional masters is very different from a post bac or smp.

if you apply for md/phd and with a masters in science, i believe that option will be more favorable with a MS than MPH

 

[Brachyury]

actually this isnt true.
an MPH is the degree most associated with epidemiology and public health administrators.

an M.S. will open you up to research based experiences and you might or might not have to write a thesis.

Neither really helps more than the other in terms of adcoms since a traditional masters is very different from a post bac or smp.

if you apply for md/phd and with a masters in science, i believe that option will be more favorable with a MS than MPH

You are correct that neither is going to impress adcoms.

Getting an MS to apply to MD/PhDs is one of the most stupid ideas I have ever heard.

If you want research experiences, work in a lab. Earning a master’s means nothing: if you want a research degree, you need to get a Ph.D. Someone with a master’s in cell biology has no unique skills that someone who worked as a lab tech or in the NIH IRTA program doesn't have. Similarly, someone with a master’s does not, or will not, have any unique research experiences or opportunities that a person who has worked as a lab tech will not have. With an MPH--even if it isn't in epi or biostats--you will have a unique set of tools that you'll bring to the table.

 

[Hastur]

If you're not sure you'll finish it during the time allotted, there are programs in existence for finishing an MPH during or after an MD. Other than that concern... study what you are most interested in.

Yes, there are probably more professional opportunities associated with the MPH than the MS, but learning more about the things you're passionate about will probably benefit you best in terms of enhancing your later learning - you'll remember best what you like best and that'll carry through in terms of how much you remember. So that should be a major deciding factor.