• SDN Site Updates

    Hey everyone! The site will be down for approximately 2 hours on Thursday, August 5th for site updates.

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
Hi all,

Could you all discuss how NIH and non-NIH MD /PhD programs work in terms of financial support, i.e. what is the bottom line? What do you get, in terms of a stipend, and what do you have to pay, if anything, in terms of tuition or fees?

Thanks in advance.
 

Neuronix

Total nerd
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Mar 14, 2002
14,109
5,429
the beach
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
The programs partially supported under the Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) grant of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences are listed here:

http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/Mechanisms/NRSA/InstPredoc/PredocInst-MSTP.htm

All or very close to all of the MD/PhD students from these institutions receive >20.5k year in stipend and pay nothing in tuition and fees for their entire time in the program. I call these programs the MSTPs and I refer to this situation as "full funding". Most non-MSTP MD/PhD programs also provide full funding as well. Part of this is to remain competitive for students and part is to compete for MSTP funding the program must already show a strong level of commitment to the MD/PhD pathway.

Your other thread mentions DO/PhD, and I wanted to make it clear that no DO/PhD program says on their website that they provide full funding. I've been challenging people to find me this or the equivalent of this for years. In contrast to MD/PhD, there are very few fully funded DO/PhD students.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
I think you should be very careful with generalizations (frankly, it shows a lack of intelligence). Many MD/PhD programs do not discuss the play-by-play, in terms of financing, for the dual degree. Likewise, other then proving you wrong, there is no incentive for DO/PhD programs to do the same.

I will be starting a DO/PhD program at MSU this fall, and I can tell you that the program is fully funded. Semantics aside, I will receive upwards of $23K per year. However, it should be noted that more money does not necessarily mean better quality. Additionally, do not be surprised if in less then five years DO/PhD programs are fully funded by the NIH. As you may, or may not know, equality is a part of the law. That is especially true for institutions that are funded by our tax dollars.

I have noticed a general attitude, on this forum in particular, against DO/PhD students. You should note, however, that this forum is partially supported by the American Physician Scientist Association, which is funded by DO/PhD and MD/PhD programs alike.

Be fare, not unhinged. Do not try to pick fights; I just asked a simple question.




The programs partially supported under the Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) grant of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences are listed here:

http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/Mechanisms/NRSA/InstPredoc/PredocInst-MSTP.htm

All or very close to all of the MD/PhD students from these institutions receive >20.5k year in stipend and pay nothing in tuition and fees for their entire time in the program. I call these programs the MSTPs and I refer to this situation as "full funding". Most non-MSTP MD/PhD programs also provide full funding as well. Part of this is to remain competitive for students and part is to compete for MSTP funding the program must already show a strong level of commitment to the MD/PhD pathway.

Your other thread mentions DO/PhD, and I wanted to make it clear that no DO/PhD program says on their website that they provide full funding. I've been challenging people to find me this or the equivalent of this for years. In contrast to MD/PhD, there are very few fully funded DO/PhD students.
 
About the Ads

Circumflex

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
Mar 7, 2006
307
1
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I think you should be very careful with generalizations (frankly, it shows a lack of intelligence). Many MD/PhD programs do not discuss the play-by-play, in terms of financing, for the dual degree. Likewise, other then proving you wrong, there is no incentive for DO/PhD programs to do the same.

I will be starting a DO/PhD program at MSU this fall, and I can tell you that the program is fully funded. Semantics aside, I will receive upwards of $23K per year. However, it should be noted that more money does not necessarily mean better quality. Additionally, do not be surprised if in less then five years DO/PhD programs are fully funded by the NIH. As you may, or may not know, equality is a part of the law. That is especially true for institutions that are funded by our tax dollars.

I have noticed a general attitude, on this forum in particular, against DO/PhD students. You should note, however, that this forum is partially supported by the American Physician Scientist Association, which is funded by DO/PhD and MD/PhD programs alike.

Be fare, not unhinged. Do not try to pick fights; I just asked a simple question.

I didn't think that Neuronix was picking a fight, he just stated that there are fewer fully-funded DO/PhD students than MD/PhD students, not that one was better than the other.

Personally, I do not know much about the differences between the DO and MD curricula. Just out of curiosity, what makes you want to do a DO/PhD instead of the MD/PhD, or do people usually apply to both?
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
I didn't think that Neuronix was picking a fight, he just stated that there are fewer fully-funded DO/PhD students than MD/PhD students, not that one was better than the other.

Personally, I do not know much about the differences between the DO and MD curricula. Just out of curiosity, what makes you want to do a DO/PhD instead of the MD/PhD, or do people usually apply to both?

Thanks for the clarification; I think it might have been the tone that caused me to assume this.

So, I actually only applied to the MSU DO/PhD program. Reason; well, there are several. For example, I was attracted to the campus, number and variety of ongoing research projects with clinical applications, amount of NIH funding, number of labs in the school, success of recent graduates, facilities, and vigor with which the schools is pursuing excellence both nationally as well as globally. Also, I am very much interested in global health issues, and the school is home to one of the world’s foremost Tropical Diseases experts. As a student, I would have the ability to do rotations in Malawi, something that I am very much interested in. The school has also pursued global health equality issues, and continues to serve populations here in the US and abroad who are in need of medical attention. It was just what I wanted in a school, both now and in the future.

So, you might ask, MSU has both an MD/PhD and a DO/PhD. Why the DO/PhD? Well, believe it or not, the DO/PhD program at Michigan State is actually more established and has more students then its MD counterpart part. Nothing against the MD program, but I felt more at ease being in a program with a better track record. Not to say that the MD/PhD program is not strong, because, in fact the MD and DO students take the same classes and the PhD students rotate in the same labs and prepare their dissertations with the same PIs.

Thanks for the question.
 

solitude

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
Dec 27, 2004
1,616
80
Status (Visible)
whoa there, Neuronix is probably the nicest guy on this board, and he's usually right. I don't think he was demeaning DO/PhD by any means, and he is correct that there are far fewer DO/PhDs than MD/PhDs.


I think you should be very careful with generalizations (frankly, it shows a lack of intelligence). Many MD/PhD programs do not discuss the play-by-play, in terms of financing, for the dual degree. Likewise, other then proving you wrong, there is no incentive for DO/PhD programs to do the same.

I will be starting a DO/PhD program at MSU this fall, and I can tell you that the program is fully funded. Semantics aside, I will receive upwards of $23K per year. However, it should be noted that more money does not necessarily mean better quality. Additionally, do not be surprised if in less then five years DO/PhD programs are fully funded by the NIH. As you may, or may not know, equality is a part of the law. That is especially true for institutions that are funded by our tax dollars.

I have noticed a general attitude, on this forum in particular, against DO/PhD students. You should note, however, that this forum is partially supported by the American Physician Scientist Association, which is funded by DO/PhD and MD/PhD programs alike.

Be fare, not unhinged. Do not try to pick fights; I just asked a simple question.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
whoa there, Neuronix is probably the nicest guy on this board, and he's usually right. I don't think he was demeaning DO/PhD by any means, and he is correct that there are far fewer DO/PhDs than MD/PhDs.

[/QUOTE] Your other thread mentions DO/PhD, and I wanted to make it clear that no DO/PhD program says on their website that they provide full funding. I've been challenging people to find me this or the equivalent of this for years. In contrast to MD/PhD, there are very few fully funded DO/PhD students. [/QUOTE]


OK now, hold on a second. Let’s look at what happened here. Does this sound like someone who is just saying something? The language is clearly adversarial in nature, and that is why I responded the way I did. Based on his words alone, not knowing his intentions, my response is not uncalled for.

For example: "I've been challenging people." You clearly do not "Challenge" someone unless you have some implicit or explicit goal. I was reacting to this language, which is clearly not phrased in the friendliest of terms.
 

solitude

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
Dec 27, 2004
1,616
80
Status (Visible)
First of all, let me be clear that my defense of Neuronix was not intended as an attack on you.

Secondly, you're correct that Neuronix's "challenge" could be interpreted in an adversarial light. However, what I intended to say by my previous post was that, based on his posting history, Neuronix's post should be interpreted differently. I understand that, because you are somewhat new to the board, you did not have the benefit of knowing that Neuronix is a great guy, and so I understand why you reacted in the way you did.

Thirdly, I want to make it clear that the board welcomes potential, current, and former DO/PhD's. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but Neuronix is a mod and, as you noted regarding the funding of this site, I presume he supports my previous statement.

Finally, I still believe that Neuronix is correct. Given that he has spent a number of years on these threads and has never heard of a fully-funded DO/PhD, I am inclined to agree with him that such programs are quite rare. You seem to have found one, and you are to be congratulated on that. Best of luck, and keep posting! :thumbup:


Your other thread mentions DO/PhD, and I wanted to make it clear that no DO/PhD program says on their website that they provide full funding. I've been challenging people to find me this or the equivalent of this for years. In contrast to MD/PhD, there are very few fully funded DO/PhD students. [/QUOTE]


OK now, hold on a second. Let’s look at what happened here. Does this sound like someone who is just saying something? The language is clearly adversarial in nature, and that is why I responded the way I did. Based on his words alone, not knowing his intentions, my response is not uncalled for.

For example: "I've been challenging people." You clearly do not "Challenge" someone unless you have some implicit or explicit goal. I was reacting to this language, which is clearly not phrased in the friendliest of terms.[/QUOTE]
 

Newquagmire

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Oct 30, 2002
1,274
4
wow.

there was a new york times article on this (inability to read interpretive cues on the internet) a few days ago.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
Thanks for the post. No hard feelings, and I hope to learn more about all of you.

I was just trying to make the point that although they are more rare, they do exist. I would agree, in large part, to that. I was just disappointed with some of the broad, generalized statements made earlier. I am sure that Neuronix is a great person, but my only objection was to his "Challenge" and sweeping statement about DO/PhD programs in general.

Thanks again.


First of all, let me be clear that my defense of Neuronix was not intended as an attack on you.

Secondly, you're correct that Neuronix's "challenge" could be interpreted in an adversarial light. However, what I intended to say by my previous post was that, based on his posting history, Neuronix's post should be interpreted differently. I understand that, because you are somewhat new to the board, you did not have the benefit of knowing that Neuronix is a great guy, and so I understand why you reacted in the way you did.

Thirdly, I want to make it clear that the board welcomes potential, current, and former DO/PhD's. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but Neuronix is a mod and, as you noted regarding the funding of this site, I presume he supports my previous statement.

Finally, I still believe that Neuronix is correct. Given that he has spent a number of years on these threads and has never heard of a fully-funded DO/PhD, I am inclined to agree with him that such programs are quite rare. You seem to have found one, and you are to be congratulated on that. Best of luck, and keep posting! :thumbup:
 

ThatOne

New Member
10+ Year Member
Jun 13, 2006
90
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
So, Dr. AK, your program advertises full support for DO/PhDs on this website? We'd love to have that link for future reference.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
So, Dr. AK, your program advertises full support for DO/PhDs on this website? We'd love to have that link for future reference.

I think you missed what I wrote earlier. Please read that carefully and you will find your answer.

By the way, I never said that my program "Advertises full support." Please check above.
 

solitude

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
Dec 27, 2004
1,616
80
Status (Visible)
Thanks for the post. No hard feelings, and I hope to learn more about all of you.

I was just trying to make the point that although they are more rare, they do exist. I would agree, in large part, to that. I was just disappointed with some of the broad, generalized statements made earlier. I am sure that Neuronix is a great person, but my only objection was to his "Challenge" and sweeping statement about DO/PhD programs in general.

Thanks again.

OK, no hard feelings. thanks for posting.
 
About the Ads

Mr. Tee

Indentured servant
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Nov 24, 2005
4,369
1
Status (Visible)
  1. MD/PhD Student
For MSTP, the NIH pays for your MD years, and the school pays for your PhD years (funding can come from a variety of sources, including your PI, but funding is guaranteed, which is a biggie). No tuition and fees. In general the schools in an area with a high cost of living (ie. big cities) give larger stipends.
 

Neuronix

Total nerd
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Mar 14, 2002
14,109
5,429
the beach
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I think you should be very careful with generalizations (frankly, it shows a lack of intelligence).

If you have evidence to prove me wrong, please post it. That was my point. Then again, I never said I was the sharpest knife in the drawer :D Even if you thought that there are more than "very few" fully-funded DO/PhD students, that's as good as I've posted, but I stand by what I said. There's no need to get huffy about it. I presented it as a challenge because for years we've been hearing that x school may have one fully-funded spot or heard that a school is fully-funded only to find out later that it's not. Some DO/PhD students are able to secure funding by applying through the NIH F30 mechanism individually and there's a separate mechanism for funding URM combined degree students. Since you're going to MSU, I will ask for more information: are all DO/PhD students at MSU funded? How many per year? For how long have they offered full funding? Have they applied for the MSTP grant?

I will state this explicitly, though I've been trying to live to it implicitly. There is no topic on this forum that is taboo if it relates to combined degree programs. You can ask about the money, dropping out, private practice, alternate PhDs, DO/PhD, whatever... It's hard to get straight advice sometimes. People dance around questions if they know the answer is controversial or there isn't a clear answer. Some people will flame you if you ask a question that connotes something unpopular. IMO, that's not acceptable. You will very rarely find me shutting down threads like you see all the time in pre-allo. Part of this is that we don't have quite the same anarchy and part if it is that I feel like I'm a very liberal moderator.

That being said, because some of my opinions or facts are unpopular, I expect someone won't like what I say once and awhile. That's life. When I meet people in person, I occasionally get the "I disagreed with your post about x several years ago and I'm mad about it!" :laugh: It's all good. If you dance around questions for a living trying not to make anyone upset, you're a politician. I'm the opposite. I also want to make it very clear that just because I'm the moderator it doesn't mean I'm always right. That's why I like SDN. If I'm wrong about something, people will be attracted to it like flies on ****. I like that. It's why I've always been hesitant to codify some of the things I put on this forum over the years. If I'm wrong, please point it out. I'm not sure I'm wrong in this case, but that's ok. People reading this thread can decide for themselves.

Additionally, do not be surprised if in less then five years DO/PhD programs are fully funded by the NIH. As you may, or may not know, equality is a part of the law. That is especially true for institutions that are funded by our tax dollars.

I would be very surprised if a DO/PhD program became funded under the MSTP grant. This is for a few reasons.

1) "Equality" has nothing to do with NIH grant funding. The MSTP grant is a competitive grant that medical schools must apply for.

2) The grant is very competitive. There are many top programs vying to get onto that grant and have been failing yet after year. The most recent addition I'm aware of was Mayo and that was a few years ago. There are many well established and fairly big name MD/PhD programs trying to get MSTP status and have been failing for years.

3) The training budget is shrinking. NIH funding in general is very hard to come by.

There are simply no DO/PhD programs that have the depth and breadth of research to successfully compete for the grant as far as I see it. Even if you take the case of MSU or UMDNJ these are not major research institutions compared to the schools competing for the grant. This is not anti-DO/PhD bias--I can't imagine the MD/PhD programs at MSU or UMDNJ getting on the MSTP grant.

I have noticed a general attitude, on this forum in particular, against DO/PhD students. You should note, however, that this forum is partially supported by the American Physician Scientist Association, which is funded by DO/PhD and MD/PhD programs alike.

This forum is entirely supported by The Coastal Research Group, its advertisers, and its donors. I was not aware that APSA had contributed money to the site. Lee Burnett has donated quite a bit of money out of his own pocket as well as copious amounts of time to help this website flourish and for that I applaud him.

Lee Burnett is a DO, BTW. I'd like to see the attitude here "against" DO/PhD students. I would be the first to rush in if I thought I saw that happening, but I've read every thread posted on this forum for ~5 years. I don't remember any such thing.

It will always be my opinion that given the choice one should attend a MSTP school. I think it is great that a pro-student outside agency critiques your program and provides some level of oversight. One of the clear cut benefits is that no MSTP is allowed to ask for money back if you drop out of their program. Many MD/PhD programs require pay back if you leave the program. In that sense you could say I'm anti non-MSTP, but that applies to DO/PhD or MD/PhD alike.

Be fare, not unhinged. Do not try to pick fights; I just asked a simple question.

:laugh: unhinged. I'm not sure I've never been called that one, but I like it. I'll keep attempting to be fair. I appreciate the support in the thread which helps to convince me that I haven't done anything wrong. Ocasionally I do slip up, people call me on it, and I hope that keeps happening. The last thing the world needs is more ass kissers.

Still, I thought I would add the part about DO/PhD because I thought about posting in your other thread but thought it would be fine lumped into one post. If I was being unfair I could pop into your other thread and say all sorts of things against DO/PhD, but what would be the sense in that? I want more information about DO/PhD because frankly there isn't much available. A big part of that is that there aren't many DO/PhD programs or students compared to MD/PhD.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
Thanks for the clarification, but I think it is important for someone in your position, especially on this forum, to be as unbiased as possible. In this you will allow more people to speak freely about their concerns and hopes without feeling that they have to defend who they are and what their choices maybe. So, your anti-non-MSTP attitude certainly came across in you first post, and I think much of what has transpired earlier has been aimed at resolving or correcting for this idea.

In my response, with “unhinged,” I meant to relay to you this unbiased quality. And by the way, you do not have to be an “Ass Kisser” to be balanced and pragmatic. It is also important for the future of this forum for us to address the notion that all MSTP programs are better then all non-MSTP programs. Here is where the concept of superiority and elitism come into play. Certainly all MSTP were at once non-MSTP, and yet the notion that they become good with the title and funding fails to recognize this fact. This reasoning would hold that, for example, “Doctors are intelligent, and all those who are in medical school or about to start medical school are stupid if they are in the medical profession.” In fact, and to be sure, there is no fine line that one can draw between when someone becomes intelligent. Likewise, a quality dual-degree programs must come with something other then funding and before funding, indeed this is the final point in the process, not an indication of the quality in question itself.

I also want to address your statement that MSU is not a “Major research institution.” Actually, MSU is one of the nations, and the worlds leading research institutions. Indeed much of the ongoing research at MSU is funded by the NIH, DOE, and many other private and state-operated agencies. By your earlier reasoning, this would qualify State as a quality program and research institutions.

I think the funding issue, which may or may not be of great importance, has become a conduit for the bias and sense of exclusivity that is so prevalent in this country. Please understand that I will not be apart of a forum that replicates and promotes this attitude, which is but a vehicle for many of the worst qualities of humanity.

Thanks much.


If you have evidence to prove me wrong, please post it. That was my point. Then again, I never said I was the sharpest knife in the drawer :D Even if you thought that there are more than "very few" fully-funded DO/PhD students, that's as good as I've posted, but I stand by what I said. There's no need to get huffy about it. I presented it as a challenge because for years we've been hearing that x school may have one fully-funded spot or heard that a school is fully-funded only to find out later that it's not. Some DO/PhD students are able to secure funding by applying through the NIH F30 mechanism individually and there's a separate mechanism for funding URM combined degree students. Since you're going to MSU, I will ask for more information: are all DO/PhD students at MSU funded? How many per year? For how long have they offered full funding? Have they applied for the MSTP grant?

I will state this explicitly, though I've been trying to live to it implicitly. There is no topic on this forum that is taboo if it relates to combined degree programs. You can ask about the money, dropping out, private practice, alternate PhDs, DO/PhD, whatever... It's hard to get straight advice sometimes. People dance around questions if they know the answer is controversial or there isn't a clear answer. Some people will flame you if you ask a question that connotes something unpopular. IMO, that's not acceptable. You will very rarely find me shutting down threads like you see all the time in pre-allo. Part of this is that we don't have quite the same anarchy and part if it is that I feel like I'm a very liberal moderator.

That being said, because some of my opinions or facts are unpopular, I expect someone won't like what I say once and awhile. That's life. When I meet people in person, I occasionally get the "I disagreed with your post about x several years ago and I'm mad about it!" :laugh: It's all good. If you dance around questions for a living trying not to make anyone upset, you're a politician. I'm the opposite. I also want to make it very clear that just because I'm the moderator it doesn't mean I'm always right. That's why I like SDN. If I'm wrong about something, people will be attracted to it like flies on ****. I like that. It's why I've always been hesitant to codify some of the things I put on this forum over the years. If I'm wrong, please point it out. I'm not sure I'm wrong in this case, but that's ok. People reading this thread can decide for themselves.



I would be very surprised if a DO/PhD program became funded under the MSTP grant. This is for a few reasons.

1) "Equality" has nothing to do with NIH grant funding. The MSTP grant is a competitive grant that medical schools must apply for.

2) The grant is very competitive. There are many top programs vying to get onto that grant and have been failing yet after year. The most recent addition I'm aware of was Mayo and that was a few years ago. There are many well established and fairly big name MD/PhD programs trying to get MSTP status and have been failing for years.

3) The training budget is shrinking. NIH funding in general is very hard to come by.

There are simply no DO/PhD programs that have the depth and breadth of research to successfully compete for the grant as far as I see it. Even if you take the case of MSU or UMDNJ these are not major research institutions compared to the schools competing for the grant. This is not anti-DO/PhD bias--I can't imagine the MD/PhD programs at MSU or UMDNJ getting on the MSTP grant.



This forum is entirely supported by The Coastal Research Group, its advertisers, and its donors. I was not aware that APSA had contributed money to the site. Lee Burnett has donated quite a bit of money out of his own pocket as well as copious amounts of time to help this website flourish and for that I applaud him.

Lee Burnett is a DO, BTW. I'd like to see the attitude here "against" DO/PhD students. I would be the first to rush in if I thought I saw that happening, but I've read every thread posted on this forum for ~5 years. I don't remember any such thing.

It will always be my opinion that given the choice one should attend a MSTP school. I think it is great that a pro-student outside agency critiques your program and provides some level of oversight. One of the clear cut benefits is that no MSTP is allowed to ask for money back if you drop out of their program. Many MD/PhD programs require pay back if you leave the program. In that sense you could say I'm anti non-MSTP, but that applies to DO/PhD or MD/PhD alike.



:laugh: unhinged. I'm not sure I've never been called that one, but I like it. I'll keep attempting to be fair. I appreciate the support in the thread which helps to convince me that I haven't done anything wrong. Ocasionally I do slip up, people call me on it, and I hope that keeps happening. The last thing the world needs is more ass kissers.

Still, I thought I would add the part about DO/PhD because I thought about posting in your other thread but thought it would be fine lumped into one post. If I was being unfair I could pop into your other thread and say all sorts of things against DO/PhD, but what would be the sense in that? I want more information about DO/PhD because frankly there isn't much available. A big part of that is that there aren't many DO/PhD programs or students compared to MD/PhD.
 

stiffany

Hurry up and wait...
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Nov 1, 2005
994
2
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I think it is important for someone in your position, especially on this forum, to be as unbiased as possible. In this you will allow more people to speak freely about their concerns and hopes without feeling that they have to defend who they are and what their choices maybe.

I also want to address your statement that MSU is not a "Major research institution." Actually, MSU is one of the nations, and the worlds leading research institutions.

So I've been watching the evolution of this thread with interest, at it quickly becomes an "Omg, someone is questioning the superiority of my institution and degree relative to the Hopkin's and UCSF's of the world." Just because someone voices an opinion that differs from yours about whether or not the MSTP versus non-MSTP programs or MD versus DO programs are inherently cushier or better for the sake of applicants does not in and of itself constitute blatant prejudice that disregards the facts. The fact is, the MSU's and UMDNJ's of the world are not considered THE top research institutions even though they may have exceptional opportunities and several NIH grants. In terms of absolute funding numbers and reputation, they still can't "compete" (why it's necessary to compete is also questionable...)

One of the things that bothers me most about all of these threads that mention the DO route is that they end up becoming a bitch session between DO's who feel insulted by people and easily take offense to the slightest tinge of preference instead of listening to the argument and then coming back with actual facts, numbers, and discussions of real job scenarios instead of an emotional plea as the unwilling victim. Not everyone is out to bash DO programs or even thinks they're somehow intrinsically inferior aside from the factual information available.

At the end of the day, instead of using emotional "logic" or subjective statements, try providing objective information. What is the funding rate at MSU for the DO/PhD program like? Where do graduates end up? What other programs are out there that people might be interested in? If you want to fight real bias (as opposed to the bias you're merely purporting in this thread), provide information instead of the same "whoa is me rhetoric."

Please understand that I will not be apart of a forum that replicates and promotes this attitude, which is but a vehicle for many of the worst qualities of humanity.

At the end of the day, that's your decision if you somehow think that preference for an MSTP program instead of a nonMSTP program constitutes a heinous crime against humanity. In that case, good riddance.
 

Neuronix

Total nerd
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Mar 14, 2002
14,109
5,429
the beach
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
In this you will allow more people to speak freely about their concerns and hopes without feeling that they have to defend who they are and what their choices maybe.

? You asked a question and I answered it. You are free to speak as freely as you want within the TOS.

It is also important for the future of this forum for us to address the notion that all MSTP programs are better then all non-MSTP programs. Here is where the concept of superiority and elitism come into play.

Objectively, the NIGMS believes MSTPs are better than non-MSTPs as they award their funding to the MSTPs. There is an open competition for these spots. It will be the same when you go to apply for funding for yourself as a scientist. Your research will be judged as better or worse based on the grants you write to the NIH.

Certainly all MSTP were at once non-MSTP, and yet the notion that they become good with the title and funding fails to recognize this fact.

I agree that a program does not immediately become much better just because they become MSTP. Though, the best programs get the funding. That's the nature of competition. Part of this competition is that they would need >10 years of full funding from the institution for example:

http://www.brown.edu/Administration/George_Street_Journal/vol23/23GSJ11a.html

I was curious how well established MSU's DO/PhD program was so I asked you some questions you ignored.

I also want to address your statement that MSU is not a "Major research institution." Actually, MSU is one of the nations, and the worlds leading research institutions. Indeed much of the ongoing research at MSU is funded by the NIH, DOE, and many other private and state-operated agencies. By your earlier reasoning, this would qualify State as a quality program and research institutions.

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/award/rank/medttl05.htm

MSU rates #104 out of 123 among US medical schools in NIH money in 2005.
 

Circumflex

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
Mar 7, 2006
307
1
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I think a lot of statements are being misinterpreted. I believe the main issue that Neuronix is trying to convey (not meaning to put words in his/her mouth) is that MSTP programs are held to a higher standard than regular MD/PhD programs and have to maintain that standard to hold on to their funding.

I am in a non-MSTP program and it is not as structured as an MSTP. The quality of your PhD education depends on several factors, namely yourself (motivation, work ethic, etc.) and your lab environment (PI, project, support, etc.). I think that the advantage of a MSTP would be that the process is more orderly and regulated.

The funding for these MSTP school grants is competitive, so it stands to reason that the programs that receive the awards have a better track record.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
At the end of the day, that's your decision if you somehow think that preference for an MSTP program instead of a nonMSTP program constitutes a heinous crime against humanity. In that case, good riddance.

I think you may have misunderstood my point. I did not say that preference constitutes anything. What I did say was that having a preconceived notion of what is good and what is not based on what is and what is not-MSTP is faulty logic. I think it would be best if you re-read, with greater interest, what was and what was not said.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
are all DO/PhD students at MSU funded? How many per year? For how long have they offered full funding? Have they applied for the MSTP grant?

The program has about 23 students, and all are funded. The program is the oldest DO/PhD program in the country (since the early 1970s), and we will apply for the MSTP grant within the next couple of years.
 

ThatOne

New Member
10+ Year Member
Jun 13, 2006
90
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
This is when the saying "Don't argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference," comes in.
 

Dr. AK

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 12, 2006
80
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
This is when the saying "Don't argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference," comes in.

I think ThatOne is correct on this. This whole discourse has devolved into an unruly argument. I can tell you that my intentions in starting this thread were not to create tension or to be argumentative. Yet I did get much of the information I was looking for, and I thank those of you who replied with that information.
 
About the Ads
This thread is more than 14 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.