I would argue that a true mudphudder is a physician scientist with a PhD to match. However, some people (particularly those who did not major in science undergrad) are offended when people try to make any distinction between MD-PhDs in science and MD-PhDs in--say--anthropology. However, I do think that the mudphud concept, at the very minimum, should focus on people getting the degrees somewhat concurrently (so not someone who gets a PhD in English, teaches for 10 years, and goes back to get an MD).
Only in rare circumstances. If you do the MD and PhD together in a funded MD/PhD program, the program's goal is generally to train physician scientists- people who will in some way advance medicine through clinical knowledge and research that somehow related to human disease. So ideally, you'll have someone who, say, sees cystic fibrosis patients in the clinic and is simultaneously coming up with new treatments in her lab (one of our graduates is doing this and is doing great).
But I have heard of a few programs out there which will fund students to do a PhD in the humanities. Something with relation to epidemiology or even ethics could still advance medicine in some way, even though not directly related to science.
This site uses cookies to help personalize content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies and terms of service.