No guarantee of employment after medical school?

[bakedbeans18]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I just had a very interesting debate with a PhD student, who feels that Match day is an obnoxious spectacle, and is upset that graduate students earning PhDs in the sciences do not have the same guarantee of a job when they complete their PhD's, despite the vast differences in the type of training, supply-demand in the respective job markets, and the investment of not only time but also money for a medical education. I believe that if graduate students amassed the same debt as a medical student (upwards of $150K) and with no guarantee of a job, as opposed to being paid a stipend and not having to pay their tuition, that they would soon become sympathetic with medical students living on loans for 4 years (or longer, if you include college) with no way to pay it back afterwards.

Just curious what other people out there think. Apparently I am 'conceited' for thinking that a MATCH system is essential. Also, by this persons analysis, medical students are lazy because they don't have to go out and find a job for themselves like the PhDs do.

I will go on the record and state, that, as passionate as I am about helping my fellow man, medicine, and the sciences, there is such a thing as financial responsibility, and my career interests do not necessarily trump my day-to-day well being and ability to put food on the table, buy clothes for my kids, pay for heating in the winter, etc.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

Sounds like they jelly.

 

[RIPSanto]

I wish I only owed 150K

 

[Arkangeloid]

Lot easier to get into a PhD program than into med school. That's part of the reason for the PhD glut tbh.

But to answer the question, not at all. Med school is bad enough WITH the guarantee of a job afterwards. Remove that guarantee and I'm pretty sure everyone in our class without money from their parents in a trust fund (all 20 of us) would leave now.

 

[bakedbeans18]

Lot easier to get into a PhD program than into med school. That's part of the reason for the PhD glut tbh.

But to answer the question, not at all. Med school is bad enough WITH the guarantee of a job afterwards. Remove that guarantee and I'm pretty sure everyone in our class without money from their parents in a trust fund (all 20 of us) would leave now.

"Oh, so what you're saying is, you're money hungry and greedy. Makes sense that you're going to be a physician."
No joke, that's what I was told. Thank god they keep them in the labs.

"Medicine doesn't stand on it's own two legs - without researchers there wouldn't be vaccines and antibiotics and new medications and interventions."

True, but if scientific research was halted today - even to maintain the status quo, physicians would still be needed to provide to patients the interventions that the scientific has so gracefully imparted unto the medical community. The government is lending insane amounts of money to medical students....so the government has an interest in getting that money back promptly...which would be impeded without a match system.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

I'm confused why this person is hating on the match. It's not really "finding a job" as much as an extension of training. Everyone has to go out and look for a job after residency.

 

[bakedbeans18]

I'm confused why this person is hating on the match. It's not really "finding a job" as much as an extension of training. Everyone has to go out and look for a job after residency.

Their contention is that PhD students have to go and do a post-doc, which like a residency, is an extension of their training. However, there is no 'post-doc match'. Why do the medical students deserve/need a match system? Why is there even a match day? Why can't the programs just email the students where they've matched and not make a public spectacle out of it? That's the issue they have.

I applied to medical school while I was in graduate school. Getting into graduate school was almost like walking onto an NCAA D3 badminton team. Getting into medical school was like winning 9 gold medals in head-to-heads against Michael Phelps. I understand that graduate students and researchers don't feel as appreciated by their community as medical students and physicians are, but that doesn't change the fact that more hurdles must be overcome just for a maybe to secure an acceptance to medical school. For most, getting a match is the culmination of 8 years (sometimes even more) of work, dedication, and commitment to one goal in mind. One day in the spotlight out of 8 years? I don't think that is unwarranted at all.

 

[Arkangeloid]

"Oh, so what you're saying is, you're money hungry and greedy. Makes sense that you're going to be a physician."

"Medicine doesn't stand on it's own two legs - without researchers there wouldn't be vaccines and antibiotics and new medications and interventions."

If I was only concerned with money I would have just become a programmer and saved myself a decade of misery and suffering through the training process. And potentially a lifetime, if I become a burnt out pessimist like many physicians I know.

 

[Stellar Clouds]

Hate to break it to you, but there is no guarantee of employment after medical school.

 

[illegallysmooth]

Sounds like neither of the people in that conversation understand what residency application/interviewing was like before the centralized process came about. The info is out there, google is your friend 🙂And yes, there's definitely no guarantee.

 

[bakedbeans18]

Hate to break it to you, but there is no guarantee of employment after medical school.

I'm really speaking for the 98% of medical school graduates that match each year. The 2% are irrelevant in this conversation, and usually not matching is the result of overconfidence with your ROL or just being a piss-poor medical student. If you're going into an industry/consulting position, your 'non-match' is not included in the final '% matched value' anyway. More or less, if you're realistic about your competitiveness with ERAS, you land a job. There is no other professional level education that can boast this, so for arguments sake, it's a guaranteed* job.

*(minus 2%)

 

[Carlin]

I'm really speaking for the 98% of medical school graduates that match each year. The 2% are irrelevant in this conversation, and usually not matching is the result of overconfidence with your ROL or just being a piss-poor medical student. If you're going into an industry/consulting position, your 'non-match' is not included in the final '% matched value' anyway. More or less, if you're realistic about your competitiveness with ERAS, you land a job. There is no other professional level education that can boast this, so for arguments sake, it's a guaranteed* job.

*(minus 2%)

That's not necessarily true. Some very qualified applicants have gone unmatched during the past several years. Just go take a look at the SOAP threads in the NRMP section of this forum to get an idea. And I believe that the US med student match rate is about 93%, not 98.

 

[bakedbeans18]

That's not necessarily true. Some very qualified applicants have gone unmatched during the past several years. Just go take a look at the SOAP threads in the NRMP section of this forum to get an idea. And I believe that the US med student match rate is about 93%, not 98.

As I said before, not matching can be the result of a senior medical student's overconfidence in their application - such as interviewing at community programs and top academic programs, and then only ranking the top programs they interviewed at.

Even still, 93% odds of getting a residency can still be considered a 'guarantee' by comparison with MBA programs, PhD programs, Law School, etc. It is not as if to say come match day, the odds of getting a job are amenable to the flip of a coin, where you are just as likely to not match as you are likely to match, 50%/50% split. Let's be real - we're talking about this in comparison to the vast majority of professional degree granting programs.

 

[AlmostAnMD]

The Match is a good idea, I look forward to it.

Match Day, however, is asinine. If they just e-mail me my results as soon as the algorithm is run, I get to leave this town like two weeks earlier. I don't need a damn celebration. "white coat ceremony", "bridge to clerkship ceremony", "match day", all pomp-and-circumstance things that can be cut easily. I was told I couldn't just pick up my white coat and I can't escape the clerkship ceremony, either. Probably can't get out of match day.

Again, I like the match. But it is really snobbish, in my opinion. If you want to celebrate go and do it with your family on your own time, which is what I'll do anyway after the match.

 

[DermViser]

I just had a very interesting debate with a PhD student, who feels that Match day is an obnoxious spectacle, and is upset that graduate students earning PhDs in the sciences do not have the same guarantee of a job when they complete their PhD's, despite the vast differences in the type of training, supply-demand in the respective job markets, and the investment of not only time but also money for a medical education. I believe that if graduate students amassed the same debt as a medical student (upwards of $150K) and with no guarantee of a job, as opposed to being paid a stipend and not having to pay their tuition, that they would soon become sympathetic with medical students living on loans for 4 years (or longer, if you include college) with no way to pay it back afterwards.

Just curious what other people out there think. Apparently I am 'conceited' for thinking that a MATCH system is essential. Also, by this persons analysis, medical students are lazy because they don't have to go out and find a job for themselves like the PhDs do.

I will go on the record and state, that, as passionate as I am about helping my fellow man, medicine, and the sciences, there is such a thing as financial responsibility, and my career interests do not necessarily trump my day-to-day well being and ability to put food on the table, buy clothes for my kids, pay for heating in the winter, etc.

Don't PhDs get a stipend and their education tuition free? Or is that just MD/PhDs in MSTP programs?

EDIT: Crud, just realized you said that in your post. So essentially they're bitching about not being assured six figures, when they have no educational debt. Boo-freakin hoo.

 

[DermViser]

"Oh, so what you're saying is, you're money hungry and greedy. Makes sense that you're going to be a physician."
No joke, that's what I was told. Thank god they keep them in the labs.
"Medicine doesn't stand on it's own two legs - without researchers there wouldn't be vaccines and antibiotics and new medications and interventions."

True, but if scientific research was halted today - even to maintain the status quo, physicians would still be needed to provide to patients the interventions that the scientific has so gracefully imparted unto the medical community. The government is lending insane amounts of money to medical students....so the government has an interest in getting that money back promptly...which would be impeded without a match system.

So I'm guessing these PhDs are willing to see and workup patients? Let them put their money where their mouths are. Time for them to use their fingers to do rectals instead of pipetting.

 

[DermViser]

I just had a very interesting debate with a PhD student, who feels that Match day is an obnoxious spectacle, and is upset that graduate students earning PhDs in the sciences do not have the same guarantee of a job when they complete their PhD's, despite the vast differences in the type of training, supply-demand in the respective job markets, and the investment of not only time but also money for a medical education. I believe that if graduate students amassed the same debt as a medical student (upwards of $150K) and with no guarantee of a job, as opposed to being paid a stipend and not having to pay their tuition, that they would soon become sympathetic with medical students living on loans for 4 years (or longer, if you include college) with no way to pay it back afterwards.

Just curious what other people out there think. Apparently I am 'conceited' for thinking that a MATCH system is essential. Also, by this persons analysis, medical students are lazy because they don't have to go out and find a job for themselves like the PhDs do.

I will go on the record and state, that, as passionate as I am about helping my fellow man, medicine, and the sciences, there is such a thing as financial responsibility, and my career interests do not necessarily trump my day-to-day well being and ability to put food on the table, buy clothes for my kids, pay for heating in the winter, etc.

Not to shock you, but you're not guaranteed a job (a residency program position) after medical school either.

 

[Psai]

Not to shock you, but you're not guaranteed a job (a residency program position) after medical school either.

Yup I get scared when I see people on match lists with "Research" or "Prelim Surgery". I'm not sure what happens if people don't SOAP successfully but I doubt that they get mentioned.

More on topic, it's not the debt or the training that sets us apart but the simple fact that we are sacrificing so much to serve other people. Job market, debt burden, etc. are all important but that's not what makes us different. Everyone wants to be us though as you can see how they're all trying to emulate us with the white coat and the title of doctor. I mean Columbia P&S had the first white coat ceremony in 1993 and it took only 2 years for pharmacy schools to start doing it too. Now everyone and their mothers has a white coat ceremony since they're all unique little flowers.

 

[DermViser]

Yup I get scared when I see people on match lists with "Research" or "Prelim Surgery". I'm not sure what happens if people don't SOAP successfully but I doubt that they get mentioned.

More on topic, it's not the debt or the training that sets us apart but the simple fact that we are sacrificing so much to serve other people. Job market, debt burden, etc. are all important but that's not what makes us different. Everyone wants to be us though as you can see how they're all trying to emulate us with the white coat and the title of doctor. I mean Columbia P&S had the first white coat ceremony in 1993 and it took only 2 years for pharmacy schools to start doing it too. Now everyone and their mothers has a white coat ceremony since they're all unique little flowers.

Yup, that's gone on for a while. When you do rotations, you'll see that even the phlebotamist has on a white coat. The key is to be flexible, not rigid, with your specialty options.

Each segment of your education is a piece of the puzzle:

• Basic science performance (if it's graded, if you're strict P/F then you're lucky in this regard, and you get a pass here)
• Step 1 Performance
• Clinical Rotation performance (here is where you'll get LORs)
• Step 2 CK performance if you take it in time to be considered for residency apps

If you're going to into medicine and expect adulation from the general public on your sacrificing and wanting to help people, that time period is LONG gone (esp. with the scapegoating of doctors by Obama and Democrats when it comes to healthcare costs).

 

[DermViser]

I'm really speaking for the 98% of medical school graduates that match each year. The 2% are irrelevant in this conversation, and usually not matching is the result of overconfidence with your ROL or just being a piss-poor medical student. If you're going into an industry/consulting position, your 'non-match' is not included in the final '% matched value' anyway. More or less, if you're realistic about your competitiveness with ERAS, you land a job. There is no other professional level education that can boast this, so for arguments sake, it's a guaranteed* job.

*(minus 2%)

Wow, you truly are delusional, but please keep expounding.

 

[bakedbeans18]

Don't PhDs get a stipend and their education tuition free? Or is that just MD/PhDs in MSTP programs?

In fact, most if not all PhD (STEM) programs waive tuition and pay a stipend.

I tossed that fact at this person, and told them that the overwhelming majority of medical students must essentially live beyond their means in order to earn an MD, by borrowing so much money to be able to afford (i) the high tuition and (ii) not to work for even a marginal income for 4 years. Their response was "Well I've been supporting myself since I was 16 years old, so I'm used to living beyond my means." I mean, I don't even know how to respond to that. It's an extreme example that doesn't represent the majority of people, and it doesn't change the argument at hand anyway.

So I'm guessing these PhDs are willing to see and workup patients? Let them put their money where their mouths are. Time for them to use their fingers to do rectals instead of pipetting.

This is where the argument about developing vaccines, antibiotics, new treatments etc. came in. They were insulted that I did not regard them as a health professional, or as they so insistently put it 'medically related professional', for which the latter, if you ask me, is just an arbitrary self-distinction. Not once did I devalue the extraordinary contributions that scientists make to society, but the basic scientists have a clearly defined role that does not include the provision of healthcare. Also, not every scientist that gets churned out of a PhD program is the next Jonas Salk or James Watson. You don't need to be a health professional to have an impact on health, but if you're going to bill yourself as a health professional, you better damn well have been vomited by a patient or been chewed out for making a mistake in a life-and-death situation, or any number of the other things that are not so glorious about medicine that would never happen to you in a laboratory setting. The closest I have come to any of this in a lab is being pooped on by a mouse - and when that happened, I just flicked the poop off the latex glove, and continued with the experiment. Also, I spent a weekend in the lab once running manual immunohistochemistry on about 200 slides, and when I was finished I forgot to put a set of 20 in the cold-box. I got chewed out for this, and that portion of the experiment had to be redone, which obviously is not ideal in terms of efficiency - but it wasn't a life and death situation, nobody's safety was threatened (well except for maybe mine when my boss looked like he was about ready to strangle me) and noone was hurt or sued over it.

Not to shock you, but you're not guaranteed a job (a residency program position) after medical school either.

Wow, you truly are delusional, but please keep expounding.

Once again, when I am saying 'guaranteed a job' this is by comparison. When I graduated (from a USNWR top 40 university) I had a very difficult time finding a job. It took me ~8 months or so before I was able to secure a full-time paying position related to my field of study from college. This is probably true for the majority of college graduates in the U.S. The same is not true for the overwhelming majority (93% match rate) of US medical graduates. So, by comparison to say, an MBA program, Law School, or in the case of this debate MD vs. PhD, it is relatively guaranteed. I'm not suggesting you can just show up to medical school, fart out 'passes' for all your courses and clerkships, pull a 198 for USMLE and expect for all the residency dogs to be barking up your ERAS tree - but if 93% of seniors match, then I interperet that as a '93% guarantee'. I'm sorry if I had the numbers wrong the first time around. According to other threads on SDN, I am not inaccurate in suggesting that unmatched seniors are either uncompetitive for the specialty they are trying to match into or that they are overconfident in preparing their ROL.

More on topic, it's not the debt or the training that sets us apart but the simple fact that we are sacrificing so much to serve other people. Job market, debt burden, etc. are all important but that's not what makes us different. Everyone wants to be us though as you can see how they're all trying to emulate us with the white coat and the title of doctor. I mean Columbia P&S had the first white coat ceremony in 1993 and it took only 2 years for pharmacy schools to start doing it too. Now everyone and their mothers has a white coat ceremony since they're all unique little flowers.

I really wanted to bring this up, but feared it would invite the whole 'Do you think PhD students don't sacrifice their livelihood and well-being through grad school and their post-doctoral fellowships? That we don't pull all-nighters and that we don't forgo a high salary right out of college so we can instead earn near-slave wage stipends while we lose sleep and work to solve problems noone else has yet tried to answer?'

By the way, I tried to defuse the whole situation by explaining that MD's do not yet have a narrowly defined skill set (that comes in residency) and so there is essentially a supply of 19,000 MD's each year that are basically 'templates' for specialization of their skills, where as a PhD student who has worked in a Microbiology lab for 5 years will be received in the job market as a 'classically trained microbiologist' - it is doubtful that an investigator who focuses on the physiology of high altitude environments will be so keen to hire someone who doesn't have extensive training in organismal biology. Likewise, there may be only 10 investigators in the country that are trying to answer a given question through their research, and there may only be 4 or 6 newly-minted PhD's with the skill set necessary or prior experience in a related laboratory to contribute meaningfully in those 10 labs that are hiring. Multiply this by about 20,000 and you get the logistical nightmare of trying to set up a system that 'matches' PhD students to post-doctoral fellowships.

The response I was given: "Yes, and because our skills are so specialized by the time we graduate, that is all the more reason why there should be a match system in place for us. There is not as great a supply of PhD students are there are doctors, and we should receive assistance in securing employment"

 

[dyspareunia]

As I said before, not matching can be the result of a senior medical student's overconfidence in their application - such as interviewing at community programs and top academic programs, and then only ranking the top programs they interviewed at.

Even still, 93% odds of getting a residency can still be considered a 'guarantee' by comparison with MBA programs, PhD programs, Law School, etc. It is not as if to say come match day, the odds of getting a job are amenable to the flip of a coin, where you are just as likely to not match as you are likely to match, 50%/50% split. Let's be real - we're talking about this in comparison to the vast majority of professional degree granting programs.

Professional degree programs are law, medical, and maybe dental. MBAs and PhDs are not professional degrees. Also, basically anyone can get into an MBA, PhD, or Law program. Med school is by far the most competitive and that fact alone is why there is more certainty in the job market compared to other degree programs. To be clear, MD/DO grads have better odds (still not guaranteed though) of finding a job in their chosen field because entry into the degree granting programs is much, much more difficult compared to all other career options.

 

[DermViser]

Professional degree programs are law, medical, and maybe dental. MBAs and PhDs are not professional degrees. Also, basically anyone can get into an MBA, PhD, or Law program. Med school is by far the most competitive and that fact alone is why there is more certainty in the job market compared to other degree programs. To be clear, MD/DO grads have better odds (still not guaranteed though) of finding a job in their chosen field because entry into the degree granting programs is much, much more difficult compared to all other career options.

The reason why medicine is so difficult is that regardless of specialty, the barrier to entry is VERY VERY high both to get into medical school and applying for residency.

 

[colbgw02]

Isn't the match basically an extension of the economic theory proposed by John Nash (of A Beautiful Mind fame) that won the Nobel Prize? If PhDs are so much smarter than MDs, as I've often heard them claim (and is probably true), then they need to start working on their own match rather than complaining about ours.

 

[mcloaf]

He's stupid, but I'd be bitter too if I were a young phd in today's funding environment.

 

[Arkangeloid]

I'm really speaking for the 98% of medical school graduates that match each year. The 2% are irrelevant in this conversation, and usually not matching is the result of overconfidence with your ROL or just being a piss-poor medical student. If you're going into an industry/consulting position, your 'non-match' is not included in the final '% matched value' anyway. More or less, if you're realistic about your competitiveness with ERAS, you land a job. There is no other professional level education that can boast this, so for arguments sake, it's a guaranteed* job.

*(minus 2%)

At our school this year we had a record number of unmatched people, and to my knowledge not a single one was a poor medical student.

Maybe "poor" as far as Derm/Ortho applicants went.

 

[cbrons]

I just had a very interesting debate with a PhD student, who feels that Match day is an obnoxious spectacle, and is upset that graduate students earning PhDs in the sciences do not have the same guarantee of a job when they complete their PhD's, despite the vast differences in the type of training, supply-demand in the respective job markets, and the investment of not only time but also money for a medical education. I believe that if graduate students amassed the same debt as a medical student (upwards of $150K) and with no guarantee of a job, as opposed to being paid a stipend and not having to pay their tuition, that they would soon become sympathetic with medical students living on loans for 4 years (or longer, if you include college) with no way to pay it back afterwards.

Just curious what other people out there think. Apparently I am 'conceited' for thinking that a MATCH system is essential. Also, by this persons analysis, medical students are lazy because they don't have to go out and find a job for themselves like the PhDs do.

I will go on the record and state, that, as passionate as I am about helping my fellow man, medicine, and the sciences, there is such a thing as financial responsibility, and my career interests do not necessarily trump my day-to-day well being and ability to put food on the table, buy clothes for my kids, pay for heating in the winter, etc.

 

[cbrons]

"Medicine doesn't stand on it's own two legs - without researchers there wouldn't be vaccines and antibiotics and new medications and interventions."

I mean this is pretty true

 

[rodmichael82]

Man what exactly is the point of threads like this?

 

[bakedbeans18]

I mean this is pretty true

Noone is contesting this. In fact, I said I agreed with this in the post which you have quoted...

...."Medicine doesn't stand on it's own two legs - without researchers there wouldn't be vaccines and antibiotics and new medications and interventions."

True, but...

Man what exactly is the point of threads like this?

It was created as a poll thread with a rant attached to give an idea of where the poll is coming from.

 

[Medstart108]

I mean this is pretty true

Also remember though a good number of scientists who made discoveries were also doctors. So its not as clear cut as it seems. This is just an example but Sir James W. Black, was a doctor and he invented Beta Blockers and H2 Receptor Blockers, both drugs that are essential today.

 

[dyspareunia]

Man what exactly is the point of threads like this?

to rustle jimmies

 

[PhysioMD]

-

 

[DermViser]

Even if you match though. There are news articles that show there are many unemployed surgeons these days, or surgeons who just work "on-call" with no full-time affiliations to a hospital? I've spent a few years working in another health profession at a major health centre, and all I know is I've seen many residents come and go but in the years at this place, I have only seen the addition of 2 new surgeons -> this is hospital wide not just my particular work area. And most surgeons here are fairly young and not going anywhere. Where do all the surgical residents end up???

 

[PhysioMD]

-

 

[colbgw02]

Even if you match though. There are news articles that show there are many unemployed surgeons these days, or surgeons who just work "on-call" with no full-time affiliations to a hospital? I've spent a few years working in another health profession at a major health centre, and all I know is I've seen many residents come and go but in the years at this place, I have only seen the addition of 2 new surgeons -> this is hospital wide not just my particular work area. And most surgeons here are fairly young and not going anywhere. Where do all the surgical residents end up???

I'm not super up-to-date on the general surgery job market, and I'm sure someone will be along shortly to correct me, but I doubt many surgeons are unemployed without a fair degree if choice involved. Meaning, a surgeon may choose to be unemployed or underemployed in a big city, when they could be gainfully employed if they were willing to move to a smaller city or the Midwest.

 

[PhysioMD]

-

 

[DermViser]

I think the article was referring to Canada specifically actually.

And that has to do with employment in the United States how? (considering Canada has nationalized healthcare which could easily affect why surgeons aren't full time, if that is in fact the case)

 

[notbobtrustme]

Lot easier to get into a PhD program than into med school. That's part of the reason for the PhD glut tbh.

But to answer the question, not at all. Med school is bad enough WITH the guarantee of a job afterwards. Remove that guarantee and I'm pretty sure everyone in our class without money from their parents in a trust fund (all 20 of us) would leave now.

Easy to get in, hard as hell to get out properly. I know, I was a PhD student (IGP at Northwestern) before medical school. You don't need all that much to get into a PhD program. Finishing it is the tough part and at least 50% will drop out even at high powered programs.

 

[PhysioMD]

-

 

[QuantumJ]

Graduate programs seemed to be much easier to get into. I applied 2 months after the deadline and got accepted before I even submitted my GRE scores (which were average). Once you're there though it can be tough to finish. It's hard to find a sufficiently uninteresting idea that's publishable. The job market is garbage too. For my astrophysics buddies, there are more astrophysics PhDs than jobs. That's great if that's your passion but at a certain point some of these grad students need to look at their future prospects. I know far too many theoretical math Phds who haven't taken their heads out of the clouds long enough to see if they can find work that justifies the time they spend in school.

 

[bakedbeans18]

Easy to get in, hard as hell to get out properly. I know, I was a PhD student (IGP at Northwestern) before medical school. You don't need all that much to get into a PhD program. Finishing it is the tough part and at least 50% will drop out even at high powered programs.

There is probably such a high drop out rate from PhD programs because it is comparatively easy to get into such a program. US Medical schools have a low attrition rate because it is a highly selective process - only the students who are (among other factors) perceived as the most capable to tough it out through a medical school curriculum for 4 years, are accepted. As far as a research-industry market that is saturated with PhD's - this is nothing new. There are very few professorship/associate professorship/assistant professorship positions available in academia, and there are at least 10 candidates for every industry position out there. However, as much as a PhD candidate 'sacrifices' they are often very well taken care of by their institution (waived tuition, health insurance coverage, stipend, subsidized university housing, etc.) whereas your typical MD student has to fend for themselves entirely on borrowed money.

 

[Mad Jack]

Graduate programs seemed to be much easier to get into. I applied 2 months after the deadline and got accepted before I even submitted my GRE scores (which were average). Once you're there though it can be tough to finish. It's hard to find a sufficiently uninteresting idea that's publishable. The job market is garbage too. For my astrophysics buddies, there are more astrophysics PhDs than jobs. That's great if that's your passion but at a certain point some of these grad students need to look at their future prospects. I know far too many theoretical math Phds who haven't taken their heads out of the clouds long enough to see if they can find work that justifies the time they spend in school.

Theoretical math PhDs do extremely well for themselves making algorithms for Wall Street trading programs. Astrophysics is a dead end degree for most though.

 

[QuantumJ]

Except of the 5 I know not one would ever consider wall street. Like I said, they do theoretical math and to them the professor is the highest calling

 

[bakedbeans18]

In either case, the PhD student I had an at length debate with over this strongly believes that medical students deserve 'equally as little' (verbatim those were her words, btw) as PhD students are given. Of course, when I countered "don't you mean medical students deserve equally as much, such as free health insurance and a stipend?" Then suddently MD's are not equal to PhD's. "That's different."

In all likelihood, the extravagance that a medical school will make of match day is probably paid for with money the medical students were charged at some point. $20 out of every students 'activity fee' over the course of 4 years, put it all together and you have champagne and food and whatever else the school puts on for match day. This is just my speculation - I could be wildly incorrect, but it doesn't change the fact that Match day isn't some evil frivolity as the curmudgeonly PhD student made it out to be.

Here's the kicker: she didn't pay for lunch today, because there was food at Match Day. Double-standard much? If you are so vehemently opposed to the celebration, don't participate. Stay in the lab and play with your petri dishes, hehe.

 

[DermViser]

There is probably such a high drop out rate from PhD programs because it is comparatively easy to get into such a program. US Medical schools have a low attrition rate because it is a highly selective process - only the students who are (among other factors) perceived as the most capable to tough it out through a medical school curriculum for 4 years, are accepted. As far as a research-industry market that is saturated with PhD's - this is nothing new. There are very few professorship/associate professorship/assistant professorship positions available in academia, and there are at least 10 candidates for every industry position out there. However, as much as a PhD candidate 'sacrifices' they are often very well taken care of by their institution (waived tuition, health insurance coverage, stipend, subsidized university housing, etc.) whereas your typical MD student has to fend for themselves entirely on borrowed money.

That and the medical school tries every way possible to try to keep you in as you've already invested so much you can't turn back, not to mention it would look very bad on the school.

 

[Mad Jack]

I really wanted to bring this up, but feared it would invite the whole 'Do you think PhD students don't sacrifice their livelihood and well-being through grad school and their post-doctoral fellowships? That we don't pull all-nighters and that we don't forgo a high salary right out of college so we can instead earn near-slave wage stipends while we lose sleep and work to solve problems noone else has yet tried to answer?'

By the way, I tried to defuse the whole situation by explaining that MD's do not yet have a narrowly defined skill set (that comes in residency) and so there is essentially a supply of 19,000 MD's each year that are basically 'templates' for specialization of their skills, where as a PhD student who has worked in a Microbiology lab for 5 years will be received in the job market as a 'classically trained microbiologist' - it is doubtful that an investigator who focuses on the physiology of high altitude environments will be so keen to hire someone who doesn't have extensive training in organismal biology. Likewise, there may be only 10 investigators in the country that are trying to answer a given question through their research, and there may only be 4 or 6 newly-minted PhD's with the skill set necessary or prior experience in a related laboratory to contribute meaningfully in those 10 labs that are hiring. Multiply this by about 20,000 and you get the logistical nightmare of trying to set up a system that 'matches' PhD students to post-doctoral fellowships.

The response I was given: "Yes, and because our skills are so specialized by the time we graduate, that is all the more reason why there should be a match system in place for us. There is not as great a supply of PhD students are there are doctors, and we should receive assistance in securing employment"

Here's the thing. The Match provides an organized system by which medical students can be placed in training that they are required to receive before they are allowed to practice. It is training with a stipend, but no more a job than a postdoc is a "job." The Match system was created precisely because there was a point in time when many programs went unfilled, students would sign binding contracts to a lower tier program that hardballed them (we'll take you to train here, but only if you sign within 24 hours) only to find their top choice later accepted them, and finding a centralized, up to date, complete, and reliable source of information on GME programs was impossible. Without the match, there was chaos for everyone. PhDs could have a match of their own for postdoctoral programs if they wanted. It isn't medicine's fault we have a better system for matching terminal graduates to training programs than scientists do. If they're so damn smart and motivated, they could easily create a match system of their own.

If he wants to be upset that physicians ultimately have a better job market than researchers, that is, again, not the fault of physicians. We have a better market because there is a clear need for physicians. People need primary care docs to see them when they are ill, radiologists to read their scans, and surgeons to perform their surgeries. While research is extremely important, we do not need it as immediately as we often require medical services, so it has ended up on the backburner of the public conscious. Sure, people know that without research our lives will stop improving. But, when there isn't a whole hell of a lot of funding to go around, and you're told you can give a guy some money to work with rats on a project that is 90% likely to produce nothing of practical value, or you can use that same funding to train a doctor, that once trained, will continue to provide service to the public and only receive funding for tangible services rendered, it's hard to justify throwing money at the researcher. Worse yet, there really isn't a unified research funding lobby on the same level of the AMA, so they don't really have a group with a strong enough voice to pull the necessary strings in Washington.

If researchers want a better job market, they need to become more organized. Have tighter standards and a system of licensure for researcher accreditation to ensure less of them are pumped out and those that are have exceptional quality, organize the postdoctoral system into a set of focus areas and create a match-like system, and create a unified lobbying and PR voice to ensure both the public and Washington are aware of the value of researchers and the resources they require for research success. To be upset at physicians because they have done everything right is simply neglecting that the PhD market has done everything wrong for the past several decades.

 

[Mad Jack]

Except of the 5 I know not one would ever consider wall street. Like I said, they do theoretical math and to them the professor is the highest calling

Given the choice between unemployment or working for Wall Street, I'd take the latter. At least they have options is kind of my point, and if they end up unemployed, that's on them.

 

[bakedbeans18]

Here's the thing. The Match provides an organized system by which medical students can be placed in training that they are required to receive before they are allowed to practice. It is training with a stipend, but no more a job than a postdoc is a "job." The Match system was created precisely because there was a point in time when many programs went unfilled, students would sign binding contracts to a lower tier program that hardballed them (we'll take you to train here, but only if you sign within 24 hours) only to find their top choice later accepted them, and finding a centralized, up to date, complete, and reliable source of information on GME programs was impossible. Without the match, there was chaos for everyone. PhDs could have a match of their own for postdoctoral programs if they wanted. It isn't medicine's fault we have a better system for matching terminal graduates to training programs than scientists do. If they're so damn smart and motivated, they could easily create a match system of their own.

If he wants to be upset that physicians ultimately have a better job market than researchers, that is, again, not the fault of physicians. We have a better market because there is a clear need for physicians. People need primary care docs to see them when they are ill, radiologists to read their scans, and surgeons to perform their surgeries. While research is extremely important, we do not need it as immediately as we often require medical services, so it has ended up on the backburner of the public conscious. Sure, people know that without research our lives will stop improving. But, when there isn't a whole hell of a lot of funding to go around, and you're told you can give a guy some money to work with rats on a project that is 90% likely to produce nothing of practical value, or you can use that same funding to train a doctor, that once trained, will continue to provide service to the public and only receive funding for tangible services rendered, it's hard to justify throwing money at the researcher. Worse yet, there really isn't a unified research funding lobby on the same level of the AMA, so they don't really have a group with a strong enough voice to pull the necessary strings in Washington.

If researchers want a better job market, they need to become more organized. Have tighter standards and a system of licensure for researcher accreditation to ensure less of them are pumped out and those that are have exceptional quality, organize the postdoctoral system into a set of focus areas and create a match-like system, and create a unified lobbying and PR voice to ensure both the public and Washington are aware of the value of researchers and the resources they require for research success. To be upset at physicians because they have done everything right is simply neglecting that the PhD market has done everything wrong for the past several decades.

You're pre-congressional and yet you're encouraging lobbying?
Don't quit your day job - just keep pulling those tumors out of the childrens and grandma ;-)

 

[DermViser]

I just had a very interesting debate with a PhD student, who feels that Match day is an obnoxious spectacle, and is upset that graduate students earning PhDs in the sciences do not have the same guarantee of a job when they complete their PhD's, despite the vast differences in the type of training, supply-demand in the respective job markets, and the investment of not only time but also money for a medical education. I believe that if graduate students amassed the same debt as a medical student (upwards of $150K) and with no guarantee of a job, as opposed to being paid a stipend and not having to pay their tuition, that they would soon become sympathetic with medical students living on loans for 4 years (or longer, if you include college) with no way to pay it back afterwards.

Just curious what other people out there think. Apparently I am 'conceited' for thinking that a MATCH system is essential. Also, by this persons analysis, medical students are lazy because they don't have to go out and find a job for themselves like the PhDs do.

I will go on the record and state, that, as passionate as I am about helping my fellow man, medicine, and the sciences, there is such a thing as financial responsibility, and my career interests do not necessarily trump my day-to-day well being and ability to put food on the table, buy clothes for my kids, pay for heating in the winter, etc.