PCOM DO/PHD molecular bio

[ToldYouSo]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Did a search & saw that most if not all the thread regarding the DO/PHD program at PCOM dealt with the health policy that has been around for a while. Has anyone here applied or thinking of applying to their newer do/phd in molecular bio?

From what Iread the first 2 years you pay regular tuition; then don't pay for the PHD portion & get a stipend (years 3-5) and then the final 2 clinical years the tuition is waived.

http://www.pcom.edu/academic_programs/aca_do/new_1.html

Really interested in it and was wondering if you guys thought it was a good idea.

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

If you aren't doing a public service program, like the military or anything like that, yeah it would be a good idea, especially if you are interested in molecular biology.

 

[Goethe87]

Did a search & saw that most if not all the thread regarding the DO/PHD program at PCOM dealt with the health policy that has been around for a while. Has anyone here applied or thinking of applying to their newer do/phd in molecular bio?

From what Iread the first 2 years you pay regular tuition; then don't pay for the PHD portion & get a stipend (years 3-5) and then the final 2 clinical years the tuition is waived.

http://www.pcom.edu/academic_programs/aca_do/new_1.html

Really interested in it and was wondering if you guys thought it was a good idea.

Yes it definitely interested me too. The money is nice sure, but what really excites me about it is the ability to distinguish yourself as a physician-scientist and leader, as well as advance the Osteopathic profession/philosophy further into basic sciences research.

Consider also it is an incredible amount of extra stress and work, and you will be in the lab for 3 years while your friends from MS1 & 2 will have already graduated and gone on to residency .

 

[cliquesh]

I would only do it if you are interested in molecular biology, you want a career in academics and/or you want to do something really competitive. Do not do it to save money. Research isn't for everyone and 7 years is a long time. It would be good for osteopathic medicine if there were more basic science DO/PhDs, though.

 

[qwerty2012]

Honestly, I feel like it is pointless to do a Phd in something like molecular bio. You can still do research as a physician. I feel molecular bio is one of those hardcore field where you have to be completely devoted to it. So why even pursuing a medical degree in the first place?

Health policy is a much better/versatile degree if you want to do administration, management and government works.

Nonetheless, having a solid background in mole bio definitely help in the medical career and is also an additional bonus when it comes to applying for residencies.

 

[cliquesh]

Honestly, I feel like it is pointless to do a Phd in something like molecular bio. You can still do research as a physician. I feel molecular bio is one of those hardcore field where you have to be completely devoted to it. So why even pursuing a medical degree in the first place?

Health policy is a much better/versatile degree if you want to do administration, management and government works.

Nonetheless, having a solid background in mole bio definitely help in the medical career and is also an additional bonus when it comes to applying for residencies.

I disagree. I think molecular biology is the future of medicine and the key to personalized patient health care. For example, nearly all patients with non-small cell lung cancer get a sample of their tumor sent to the molecular lab to see if there are any mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR), which, if present, confers hypersensitivity to the tyrosine kinase inhibitors like gefitinib and erlotinib. Similarly, in breast cancer, most clinicians order the molecular test oncotype DX to quantify the likelihood of disease recurrence. So, with a PhD in molecular biology, I could see someone working as a medical, radiation, or surgical oncologist doing clinical research or a molecular pathologist doing hardcore science research and becoming a billionaire, like the creators of oncotype. If you are not interested in cancer, then, yeah, it might be pretty pointless. Molecular tests are frequently used to identify infectious diseases, though. So doing ID would a reasonable option, too.

 

[TriagePreMed]

Did a search & saw that most if not all the thread regarding the DO/PHD program at PCOM dealt with the health policy that has been around for a while. Has anyone here applied or thinking of applying to their newer do/phd in molecular bio?

From what Iread the first 2 years you pay regular tuition; then don't pay for the PHD portion & get a stipend (years 3-5) and then the final 2 clinical years the tuition is waived.

http://www.pcom.edu/academic_programs/aca_do/new_1.html

Really interested in it and was wondering if you guys thought it was a good idea.

I wouldn't do this if that were really the case. That sounds absolutely ridiculous. You'll pay 2 years of tuition + living expenses? You realize how much interest you'll rack up in 3+ additional years paying nothing to your students loans? Imagine something goes wrong with your PhD and it takes you a year or two more. Then after that you pay for living expenses? That's ridiculous. Every MD school I've seen has everything free. I think MSUCOM, NSUCOM and OSUCOM have better arrangements than this, and honestly, a PhD from a no-name school won't exactly launch your career.

 

[Goethe87]

I disagree. I think molecular biology is the future of medicine and the key to personalized patient health care. For example, nearly all patients with non-small cell lung cancer get a sample of their tumor sent to the molecular lab to see if there are any mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR), which, if present, confers hypersensitivity to the tyrosine kinase inhibitors like gefitinib and erlotinib. Similarly, in breast cancer, most clinicians order the molecular test oncotype DX to quantify the likelihood of disease recurrence. So, with a PhD in molecular biology, I could see someone working as a medical, radiation, or surgical oncologist doing clinical research or a molecular pathologist doing hardcore science research and becoming a billionaire, like the creators of oncotype. If you are not interested in cancer, then, yeah, it might be pretty pointless. Molecular tests are frequently used to identify infectious diseases, though. So doing ID would a reasonable option, too.

I really liked the way this response started but then...



DO/PhD Molecular and cell bio =/= cancer and ID only.

Drug target discovery/design? Cell signaling? Hell, even gene therapy?

 

[qwerty2012]

I disagree. I think molecular biology is the future of medicine and the key to personalized patient health care. For example, nearly all patients with non-small cell lung cancer get a sample of their tumor sent to the molecular lab to see if there are any mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR), which, if present, confers hypersensitivity to the tyrosine kinase inhibitors like gefitinib and erlotinib. Similarly, in breast cancer, most clinicians order the molecular test oncotype DX to quantify the likelihood of disease recurrence. So, with a PhD in molecular biology, I could see someone working as a medical, radiation, or surgical oncologist doing clinical research or a molecular pathologist doing hardcore science research and becoming a billionaire, like the creators of oncotype. If you are not interested in cancer, then, yeah, it might be pretty pointless. Molecular tests are frequently used to identify infectious diseases, though. So doing ID would a reasonable option, too.

You can do all the above mentioned with just the Phd. I agree finding biomarkers and genetics are big in the future. But that will be the main focus for researchers. I feel getting either do or md is redundant if anyone wants to fully pursue this.

 

[TriagePreMed]

You can do all the above mentioned with just the Phd. I agree finding biomarkers and genetics are big in the future. But that will be the main focus for researchers. I feel getting either do or md is redundant if anyone wants to fully pursue this.

Most MD/PhD folks work like 80% in lab and 20% in clinical practice. The double degree is meant to be a researcher, but they want to give the medical training so you can have a different point of view.