Ph.D vs. M.D. in Pathology

[tahitian3]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have a question (I've tried to do a search here under "ph.d" "graduate school" etc. but my questions really weren't answered).
So, besides the actual degrees, what is the difference, in scope of practice, of a pathologist that went to medical school with a pathology residency and one that got a Ph.D in a biology program? Can they both be salaried and work in hospitals? Does anyone know a general figure for the salary of a pathologist with a Ph.D?

 

[Jeeves]

With a medical degree and board certifiction, you actually read slides, take care of patients, and can do research as well as teach.

I think with a PhD you are limited to academics(teaching and research) as well as industry( pharmaceutical companies etc)and I guess forensics.... I think Dr. Henry Lee is a PhD only (this is however a different track than forensics for MD). http://www.drhenrylee.com/about/curriculum_vitae.doc

In many cases the MD degree will offer more flexibility as you go through training and probably higher salaries.

To work toward a PhD after undergrad is usually an 8 year commitment with a post doc afterward. Your education is often free and you receive a stipend for living expenses. You make very little as a post-doc.(average 25,000). If you work in academics you will likely have to write grants successfully and do research to remain active in most departments and to move in a tenure track.


Pathology MD requires four years of med-school (will cost you average of >100,000 dollars), four years of residency (you'll make average of 35,000 dollars ), and then fellowships (usually a year).

Average pathology salaries after residency training vary but 125,000 seems to a good guess.

Fellowship can double or triple that based on what fellowship, location, where you trained etc.


I think academic PhD's as well as private PhD's (industry) make less than MD's probably because employers know that an MD could make more if they left for private practice.

Check out these websites
http://asip.uthscsa.edu/PATH_CAREER/ASIP_BROCHURE.html

http://www.aamc.org/students/cim/pub_pathology.htm

 

[tahitian3]

thanks so much jeeves 🙂

 

[joedogma]

I think jeeves answered the question fairly well. Remember, someone who goes to medical school (MD or DO) can become a licensed physician. As far as I know (please correct if wrong) only a licensed physician can sign off on pathology reports, lab reports, etc...PhD's usually go into research and academics so while both may work in the same hospital, their jobs are much different.

 

[Gut Shot]

I received my PhD in "Experimental Pathology" (which is actually not nearly as cool as it sounds) in 2001. Most PhD's in path would go into roles outside of patient care (research, academics, biotech, etc.). There are, however, some tracks that put PhD's in charge of clinically oriented activities, such as running hospital labs (micro, clinical chem, etc.).

Personally, I decided to pursue an MD because, while I liked the research a great deal, I couldn't resist the draw of clinical cases and diagnostics (and the blood and guts).

Also, while 99.99+% of slides/specimens are examined by MD's, a few do make it to specialized PhD's. One of my mentors, for instance, is highly skilled at microscopic diagnosis of mycoses, and is frequently called for consult on unusual cases from across the country.

I should mention that MD's are generally capable of following all the same tracks as PhD's (research, academics, biotech, etc.), should they be so inclined. As for salary, the rule of thumb at my graduate institution was that an entry-level MD in the department would make about the same as a full professor PhD (low 100's). The PhD's tend to have better renumeration in industry, although they often sacrifice some job security.

 

[pathdr2b]

Both, PLEASE!!!! 😀