-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
PharmD and MD Differences
Started by tackett26
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
So, why have you been playing with my used condoms from your mom?
Thanks for letting me know though. 😉
Agreed! Most people take things too seriously....
Just found out today I am going to get to be one of those stereotypical medical students!!!
Got the call today!! Class of 2014
Got the call today!! Class of 2014
damn, that's early. you apply early decision or something?
1
146233
Either that or part of a guaranteed admissions program. EDP applicants are notified by October 1; some schools may notify sooner.
Congrats! Which School?
I was EDP. U of SC.
Thanks! So happy!!!
Thanks! So happy!!!
technically yes, but I think it should be more for physicians in the healthcare arena. I think it is too confusing to patients.
Many do not get the difference.
For example, me as a pharmacist, I would not want to be called doctor.
I would say MD, DO, DPM, DMD/DDS - yes
PharmD, OD - maybe
doctorate Nursing , Physical therapy - no
In academia, all are doctors to me. All are doctorate degrees.
This stuff is so touchy and different in different situations.
it is touchy.
i'm all for calling profs. doctors if they have a PhD.
but in healthcare, i would like to reserve it to MD and DO only
Why don't we all just drop the pretension and drop the doctor title altogether unless the patient wants to use it?
Seems rather silly to me.
Seems rather silly to me.
oh there you are, meister. was wondering when you would metastasize from the physician pay thread and start destroying other threads on SDN...
I always considered the more general meaning. That is a "doctor" is an expert in their respective field. I think if not called doctor, other health care professionals should have a way of conveying to patients that they are an expert in their field, and they aren't just a guy off the street that the hospital hired.
Are you really being honest here? I don't know where you learned your English, but in the US, doctor defaults to medical doctor, not the college professor or any other field expert. I know the etymology of doctor is "teacher" and all, but English is full of less than useful etymologies, like "assassin" coming from the word "hashish" (weed). And I bet when you give a college professor action toy to your 4 year old child, you won't tell him to call that toy "doctor."
I did research at a very prestigious institution and they made sure that all name tags and labels on coats had MD in front of physicians and only physicians had the prefix Dr.
Even the PhD's ID tags did not carry PhD in front of it. they also were not given Dr. Prefix's.
One jerkoff postdoc I worked with wanted it changed...they laughed to her face. haha.
Even the PhD's ID tags did not carry PhD in front of it. they also were not given Dr. Prefix's.
One jerkoff postdoc I worked with wanted it changed...they laughed to her face. haha.
Is he a doctor? He has a Juris Doctorate.
Is Obama a doctor? He taught (taught'er = doctor) constitutional law at UChicago, BTW, and would probably be a bigger expert at what he does than the typical Walgreen's pharmacist on drugs (there are PhDs in pharmacology).
Is he a doctor? He has a Juris Doctorate.
Is Obama a doctor? He taught (taught'er = doctor) constitutional law at UChicago, BTW, and would probably be a bigger expert at what he does than the typical Walgreen's pharmacist on drugs (there are PhDs in pharmacology).
They do have doctorates. Yes they are experts on what they do. And I'm not impressed.
Some of you guys really need to grow up! If you receive a doctorate, regardless of what subject area the doctorate is in you have the right to use the word doctor before your name. Likewise a PharmD reserves the right to have the title PharmD after their name. I see nothing wrong with signing PharmD after my name. I worked hard to earn my doctorate, and it's something that no one can take away from me.
A PhD pharmacologist cannot be licensed to dispense drugs. A PhD in biomedical sciences cannot prescribe medicines. If you have a doctorate you can call yourself doctor. If someone mistakes you for a medical doctor and you are not you simply clarify, "I'm not that kind of doctor." It isn't that hard to do.
Saying that a PharmD working at a retail pharmacy is less qualified to answer drug questions than a pharmacology PhD is equally absurd. First of all, like all health care professionals pharmacists and physicians are required to participate in continuing education. At many pharmacy schools throughout the country (such as Ohio State) pharmacy students take classes right alongside the medical students.
If you have such an inferiority complex that you must attack the expertise of anyone and everyone who has a doctorate in an area other than your own are of expertise, then you have a problem. You need to work it out with a psychologist (who also has a doctorate-by the way), a psychiatrist, and possibly a psych pharmacist (yes they exist).
I initially started this thread to inquire about the differences in clinical training received by PharmD candidates and medical students. I wanted to bring us together as health care professionals working to ensure that our patients get a fair shake. Instead it has turned into an all out war. Grow up, and act your age!
It has been said that lawyers aren't called doctor, but that is of their own choice. I have addressed several attorneys as doctor, and I believe that it is a sign of respect. Honestly, you may think law school is a joke, but I wouldn't trust a physician or pharmacist with ANY of my legal problems. To say that you are a better expert in your field than any other expert is in any other field is absurd.
My take home message is going to be short and sweet: If you can't work with a team of health care providers then you should not be licensed to practice in any healthcare setting.
I can take a little bit of disagreement, a little bit of good fun giving each other a hard time. But afterwards, you need to show the other side that you have respect for them and what they do.
No one is an expert in everything.
I wish I could show an excerpt of an article my pharmacy school pharmaceutics professor showed me. The page told a story about Einstein who frequently had to call his university to ask them where he lived. The message my professor was trying to get across is no one is an expert at everything.
When I created the original post I wanted it to bring us together instead it has turned into a battle.
A PhD pharmacologist cannot be licensed to dispense drugs. A PhD in biomedical sciences cannot prescribe medicines. If you have a doctorate you can call yourself doctor. If someone mistakes you for a medical doctor and you are not you simply clarify, "I'm not that kind of doctor." It isn't that hard to do.
Saying that a PharmD working at a retail pharmacy is less qualified to answer drug questions than a pharmacology PhD is equally absurd. First of all, like all health care professionals pharmacists and physicians are required to participate in continuing education. At many pharmacy schools throughout the country (such as Ohio State) pharmacy students take classes right alongside the medical students.
If you have such an inferiority complex that you must attack the expertise of anyone and everyone who has a doctorate in an area other than your own are of expertise, then you have a problem. You need to work it out with a psychologist (who also has a doctorate-by the way), a psychiatrist, and possibly a psych pharmacist (yes they exist).
I initially started this thread to inquire about the differences in clinical training received by PharmD candidates and medical students. I wanted to bring us together as health care professionals working to ensure that our patients get a fair shake. Instead it has turned into an all out war. Grow up, and act your age!
It has been said that lawyers aren't called doctor, but that is of their own choice. I have addressed several attorneys as doctor, and I believe that it is a sign of respect. Honestly, you may think law school is a joke, but I wouldn't trust a physician or pharmacist with ANY of my legal problems. To say that you are a better expert in your field than any other expert is in any other field is absurd.
My take home message is going to be short and sweet: If you can't work with a team of health care providers then you should not be licensed to practice in any healthcare setting.
I can take a little bit of disagreement, a little bit of good fun giving each other a hard time. But afterwards, you need to show the other side that you have respect for them and what they do.
No one is an expert in everything.
I wish I could show an excerpt of an article my pharmacy school pharmaceutics professor showed me. The page told a story about Einstein who frequently had to call his university to ask them where he lived. The message my professor was trying to get across is no one is an expert at everything.
When I created the original post I wanted it to bring us together instead it has turned into a battle.
Last edited:
Are you really being honest here? I don't know where you learned your English, but in the US, doctor defaults to medical doctor, not the college professor or any other field expert. I know the etymology of doctor is "teacher" and all, but English is full of less than useful etymologies, like "assassin" coming from the word "hashish" (weed). And I bet when you give a college professor action toy to your 4 year old child, you won't tell him to call that toy "doctor."
Yes I'm being honest! And to be honest I wouldn't go to med school just for the prestige. If you want prestige get an MBA. Those guys will be out on a beach with a hot babe only a year or so after undergrad while you've got your hand up some old guy's ass trying to make a diagnosis!
I'm fairly certain you guys can pick at each other without my help. You guys have been doing it for years as best as I can tell. If I wanted to troll I'd have opened with some derogatory statement. And I would have not have written my statement earlier telling you guys not to let your anger, ego, or whatever else it is you call it get out of hand.
If you are not here to help people. This is definitely the wrong field.
And you actually agree with this system? Think about it.
You are aware that this is a dangerous system in which it will be increadably different to distinguish between, a PharmD, a PhD, and a janitor. In fact the Board of Pharmacy in most states (at least the ones I've worked in) require pharmacy a employee's title be on their badge. Failure to do so can get you in trouble with the board.
write pharmd after your name all you want. no one wants to stop you, you earned it.
what others are saying is that the title "doctor" needs to be reserved for those who are traditionally associated with the doctor role.
both sides have a point. does it really matter? no. do people care? yes, quite a lot, depending on who you talk to. it is quite egotistical. a lot of md's put down do's as it is. add pharmd to the mix and the ridicule will never stop.
im not advocating either side at this point because tackett, you made a good point, as did the other posters here. im just commenting on how things are.
what others are saying is that the title "doctor" needs to be reserved for those who are traditionally associated with the doctor role.
both sides have a point. does it really matter? no. do people care? yes, quite a lot, depending on who you talk to. it is quite egotistical. a lot of md's put down do's as it is. add pharmd to the mix and the ridicule will never stop.
im not advocating either side at this point because tackett, you made a good point, as did the other posters here. im just commenting on how things are.
I'm only referring to doctor to mean a learned person. As a means to differentiate a health care professional from an assistant. I don't really care about the ego trip. I just want my patients to view me as a credible source. You wouldn't believe the number of people that think you don't have to have a college degree to be a pharmacist. I'm trying to put down the notion that we are over glorified store clerks and tell patients that we know what we're talking about when we say don't mix drug X with over the counter drug Y. Its just discouraging when people don't believe me when I tell them not to eat garlic while they're taking coumadin, and they end up in the hospital.
I see your point, and I'm basically going to agree to disagree with the other side without being disagreeable (if that makes any sense).
I'm not worried about feeding my ego. In fact during my research years I sometimes got in trouble for not wearing a lab coat. Its not that I'm against lab coats, but rather I wear a lab coat for its intended purpose (to protect myself from a sample or a patient infection). I don't wear a lab coat as a status symbol.
I'm legitimately concerned about my patients. We all have our areas of expertise, and I think we should work together as a team.
At the risk of sounding corny. Imagine for a moment that we are all a football team. Actually the football team at my old high school was a good example. That is to say, they spent all of their time fighting each other and by years end hadn't won a single game. We could fight each other just like they did, but it won't be a game that we loose. Its a patient's life. Once its lost, you can't get it back.
lol, very corny at the end there, but i see what you are saying
Bizarre, apparently saying turf battles over the use of the doctor title are a tad pretentious is akin to destroying threads on SDN.
As long as I can be called "drug dealer." Its sad. People have more faith in drug dealers than their pharmacists sometimes.
I refuse to call you drug dealer, I will however call you "pusher man"
After looking searching pusher man on google and doing a little investigative work through urban dictionary, I will call you pusher man for multiple reasons...
1. pusher man 51 up, 4 down
An urban drug dealer
Your local crackhead.
get this def on a mug
by Bobby Jan 29, 2005 share this
2. pusher man 17 up, 24 down
n. man one has to pay for dank at not mentally stable prices, but due to a lack of options are forced to buy as is
"God Damn the pusher man."
-Steppenwolfe
get this def on a mug by Ghandi Sep 24, 2002 share this
3. Pusher Man 2 up, 63 down
One who loves the cock in his anus all day.
Oh pusher man, your hole is so tight!
1. pusher man 51 up, 4 down
An urban drug dealer
Your local crackhead.
get this def on a mug
by Bobby Jan 29, 2005 share this 2. pusher man 17 up, 24 down
n. man one has to pay for dank at not mentally stable prices, but due to a lack of options are forced to buy as is
"God Damn the pusher man."
-Steppenwolfe
get this def on a mug
by Ghandi Sep 24, 2002 share this 3. Pusher Man 2 up, 63 down
One who loves the cock in his anus all day.
Oh pusher man, your hole is so tight!
what? thats absurd and stupid.
all the physicians had separate name tags. the pharmDs were in a different setting...im sure they had a distinctive name tag as well.
the PhDs were not differentiated from lab techs...thats all.
PhD isnt some sort of amazing degree. its not hard to get. seriously...anyone can get one. PhDs are dime a dozen and I'm willing to say that because they're cheap labor and schools are willing to place people in their programs if people want one.
thats not a diss on all PhDs. there are phenomenal ones amazing researchers. but i'll bet they'd do just as fine without the degree...they just have one because its a necessity in the career ladder.
unfortunately there are a ton of PhDs out there who are really hacks. or aren't too smart.
the thing is, and this is specific to what i did and to medicine...getitng a PhD isnt about intelligence or even hard work. its about time. do enough of this or that for this many years and you'll get it...publish a thesis thats not necessarily even decent and you'll still get it.
there's a reason why the best researchers got trained by the best researchers(not necessarily the best schools-its about the quality of the people around you not the stupid name)
honestly, a PhD doesnt impress me. the number of publications doesnt impress me. the pedigree doesnt impress me. what impresses me is the quality and impact of your research. ill bet the guys who have the greatest impact dont give two (curseword(s)) about their degrees.
There's no way I agree with some of this...
MD, DO, DMD...sure
DPM? are you serious? no way. never. this is where the confusion starts. i think the same applies to physician assistants. let me give a personal example...
we had just moved to a another state(its poorer and more rural...ill leave it at that) and had moved to an urban town/suburb.
as a result my insurance and physician changed and I met this lady for the first time.
she was doing a regular physical checkup for me and that was fine and I assumed she was my physician-lab coat and all with no ID other than her name.
later on i asked where she went to med school and she tells me she's a physician assistant. i was surprised. not offended but surprised because i thought she did a decent job of being a physician(knowledge for basic checkup etc.)
but i cant begin to say how uncomfortable I feel(even as a premedder/future md student) having her take care of me especially if I had specific questions regarding my health. i was 17 at the time...and a few years back had some serious hypochondria/other medical issues that a very good pediatrician of mine allayed fears of. i doubt a PA could do the same especially since they dont have the same educational background.
so no, I am not comfortable with this sort of homogenization of the term "doctor" being used on everyone. i have no doubt competent nurses who know more htan physicians in certain areas exist. im sure the same applies to every profession. but giving the term doctor to everyone merely confuses patients and causes discomfort. thinking about my situation and having discussed her experiences and knowledge makes me appreciate that i know she's a PA.
also...and this could be important, my PA was more willing to refer me to a specialist than my other physicians have. this is probably due to inexperience or legal restrictions but either way it can only lead to an increase in costs if it is true and not just anecdotal.
I think doctor is fine in certain settings. Like academia as you mentioned. All my clinical faculty were PharmDs and we called them Dr. SoandSo in class. However, once we got on rotations they usually just went by their first names.
I think if you do use Dr. as a pharmacist during patient interaction, you should really say something like, "Hi I'm your pharmacist, Dr. Rx515" to avoid confusion. It also offers a teaching opportunity if they question the title. In a hospital setting if someone in a white coat walked into my room and just said, "I'm Dr. X", I would probably assume MD/DO like the rest of the nation unless they told me otherwise.
So you are suggesting that a medical degree is superior to a PhD. Fact is, I've never seen an MD lecture in quantum mechanics, and to be honest, I never will. Furthermore the PhD is more rigorous in the respect that it requires a dissertation. To be perfectly honest this should be a requirement for all doctorates. In fact a few progressive schools have implemented this policy (see the Duke University School of Medicine Page).
It is a dangerous situation if you don't distinguish between areas of expertise. That is the whole purpose for only calling physicians "doctors." Furthermore you said in your first post that only physicians had ID tags identifying their title and expertise which is in direct conflict with what you are saying now.
Please see my earlier lecture on respect between medical professionals. If you cannot work with the rest of the medical team you are not qualified to be a physician.
really? do you get off on your high horse? whats your deal man? dont act all noble and ghandi on me. I'm not stupid. please see your earlier lecture? as if I need to be lectured? its people like you that ruin intelligent debate. dont moralize on me. everything I've said stands true to reality. that IS A FACT.
I made a comment on how there is a strict distinction on who is called a dr. and who is not. thus, PHDs were not given the TITLE OF DOCTOR. there is nothing wrong with that nor does it conflict with what I said later. that pharmacists and dentists and so forth had their own distinctive tags.
maybe you should learn to read?
Oh and btw....yea I dont want to see an MD teach quantum mechanics...but then again I WAS SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO THE MEDICAL SETTING WHERE I DID RESEARCH.
i did not work in the physics department, i worked at the biomedical research facility in OUR HOSPITAL....again, your reading comprehension is severely lacking.
having doctor in front of everyone including PhDs is pretty lame, its meaningless...the distinction AS YOU YOURSELF HAS SAID, is a necessity especially in A HOSPITAL SETTING.
ohh and to your next topic...about the rigors of PhDs...
thats a joke buddy. because it has a dissertation? are you serious? do you even know what it is? do you know how EASY it is to write one up? ask anyone with a PhD...ask them, how difficult was it to obtain your PhD....almost all will say, its fairly easy, its doing something with it AFTERWARDS thats difficult.
writing some paper and calling it a dissertation does NOT ADD TO THE RIGOR. the fact is, getting into a PhD program and even completing it is far easier than getting into an MD program. its true. if you dont want to believe it I really dont care.
Here's a pretty good example....looking up the statistics for the medical school I worked at, the average GPA of entering med student was 3.8. the average GPA of a PhD student in the biology science was 3.2 go figure.
now this isnt about how great an MD is over a PhD.... a lot of the students at my school chose to do PhD over an MD for a variety of reasons and most of these guys had the numbers to get into either programs.
its insane to think that somehow a PhD is lowly or whatever. but the fact is its a lot easier to get one and as a result its respect has been diluted.
if you cant grasp that point and want to flaggelate yourself everytime you even think that everyone and every degree is not created equal because of some extreme sense of political correctness then its your problem.
you've either got some sort of extreme insecurity about respect in professions or your just ignorant/and/or naive about the current situation.
time and time again i've seen more respect given to MDs than PhDs by default. thats not to say that PhDs aren't respectable...again this goes down to what have you done for me attitude. the PhD researchers at my school who did really good work were above and beyond the physicians who did routine surgeries. but as a whole, and excluding the rockstar outliers in both physicians and PhDs, average MDs are given more respect as a result of the rigor of getting in and completing medicine/residency than your average PhD researcher/postdoc. its a fact of life.
anyway back to the nametag distinction. I suspect that the above reason along with making sure that physicians are given distinct titles so people know whos capable of practicing and who is not was the reason why they wanted only MDs to have Dr. before their title.
also...this has nothing to do with the OP...so why are we on this topic again???
You are truly an idiot, and are give a bad name to pre-med students everywhere. You seriously believe that GPA is the best indicator of aptitude? Does it concern you at all that the courses taken by a pre-med and someone going onto graduate school may be completely different depending on the school? For instance the bare minimum to get into a medical school is as follows: 2 semesters of biology, 2 semesters of general and organic chemistry (with their labs), 2 semesters of physics with lab, a math class, and an English class. An applicant who only took those classes would have a much lower GPA than someone (pre-med, pre-pharm, or Pre-PhD) who got a degree in biochem and survived 2 semesters of p-chem.
Secondly you have a great tendency to over generalize. It honestly depends on which PhD program you are going into. That is to say some are more competitive than others. The same is true for medical school.
In your vast ignorance you've missed the point that each of these doctorates is experts in their own field. I would not go to a physician to discuss my legal problems, but I would go to a lawyer for this. Likewise I wouldn't go to a technician to talk about a complex drug interaction (rather you would go to a pharmacist)!
Additionally your first post read as follows "Even the PhD's ID tags did not carry PhD in front of it"- thus implying that your institution did not identify the expertise of their staff. Furthermore to say that a PhD is the same as a technician is ridiculous! Are you suggesting that an undergraduate degree is equivalent to the higher level course work, the qualifying exam, rotations, and dissertation required for a PhD.
You clearly have some damned ego issues? Remember that you that you are not a physician yet. With this poor attitude you never will be. Also most of your pre-clinical instructors at schools of medicine have …. Gasp … A PhD. Yes that's right, having a PhD or a PharmD will qualify you to teach at a school of medicine. And if you don't treat them with respect when you get there you won't make it through the first day!
And are you also suggesting that PhDs don't contribute to medical sciences? Have you ever heard of knockout mice, PCR, RNAi, or gel electrophoresis? These were all discovered by PhDs!
You also stated
"anyway back to the nametag distinction. I suspect that the above reason along with making sure that physicians are given distinct titles so people know whos capable of practicing and who is not was the reason why they wanted only MDs to have Dr. before their title"
This suggests that only MDs are qualified to render patient care, and in case you haven't noticed this is not the case. Everyday patients receive medication therapy management from pharmacists. PA's are also playing an important role in patient care.
You also said that "time and time again i've seen more respect given to MDs than PhDs by default. thats not to say that PhDs aren't respectable...again this goes down to what have you done for me attitude"
So you are you saying that if the rest of society went jumping off a bridge you would join them? The average patient doesn't know their anus from their ulna. Just because they don't respect all members of the healthcare team doesn't mean that physicians, hospitals and other health care team members should follow suit.
Also I created the original OP, and I'm not the one who stumbled in here off topic!
Last edited:
That's true... its too bad we are on different schedules, makes it hard to meet up and hit on them.
I hear they go to the cell block, my roommate had a pharm student as a roomie last year and she said a few of them were a little fast with the guys
dude...i feel like im talking to wall. you're that dense. its sad.
let me clarify your idiocy point by point so that you may just shutup...
You seriously believe that GPA is the best indicator of aptitude
I never said it was a good indicator of APTITUDE...just that medical school is much more difficult to gain acceptance...it requires more work to get into it-i.e. higher GPA. and dont pull the BS about classwork and courses taken. the vast, and i mean THE VAST majority of medical students are science majors. SCIENCE...as in they take classes alongside their future PhD science counterparts genius. this is based on STATISTICS...ever hear of that? perhaps you need to brush up on it.
what are you trying to imply? that somehow med students have higher GPAs because they take Bull courses? really? go announce that to the rest of the med students here...lets see what they say about that.
you really think that the vast majority of students in med school take the BARE MINIMUM? really? hmmm..
Does it concern you at all that the courses taken by a pre-med and someone going onto graduate school may be completely different depending on the school? For instance the bare minimum to get into a medical school is as follows: 2 semesters of biology, 2 semesters of general and organic chemistry (with their labs), 2 semesters of physics with lab, a math class, and an English class. An applicant who only took those classes would have a much lower GPA than someone (pre-med, pre-pharm, or Pre-PhD) who got a degree in biochem and survived 2 semesters of p-chem.
-wow..what are you saying now? that somehow the vast majority of students who are in med school took Bull**** courses to get thier high GPA? really? i wonder what the med students think of that....
but on that note, i took pchem. i majored in neuroscience. i also took biochem, physio, anatomy, genetics, cell bio, mol cell bio, almost every PhD intro neuro course(which was required for our major), and all the prerequisites for med school. i can also assure you that the vast majority of students who applied to med school at my school majored in some form of biology, chemistry, physics-man i cant even believe im defending med students
Secondly you have a great tendency to over generalize. It honestly depends on which PhD program you are going into. That is to say some are more competitive than others. The same is true for medical school.
- I never said all the PhD programs are the same. I mentioned my school because in biochemistry and biology it is a top ten program. its medical program is also top ten. as a result it was a decent comparison.
i know there are far more rigorous programs. Duke almost requires students to graduate top of class for PhD consideration. at least from waht I've heard...
thats not to say that this represents all programs...in general, getting into medical school is far more difficult. in fact, the national average for acceptance is about 3.6 GPAwise. for PhD? its about 3.0. THATS A FACT.
i am also not saying that somehow all PhDs are lower in value in anyway...merely that on average they are easier to get and less respected as a result. they really are dime a dozen.
In your vast ignorance you've missed the point that each of these doctorates is experts in their own field. I would not go to a physician to discuss my legal problems, but I would go to a lawyer for this. Likewise I wouldn't go to a technician to talk about a complex drug interaction (rather you would go to a pharmacist)!
who ever disagreed with this? I certainly DID NOT. why even bring it up. of course they're all experts in their field. dude...your just rambbling now.
Additionally your first post read as follows "Even the PhD's ID tags did not carry PhD in front of it"- thus implying that your institution did not identify the expertise of their staff. Furthermore to say that a PhD is the same as a technician is ridiculous! Are you suggesting that an undergraduate degree is equivalent to the higher level course work, the qualifying exam, rotations, and dissertation required for a PhD.
yea the PhD tags didnt carry the PhD in front of it...so what? what do you mean identify experts on staff? they're researchers....they are not some sort of experts for patients to go up to and ask questions. the people they work alongside are all on the same page and know if they're PhDs or lab techs or PIs or postdocs etc. they are not in a patient care setting. therefore, there is no need for a distinction! ok? when you work in a research lab you ahve a hierarchy. that hierarchy is PI, postdoc, lab tech etc... in that order. everybody knows their roles.
I never said that a PhD and tech are the same...you are reading into what I wrote and trying to take things out of context. do you know what that makes you? a troll
and on that note...yes i know that my professors will be PhDs...so what?
and i never said PhDs dont contribute to medicine. again you take it out of context. trolling all over again. i even said that the best PhDs can outmatch even a good MD...
MY POINT IS NOT ABOUT MD VS PHD. it is absolutely not about that. just that giving a distinction that PhDs should be called Dr. in a medical setting such as a hospital is ridiculous. there's no need for it.
my second point is that PhDs are dime a dozen. its easy to get one. as a result their importance has been devalued over time. its not that somehow a PhD is worthless. it is absolutely essential for our economy to grow. but the problem is that the PhDs given out are not all equal and that the majority of them are not exactly that difficult to attain even if it is at a good school. they are cheap labor! as a result institutions are more than willing to give out PhD positions so that PIs can get cheap research labor. thats just HOW IT IS.
Last edited:
I like how you dissed all med students by implying that they have higher GPAs because they took the 'bare minimum' only for science courses. as if somehow they're not in as rigorous a program as PhD students...lol.
and I'm 100% sure now that the only reason why you posted on the allo forum was to create this sort of debate. so you can vent your frustration against med students or something along those lines...
you sir are a troll :troll:
Someone please close this thread.
and I'm 100% sure now that the only reason why you posted on the allo forum was to create this sort of debate. so you can vent your frustration against med students or something along those lines...
you sir are a troll :troll:
Someone please close this thread.
