PhD not necessary for research, but why do MD/PhD?

[monkeyMD]

I always hear that MDs do NOT have to have a PhD to do research. I am really interested in research, but I have been only considering the MD programs and this summer I will be applying. However, I have recently begun to consider the possibility of applying to MD/PhD programs.

From your viewpoint, what concrete reason should I have (i.e., career goals) to apply to MD/PhD programs? I really like research ( I have 3.5yrs of experience as an undergrad) and I like the clinical side of medicine. I want to do research...but I don't know if I can ONLY do research for the rest of my life. In general, should you get a MD/PhD only if you want your own lab or you want to become a professor?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[tortuga87]

You should do an MD/PhD if you want to spend most of your time (e.g., 80-90%) doing research. The rest is clinical. Doing research means you get paid less. Hence, MD/PhDs do not have to pay for medical school, so they can pursue their research careers without fear of debt. You can go the same route with just an MD, but you have debt, and it's harder to pay off.

Wanting to become a professor is nice and will help you in the interview trail. Most schools pride themselves on the percent of their alumni who went on to become professors. Please note that an MD/PhD professor often does do clinical one day or half a day of the week, but the majority is spent doing research-related things like grant writing.

 

[Neuronix]

The goals and the reality of MD/PhD graduates are somewhat different.

The goals are majority time research faculty at academic medical centers or research institutes who bring in large independent grants. Alternatively, industry researchers and leaders.

The reality is here: http://akabaslab.aecom.yu.edu/articles/Acad Med MD-PhD Outcomes 2010.pdf

(i.e. somewhere around 50%-60% of graduates pursue that goal)

Still, if you're going to take on MD/PhD, you should have the goal firmly etched in your mind.

 

[Reddpoint]

The only reason I think getting a MD-PhD makes sense is to get med school paid for. If you want to do straight basic yeast research get a PhD. If you want to do clinical or "translational" research get an MD and put in your research years once you have completed your clinical training.

The problem with the MD-Phd is that what you think you want to do in college will probably be much different that what you want to do after med school and then residency. Furthermore even if you still want to do research what you did during med school is going to be probably 4-7 years out of date.

My suggestion is go to med school and residency. You can always do a HHMI year during med school to see if you like full time research. When ever you enter the lab whether its post residency or during fellowship you will still end up putting in 4-5 years of lab work before you start your own lab. However at least you can transition out of your post-doc straight into your own lab.

 

[ablavar]

The only reason I think getting a MD-PhD makes sense is to get med school paid for.

I stopped reading after this. I really don't think you know what a PhD is for.

 

[M Tobaggen MD]

I dont know about you, but I did MD/PhD to get into the VIP room at clubs and to throw some D's on my sweet ride that i bought with my stipend

 

[gbwillner]

The reality is here: http://akabaslab.aecom.yu.edu/articles/Acad Med MD-PhD Outcomes 2010.pdf
.

I hadn't read Skip's paper before... Although the attrition rate is lower than I would have thought, reading the fine print suggests that a majority of MD/PhDs are not devoting a significant percentage of their time to research. The paper states 40% or less spend at least 75% of their time doing research. To me this means less than 40% are actively writing grants. 2/3 do SOME research... which can mean something or basically nothing. Spending 50% of your time doing research really means you are on service 6 months of the year- which is the same as someone who is in academics and doing no research.

 

[MUTiger15]

The only reason I think getting a MD-PhD makes sense is to get med school paid for. If you want to do straight basic yeast research get a PhD. If you want to do clinical or "translational" research get an MD and put in your research years once you have completed your clinical training.

The problem with the MD-Phd is that what you think you want to do in college will probably be much different that what you want to do after med school and then residency. Furthermore even if you still want to do research what you did during med school is going to be probably 4-7 years out of date.

My suggestion is go to med school and residency. You can always do a HHMI year during med school to see if you like full time research. When ever you enter the lab whether its post residency or during fellowship you will still end up putting in 4-5 years of lab work before you start your own lab. However at least you can transition out of your post-doc straight into your own lab.

Sooo who pays for your med school? Do you know what the costs are for getting an MD-PhD, if there are any?

So if I say got an MD and wanted to do research I could find a lab and then get a PhD or would I be able to get a grant and do research with an MD, no PhD?

And, say I am definitely going to be an MD but have decided I also want to do research. Do you still think I should do MD, not MD-PhD? What are some more pros and cons you have.

Just trying to pick your brain. And anyone else's.

 

[Narmerguy]

Is it possible to do research at an academic institution without having your own lab (spending closer to 50% of your time doing research and 50% clinical)?

 

[KPCOFGS]

Sooo who pays for your med school? Do you know what the costs are for getting an MD-PhD, if there are any?

So if I say got an MD and wanted to do research I could find a lab and then get a PhD or would I be able to get a grant and do research with an MD, no PhD?

And, say I am definitely going to be an MD but have decided I also want to do research. Do you still think I should do MD, not MD-PhD? What are some more pros and cons you have.

Just trying to pick your brain. And anyone else's.

What I wish I'd known about before applying MD/PhD are loan repayment programs, such as this one through the NIH:

http://www.lrp.nih.gov/about_the_programs/index.aspx

Now I don't know if I would've done this over MD/PhD if I had known about it beforehand, but this is something to think about if you're interested in research but not sure about committing 4+ years to a PhD.

 

[MUTiger15]

What I wish I'd known about before applying MD/PhD are loan repayment programs, such as this one through the NIH:

http://www.lrp.nih.gov/about_the_programs/index.aspx

Now I don't know if I would've done this over MD/PhD if I had known about it beforehand, but this is something to think about if you're interested in research but not sure about committing 4+ years to a PhD.

What a great site! I have seen some other loan repayment programs as well, but this one seems more along my lines. Thanks for the reference.

So are you in an MD/PhD program currently? If so, what is it like? For instance, what does any given day have in store? And, what do individual years of the program look like?

Thanks