PhD vs. MD/PhD

[jadedenvy]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello all, I have been clicking around on this part of the forum for a couple days now and thought I'd ask for some advice on a dilemma I'm having.

I am a junior at a university right now, having transferred in the fall from a community college. I have recently (late, I know, but bear with me) begin to try to figure out what I'm going to be doing after my senior year. I have been really enjoying my physiology classes so far and at this point I believe that perhaps a path in pathophysiology may be one that I would really enjoy. I had planned on applying to a good physiology graduate school this coming fall/winter to pursue a PhD in the subject, and have meanwhile been trying to make contacts for letters of recommendation and have set up (my first...) internship over the summer working in a lab and applying for a Senior Honors Thesis next year. Now, however, I have started to look into MD/PhD programs, for a couple of reasons. One, I am interested in transitional research, and I think that I can use the knowledge and experience gained through treating patients with a disease and apply it to the research I'm doing on said disease. It may also help me think more creatively and give me some more motivation (if I need any) to continue on researching the subjects. The other reasons are a bit more practical in nature - I have read many times that a MD/PhD is better off financially and job wise in some cases than a pure PhD, and this way if I decide research is not for me I can fall back on the MD to make a living.

However, the thing that puts me off to the program isthe time it takes to complete it. XP There is no way I will be able to apply this year, as I have perhaps one person who may write me a LOR, and no experience in either research or clinical matters. I know, I know, I should have started this in my freshman year, but as I said I went to a community college where there weren't any research faculty members as far as I know, and at that point I didn't know what I wanted to do. (In fact, I decided just last summer that I really wanted to be a biology major. I had toyed with the idea before, but didn't want to spend another year at my community college, so transferred in under another major. Now I'm desperately trying to finish all the classes I have to take for my major by spring/summer of next year.) My one saving grace is that my GPA right now is 3.96. Either way, if I wish to apply for the MD/PhD I would have to stay an extra year here to apply for 2013 admissions, and combined with the fact that the MD/PhD takes so long to do I am quite worried.

I realize that all of this can change, as I don't have any research experience and I may change my mind when I go through the labs this summer/next year. As for now though I am trying to create at least a couple of plans for this/next year. So, long diatribe aside, I suppose these are my questions -

1) As a Physiology PhD, is there any chance that I will have any sort of "clinical" experience that may provide me with the transitional research I would like to have? I have heard as an MD you can get research experience through post doc or through school - is the opposite true of PhDs, can they get any clinical experience (not practicing on patients, but diagnostics/seeing the disease or whatever) through school or post doc?

2) If I enter the school as a PhD (fully intending to be so), is there any chance I might be able to become a MD/PhD? I have heard people say here that it is very rare, but it seems more like they were talking to people who wanted to switch entirely but not lose their work, whereas I still have the intentions of being a PhD but want to use the MD to further the knowledge I would have in my field (And of course I won't mention the practicalities...)

3) What generally happens after one completes an MD/PhD? Do they do post doc research or residency or both? Are these things required? I ask because I had heard that for some reason the time that it takes to complete an MD/PhD is roughly the same as it takes to complete a PhD when you take into account the post doc studies the latter has to take

4) Does anyone just have some general advice on what I should do or think about?

To those that read this, I apologize for the wordiness, and I thank you for hearing me out. To those that reply, I appreciate it very much and thank yo

 

[Neuronix]

1) As a Physiology PhD, is there any chance that I will have any sort of "clinical" experience that may provide me with the transitional research I would like to have? I have heard as an MD you can get research experience through post doc or through school - is the opposite true of PhDs, can they get any clinical experience (not practicing on patients, but diagnostics/seeing the disease or whatever) through school or post doc?

The physiology program at the medical school where I attend does a lot of work on muscle physiology. As such, their PhD students can shadow specialists who see patients with the muscle diseases they work on. Is this enough for you? As a PhD you will not understand the clinical manifestations and management of the disease, nor will you be able to collect patients yourself for samples or other related clinical research.

Now many would argue you do not actually need the MD to do that type of research. The MDs don't understand the protein-protein interactions that cause the clinical disease they are seeing. They don't understand how to run the experiments to tease apart the disease mechanisms. They wouldn't be able to look for molecular therapies based on this basic research.

Is there value in being a person who understands both of the clinic and the bench? Maybe. It depends on who you ask. Is it enough to have a team of people who get together and bring their expertise in each individual area to work on the problem? Maybe that is sufficient. In this sense, the value of the MD/PhD becomes somewhat philosophical and personal, as you can find successful examples of both approaches to the problem.

2) If I enter the school as a PhD (fully intending to be so), is there any chance I might be able to become a MD/PhD? I have heard people say here that it is very rare, but it seems more like they were talking to people who wanted to switch entirely but not lose their work, whereas I still have the intentions of being a PhD but want to use the MD to further the knowledge I would have in my field (And of course I won't mention the practicalities...)

Yes there is a chance. But you will be looking at completing the PhD first, followed by the MD. The total time is longer, the cost is much higher, and the PhD does not make it any easier to get into medical school.

3) What generally happens after one completes an MD/PhD? Do they do post doc research or residency or both? Are these things required? I ask because I had heard that for some reason the time that it takes to complete an MD/PhD is roughly the same as it takes to complete a PhD when you take into account the post doc studies the latter has to take

95%+ do residency. If you want to continue doing serious bench research, the pathways are somewhat dependant on the clinical field. Sometimes the research is built into residency, sometimes the research is built into fellowship (after residency), and some will spend time doing 80%+ research trying to build their labs (I like to call these research fellowships, but there's other names/ways of putting in the time). In general, expect to spend at least 6 years of residency and fellowship time after an MD/PhD program before becoming a physician-scientist.

4) Does anyone just have some general advice on what I should do or think about?

Meet with a pre-medical advisor at your school to make sure you have the appropriate courses for applying to medical school. They should be able to look at your community college transcript, the courses you took at university, and come up with additional courses you need to take and put that into an application time frame with the MCAT. Even if you are undecided about applying MD or MD/PhD it would be good for you to know your options.

For MD/PhD start doing research ASAP and do as much as you can while keeping your GPA high. You will also need some amount of volunteering/shadowing (100 hours is general advice). You will probably have to take a year out and start research now, but if you score high on the MCAT and all your other ducks are in a row you could make it with only one year out.

As for the time investment, only you can decide if it's worth it to spend all that time training. It's hard to have that perspective as a 20something, but as a 30something I can tell you that it's a personal decision that's worth it for some and not for others.

 

[jadedenvy]

Thank you very much for the advice!

I have emailed a MD/PhD at my school who has a PhD in Physiology about an appointment to hear about his experience, and I hope that will also lend me some of the insight I will need to make the decision.

As for right now I'm leaning more on the "no" side, because if I can be able to shadow physicians in graduate school that may be enough for me. I can also keep an eye out or email people to see if their school focuses on that - I was looking it up last night and I saw that UCSF has a transitional research program for the biomedical science PhD and that may be better for me. At this point I can't really get over the amount of time it would take me to complete this, but perhaps that is because I feel like while I'm in school it will be the same as I'm in school now - poor, doing nothing but going to school, sort of without a life. I do have a boyfriend and I know I would someday like a family, and sadly that does factor in somewhat. I have heard the fact that you don't have a life in graduate/medical school is somewhat inaccurate though. However tempting it is to be able to feel secure with the MD as backup or be able to make a bit more money, I'm trying not to let it affect my decision because I don't think that is a good thing to focus on when it comes to having a commitment for so many years, if you know what I mean.

So, on the thought of switching to an MD/PhD after starting a PhD, that would be completely different from doing an MSTP? Because MDs can switch to do the MD/PhD or the MSTP or whichever a year or two after they've started, I know that much, but for some reason that doesn't apply to PhD students either? Is there a reason for that? I suppose what I'm confused about is that I know for the MD/PhD you can decide later as an MD and still have the integrated training, but if you wish to switch as a PhD your only choice is to do the degrees sequentially?

Thanks again for your answer and advice, I really appreciate it. ^^

 

[Neuronix]

So, on the thought of switching to an MD/PhD after starting a PhD, that would be completely different from doing an MSTP? Because MDs can switch to do the MD/PhD or the MSTP or whichever a year or two after they've started, I know that much, but for some reason that doesn't apply to PhD students either? Is there a reason for that? I suppose what I'm confused about is that I know for the MD/PhD you can decide later as an MD and still have the integrated training, but if you wish to switch as a PhD your only choice is to do the degrees sequentially?

There are a few reasons, none of them great ones.

For MD -> MD/PhD or PhD -> MD/PhD they're evaluating you as would they have taken you if you had applied straight to MD/PhD. That's more common as a medical student, considering they have all the pre-med requirements, a high MCAT score, often have significant research experience, and had shadowing/volunteering. It's a much simpler transition. To find a grad student with all of that, who could have gotten into a MD/PhD program is pretty rare. I think the biggest part is that it takes effort to do well on the MCAT. If you want to go to med school you take the MCAT and prepare hard for it. PhD students don't take the MCAT. If you took the MCAT and crushed it, you probably wouldn't go to grad school because to crush it you were probably focused on med school.

If you did change your mind, took the MCAT and crushed it, then there's the issue of "stealing" graduate students. Graduate students are a lot of labor to graduate departments. If the MD/PhD program pulls one to be in medical school, it can create political issues. Frankly as a grad student, they already have you in their grasp and expect you to start being their indentured servant in the near future. Medical school is not a "service" oriented program, but grad school and residency are. You help to prop up the medical center in those positions and so they need your labor.

But I think you're also assuming this MD->MD/PhD thing is automatic as well. Some programs do it fairly commonly, but many don't do it often or prohibit that. There's another active thread right now where a medical student is unhappy they can't switch from MD to MD/PhD at their program. In any case, if you do switch from MD to MD/PhD you are looking at 1-2 years of medical school debt before ever starting. For that reason I never recommend it. In all cases, do what you need to make up your mind, prepare yourself for the path you've chosen, and go for it. Don't ever start a program with the idea of switching.

 

[orrghead16]

4. Do the straight Phd

If I was in the same shoes, I would never even think twice. Unless you are 100% certain you want to go md/phd, I wouldst waste the (literal) years of you're life going for it (and maybe not getting in). Nx gave some great advice. Keep clear reality. If you want, it can be done, but it will take a complete life change and not just a different check in the application box.

If you ARE having a heart change, get involved in research now and plan to take some years off. Before you go for a combined program you need to prove to them you are in for the long haul, as previously said.

 

[jadedenvy]

Thanks for the excellent replies everyone! I do appreciate your advice and will definitely take it into account. I am of course, planning on seeing on how I like research before I make a decision - could be that I end up hating it and I have to start from scratch again, but ce la vie, better knowing now than later.

Although now I'm curious, does anyone know of a nursing/PhD program? How does it compare to the MD/PhD timewise?

 

[hopefuldoc97239]

4. Do the straight Phd.

I wouldn't be so quick to give this advice... I did a research PhD and am now starting med school. I have a couple of friends who are in the same boat.

Here's why: about 90% of the people I know who got PhD's are stuck in dead-end post-docs. If you look at FASEB data, the number of health/biosci PhD's has doubled in the last 30 years while tenure-track faculty positions have flat-lined. There aren't enough jobs for PhDs.

The demand for PhD's doesn't begin to measure up to the supply. This has been a problem for a long time... Check out this article from Time Magazine that way back in 1973 was already saying we were making too many PhDs. And this article from The Economist. And this article from the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Even the NIH agrees. In 2000, the "Personnel Needs Committee" of the NIH issued a memo saying that they believed "there is a substantial overproduction of biomedical PhDs."

does anyone know of a nursing/PhD program? How does it compare to the MD/PhD timewise?

Don't expect very many people on SDN to support the idea of being a nurse/researcher... But to answer your question, if you got a RN with BSN, then there are plenty of nursing programs that would admit you for their nursing PhD programs (research based). RN's make good money, so nursing programs actually have trouble attracting RN's into their nursing PhD programs.

 

[jadedenvy]

Here's why: about 90% of the people I know who got PhD's are stuck in dead-end post-docs. If you look at FASEB data, the number of health/biosci PhD's has doubled in the last 30 years while tenure-track faculty positions have flat-lined. There aren't enough jobs for PhDs.

This is actually one of the things I am afraid of - I know the job market is extremely competitive, and knowing that I would be able to fall back on the MD in case I can't find a job as a PhD is quite attractive. I really don't want to have that taint my decision, but it's kind of hard. XP

Don't expect very many people on SDN to support the idea of being a nurse/researcher... But to answer your question, if you got a RN with BSN, then there are plenty of nursing programs that would admit you for their nursing PhD programs (research based). RN's make good money, so nursing programs actually have trouble attracting RN's into their nursing PhD programs.

Would you have to get a PhD in nursing, or is it like the MD/PhD where you can do the PhD in any other subject, it's just that biomedical sciences is more prevalent? And do you have to be a registered nurse already to do this, or go to medical school? I know nurses have something of a different track than doctors do, in that they can be licensed after special programs after high school and with an AA...

I'm just trying to explore my options now. So far I know I really like Physiology and I enjoy doing case study problem solving, if that makes sense. XP Though if I did do some sort of nurse program I would hope to do it in Canada, where I hear they have responsibilities and respect much closer to the level a doctor receives than they do here.

 

[hopefuldoc97239]

Would you have to get a PhD in nursing, or is it like the MD/PhD where you can do the PhD in any other subject, it's just that biomedical sciences is more prevalent? And do you have to be a registered nurse already to do this, or go to medical school? I know nurses have something of a different track than doctors do, in that they can be licensed after special programs after high school and with an AA...

I don't know if there are combined nurse/scientist programs, so you'd have to look into that yourself. I don't think there are, but I never really looked that hard.

You're right that nurses can become RN's after just an associate degree, but to go to grad school you would have to get a bachelor's degree (usually a BSN) also before starting grad school.

The way it usually works for nurses who want to go to into research afterwards is that after becoming a BSN/RN you go into a nursing PhD. These people are researchers, and like all PhD programs it matters less what your department or "major" is; what matters more is who your advisor and dissertation committee are. If your nursing program is okay with you doing biomedical research for your PhD then go for it (but don't just assume that this will be cool at every school). Otherwise, you'll be doing nursing research: like researching ways that nurses can improve care, researching the nursing shortage, researching effective ways to teach nurses... etc.

Back in the day there weren't as many nursing PhD programs, so it used to be more common for nurses to get PhD's in other fields before returning to work as nursing faculty. At my school, in addition to the many nursing faculty whose PhD's are in nursing, there are nurse faculty whose PhD's are in all sorts of different things, like educational psychology, biochemistry, and human resource management. There's also faculty with other degrees... an MD, a PsyD, and a DNSc.

Having a nursing degree isn't going to keep you out of any PhD program, assuming that you're a good candidate otherwise. It's not necessarily going to help you either. So if you want to have some clinical background but also be a researcher then you could totally go to nursing school then go to graduate school. The nursing school won't be funded, but the graduate school still should be.

 

[Neuronix]

If you want to be a specialist physician and do bench research, do an MD/PhD program.

If you want to be a nurse and a clinical researcher, look into clinical nursing with master's or doctoral level training. If you want to be a glorified nurse, try nurse practitioner training. Or maybe you should just go to medical school if you don't plan on doing bench research?

These are all very different training pathways with very different objectives. There is no such thing as a nurse basic science researcher training pathway.

 

[jadedenvy]

If you want to be a specialist physician and do bench research, do an MD/PhD program.

If you want to be a nurse and a clinical researcher, look into clinical nursing with master's or doctoral level training. If you want to be a glorified nurse, try nurse practitioner training. Or maybe you should just go to medical school if you don't plan on doing bench research?

These are all very different training pathways with very different objectives. There is no such thing as a nurse basic science researcher training pathway.

Okay, good to know. I do still want to do basic research, I believe, but I am worried about the job prospects later on in my career, as hopefuldoc was talking about.

I think at this point I'll just keep looking for graduate schools that have specialized programs for transitional research - I think UCSF has one, GEMS, and it looks like NYU has a Pathobiology that focuses on that type of research too. If I apply this year and it turns out that the research I'll be doing over the summer and next year isn't enough for them to accept me, I'll just take another fall quarter of classes (instead of the summer quarter I was planning on doing) and apply again, working and researching until I hear back from them and hopefully get accepted.

Thanks for all of your advice though, I really appreciate it and will be certain to keep it in mind. 🙂 If I have any more questions I definitely know where I can find people who can tell me more about it!

 

[Neuronix]

Okay, good to know. I do still want to do basic research, I believe, but I am worried about the job prospects later on in my career, as hopefuldoc was talking about.

I think at this point I'll just keep looking for graduate schools that have specialized programs for transitional research - I think UCSF has one, GEMS, and it looks like NYU has a Pathobiology that focuses on that type of research too. If I apply this year and it turns out that the research I'll be doing over the summer and next year isn't enough for them to accept me, I'll just take another fall quarter of classes (instead of the summer quarter I was planning on doing) and apply again, working and researching until I hear back from them and hopefully get accepted.

I don't see how one of those programs makes the job prospects any better for a PhD.

 

[jadedenvy]

I don't see how one of those programs makes the job prospects any better for a PhD.

Oh, they probably won't. It would provide me with the transitional research that I had hoped the MD would give me, only without the fifteen year price tag, but as for the practicalities of jobs and money and the like it probably won't help at all. I'm not sure what I'll do about that part yet...

 

[hopefuldoc97239]

Oh, they probably won't. It would provide me with the transitional research that I had hoped the MD would give me, only without the fifteen year price tag, but as for the practicalities of jobs and money and the like it probably won't help at all. I'm not sure what I'll do about that part yet...

Do you mean "translational"? Because I don't know what transitional research means... 🙂

But listen... in my humble opinion you're crazy to get just a PhD. The odds are stacked against you (anyone) who wants to go on to be an independent PI. You're much more likely to end up being a research associate type. That's not a bad career, but if that's where you're headed anyway, why not do a program like this MCR program? Half the time compared to a PhD (or less!), and you can end up making $60,000/year or more, which is totally comparable to what you'd make as a PhD who's stuck in an endless post-doc or working as a research associate.

 

[gbwillner]

Do you mean "translational"? Because I don't know what transitional research means... 🙂

But listen... in my humble opinion you're crazy to get just a PhD. The odds are stacked against you (anyone) who wants to go on to be an independent PI. You're much more likely to end up being a research associate type. That's not a bad career, but if that's where you're headed anyway, why not do a program like this MCR program? Half the time compared to a PhD (or less!), and you can end up making $60,000/year or more, which is totally comparable to what you'd make as a PhD who's stuck in an endless post-doc or working as a research associate.

I can't agree with this. I know that funding is tight for grants and all. But to advise someone against doing a PhD because money's not growing on trees is bad advice, IMHO. This is true in any profession. True, medicine tries to insulate itself by creating artificial demand by limiting admission spots. True, there is a shortage of nurses and they make decent money. But that could change in 5-10 years- you don't know. Would you advise people not to go to law school since there are so many unemployed lawyers? Would you tell a kid who is good at football to quit since his chance of going to the NFL are like 0.01%?
If you love science and want to do a PhD, do a PhD. I know lots of successful scientists who "only" have a PhD. Actually, it's most of them. If you are good at what you do you will succeed. By the way, you don't have to be a PI with a PhD: you could work in industry or teach. There are other opportunities.

 

[bucks2010]

OP - how much research experience do you have? I think you mentioned in the original post that you won't begin your first research experience until this summer. Is this correct?

If so, I really think you need to put the grad school talk off until you get some real research experience and can see what life as a researcher entails. Research careers can be a long, hard slog. The results can be interesting but you will encounter many frustrations along the way. Funding is scarcee and your pay will suck for a long time. Experience post-docs at my biomedical lab are making less than $40k/year. These are folks that are years removed from their PhD's, many of them married with kids, working all sorts of hours, and who knows if/when they will get a position as a professor. You really need to figure out if you're comfortable with this. It's definitely a different reality than most grad schools would have you believe. It can be an interesting line of work, but you have to be able to deal with a lot of crap that you will never read about in the brochures. When my biochem prof was applying for positions, he told us that some places he applied to had 400 applications for 1 spot. 400.

At this point it's obvious you're not quite sure what you want. In your current state I don' think you're in a place to be applying to schools this fall. It's like applying for medical school with no shadowing or clinical experience - you just don't know what you're getting into.

My suggestion is to get some research experience (more than a summer - especially if you're still remotely considering an MD/PhD) and then reassess your motivations/desires in 6 mos. or so.

Also, the nursing PhD is a bad idea IMHO. You have demonstrated no motivation whatsoever to become a nurse, and nursing as a profession is very, very different from translational research. If you want a nursing PhD, you better be comfortable with working as a nurse first. I don't think you would be.

So my recommendations for you are:
1. delve into the research experience this summer (and find a way to continue doing research next year). you need to make sure you're interested in real research. and that you're comfortable with the other stuff that comes with it.

2. shadow some MD's/MD/PhD's in whatever field you may be interested in. you didn't mention shadowing in your first post, from what I saw. you aren't going to be able to go to medical school without demonstrating a motivation to become a physician. you need to figure out if you will enjoy being in a clinic, in the hospital, and would enjoy practicing as a physician. it is not wise to consider getting an MD when you don't know what being a physician entails.

3. the nursing thing - just set it aside for now. it's a rabbit trail and probably the least efficient way to get to where you want to go in your career.

 

[jadedenvy]

OP - how much research experience do you have? I think you mentioned in the original post that you won't begin your first research experience until this summer. Is this correct?

If so, I really think you need to put the grad school talk off until you get some real research experience and can see what life as a researcher entails. Research careers can be a long, hard slog. The results can be interesting but you will encounter many frustrations along the way. Funding is scarcee and your pay will suck for a long time. Experience post-docs at my biomedical lab are making less than $40k/year. These are folks that are years removed from their PhD's, many of them married with kids, working all sorts of hours, and who knows if/when they will get a position as a professor. You really need to figure out if you're comfortable with this. It's definitely a different reality than most grad schools would have you believe. It can be an interesting line of work, but you have to be able to deal with a lot of crap that you will never read about in the brochures. When my biochem prof was applying for positions, he told us that some places he applied to had 400 applications for 1 spot. 400.

At this point it's obvious you're not quite sure what you want. In your current state I don' think you're in a place to be applying to schools this fall. It's like applying for medical school with no shadowing or clinical experience - you just don't know what you're getting into.

My suggestion is to get some research experience (more than a summer - especially if you're still remotely considering an MD/PhD) and then reassess your motivations/desires in 6 mos. or so.

Also, the nursing PhD is a bad idea IMHO. You have demonstrated no motivation whatsoever to become a nurse, and nursing as a profession is very, very different from translational research. If you want a nursing PhD, you better be comfortable with working as a nurse first. I don't think you would be.

So my recommendations for you are:
1. delve into the research experience this summer (and find a way to continue doing research next year). you need to make sure you're interested in real research. and that you're comfortable with the other stuff that comes with it.

2. shadow some MD's/MD/PhD's in whatever field you may be interested in. you didn't mention shadowing in your first post, from what I saw. you aren't going to be able to go to medical school without demonstrating a motivation to become a physician. you need to figure out if you will enjoy being in a clinic, in the hospital, and would enjoy practicing as a physician. it is not wise to consider getting an MD when you don't know what being a physician entails.

3. the nursing thing - just set it aside for now. it's a rabbit trail and probably the least efficient way to get to where you want to go in your career.

Yeah, I am well aware that I may end up hating research which would throw off my whole plan, which is why this is just a tentative plan right now. I think that perhaps what I should do is apply anyways this fall, but only to my top schools, and if I don't get in, that's fine. I'll be doing (hopefully) a senior honor thesis starting in the fall which goes for a year, so if I do get accepted I will hopefully have had enough of a taste of research that'll let me know if this is how I want to go about doing things. If I don't get accepted, which is likely, then I will finish up my bachelors in the following fall quarter and use next summer and the rest of the school year to gain more experience and make myself a more attractive applicant to schools.

And yeah, I totally meant translational, sorry. XP

I'm going to apply through one of the pre-med clubs here to shadow a physician (hopefully an MD/PhD), and while I have no guarantee of being able to get it, it does favor seniors and I believe it goes in order of GPA or something, so I'm hoping I'll get in. It should be helpful whether I decide to do an MD/PhD or just a straight PhD, since I'm interested in the translational research.

So yeah, I'm well aware I'm at this point unprepared to apply to any graduate school (though I hope to change that, and I really hope my GPA will count for something). I just don't want to have what happened to me as a transfer, where I ended up transferring in another major in order to avoid the transfer cap that would have been imposed the next year on the number of biology students, then realizing that it's not easy to change your major here, you have to apply for exceptional admission and not be here for more than six quarters, etc etc. I sort of think this happened because I hadn't checked out all the options available to me before it was time to make a decision so I'm hoping to rectify that this time around.

 

[hopefuldoc97239]

I know lots of successful scientists who "only" have a PhD. Actually, it's most of them.

Sounds like selection bias to me. Yes you know successful scientists with a PhD. But what about all the other people who have PhD's and who aren't successful? If you're working as a resident as your user status suggests, you aren't likely to run into those people.

If you are good at what you do you will succeed.

I really think that this "good things happen to good people" idea is just wishful thinking. It's the exact opposite of a report that came out from the Broken Pipeline group, a group of schools (like UCLA, Harvard, Brown) who are concerned about the research training system in our country. They wrote "even the most promising young investigators at premier academic research institutions are struggling." See their latest report here.

I will also quote from an National Science Board's "Science and Engineering Indicators, 2008":

Around half (49%) of U.S.-educated S&E doctorate recipients in postdoc positions in April 2006 had doctorates in the biological sciences, well above the 23% they represented of all S&E doctorates awarded in 2005...The high representation among postdocs of biological sciences doctorates reflects both the field's high rate of entering postdocs... and the relatively long periods these individuals spent in postdoc positions... There have also been increases in the average length of time spent in a postdoc position, most notably in the life sciences... In the life sciences, the tenure-track rate has generally declined for more recent graduation cohorts...​

We don't know where these people go after post-docs, but given the 30-year flat line in tenure track positions we know that there are literally thousands and thousands of researchers who leave science every year.

And here's another interesting read.

And another.


And this is kind of a tangent, but here's an interesting argument from a professor of theoretical medicine who says "Modern scientists are 'dull and getting duller' because the career path required to join the profession weeds out anyone interesting, creative or exceptionally intelligent."

 

[tortuga87]

If you want to do life science research in academia, do not go to a PhD-only program in the life sciences. The reason - the percent of grad students who end up in a tenure-track faculty position w/ research is very very small. Moreover, most grants are awarded to translational rather than basic research. You need to do disease research to get funding.

Long time ago, it wasn't so. But now it is. A quantitative analysis has already been done in several previous threads from years ago.

Please disregard a PhD-only program and only consider paths with clinical work and research such as:

MD/PhD
MD/MS
MD + extended research fellowship
OD/PhD
OD/MS
RN/PhD
etc.