John Lysander said:
Andy,
Thanks for the reply. My perspective is that I only need the MD as a backup plan in case my research does not work out. That is why I want to do the clinical pathology track. I am just wondering though if you know the difference in salary for AP, CP or combined AP/ CP training. If there is not a substantial difference in salary, I would not mind just doing CP and then focusing solely on research. I also like the fact that, as you mentioned, that you do not really have to do all these tests yourself as there are always techs who do those for you. Also, does AP really help you with your research over CP? My perspective is that one's research does not necessarily depend on one's clinical training. Therefore, what does it matter if CP training is in your word, "geared for an academic research career"? Plus, is not an academic research career something that we all aim for? Or is there a difference between an academic research career and a "basic" research career?
That was my mentality as well regarding the MD training. I always said in grad school that if some fool was stupid enough to give me tenure right then and there and I had won the lottery, I would drop the MD training in a heartbeat and fund my own research to do what I love best--SCIENCE. The last phase of MSTP training (the clinical clerkships) were some of the most depressing, frustrating moments in my life and if there was a very good out-option that presented itself, I would have easily quit with the PhD alone.
Difference in salary between AP, CP, or AP/CP. Hmm...not really qualified to comment at this point. However, the real question regarding salary deals with whether you will be in the academic sector vs. the private practice sector. If you are in private practice, you tend to make more money. However, it is generally accepted now that you need double AP/CP certification to get these jobs. Perhaps it is because in this arena, you need folks who can do a little bit of everything. In academia, specific types of jobs tend to be partitioned a little more strictly so it is easier to get a job as a single boarded pathologist. For instance, a CP only person can direct the microbiology lab. The AP only person would sign out breast or GI cases all day at the scope.
Does AP help with research over CP? That's not what I was implying. Issues pertaining to AP or CP can inspire important and insightful research questions. So that's not the issue. The main issue is this...job security. The jobs that can be filled by CP only folks are shrinking. Part of this has to do with the fact that more residents are doing AP/CP combined training (i.e., credential inflation). CP only jobs tend to be higher up management/director type positions...and these positions don't grow on trees. The CP workhorse positions are easily filled by non-MD folks (i.e., technicians). And plus, after all this training, do you wanna be a technician? In contrast, AP only positions tend to be more abundant. You need MD trained people to sign out cases in all different organ systems/subspecialties. Hence, there is more demand to fill not only the upper level management positions but also to fill the workhorse positions. Again, the issue is about job security and ensuring that AMPLE safety net options exist should the research not be successful.
Thanks also for the analysis of the length of the MSTP and postdoc. May I ask how long did you take for your MSTP? I just think that 7 years MSTP and 3 years post doc are reasonable. Since, I do not expect to have groundbreaking papers during my PhD training, I think I can do my MSTP in 7 years. I'll save those brilliant insights for my postdoc and just try to get out of the PhD training as soon as possible since it is the postdoc that determines your assistant faculty position anyway. Moreover, given the flexibility of the CP training, the 3-year post doc, if one picks a lab as soon as one enters residency, may actually be a 5-year post doc, a reasonable time to crank out some high quality papers.
Congratulations on your residency match, Andy! Brigham & Women's Hospital Pathology is definitely one of my top choices for residency.
MSTP took me 7 years. But I always qualify that by saying that I skipped all my classes during M1 and M2 year. Granted, I spent M1 year learning how to jam on the electric guitar and did no research. But I spent all M2 year in the lab getting a head start on research. I worked on about 4 projects simultaneously that year, none of which panned out. But I learned all the basic techniques and was able to raise better-devised research questions at the end of the year so during my first year of actual graduate study, several projects ended up working and I was able to see the light at the end of the tunnel shortly thereafter.
Don't hold back until postdoc to crank out the awesome papers. Start NOW! I would've killed (figuratively speaking) for the opportunity to work on a project published in Cell, Science, Nature. These opportunities don't grow on trees. Be opportunistic and keep your eyes peeled for when serendipity rears its pretty face. Don't be afraid of asking tough questions. But have some back up projects at the same time. Start establishing a strong track record right here, right now. It doesn't hurt and can only help your cause.
This answers one of my concern regarding AP vs. CP in my previous post. I didn't know one is so limited by the CP only option. I guess everything has a price, doesn't it? In that case, I'll probably do AP then. I have one more question though, does AP + CP have a much better value than AP only (in terms of salary and career opportunity)?
Well, do a pathology rotation in med school and see for yourself by exposing yourself to AP and CP aspects of pathology. Go with what is more interesting (or more palatable) for you. Also, are you more of a biochemist or cell biologist? Do you like developing and optimizing assays? Do you like microscopy? If you're more cell bio/microscopy inclined, like I am, you will find AP much more interesting than CP. If you like biochemical assay research and development, then CP is the way to go. If you like microbiology and hematology, CP is good too. It all depends on your overall research interets.
Does AP/CP have much better value than AP only? I've grappled with this issue as I went through the application process this year. I have gotten in some heated arguments with people who believe that by not doing AP/CP I was being extremely stupid (well not arguments really, basically when an interviewer tells you how foolish you are, you really don't argue back...you just sit there, take it like a man, and conclude the interview cordially while mentally extending your middle finger). For every naysayer, there have been proponents who say that I am absolutely doing the right thing given my career interests.
I'll sum it up:
AP/CP: gives you many many options. you can do private practice and roll in an insane amount of salary. you can also do research. but when you do research, you're not likely gonna be using training from both AP and CP disciplines. AP/CP takes twice as long in essence. More time down the crapper.
AP only: less options. pretty much restricted to academia. all the AP/CP folks are gonna outcompete you for the private practice jobs. you're gonna be doing research. but if research fails, you can sign out cases at academic-affiliated hospitals. you're not gonna be making mad bank like the private practice folks if that's the case.
