REAL doctors?

[Haemulon]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

All this is making my head ache. Here are my thoughts:

1. Those that earn a Doctorate are Doctors and deserve to use that title, providing that it is common convention for them to do so. This includes both academic and professional degrees.
2. There can be no meaningfull comparisons made between MD's and PhD's. A PhD is the terminal/highest academic degree. An MD is a professional degree, the terminal degree in medicine.
3. The relative prestige carried by any particular degree varies depending on the setting and perspective.
4. Other terminal professional degrees, such as for vets, chiropracters, dentists, also cannot be easily compared, but are referred to as Doctors.
5.That being said, I am finding it very difficult for myself to consider Chiropractors even remotely in the same league with MD's, Dentists, Vets, and PhD's. I mean, lets not get too crazy with the doctoring here.
6. There are some other terminal professional degrees (Professional Doctorates) that, by convention, are not entitled to be called Doctor. One such example is the JD degree.

 

[DoctorPardi]

ok edit got somethin else to say! i'm sure you guys have had plenty experiences emailing doctors/professors.. it's always like

Dear Dr. Smith,
blahblahblah

sincerely,
Rob

then they usually respond:

Dear Rob,
blahblahblahblah

John

For some reason I get annoyed when the person signs "Dr. Smith" instead of John..now, never would i actually call the person John, and the person most likely knows that.. but I feel like them signing Dr. Smith portrays an "i'm bigger than you and i'm gonna throw my weight around." i've only had this happen once.

I had a Dr. Jon Smith sign an email to me as Jon lol. I don't know what this post has to do with anything either.

 

[notdeadyet]

I will make my stance now and say that I think that the MD is a degree that's more difficult to obtain, leads to more financial gains, and therefore is not inferior to a PhD.

See my comment #1. This is what I mean about the "sad" part. Where does this MD inferiority come from? Or more importantly, where does money come in to play?

 

[as06]

Not only that, it's a heck of a lot harder to get into M.D. programs than it is to get into Ph.D. programs.

At risk of bringing up desidr's famous physics PhD thread, we really should remember that the number of people who are suitably prepared to enter some of these PhD programs is very limited. While the Spanish Lit major can apply to medical school, he/she usually can not apply to a PhD program in physics. That said, I think this comparison is neither fair nor productive.

some PhD's actually don't know anything about anything, because their work is usually so specific

Well, not to be obnoxious, but these PhDs would then know something about that specific field.

 

[adam64897]

See my comment #1. This is what I mean about the "sad" part. Where does this MD inferiority come from? Or more importantly, where does money come in to play?

I think it's quite clear that the person who posted that was making a point that getting an M.D. degree was more rewarding as an all around career than a Ph.D.

 

[xylem29]

Now that I think of it - the only PhD types I would call "doctor" are those who are in academia and who are part of university faculty.

A dude who just barley got his minimum 3 publications, where at least one has to be first authorship I think, and who writes a thesis just good enough to pass - a fresh graduate who just earned his PhD but has yet to do a post doc or even been involved in his field long enough to be considered an "expert" - to me is just another student who has been guided by both his supervisor and commitee and followed text book procedures for completing the requirements - I wouldn't call him "Doctor".

 

[xylem29]

At risk of bringing up desidr's famous physics PhD thread, we really should remember that the number of people who are suitably prepared to enter some of these PhD programs is very limited. While the Spanish Lit major can apply to medical school, he/she usually can not apply to a PhD program in physics. That said, I think this comparison is neither fair nor productive.



Well, not to be obnoxious, but these PhDs would then know something about that specific field.

That physics PhD program doesn't make any sense. It's quite simple - a bio major with no english course cannot apply to english lit PhD programs, a history major cannot apply to do an MSc in immunology - both are able to apply to med school. What's the difference? Well for one thing - if you have a professor lined up with available funding, you MEET the gpa cut off which is usually B+ to A- (depending on your program) in your last 10 credits (or yrs 3 and yrs 4) and have a 3.30 cGPA and you're in. Let's not have a discussion about which is more competitive - all things considered equal - i.e. if you have a physics background, it would be easier to go to grad school for physics than to go to med school (ex. you'll need higher grades, more intimate LOR's, more EC's, etc for med school).

True - I worded it wrong - what I meant was that having a PhD doesn't necessarily mean that you are more bright, intelligent, or more of an intellectual than someone with an MD - I mean, some of my professors struggle with physics and mathematical contraints within evolutionary biology, the clash between genocentric views and organicsm paradigms within modern developmental biology, they think about the same things that the great thinkers/theorists struggled with in the past - these ppl are brilliant and I don't think I have the mental capacity to ever reach that level of insight in biology, it's craz **** - then there are those who, impressively (sarcasm), know everything about the ECM and the interaction b/w bml29 and its role in universal signalling cascades....yea, if you spend 10 plus years studying the same thing, teaching the same course...a lot of students recognize the knowledge that some professors have is BS, even my friends who are in humanities do too. It's "how they think" that's important.

 

[adam64897]

At risk of bringing up desidr's famous physics PhD thread, we really should remember that the number of people who are suitably prepared to enter some of these PhD programs is very limited. While the Spanish Lit major can apply to medical school, he/she usually can not apply to a PhD program in physics. That said, I think this comparison is neither fair nor productive.

productive? fair? huh? it's the absolute truth that it is easier to get into a Ph.D. program than medical school. First of all, a GPA of 3.0 will usually get ya in and the GRE (not quite the MCAT) has to be taken. I guess you're correct as far as who can actually apply to a specific Ph.D. program, but as a whole there are more people who get into Ph.D. programs every year than those who get into an M.D. or D.O. school. Guess I should refrase...there are more Ph.D. candidates than M.D. candidates.

 

[as06]

True - I worded it wrong - what I meant was that having a PhD doesn't necessarily mean that you are more bright, intelligent, or more of an intellectual than someone with an MD - I mean, some of my professors struggle with physics and mathematical contraints within evolutionary biology, the clash between genocentric views and organicsm paradigms within modern developmental biology, they think about the same things that the great thinkers/theorists struggled with in the past - these ppl are brilliant and I don't think I have the mental capacity to ever reach that level of insight in biology, it's craz **** - then there are those who, impressively (sarcasm), know everything about the ECM and the interaction b/w bml29 and its role in universal signalling cascades....yea, if you spend 10 plus years studying the same thing, teaching the same course...a lot of students recognize the knowledge that some professors have is BS, even my friends who are in humanities do too. It's "how they think" that's important.

I agree with you about the brightness/intelligence, etc, and think that the converse applies as well.

The one place where I disagree, though, is about professors/PhDs with knowledge in seemingly arcane topics. More often than not, they're so involved in this research because there is at least a small community that is aware of all of the possibilities from such work. Uusually, people outside of the field don't know all of these connections. In college, I used to wonder how certain professors could possibly dedicate their lives to seemingly minute fields. While looking at research descriptions during this application cycle, I've seen some of thse topics pop up in unexpected places and have been blown away with some of their implications.

 

[GoodDoctor]

Asking the question "are they real doctors?" always rustles up contention because people come to the table with the notion that doctor = physician. PhD's, OD's, dentists, pharmacists, optomotrists, podiatrists, and yes, even chiropractors are all "doctors" by title, just as physicians are. However, when someone falls over in a restaurant and someone shouts, "Is there a doctor in the house?" everyone understands that he means "Is there a physician in the house?" and a PhD in English Lit or an optomotrist would not step forward. So, to the OP's original questions -- Yes, they are all doctors. It's just a title.

 

[notdeadyet]

Now that I think of it - the only PhD types I would call "doctor" are those who are in academia and who are part of university faculty.

Totally rational. If someone's a PhD is Slavic Languages and teaching a university course, I have no problems calling him "doctor". If he insists on being called outside of the classroom, I'd laugh.

Where I have a little trouble is the amount of MDs who take "Dr." to be a title outside of medicine. In the clinic/hospital/office? Sure. But I find folks who use the title in social settings pretty pathetic.

This is not the Soviet Union. We do not address people by job title. I will no more call a physician by the "doctor" title outside of his line of work than I would a PhD, DVM, etc.

 

[GoodDoctor]

On the question of PhD's vs MD's, I think there are two distinct types of PhD's. I think the run of the mill PhD is not excessively impressive. I know many PhD's who work in the real world in various fields, from health care to engineering to publishing. They are all smart, very above average people. Still, they are not as impressive as many university professors I've known. These are the PhD's I really respect.

I think that most MD's are like most run of the mill PhD's -- all above average folks in many respects. If the comparison is between these two sets, I give the MD a bit more respect, as I believe it is a tougher path to follow, a more intense lifestyle.

If the comparison is between most MD's and top university professors, I have more respect for the prof's academically, but more respect for the MD's in the humanitarian dept., maybe because I'm still holding on to my childhood hero worship of these men in white coats saving the world.

When I hear about someone who has a PhD, I say "Oh, neat." When I hear about someone who is a professor or doctor (physician), I say "Wow, impressive."

 

[Depakote]

6. There are some other terminal professional degrees (Professional Doctorates) that, by convention, are not entitled to be called Doctor. One such example is the JD degree.

My dad is a J.D.

I was in an interview for some school where I answered a secondary question about parent's highest level of education. The only level above Graduate was Doctoral, so I selected that. When the interviewer asked me what my father was a doctor of, I explained that he was a lawyer... he was confused. "Well, you say here that he's a doctor." I said, yes, he has a Jurist Doctorate.

It was awkward.

 

[Haemulon]

Totally rational. If someone's a PhD is Slavic Languages and teaching a university course, I have no problems calling him "doctor". If he insists on being called outside of the classroom, I'd laugh.

Where I have a little trouble is the amount of MDs who take "Dr." to be a title outside of medicine. In the clinic/hospital/office? Sure. But I find folks who use the title in social settings pretty pathetic.

This is not the Soviet Union. We do not address people by job title. I will no more call a physician by the "doctor" title outside of his line of work than I would a PhD, DVM, etc.

I respectfully disagree with your post. If a doctoral graduate is being addressed in a setting or circumstance where the prefix "Mr." or "Mrs./Ms./Miss" is used, then it is appropriate to use their earned prefix "Dr." instead. They may introduce themselves to people as simply firstname lastname, (but how many people would say Mr. or Mrs. while inroducing themselves anyway?).

 

[DougFlutie]

Now that I think of it - the only PhD types I would call "doctor" are those who are in academia and who are part of university faculty.

A dude who just barley got his minimum 3 publications, where at least one has to be first authorship I think, and who writes a thesis just good enough to pass - a fresh graduate who just earned his PhD but has yet to do a post doc or even been involved in his field long enough to be considered an "expert" - to me is just another student who has been guided by both his supervisor and commitee and followed text book procedures for completing the requirements - I wouldn't call him "Doctor".

That's because you're ignorant and need to get slapped in the face with a healthy backhand of humility.

Have you ever published a paper, an abstract, a leaflet? Do you have any idea the level of dedication and inquiry requisite to publish in a respected journal that counts towards the minimum number of publications for a degree?

You are what is wrong with premedical students. Somehow, in your infinite wisdom and knowledge that has been bestowed upon you through introductory general chemistry courses and your frequent viewings of Grey's Anatomy, you are capable of marginilizing a person's doctoral degree which took anywhere between 4 and 8 years of post-graduate study to obtain.

You do realize, of course, that these uninspired students who "cookie-cuttered" their way through their degree are the ones giving you the ability to diagnose and apply modalities to your patients?

You want to talk about "guidance"? How about a set curriculum of 2 basic science years that are built on sheer memorization and then 2 clinical years of preset rotations followed by an automatic conveyance of a doctorate? Sounds a little bit more structured and less imaginative than the 4 year limbo of a thesis that hinges on an sound hypothesis, elaborate design, literature review, and constant self-doubt.

You need to learn some respect for the people who do the research to make you an effective physician, and start giving them the title they deserve, even if it means you've got to start with a stutter at first.

No one is asking you to call them doctor at the Kwik-E-Mart, but if they're TA'ing a class full of pompous little asses who want to wear stethoscopes at all costs, using a curriculum that likely involves a tedious level of pedagogy, you'd better ante up, regardless if they've done a post-doc or not.

 

[xylem29]

That's because you're ignorant and need to get slapped in the face with a healthy backhand of humility.

Have you ever published a paper, an abstract, a leaflet? Do you have any idea the level of dedication and inquiry requisite to publish in a respected journal that counts towards the minimum number of publications for a degree?

You are what is wrong with premedical students. Somehow, in your infinite wisdom and knowledge that has been bestowed upon you through introductory general chemistry courses and your frequent viewings of Grey's Anatomy, you are capable of marginilizing a person's doctoral degree which took anywhere between 4 and 8 years of post-graduate study to obtain.

You do realize, of course, that these uninspired students who "cookie-cuttered" their way through their degree are the ones giving you the ability to diagnose and apply modalities to your patients?

You want to talk about "guidance"? How about a set curriculum of 2 basic science years that are built on sheer memorization and then 2 clinical years of preset rotations followed by an automatic conveyance of a doctorate? Sounds a little bit more structured and less imaginative than the 4 year limbo of a thesis that hinges on an sound hypothesis, elaborate design, literature review, and constant self-doubt.

You need to learn some respect for the people who do the research to make you an effective physician, and start giving them the title they deserve, even if it means you've got to start with a stutter at first.

No one is asking you to call them doctor at the Kwik-E-Mart, but if they're TA'ing a class full of pompous little asses who want to wear stethoscopes at all costs, using a curriculum that likely involves a tedious level of pedagogy, you'd better ante up, regardless if they've done a post-doc or not.

I know how much work it takes to get published in Cell, Nature, and other journals of that calibre - but I also know how much work is required to get published in a 4th tier journal too. To get your PhD, publishing in the top tier journals is not a requirement. I've worked in labs before and I've worked with PhD candidates as well - I still stand by my words of "textbook procedures" and not being anymore brighter than a med student.

Also, you're a good example of what I meant when I said medicine attracts the worst kind, not the best kind, of ppl - "a class full of pompous little asses who want to wear stethoscopes at all costs"

 

[DougFlutie]

I know how much work it takes to get published in Cell, Nature, and other journals of that calibre - but I also know how much work is required to get published in a 4th tier journal too. To get your PhD, publishing in the top tier journals is not a requirement. I've worked in labs before and I've worked with PhD candidates as well - I still stand by my words of "textbook procedures" and not being anymore brighter than a med student.

Have you ever written a manuscript and had it published? An abstract even? Until then, you're not allowed to judge the work of others based on something you've never had to do.

And I'm not usually one to pick on grammar, but when you're going to talk about how smart you are in comparison to another population, it may be best to use it properly.

Also, you're a good example of what I meant when I said medicine attracts the worst kind, not the best kind, of ppl - "a class full of pompous little asses who want to wear stethoscopes at all costs"

I don't quite understand your point, if there is one at all. Are you debating that most premeds have no idea what it takes to get a PhD yet still feel the need to demean those who earn it by calling it "textbook" procedures?

You still haven't addressed the fact that a MD is completely formulaic upon matriculation to a 4-year institution. The bottom line is that you have no idea what you're talking about, but you feel well qualified to do so, and make disparaging remarks about others at the same time (a rather unoriginal set of qualities for a premedical student who has yet to grasp real life).

 

[Haemulon]

Have you ever written a manuscript and had it published? An abstract even? Until then, you're not allowed to judge the work of others based on something you've never had to do.

And I'm not usually one to pick on grammar, but when you're going to talk about how smart you are in comparison to another population, it may be best to use it properly.



I don't quite understand your point, if there is one at all. Are you debating that most premeds have no idea what it takes to get a PhD yet still feel the need to demean those who earn it by calling it "textbook" procedures?

You still haven't addressed the fact that a MD is completely formulaic upon matriculation to a 4-year institution. The bottom line is that you have no idea what you're talking about, but you feel well qualified to do so, and make disparaging remarks about others at the same time (a rather unoriginal set of qualities for a premedical student who has yet to grasp real life).

I support this post. Xylem seems to look condescendingly upon PhD's and graduate students despite having never obtained their training, experiences, or degrees himself. I think until one has experienced graduate school, one's derrogatory opinions of its merit carry little weight.

 

[t-funk]

Thanks for saying exactly what I've been thinking all along!!! I've watched PHD slave for years morning until night only to not get their degrees because their research didn't turn out and these were extremely intelligent people. It happens all the time in academia. I oftentimes feel that my applying to MD is taking the easy way out compared to a PHD in my field!!

 

[Fermata]

For the record, doctor is latin for "teacher" and it was academics who were originally given the title. Only later did it become a synonym for physician.

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

Everyone needs to chilax and stop bickering over such a ridiculous debate. If you think you are too good to call PhDs doctors then go ahead, call them Mr., Mrs., or even Dick or Jane. Chances are, they won't even care. At worst, they'll think your a pompus ass (which would be correct if you think they don't deserve to be called Dr. because obtaining a PhD is "not real")

 

[MossPoh]

While the fact remains that when one says "doctor" on the street, on usually thinks of one involved with the medical profession, it does NOT mean that a phd is any less qualified. I have seen the stress that results from this stuff. People may refuse to acknolwedge the guy with a phd in german and applied linguistics but the fact is he has worked for years upon years just to become proficient in the language before he even starts to get into indepth material. Then he sits and cranks out papers for the next few years, simultaneously scratching every surface possible for new data and ideas. They are constantly in the pursuit of new information and aren't always guarenteed a prestigous highpaying job. (The guy I'm referring to is one of the smartest people I know and is still searching for a job....not too many linguistics positions opening up)
One of my major problems with medicine is that there seems to be a feeling of superiority that is really uncalled for. I have seen it plenty of times where a doc does something stupid because he/she thinks they know all...just to have their ass bailed out by someone whom they look down on. (Nobody openly says that they look down on these people by the way...) Receiving a medical degree doesn't make you master of the world, yet I see doctors act condescending even towards people, whom within all reason are MORE successful than the doctor. I watched one doc start explaining what a patient had in overly complicated terms and then when the patient (a self made millionaire) asked for him to simplify it the doctor just made a loud sigh, changed his voice tone, and described it in such a childish way that it was almost offensive. I am not saying that everyone does that....but whether one likes it or not, people have the tendency to want to feel smarter and better than others. Phds will (generally) work their asses off, could've made it in medical school if it was their bag, and deserve equal respect. Get called doctor on your job, and by your first name outside...if someone calls you doc then fine..but demanding it is kind of dick no matter who it is. md, phd..whatever.

 

[notdeadyet]

.

 

[notdeadyet]

If a doctoral graduate is being addressed in a setting or circumstance where the prefix "Mr." or "Mrs./Ms./Miss" is used, then it is appropriate to use their earned prefix "Dr." instead.

And my logic is that anyone (MD, PhD, DVM, etc.) who attaches the Dr. title in non-professional circumstances like these is a little sad.

 

[notdeadyet]

One of my major problems with medicine is that there seems to be a feeling of superiority that is really uncalled for. I have seen it plenty of times where a doc does something stupid because he/she thinks they know all...just to have their ass bailed out by someone whom they look down on.

Amen. At a lot of hospitals they use the phrase MD=Medical Diety. The biggest eye opener on SDN for me has been seeing these folks in the making. When you have premeds turning their noses up at nurses and striving for medical cynicism prior to the first day on the job as a doctor, I can see where this complex is coming from. Medicine has a way disproportionately high number of snobs and a$$holes. Don't be one.

Get called doctor on your job, and by your first name outside...if someone calls you doc then fine..but demanding it is kind of dick no matter who it is. md, phd..whatever.

Best post on the subject yet.

 

[Haemulon]

And my logic is that anyone (MD, PhD, DVM, etc.) who attaches the Dr. title in non-professional circumstances like these is a little sad.

That seems to me to be a very judgmental and broad generalization (saying that anyone that uses the title doctor in any circumstance other than their actual professional practice is "sad.") I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I always refer to people by their appropriate titles as a courtesy and sign of respect, until such time as I have developed the appropriate casual relationship with them or they request an alternate identification. I believe this to be in line with principles of good etiquette.

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

There is nothing wrong with calling someone Dr. outside of his or her professional setting (if you don't know them personally), it's actually polite imo. However, at a party or wherever you may be, if you say "Hey Dr. Doe" most normal people will say "call me John" because they realize it's not really necessary to call them Dr in that situatiob. But to say it's "sad" to call someone Dr. out of good etiquette is a little bit of a stretch.

Edit: To NotDeadYet, I sort of misread your post. If a person demands to be called Dr. outside of his setting, then yes, I agree that's a little bit ridiculous.

 

[Haemulon]

There is nothing wrong with calling someone Dr. outside of his or her professional setting (if you don't know them personally), it's actually polite imo. However, at a party or wherever you may be, if you say "Hey Dr. Doe" most normal people will say "call me John" because they realize it's not really necessary to call them Dr in that situatiob. But to say it's "sad" to call someone Dr. out of good etiquette is a little bit of a stretch.

Edit: To NotDeadYet, I sort of misread your post. If a person demands to be called Dr. outside of his setting, then yes, I agree that's a little bit ridiculous.

Agreed. It is silly to demand that your title be used in a social situation. Yet is also polite for others to initially use it for introductions.

"I'd like you to meet my colleague, Dr Joe Smoe. This is my long time friend John Deer. Nice to meet you Dr. Smoe. Oh please, call me Joe. Always a pleasure to meet a friend of Tom's."

Something like that feels right to me.

 

[honker]

If you have the right attitude, you will insist on not being called "Doctor" outside of a professional setting. Otherwise, you are being a bit over the top.

 

[Rainman84]

But to say it's "sad" to call someone Dr. out of good etiquette is a little bit of a stretch.

This has been said in much more eloquent ways, but I think the sad part is that a lot of good etiquette is reserved for MD's moreso than other hardworking folks out there... otherwise a thread trying to inflate our future medical egos by belittling other professionals' titles wouldn't exist.

 

[xylem29]

Have you ever written a manuscript and had it published? An abstract even? Until then, you're not allowed to judge the work of others based on something you've never had to do.

And I'm not usually one to pick on grammar, but when you're going to talk about how smart you are in comparison to another population, it may be best to use it properly.

I never said I was smarter than anyone.

You still haven't addressed the fact that a MD is completely formulaic upon matriculation to a 4-year institution. The bottom line is that you have no idea what you're talking about, but you feel well qualified to do so, and make disparaging remarks about others at the same time (a rather unoriginal set of qualities for a premedical student who has yet to grasp real life).

Yes, MD is completely formulaic - as is obtaining a PhD. I don't have first hand experience, that is correct.

No, I'm no demeaning PhD's - someone implied that PhD's are somehow smater than MD's because MD's "memorize" while PhD's "think" and that earning a PhD is more difficult as is gaining admission into graduate school. I never meant to say that a PhD was inferior - what I mean to say was that just because you have a PhD does not mean you are more intelligent than someone who only has a highschool degree - sorry but that's what I believe. Neither does having an MD of course. I know plenty of pompous ignorant d-bags in both graduate school and med school as well - higher education doesn't = intelligence. If you think that getting a PhD is more stressful than getting an MD or becoming a head Chef or earning an MBA or becoming a professional plumber, then sorry, you're wrong. Everything is stressful and difficult. Writing abstracts, giving seminars, coming up with experiments, coming up with the right questions to ask - as if a PhD candidate does ALL THIS without consulting their supervisor - as if grad students have to be somehow more innovative or intelligent than others - even if I have not gone through it myself - I can make reasonable assumptions.

Do I look down on the PhD degree? Of course not. Nor do I look down on those who have a PhD. As another poster mentioned - "run of the mill" types are what I look down on - it's quite easy to pass med school just as it's quite easy to obtain a PhD - don't make it sound as if writing an abstract or manuscript is like some huge deal - your supervisor guides/helps you through it to ensure that you get published - just like the dean helps you to ensure you pass board exams. Just as you can have a PhD spend 4 years of research and not graduate b/c all the work was wrong - you can have a student spend 4 years in med school or dental school and somehow not meet one requirement and fail out.

My condescending tone was a response to the usual slagging of the MD degree.

 

[t-funk]

I am not much on posting but this really bothers me!! I read the forum 2-3 times a day and as you can see, this is my 4th post. I work at a major research university and basically assist graduate students in their research since I happen to have technical knowledge with regard to mass spectrometry that most graduate students don't. In doing so, I watch them throughout the course of their graduate careers. I have yet to see a PHD candidate graduate in less than 7 years of postgraduate work as they have spent several years applying for grants and writing publications without the help of their advisors! I have no idea where this advisor assisting everything idea comes from? They may end up doing the final edit but oftentimes that results in a complete rewrite!!! From the graduate students I have spoken to at this U, the Chemistry dept admits 40 PHD students every year. About 4 of those will end up with their degree. Don't try to tell me this happens in MD programs or that those 36 students that didn't receive their degrees just weren't good enough. I'd have reason to bet that many of those 36 or so students could have flown through an MD program. I also understand that I had absolutely no idea what graduate school was about until I was already there but I wasn't walking around thinking I knew everything about it!!

 

[dvm'08]

the only people who would even think about debating a topic like this would be a bunch of arrogant, pompous wanna-be med students.

get over yourselves.

 

[thoffen]

Most of them have at least a few cases in which they're the primary, unassisted, surgeon by the time they finish.

This is only because human life and health is held in a much higher regard than that of different animals, at least from a litigious standpoint.

 

[Haemulon]

the only people who would even think about debating a topic like this would be a bunch of arrogant, pompous wanna-be med students.

get over yourselves.

Hmmm. And yet your post does not in the least come off as arrogant, pompous, presumptive, overgeneralized, and ignorant. Or does it? Lets leave the personal attacks out of this.

 

[dvm'08]

Hmmm. And yet your post does not in the least come off as arrogant, pompous, presumptive, overgeneralized, and ignorant. Or does it? Lets leave the personal attacks out of this.

lets not.

I'd challenge you to find another thread debating who should be called "doctor" in any other forum on this site... You wont be able to because NOBODY ELSE cares. So considering that this thread is only found in the pre-med section of SDN - i'd say that my presumptive "overgeneralizations" aren't quite so farfetched.

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

lets not.

I'd challenge you to find another thread debating who should be called "doctor" in any other forum on this site... You wont be able to because NOBODY ELSE cares. So considering that this thread is only found in the pre-med section of SDN - i'd say that my presumptive "overgeneralizations" aren't quite so farfetched.

ok guys, I am guilty of this as well, but it's time to stop feeding the troll. He was just banned, and he's getting grossly overweight.

 

[gregMD]

the only people who would even think about debating a topic like this would be a bunch of arrogant, pompous wanna-be med students.

get over yourselves.

couldn't agree more.

 

[Dr.Acula]

lets not.

I'd challenge you to find another thread debating who should be called "doctor" in any other forum on this site... You wont be able to because NOBODY ELSE cares. So considering that this thread is only found in the pre-med section of SDN - i'd say that my presumptive "overgeneralizations" aren't quite so farfetched.

The vet is right. I hate pre-meds and other people of their ilk. We all want to make something of ourselves, we all want to be respected, but this doesn't mean we have to be arrogant or condescending. I know this one doctor who is extremely well known in the field and highly respected by his colleuges. Everytime I see him, he's wearing shorts an old t-shirt and insists I call him by his first name. His checks don't even have "Dr. __ __" in the corner. He's the kind of doc i'd like to be.

 

[RokChalkJayhawk]

Everyone needs to chilax and stop bickering over such a ridiculous debate. If you think you are too good to call PhDs doctors then go ahead, call them Mr., Mrs., or even Dick or Jane. Chances are, they won't even care. At worst, they'll think your a pompus ass (which would be correct if you think they don't deserve to be called Dr. because obtaining a PhD is "not real")

Word. If you don't call a PhD "doctor" you're an assclown. Just because they chose not to roll their dice in medicine doesn't mean they didn't put in the time in their own field.

And the statement that "most PhDs aren't that smart and are specialized in one field" is unbelievably foolish. How many fields would you consider yourself an expert in after you finish your MD degree? I wouldn't want you to be my financial advisor simply because you got an MD. I'd probably go with someone who got a doctorate in economics.

 

[Haemulon]

lets not.

I'd challenge you to find another thread debating who should be called "doctor" in any other forum on this site... You wont be able to because NOBODY ELSE cares. So considering that this thread is only found in the pre-med section of SDN - i'd say that my presumptive "overgeneralizations" aren't quite so farfetched.

Lets not leave out personal attacks? What is that all about? Posting personal attacks is not consistent with the SDN terms of service and is not in keeping with the spirit of SDN. A discussion about the etiquit of professional titles, while perhaps borderline in its relevancy for this particular forum, is a legitimate discussion worthy of consideration because there are certainly traditional social courtesies and protocols that people may want to learn about (even debate). If you do a search on the web you should find a number of sites that feature a Q and A on this topic. Many of the individuals inquiring on such sites are newly minted MD's and PhD's trying to find out the appropriate usage of the title in various circumstances. If you despise such discussions so much, no one is forcing you to keep opening the thread. As for me, I will continue to refer to both PhD's and MD's alike by the title Dr. as a sign of respect and courtesy. You do as you wish.

 

[ChymeChancellor]

Hey guys... let's start bashing naturopathic doctors!!!

 

[notdeadyet]

Hey guys... let's start bashing naturopathic doctors!!!

They're not really doctors...

Kidding...

 

[Haemulon]

Hey guys... let's start bashing naturopathic doctors!!!

I was just sitting here thinking ... you know, it feels like time for Chyme.

 

[Haemulon]

They're not really doctors...

Kidding...

I honostly don't even know what a naturopathic doctor is. Although I can probably make a good guess. (or google it)

 

[albaniandoc]

In my country when someone is introduced, they say: Joe Shmoe is a science doctor (that denotes a PhD), or say professor doctor (PhD obviously). We never refer to medical doctors as physicians. We simply say, doctor. So to sum up, for the masses doctor means MD otherwise is clearly specified such as doctor of sciences or professor doctor. And I agree, people that demand they be called doctors outside of their job are just d*cks, unless they are using it as a sex role play scenario. Who's your doctor biatch?

 

[ChymeChancellor]

What about doctors of physical therapy! What a joke... 😴

 

[Xypathos]

They're not really doctors...

Kidding...

Actually, they're not --- quite a few states don't recognize them as doctors or even legitimate "healers." Just people who "prescribe" herbs.

 

[Hardbody]

My dad is a J.D.

I was in an interview for some school where I answered a secondary question about parent's highest level of education. The only level above Graduate was Doctoral, so I selected that. When the interviewer asked me what my father was a doctor of, I explained that he was a lawyer... he was confused. "Well, you say here that he's a doctor." I said, yes, he has a Jurist Doctorate.

It was awkward.

Thats probably because technically your dad is a doctor, I've yet to hear a lawyer refer to themselves as a Dr.

 

[ChymeChancellor]

Thats probably because technically your dad is a doctor, I've yet to hear a lawyer refer to themselves as a Dr.

I'm with Depakote on this one. My dad is also a lawyer and I have heard him refer to himself as a Dr. on more than one occasion.