Should I go to Med school? I am on the fence. details inside

[Dor DP]

Hello! I really need some advice regarding whether I should go to Med school or not.
It is going to be long so the Basic question is- should I go to Med school if I think about going to biomedical research? shouldn't a PhD be sufficient?
The following details are important in order to understand the full context so I appreciate if you kept reading. I'll divide it by sections so you can jump to the last ones.

Some details and background:
I am an 18 years old and I don't live in the USA (I live in Israel). My country follows both the European and the American standart so there are 2 ways to get into Med School:
1. 7 years of Med school- you start with no degree and get in based on your high school grades, Psychometric test (General GRE/ACT like test) and some personality tests/interview. After 7 years (of which one is internship) you get M.D
2. after you have a 3/4 years bachelor degree (typically in Biology/biomedical sciences/chemistry) you can take the biochemistry GRE test, do personality tests and get into Med school.

I loved Medicine for more years than I can remember. Ever since I started having health issues (age 12) I started reading articles and Medical journals. My Parents and my Doctors were even disturbed that I knew so much, knew to interpret my tests results and ask for the right next ones. It took years to diagnose what I had (caused me a lot of emotional and physical pain) so I said to myself " I will be a doctor to make sure it won't happen to any one of my patients, I'll diagnose better".

Former experiences:
Once I started volunteering as a Medic assistant on ambulances, I realized treating patients might not be for me. Around the same time I got exposed to the Science of Medicine and Medical research so I said I'll go MD-Phd.
I really want to do the PhD in one of the top American institutes (You know, John Hopkins, Harvard, UCSF, Rockefeller....) because it opens more doors in the Israeli and in the international Academia (and I might prefer to live and work in America due to financial and personal reasons). I realized it's virtually impossible for people who had their bachelor's degree outside of USA/Canada to to MD-PhD in the states so I kinda gave up on this.

Current status:
I am now a freshman in University. I got into a special track of biology that focuses of research (basically let you take Master courses in your bachelor degree and gives you bigger undergrad projects in the labs, theoretically you can finish the track with publications, but probably not as one of the first authors).

I was stunned to see how many people in the biology department and even from my small research track (we are 7 people) want to go to Med school after this degree. I was talking to one of them who is trying to get to Med school already this year, and she was astounded to see that my Highschool diploma grades are extremely high (I already knew that, I won't be surprised if the are among the top 10 in the entire country for last year graduates) and that my Psychometric test is 97th percentile (only took the test once without studying much). She said I can take the personality tests and have a good chances of getting into Med School this year. I told my parents that and they were so excited, they really want me to be a Doctor (MD) as it's prestigious.

I really want to be involved in Biomedical research and Translational research. I want to study diseases (for now Cancer and Immunological disorders) and develop new therapies and drugs. I know I'll enjoy the preclinical years of Med School but I feel like I won't enjoy working with patients in the clinical years.
The problem is that I don't have research experience (the first research project will be only next summer) so I am not even 100% sure I will like research.

Questions to you:
1. a. Is MD even beneficial for Biomedical research? If I only have PhD, will I be a subpar researcher compared to MD-PhD ones?
b. Could having only a PhD make it difficult for me later on to get a lab (to be a PI in a tenure track) in a good American University (as MD-PhD Scientists are very common in the USA). I know it won't have an effect on the Israeli Academia as few MD here are doing research and MD-PhD is highly unpopular here.

2. If MD is recommended- Do you think I Should go to Med school this year even though I feel like I won't enjoy the Clinical years? Do it Just to have the MD and after that go to do postdoctoral training in the USA/go to do PhD in the USA?
3. Do you think I should keep up with this bachelor degree and only after graduation decide? if I like research should I go just PhD? but only if I don't like research I should pursue a (4 year track) MD?

Thanks in advance for your help. Sorry if my English is insufficient. believe me I am working on improving my language skills.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Select All That Apply]

@Dor DP You should talk to a physician in Israel and ask them for feedback. I'm more concerned if you feel that at some points you are "really into" something and then after a few weeks/months you lose interest in things altogether. Either way you should be talking to your primary doctor as they are probably a better resource for these questions or can redirect you to better resources.

 

[Dor DP]

@Dor DP You should talk to a physician in Israel and ask them for feedback. I'm more concerned if you feel that at some points you are "really into" something and then after a few weeks/months you lose interest in things altogether. Either way you should be talking to your primary doctor as they are probably a better resource for these questions or can redirect you to better resources.

It was a long process and not total loss of interest.
I always wanted to do research and develop new therapies, and I thought it was easy to combine patient care and research as an MD. I wasn't even aware of the existence of Biomedical PhD until 2 years ago. I thought you had to be a physician in order to conduct research. The clinical experience I had wasn't very positive and I just didn't enjoy the patient care as much as I thought I would.
When I read about the 80% research 20% patient care of MD-PhD I thought it could be nice but I right now I am lost.

I think it's ok to be lost as an 18 years old. I will gain quite a lot of lab (Academic) research experience over the next 3 years and I'll have a better prospective.

My question is quite different. If I decide I love research and that I want to be a PI one day, Does not having an MD can negatively affect my chances of being hired by a good university (especially if I will prefer to stay in the USA where many researchers have MD). or even more importantly will it negatively affect my research abilities? (I tend to say no because many successful researchers only have PhD, and many of the Medicine nobel laureates are "just" Ph.D)

 

[Dor DP]

Anyone else?

 

[Orangekiwi]

OP, I work in a cancer research lab in one of the institutions you mentioned being interested in above. Let me first start by saying that although externally these institutions seem very prestigious and people look at you differently for being affiliated with them, its really just a name and often does more harm then good if what you're interested in is doing actually rigorous science. There are more people here who do junk science because they think their findings have to be ultra-significant to live up to the name of the institution than there were at the less prestigious university that I went to, and the environment is extremely toxic as a result. As my friend @EmbryonalCarcinoma, who got their PhD at another such institution will tell you; low impact does not mean bad science and high impact does not mean good science. I tell you this not to dissuade you- there are a lot of great people doing amazing things here and it's definitely easier to get funding, but keep in mind that it's not all sunshine and rainbows like the image they project. To get into your actual questions,

1.) a.) It depends on how clinical you want your work to be. If you want to run clinical trials and have your research directly relate to patients and patient outcomes then yes, an MD is very valuable. If you're more interested in basic science and discovering the underlying biology, an MD is almost useless. In my experience, MD/PhD's (who got both on a dedicated track) are actually WORSE bench scientists than people with only PhD's.
b.) No, having only a PhD will not make this difficult. Most of the PI's who work in my department are PhD's only, and I work in one of the most clinically translatable research departments there is. MD/PhD's are far from common, in fact people often talk about how there is a lack of physician scientists in the US. Far more important than your degrees is the research you do, where it gets published, and, unfortunately, how willing and able you are to play into the politics of the system. For example, my PI is very highly respected in his field, runs a wet lab of 30+ people, has an endowed professorship at the medical school, and does not even have a PhD, only an MD. That is... exceedingly rare and probably impossible today, but it still illustrates my point.

2.) This one is easy- If you don't think you'll enjoy the clinical aspect of med school, don't go. The point is to train clinicians, and if what you're interested in is solely research it's a waste of time and money. Both the school aspect and your ensuing residency would be clinical in nature, thats... kinda the whole deal.

3.) I think you should stay on the bachelors track, because you'll probably need it if you want to get a PhD in the US either way. It seems to me like a PhD is the right path for you, but keep doing research, maybe try shadowing some physicians in other specialties including less patient facing and/or more academic ones and see if that appeals to you more and see what you end up liking.

Hope this helps.

 

[crepuscular.ray]

MD-Phd is not the default for professors in the US, and definitely not necessary if you just want to do research. Not having an MD is not a blemish for a researcher, and some people don't even have a PhD but have careers in academic research (although not as professors). This is just me, but your parent's perception of MD prestige can be a harmful motivator. You still have plenty of time to figure your career out, and figure out what drives you

 

[Lampstrike]

So I normally don't post on sdn, but your predicament resonates quite heavily with me. I faced a similar decision a few years back.

I concur with @Orangekiwi. I find your perspective a bit funny because the general view in America is that the pure PhDs are actually better researchers than the MD-PhDs. This is mostly because MD-PhDs often get easier PhD projects, so there is often this view that they really only have a PhD-lite. (I don't hold this view personally. I think that MD-PhDs are just as skilled as researchers as pure PhDs, but there are many prominent scientists who do believe that.)

While it may be easier to get a clinical lab as an MD/PhD, you sound more interested in a basic science-oriented mechanism-based research path, rather than a clinically-oriented outcomes-based research experience. The type of lab you want would be a tenure-track lab in a science department (likely affiliated with a school of medicine, but not a clinical department). For that, PhDs and MD-PhDs will be equally competitive.

Don't do an MD if you don't like clinic. The only real reason to have an MD is if you want to be a practicing clinician. If you want to get the pre-clinical knowledge base because you think it will help you be a better scientist, then I encourage you to look up the Harvard HST program. They take grad students and have them sit in on medical lectures so they can get that knowledge base without having to do the clinical work of a 3rd or 4th year med student. Alternatively to that, you can just buy some medical textbooks and read them on your own. Based on your grades, you seem fairly intelligent, so I don't imagine you will have a difficult time understanding the material (especially if you are self-motivated).

I would get more research experience during your undergrad before deciding. Research is really not as glamorous as it seems from the outside. It can be a very frustrating field and it is certainly not for everyone. If you don't like it, you can always go back to medicine.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

 

[Dor DP]

So I normally don't post on sdn, but your predicament resonates quite heavily with me. I faced a similar decision a few years back.

I concur with @Orangekiwi. I find your perspective a bit funny because the general view in America is that the pure PhDs are actually better researchers than the MD-PhDs. This is mostly because MD-PhDs often get easier PhD projects, so there is often this view that they really only have a PhD-lite. (I don't hold this view personally. I think that MD-PhDs are just as skilled as researchers as pure PhDs, but there are many prominent scientists who do believe that.)

While it may be easier to get a clinical lab as an MD/PhD, you sound more interested in a basic science-oriented mechanism-based research path, rather than a clinically-oriented outcomes-based research experience. The type of lab you want would be a tenure-track lab in a science department (likely affiliated with a school of medicine, but not a clinical department). For that, PhDs and MD-PhDs will be equally competitive.

Don't do an MD if you don't like clinic. The only real reason to have an MD is if you want to be a practicing clinician. If you want to get the pre-clinical knowledge base because you think it will help you be a better scientist, then I encourage you to look up the Harvard HST program. They take grad students and have them sit in on medical lectures so they can get that knowledge base without having to do the clinical work of a 3rd or 4th year med student. Alternatively to that, you can just buy some medical textbooks and read them on your own. Based on your grades, you seem fairly intelligent, so I don't imagine you will have a difficult time understanding the material (especially if you are self-motivated).

I would get more research experience during your undergrad before deciding. Research is really not as glamorous as it seems from the outside. It can be a very frustrating field and it is certainly not for everyone. If you don't like it, you can always go back to medicine.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

Thank you very much for this detailed comment.

It's true that I am very interested in Basic research, but I want my basic research to become translational and have clinical impacts (basically develop new therapeutics).

Few of my Israeli role Models are- prof. Zelig Eshhar (the one who invented CAR-T treatment for B cell lymphoma), Prof. Ruth Arnon (co-developer of the Copaxone for MS) and Prof. Michal Schwartz (pioneer of Neuro-Immunology, discovered the Neuro-Immunological communication system and now her therapy (Anti PD-1 AB) is in Clinical trails for Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's).
They are all PhDs and Immunologists. Immunology is probably my biggest passion for the last few years.
An American example might be Jan Vilcek, MD-PhD (co-inventor of the Infliximab Anti-TNF alpha that is used to treat several autoimmune diseases).

So I do want to have impact on patients and to also do translational research (bench to bedside). I don't mind if I am not the doctor who manages the human clinical trails, but I do want to identify the new therapies, do animal trails, write the patents and collaborate with the pharma companies.
Is it possible to do all of this as a PhD (no MD) In the USA? I know it's possible in Israel (all 3 examples above)

Links :

Zelig Eshhar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ruth Arnon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Michal Schwartz - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Dor DP]

OP, I work in a cancer research lab in one of the institutions you mentioned being interested in above. Let me first start by saying that although externally these institutions seem very prestigious and people look at you differently for being affiliated with them, its really just a name and often does more harm then good if what you're interested in is doing actually rigorous science. There are more people here who do junk science because they think their findings have to be ultra-significant to live up to the name of the institution than there were at the less prestigious university that I went to, and the environment is extremely toxic as a result. As my friend @EmbryonalCarcinoma, who got their PhD at another such institution will tell you; low impact does not mean bad science and high impact does not mean good science. I tell you this not to dissuade you- there are a lot of great people doing amazing things here and it's definitely easier to get funding, but keep in mind that it's not all sunshine and rainbows like the image they project. To get into your actual questions,

1.) a.) It depends on how clinical you want your work to be. If you want to run clinical trials and have your research directly relate to patients and patient outcomes then yes, an MD is very valuable. If you're more interested in basic science and discovering the underlying biology, an MD is almost useless. In my experience, MD/PhD's (who got both on a dedicated track) are actually WORSE bench scientists than people with only PhD's.
b.) No, having only a PhD will not make this difficult. Most of the PI's who work in my department are PhD's only, and I work in one of the most clinically translatable research departments there is. MD/PhD's are far from common, in fact people often talk about how there is a lack of physician scientists in the US. Far more important than your degrees is the research you do, where it gets published, and, unfortunately, how willing and able you are to play into the politics of the system. For example, my PI is very highly respected in his field, runs a wet lab of 30+ people, has an endowed professorship at the medical school, and does not even have a PhD, only an MD. That is... exceedingly rare and probably impossible today, but it still illustrates my point.

2.) This one is easy- If you don't think you'll enjoy the clinical aspect of med school, don't go. The point is to train clinicians, and if what you're interested in is solely research it's a waste of time and money. Both the school aspect and your ensuing residency would be clinical in nature, thats... kinda the whole deal.

3.) I think you should stay on the bachelors track, because you'll probably need it if you want to get a PhD in the US either way. It seems to me like a PhD is the right path for you, but keep doing research, maybe try shadowing some physicians in other specialties including less patient facing and/or more academic ones and see if that appeals to you more and see what you end up liking.

Hope this helps.

Thank you very much. Your comment is really helpful.
I'll definitely keep up with my bachelor's degree.
Though now I question about where I should do my PhD at /;

 

[Lampstrike]

Thank you very much for this detailed comment.

It's true that I am very interested in Basic research, but I want my basic research to become translational and have clinical impacts (basically develop new therapeutics).

Few of my Israeli role Models are- prof. Zelig Eshhar (the one who invented CAR-T treatment for B cell lymphoma), Prof. Ruth Arnon (co-developer of the Copaxone for MS) and Prof. Michal Schwartz (pioneer of Neuro-Immunology, discovered the Neuro-Immunological communication system and now her therapy (Anti PD-1 AB) is in Clinical trails for Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's).
They are all PhDs and Immunologists. Immunology is probably my biggest passion for the last few years.
An American example might be Jan Vilcek, MD-PhD (co-inventor of the Infliximab Anti-TNF alpha that is used to treat several autoimmune diseases).

So I do want to have impact on patients and to also do translational research (bench to bedside). I don't mind if I am not the doctor who manages the human clinical trails, but I do want to identify the new therapies, do animal trails, write the patents and collaborate with the pharma companies.
Is it possible to do all of this as a PhD (no MD) In the USA? I know it's possible in Israel (all 3 examples above)

Links :

Zelig Eshhar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ruth Arnon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Michal Schwartz - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Absolutely. I know several PhD-only scientists who do therapeutic development/animal trial work/ pharma collaborations. The only thing in your entire comment that would require the MD is running a clinical trial in humans. And for that, PhD-only scientists can still be heavily involved. They just need to have a collaborator with an MD.

 

[Dor DP]

Absolutely. I know several PhD-only scientists who do therapeutic development/animal trial work/ pharma collaborations. The only thing in your entire comment that would require the MD is running a clinical trial in humans. And for that, PhD-only scientists can still be heavily involved. They just need to have a collaborator with an MD.

So I guess it doesn't worth to do MD just for that. Probably easier to find Physicians to collaborate with.

Thank you very much for everything.