Specialties for People who Liked Organic Chemistry / Physics

[soccer90876]

MD Class of 2024 open-minded to specialties (leaning surgical but not set on it). Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[efle]

If you liked using your brain to solve puzzles, you're going to hate the mind numbing monotony of long surgeries.

Look into Radiology early on

 

[caterwaiter]

I don't think you're going to know until you see and experience everything.

 

[Moko]

If you liked using your brain to solve puzzles, you're going to hate the mind numbing monotony of long surgeries.

Look into Radiology early on

Looking at black and white images all day (with the occasional splattering of color) in a dark room seems pretty mind numbing and monotonous as well .

OP, pretty much all fields will become repetitive over time, which is fine as long as someone enjoys their work. Keep an open mind during your medical school career to figure out what interests you the most. Focus on what the attendings do (and not what the residents do), as job responsibilities and lifestyles do change quite drastically.

Most fields in medicine do not draw directly from physics and/or organic chemistry in their daily work, apart from rad onc and orthopedics. Of course, my thoughts here are likely due to my own ignorance.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

I majored in math and loved physics. I thought I was going to do something surgical or maybe anesthesiology, but then I discovered rads and path. Rads is cool, but a lot of people think they can do a radiologist’s job as well or better than the radiologist. No one thinks they know pathology better than the pathologist, and I was surprised at how much impact they have on patient care.

 

[WinslowPringle]

I don't think there's any particular correlation between loving o-chem and physics and any particular specialty. N of 1 though, I loved organic chemistry and added on a chemistry major because of it, and also loved physics (and math) and did general surgery.

If you liked using your brain to solve puzzles, you're going to hate the mind numbing monotony of long surgeries.

Look into Radiology early on

Strongly disagree. I'm a PGY5 in general surgery. I love using my brain to solve puzzles. Think about it - surgery is exactly using your brain to solve puzzles. You have to think throughout the whole operation - what goes where, what plane am I in, how do I get from where I am now to where I need to be? Surgery is very creative and requires a lot of planning, thinking, solving puzzles and fixing things. Long surgeries are the exact opposite of mind numbing, boring or monotonous for the surgeon. The longer the surgery, the more complex typically.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

I don't think there's any particular correlation between loving o-chem and physics and any particular specialty. N of 1 though, I loved organic chemistry and added on a chemistry major because of it, and also loved physics (and math) and did general surgery.



Strongly disagree. I'm a PGY5 in general surgery. I love using my brain to solve puzzles. Think about it - surgery is exactly using your brain to solve puzzles. You have to think throughout the whole operation - what goes where, what plane am I in, how do I get from where I am now to where I need to be? Surgery is very creative and requires a lot of planning, thinking, solving puzzles and fixing things. Long surgeries are the exact opposite of mind numbing, boring or monotonous for the surgeon. The longer the surgery, the more complex typically.

It’s almost like you can find intellectual satisfaction in any specialty if it interests you.

 

[efle]

I don't think there's any particular correlation between loving o-chem and physics and any particular specialty. N of 1 though, I loved organic chemistry and added on a chemistry major because of it, and also loved physics (and math) and did general surgery.



Strongly disagree. I'm a PGY5 in general surgery. I love using my brain to solve puzzles. Think about it - surgery is exactly using your brain to solve puzzles. You have to think throughout the whole operation - what goes where, what plane am I in, how do I get from where I am now to where I need to be? Surgery is very creative and requires a lot of planning, thinking, solving puzzles and fixing things. Long surgeries are the exact opposite of mind numbing, boring or monotonous for the surgeon. The longer the surgery, the more complex typically.

I mean, you've got to recognize that to 99% of students, 6 hours of debulking or yet another uncomplicated cholecystectomy doesn't strike us as very intellectually demanding.

Maybe it's a leap of faith thing and being the attending is always exhausting you mentally, but as a student, dear god did it get boring.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

I mean, you've got to recognize that to 99% of students, 6 hours of debulking or yet another uncomplicated cholecystectomy doesn't strike us as very intellectually demanding.

Maybe it's a leap of faith thing and being the attending is always exhausting you mentally, but as a student, dear god did it get boring.

In my experience, any time I've been the one actually doing something, it's been way less boring. I imagine being the actual primary surgeon for even your billionth lap chole is probably a little sphincter tightening.

 

[efle]

In my experience, any time I've been the one actually doing something, it's been way less boring. I imagine being the actual primary surgeon for even your billionth lap chole is probably a little sphincter tightening.

Funny enough, the cases where I was driving the camera were even worse, because now I had to constantly pay attention to the horizon and instruments going in/out instead of being able to daydream and entertain myself. Again maybe it's a leap of faith where actually being the surgeon is intellectually stimulating and draining, but for the life of me I couldn't see how in routine bread and butter cases. Rounding on the zebras in medicine, reading EKGs and imaging, and discussions about differential and treatment options was a world apart. Not that medicine didn't also have a bunch of boredom - but the stereotype of bookish nerdy people gravitating to medicine, and broskis that prefer doing expert things with their hands every day gravitating to surgery, didn't pop up out of nowhere

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Funny enough, the cases where I was driving the camera were even worse, because now I had to constantly pay attention to the horizon and instruments going in/out instead of being able to daydream and entertain myself. Again maybe it's a leap of faith where actually being the surgeon is intellectually stimulating and draining, but for the life of me I couldn't see how in routine bread and butter cases. Rounding on the zebras in medicine, reading EKGs and imaging, and discussions about differential and treatment options was a world apart. Not that medicine didn't also have a bunch of boredom - but the stereotype of bookish nerdy people gravitating to medicine, and broskis that prefer doing expert things with their hands every day gravitating to surgery, didn't pop up out of nowhere

Driving the camera is different. I did that as an OR tech for years. It gets insanely boring, but you're not actually doing the case. You're just showing the surgeon where they're working (which is important, but not the same).

 

[efle]

Driving the camera is different. I did that as an OR tech for years. It gets insanely boring, but you're not actually doing the case. You're just showing the surgeon where they're working (which is important, but not the same).

Dang, so I was supposed to figure out if I liked surgery from freakin' closing skin? Leap of faith indeed

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Dang, so I was supposed to figure out if I liked surgery from freakin' closing skin? Leap of faith indeed

Imo, if you are "trying to figure out if you like it" from closing or driving the camera, you probably don't like it enough to do it as a career.

 

[Moko]

Imo, if you are "trying to figure out if you like it" from closing or driving the camera, you probably don't like it enough to do it as a career.

To add on: not being into surgery is totally fine. Different strokes for different people. If different specialties did not appeal to different people, we would not have the consultants we need to take adequate care of patients.

 

[FindersFee5]

I mean, you've got to recognize that to 99% of students, 6 hours of debulking or yet another uncomplicated cholecystectomy doesn't strike us as very intellectually demanding.

Maybe it's a leap of faith thing and being the attending is always exhausting you mentally, but as a student, dear god did it get boring.

With surgery, more than any other specialty as a med student, you get out of it what you put into it. A 2 hour case that I hadn't prepared for and didn't know the relevant anatomy and steps felt like the most mind numbing act of drudgery I could imagine.

Contrast to that: time often flew during a complicated 10 hour free flap where I had been present for the pre-operative consult and planning, understood the anatomy and the problems we were trying to solve, thinking about what was coming next and what could go wrong, and then imagining how I would physically perform each step.

 

[ndafife]

Try to shadow a bit M1 year to get an idea of what you like. Keep in mind surgical subspecialties are often very competitive and you will likely need some degree of research.

Just keep in mind everything surgical is going to get boring after a bit, so while a big neck dissection is cool, if you hate tonsillectomies ENT may not be for you.

And if you are looking for a fellowship (Peds surgery, general-> CT, general ->plastics, ortho->spine) keep in mind that they can be very competitive in some cases. So unless you are comfortable doing hernias/appys/gallbladders the rest of your life don't go into general surgery or whatever only if you want a particular subspecialized area.

 

[ndafife]

.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

With surgery, more than any other specialty as a med student, you get out of it what you put into it. A 2 hour case that I hadn't prepared for and didn't know the relevant anatomy and steps felt like the most mind numbing act of drudgery I could imagine.

Contrast to that: time often flew during a complicated 10 hour free flap where I had been present for the pre-operative consult and planning, understood the anatomy and the problems we were trying to solve, thinking about what was coming next and what could go wrong, and then imagining how I would physically perform each step.

Unless you’re not into surgery. Then it doesn’t really matter how much you prepare. A 10 hour free flap sounds like torture.

 

[Tenk]

I majored in math and loved physics. I thought I was going to do something surgical or maybe anesthesiology, but then I discovered rads and path. Rads is cool, but a lot of people think they can do a radiologist’s job as well or better than the radiologist. No one thinks they know pathology better than the pathologist, and I was surprised at how much impact they have on patient care.

Wait until you’re doing a frozen section and the surgeon breaks scrub to come down and tap his foot and look at the slide with you because surgeon.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Wait until you’re doing a frozen section and the surgeon breaks scrub to come down and tap his foot and look at the slide with you because surgeon.

I actually watched that happen when I was shadowing a path resident lol. But he just wanted to explain what it was that he wanted. He didn’t actually argue with her or anything. I’m sure it happens though.

 

[WinslowPringle]

I mean, you've got to recognize that to 99% of students, 6 hours of debulking or yet another uncomplicated cholecystectomy doesn't strike us as very intellectually demanding.

Maybe it's a leap of faith thing and being the attending is always exhausting you mentally, but as a student, dear god did it get boring.

Oh, I completely recognize surgery is boring to students. It's not boring when you're the one doing it 😀. Just like watching someone do a puzzle would be boring; doing it is completely different.

In my experience, any time I've been the one actually doing something, it's been way less boring. I imagine being the actual primary surgeon for even your billionth lap chole is probably a little sphincter tightening.

Yeah. Everyone's anatomy is some variation on a theme. People use lap choles as an example of a 'routine' surgery but put some inflammation in there and they are anything but.

...... So unless you are comfortable doing hernias/appys/gallbladders the rest of your life don't go into general surgery or whatever only if you want a particular subspecialized area.

...hey, we also do dead colons, fournier's, and lots of butt pus. Don't forget the fun cases lol

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[alprazoslam]

I didn’t know it was possible to like organic chem

 

[efle]

Different strokes for different folks. Part of why I didn't like IM is that I felt it was a lot of pseudo-intellectual, "thought experiment"-type thinking. There were a lot of discussions about things that were only clinically relevant in theory and a lot of zebra chasing for academic purposes. Surgery does the EKG reading, imaging, etc, but surgical thinking and clinical management is a lot more decisive. "Will this change clinical management? No? Then no need to discuss it." Just because the thinking isn't discussed for hours, doesn't mean it's not there. In the OR, you need to constantly assess where you are and where you are going; you're not just going through motions. Broski doesn't mean anti-intellectual

Each field has their own sets of puzzles. I've seen many surgical consults from medicine residents where they 100% miss the mark because they don't have the knowledge to piece together that puzzle. Similarly, there are plenty of things that surgeons won't have the knowledge to piece together. Pathologist and radiologist put together clinical data that others can't. We all have our own intellectual challenges

@footballman Radonc does a lot of physics, toxicology through EM or path uses a lot of OChem

Everyone's got their area of expertise, sure. A surgeon can't space out while they take out gallbladder #764 and I'm sure a pro athlete thinks constantly about their games, but it's not really accurate to say their "intellectual challenges" resemble those of an organic chemist or physicist.

Look at the USMLE distributions for US Seniors in the big specialties that don't have high competitive pressure elevating their scores. Rads has a mode of 250+ just because of who it attracts, you can match it just fine with a 230, but yet it pulls from the high end of the bell curve more than the middle. Medicine too has as many 250+ scorers every year as 230s. Completely different pattern than when you look at something like general surg or obstetrics or EM or gas.

 

[readmypostsMD]

I majored in math and loved physics. I thought I was going to do something surgical or maybe anesthesiology, but then I discovered rads and path. Rads is cool, but a lot of people think they can do a radiologist’s job as well or better than the radiologist. No one thinks they know pathology better than the pathologist, and I was surprised at how much impact they have on patient care.

is going into rad a safe career move? i feel like it might be taken over in like 10-20 years

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

is going into rad a safe career move? i feel like it might be taken over in like 10-20 years

I think that's pretty unlikely. Obviously, I don't have a crystal ball, but everyone who seems to actually know what they're talking about thinks that's not going to happen. If anything, AI will make radiologists' lives easier, but it certainly won't be replacing them.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

but it's not really accurate to say their "intellectual challenges" resemble those of an organic chemist or physicist.

Did I miss where someone actually said that, or are you just arguing against a straw man?

 

[efle]

Did I miss where someone actually said that, or are you just arguing against a straw man?

He said "we all have our own intellectual challenges" and the whole thread is about what will scratch the same itch as physics and Ochem (see title)

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

He said "we all have our own intellectual challenges" and the whole thread is about what will scratch the same itch as physics and Ochem (see title)

Well the thread title actually is asking for specialties that people who like ochem/physics would like. It's not asking which specialties have the same intellectual challenges as an organic chemist or a physicist. And the person you quoted didn't say that either.

 

[efle]

the thread title actually is asking for specialties that people who like ochem/physics would like. It's not asking which specialties have the same intellectual challenges as an organic chemist or a physicist

"it's not asking what is like doing organics or physics, it's asking what people who like organics and physics would like"

Weak.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

"it's not asking what is like doing organics or physics, it's asking what people who like organics and physics would like"

Weak.

I mean you’re attacking an argument that isn’t being made. Asking what field has the same intellectual challenges as ochem and physics and what fields would someone who enjoyed ochem and physics enjoy are not the same, and they aren’t just semantically different.

 

[efle]

I mean you’re attacking an argument that isn’t being made. Asking what field has the same intellectual challenges as ochem and physics and what fields would someone who enjoyed ochem and physics enjoy are not the same, and they aren’t just semantically different.

Expand on that difference part for me then. What makes someone like physics or choose physics for their career, if not loving the intellectual challenge of interpreting, analyzing, and solving logic puzzles? That seems pretty implicit, but happy to be educated differently.

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[efle]

I thought inpatient medicine was one of the least intellectually stimulating fields. I felt like 95% of the time it is blatantly obvious what is going on and for the other 5%, you could treat their symptoms and they get better. Does that mean it's not intellectually stimulating to other people? No. I think surgery is much more intellectually challenging and requires you to use your knowledge to develop creative solutions to problems. Surgery also deals with interpreting and analyzing data for medical management, including managing acute situations. Whereas you find it to be a boring field. Again, different strokes for different folks. Just because I don't see a specialty as an interest challenge doesn't mean it's not a field with interesting challenges.

I don't get what step score has to do with this. "That don't have high competitive pressure elevating their score." It sounds like you are trying to claim that high step score=interest in intellectual challenges, except for when it comes to all the competitive surgical fields (ie. convenient cherry picking). There is no evidence for that claim. Most people I know going into rads want a chill life and minimize patient interaction.

If OP is looking for a field that incorporates OChem and physics, I already said radonc and tox. They could also get involved with tech-filled fields like IR and surgery and design new equipment to satisfy their interest.

My medicine experience was also replete with obvious boring stuff (like patients skipping dialysis or their meds), but it had crazy zebras in the mix too, often that had been sent from other centers. Working up differentials, planning on weird presentations that didn't have anything algorithmic to follow, reading weird EKGs, weird imaging, making sense of unexpected lab results, etc was all a much larger part of medicine, relatively. Maybe we just had different rotation experiences. Surgery rounding was usually 30 minutes of "afebrile, other vitals and labs WNL, meeting milestones"

I don't really think it's cherry picking to say that the small and difficult to match fields have higher step scores because they're small and difficult to match. I spent weeks with plastics and ENT on my surgery rotation and as far as I can see they aren't any more or less intellectual than general, just a lot more competitive for other reasons.

But I absolutely do think that the score pattern for Rads is because the high end is relatively more drawn to interpretive/analytical work to keep them using their mind all day. They don't have the competitive pressure to generate that pattern otherwise. If you want to say it's that better students are more likely to want to avoid patients, we'll just have to agree to disagree. What's your explanation for IM having such a different pattern too though, with much higher relative representation of the high scores despite being similarly easy for Average Joe to match?

 

[Lawpy]

I don't understand this thread. People have different interests and every specialty is intellectually stimulating in their own way.

 

[efle]

I don't understand this thread. People have different interests and every specialty is intellectually stimulating in their own way.

I don't understand why people are insisting its similar. Specialties can have huge differences in every category I can think of - typical lifestyle, relative $$, typical personality type, gender balance, what the training is like, blah blah. The daily work of someone in rads and path is a world apart from someone in an OR. Why is the idea that they can differ in intellectual demands too, so objectionable? We can see that people who score great on boards and don't want anything surgical are not equally distributed among the easy-to-match fields. It's not a judgement of anyone involved, it's not like it means all general surgeons are dumb or something. It just is.

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[efle]

It is cherry picking. You can't say that high scores mean someone is more drawn to analytical stuff and then completely discount a large group of people just because what they were interested in happened to be competitive. I would argue step score does not relate to intellectual curiosity. I did not say that better students are more likely to want to avoid patients. I said that that is a draw that is often stated by people I know going into radiology.

18% of IM, 18% of gen surgeons, 15% pathologist, 14% EM got 250+. It's not a huge variation. IM also has competitive fellowships that pay better than some surgical subspecialties without the surgical lifestyle, which is a large draw for many competitive applicants. It's also the largest field in medicine, a field a lot of applicants default to, and a field many enjoy, so it's not surprising for them to have high representation in each score range.

So why then do you think rads has a disproportionately high distribution, if not the nature of the work being more analytical/interpretive?

I think you forgot to set it to USMD Seniors. These distributions are very different above their medians.

Spoiler: Med and Surg US Seniors

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[efle]

Rads is a ROAD lifestyle, highly compensated specialty. I'm sure people who go into it really enjoy the subject matter as well and I'm sure some chose it because they like the thinking style that goes into it. There is no point arguing this further. You're trying to make a claim based on pure conjecture that does not have data behind it. You do not know why people chose the field they did, including those who went into competitive fields

The point is that just because you can't comprehend the analytical thinking that goes into a field doesn't mean your opinion is a universal truth. The fact of the matter is that OP will likely find the type of intellectual experience they want in whichever field they end up being drawn to.

There is data. Rads is 4% of the match and gets 7% of the high scoring range, in fact 250+ being the most common score to have. That pattern is not seen in other similarly easy to match specialties, for example, not seen in the A in ROAD despite being similarly compensated shift work.

You can stop responding whenever you want, but it's a shame because I enjoy hearing your thoughts. I've not got any horse in this race, just don't see an alternative explanation to why the above pattern is occurring

 

[Lawpy]

I don't understand why people are insisting its similar. Specialties can have huge differences in every category I can think of - typical lifestyle, relative $$, typical personality type, gender balance, what the training is like, blah blah. The daily work of someone in rads and path is a world apart from someone in an OR. Why is the idea that they can differ in intellectual demands too, so objectionable? We can see that people who score great on boards and don't want anything surgical are not equally distributed among the easy-to-match fields. It's not a judgement of anyone involved, it's not like it means all general surgeons are dumb or something. It just is.

How do you compare intellectual demands between specialties? Like I'm not even sure if there is an objective way to compare them because it's largely influenced by personal interests in the field.

Also I'm not sure what you're referring to with the equal distribution, but isn't this still largely self-selecting in the end?

 

[efle]

How do you compare intellectual demands between specialties? Like I'm not even sure if there is an objective way to compare them because it's largely influenced by personal interests in the field.

Also I'm not sure what you're referring to with the equal distribution, but isn't this still largely self-selecting in the end?

Self selecting is exactly my point, we wouldn't see something like the rads pattern unless high scorers were gravitating to it in larger proportion than similar options like gas.

Which rotations have you done? Of course there's no objective measure, but if you've spent time in a reading room and in routine surgeries, you'd be crazy to call gas and rads similarly mentally strenuous in a typical hour of their work

 

[Lawpy]

Self selecting is exactly my point, we wouldn't see something like the rads pattern unless high scorers were gravitating to it in larger proportion than similar options like gas.

Which rotations have you done? Of course there's no objective measure, but if you've spent time in a reading room and in routine surgeries, you'd be crazy to call gas and rads similarly mentally strenuous in a typical hour of their work

Not in rotations yet but was confused about the discussion. Although I feel like this discussion is sort of related to the some of the past conversations on intelligence and mental stimulation. I just think this is too subjective to make any sort of argument.

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

some people find crossword puzzles intellectually stimulating. some people find them boring and like sudoku more. others prefer physical jigsaw puzzles. Some people are really into analyzing sports statistics, other people like art history. some like making their own sculptures and find the artistic process to be intellectually stimulating. None of these are the "right" kind of stimulating, and people can have multiple interests.

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[efle]

You are basing an argument on the assumption that 250+ indicates someone who is interested in analytical, intellectual puzzles moreso than someone with a lower step score (except, of course, if you go into a competitive field where getting a 250 doesn't mean anything). Until you can prove that assumption, there is no argument.

Lets say we grant that there's no relationship between being top of the curve on boards and liking cerebral work.

Why then is rads the only easily matched field with that score pattern? Like, I get that you don't like my explanation, I just keep asking to hear what you think is causing it instead and getting no answer!

 

[efle]

some people find crossword puzzles intellectually stimulating. some people find them boring and like sudoku more. others prefer physical jigsaw puzzles. Some people are really into analyzing sports statistics, other people like art history. some like making their own sculptures and find the artistic process to be intellectually stimulating. None of these are the "right" kind of stimulating, and people can have multiple interests.

Sure, but if I told you one of my parents loves whittling and the other loves Sudoku, and your life depended on correctly guessing which one had to tutor the other in Physics...you really gonna flip a coin on that one?

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

Sure, but if I told you one of my parents loves whittling and the other loves Sudoku, and your life depended on correctly guessing which one had to tutor the other in Physics...you really gonna flip a coin on that one?

...yes? Sudoku isn't actually that popular among people who are really numbers people, at least in my experience. Maybe kenken would be more apt. and a lot of those types of games (and standardized testing, frankly) are about high speed pattern recognition more than intellectual pontification. But there are visual things (whittling, visual pattern recognition games, puzzle toys, etc) that one might find intellectually stimulating that might be in line with surgical interest. And frankly my (albeit limited) experience with rads is that its also more about pattern recognition (unless you're actually developing new modalities or something).

I have nothing on the line here, I'm pretty definitively uninterested in surgery, but I think you're caught up in the idea that there's only one right way to be intellectually stimulated, and that somehow high test score = only kind of intellectually interested person. Studying for STEP has probably so far been one of the least intellectually stimulating experiences of my life, and I am someone who really enjoys puzzles/analyzing/solving things.