why do an MD too?

Started by 3Xhelix
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

3Xhelix

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I have been thinking seriously about a career choice lately. i applied to med school this year, but didn't get in for reasons that i think are easily resolvable over the next year. I did research my last year of undergrad, now i'm working full time as a tech in a molecular biology lab. I'm really enjoying research, but i know i would like more contact with people in my ultimate career choice. This leads me to a dilemma, and I thought getting the MD and PhD degrees might help satisfy all the needs that I have.

my question, however, is this - i've been reading up on medical scientists and what they do all day. it seems like the vast majority (> 85%) of their time is devoted to bench research. What is the point of the MD degree if one sees patients so little?

is the degree supposed to make one a better researcher? it seems that since what scientists study is often so focused, one wouldn't need a medical degree to know the relevant anatomy, pathology, etc of an area - it would be relatively easy to learn this information while researching.
Is it really worth getting a medical degree to only see patients 15% of the time? (or less) Am i missing anything here?
any input would be appreciated, especially form current/training medical scientists.
thanks
 
:laugh:

This question is like the most discussed question of all times.

Click Here

Disclaimer: "a waste of time" is a bit of an overdramatic hyperbole. I'm not really saying that it's ALWAYS a waste of time. I'm just saying, under certain circumstances, it's a waste of time....but under other circumstances, you ought to do things that waste time anyway.
 
sluox said:
:laugh:

This question is like the most discussed question of all times.

Click Here

Disclaimer: "a waste of time" is a bit of an overdramatic hyperbole. I'm not really saying that it's ALWAYS a waste of time. I'm just saying, under certain circumstances, it's a waste of time....but under other circumstances, you ought to do things that waste time anyway.


Thanks, that was good info. From what I can gather form this passage, I guess the MD/PhD is really a research degree, not a clinical degree. The MD just makes the postdoc period shorter and makes it easier to get grants and a PI position.
if anyone has any extra input i'd appreciate it.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
3Xhelix said:
Thanks, that was good info. From what I can gather form this passage, I guess the MD/PhD is really a research degree, not a clinical degree. The MD just makes the postdoc period shorter and makes it easier to get grants and a PI position.
if anyone has any extra input i'd appreciate it.
You got it!

The NIH prefers that MD/PhD graduates go onto do some kind of research activity as a component of their careers (whether it be basic, translational, or clinical). I was told when I was an upstart in my MSTP program that MD/PhD graduates who do only clinical work and no research are kinda frowned upon.
 
sluox said:
:laugh:

This question is like the most discussed question of all times.

Click Here

Disclaimer: "a waste of time" is a bit of an overdramatic hyperbole. I'm not really saying that it's ALWAYS a waste of time. I'm just saying, under certain circumstances, it's a waste of time....but under other circumstances, you ought to do things that waste time anyway.

Thanks for that article!