Why is an MD more prestigious than a Ph.D?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
My doctorate is bigger than YOUR doctorate!! SSEEEE!?!

/whizz
 
My neuropsy told me that I should be intellectually gifted in order to perform medical research, is that rrue?
 
A bachelor's in physics followed by a PhD in economics will make you CEO of a multinational financial conglomerate, with a sign on bonus of a cool $60 million and $1 million end of the year bonuses each year. I'm going for it. This $200,000 a year or less and NOT being at the tippy top of the global pecking order with this medical business is going to leave me sad and empty in the end, even with a great woman at my side. Man, I want to foment war with countries on the other side of the world from the comfort of my cozy gianormus poolside luxury LaZBoy armchair through web conferencing via my laptop computer hooked up to my 200" plasma screen TV on my multi-million dollar yacht. 👍
 
Last edited:
Robin des Bois said:
Diagnose AS? Yes, they always do it. I
I was under the impression that MDs needed a PhD to become researchers, my bad. But then, what's the difference between MDs' research and MD-PhD?
Click to expand...

I know lots of MDs who do basic science research (biochemistry, molecular biology, microbiology, etc) without PhDs. They also do clinical research and have clinical responsibilities. Not the norm but totally possible if you want to do it.
 
You guys should all just Google "residency research requirements" and "research fellowships"....

Very often residencies have their own research portions where you will take 1-2 years to just do research. There are also post residency fellowships that are very research heavy
 
unleash500 said:
I did a phd first and now doing md...

Phd imo is so much easier to me. I am given so much time and all i have to worry about is results and understanding concepts. Md on the other hand i am always time crunched.

MD is at another league imo. It is more than academics.
Click to expand...

Where did you get your PhD? In what field??

My PhD (completed at a top 5 medical school) was HARD and relatively stressful! And I consider myself a pretty smart guy when it comes to science. Even then, the PhD was the hardest thing I have ever done in my life. I'm putting in about the same amount of time into medical school, but I can study for 8-12 hours a day and not worry about all my "experiments" failing, and I don't have to think too hard. Medical school is mostly rote memorization which any decently smart person can do if they put it in the time.

There's a reason many MD/PhD students defect into straight clinical medicine. It's not that the PhD is hard in itself--it's just that research is harder than just taking classes.

You are either very good at research, got very lucky on your project, or are just BSing.
 
Nuel said:
My PhD (completed at a top 5 medical school) was HARD and relatively stressful!


You are either very good at research, got very lucky on your project, or are just BSing.
Click to expand...

I feel like there may be connections to be drawn here :prof:


joking aside, the MD/PhD students that I know treat their research years (in which they formally join a graduate program, go through comps with committees comprised of graduate college faculty, and defend a thesis - and also make up any coursework that was not covered by the pre-clinic medical school years - also while on a free ride to their PI which doesn't exactly give any faculty incentive to cut them loose early) like an extended vacation. PhDs are not easy nor are they just handed out. However your description of medical school means that either you are a phenomenal memorizer or you are one of those who comes out the tail end of a class not really understanding what happened but with the ability to regurgitate scattered factoids (which is an odd approach for a prior PhD...). Many of our courses are also taken by first and 2nd year graduate students - neuroscience students in our med neuro, pharmacology students in our pharm, whatever. I know many of these students through my GF and what is a normal day for any one of us is the stuff of nightmares within those circles. Again - not that PhD is easy by any means. But rather than simply being content with themselves and their choices, when people start making comparisons they forget that comparisons can go both ways 👍
 
Last edited:
Stray question: If the residency that you want to join includes a year or so of research requirements (Shands Hospital Surgical Residency program requires PGY-3's to take part in research), is is possible to earn a master's or Ph.D from such a program?
 
Last edited:
SpecterGT260 said:
I feel like there may be connections to be drawn here :prof:
Click to expand...

I see what you are getting at, but I never met anyone in graduate school who thought the PhD was "easy". Even the MD/PhD students didn't think the PhD was "so much easier" than medical school. In fact, most where humbled by what it took to do great research and some of them decided they were going to stick with clinical medicine instead.

I plan on running an independent research program, and I am much more worried about my ability of being a successful scientist than a successful physician. It's not that one is better than the other; it's just that research is intrinsically hard, and changing national and institutional policies won't change that fact.
 
Nuel said:
I see what you are getting at, but I never met anyone in graduate school who thought the PhD was "easy". Even the MD/PhD students didn't think the PhD was "so much easier" than medical school. In fact, most where humbled by what it took to do great research and some of them decided they were going to stick with clinical medicine instead.

I plan on running an independent research program, and I am much more worried about my ability of being a successful scientist than a successful physician. It's not that one is better than the other; it's just that research is intrinsically hard, and changing national and institutional policies won't change that fact.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my edit.

Are you pre-med, med student, or a PhD hanging out in the pre-allo section? Without sigs or tags its hard to keep everyone straight. I am just curious if you are drawing these opinions based on first hand experience or your own spin on someone elses experience based on observation.
 
SpecterGT260 said:
joking aside, the MD/PhD students that I know treat their research years (in which they formally join a graduate program, go through comps with committees comprised of graduate college faculty, and defend a thesis - and also make up any coursework that was not covered by the pre-clinic medical school years - also while on a free ride to their PI which doesn't exactly give any faculty incentive to cut them loose early) like an extended vacation. PhDs are not easy nor are they just handed out. However your description of medical school means that either you are a phenomenal memorizer or you are one of those who comes out the tail end of a class not really understanding what happened but with the ability to regurgitate scattered factoids (which is an odd approach for a prior PhD...). Many of our courses are also taken by first and 2nd year graduate students - neuroscience students in our med neuro, pharmacology students in our pharm, whatever. I know many of these students through my GF and what is a normal day for any one of us is the stuff of nightmares within those circles. Again - not that PhD is easy by any means. But rather than simply being content with themselves and their choices, when people start making comparisons they forget that comparisons can go both ways 👍
Click to expand...

I have heard and seen the "extended vacation" comment quite a bit. I was shocked when I met an MSTP student who took 6 months off to tour some continent. That wouldn't have gone down well with me or my PI. The thing is that, the PhD is what you make of it. You can go in and try to get an easy project, get out fast and just learn the basics of doing research (depending on the lab). It's still not easy, but that works.

In the other case, you can embark on a challenging affair depending on your goals. I know an MD/PhD and two PhD colleagues who worked 14 hrs a day in lab non-stop, 6 days a week. They had no lives. I tried to maintain 8-14 hrs of efficient work 5 days week, so at times i would run 3 experiments in parallel so i could avoid staying in lab for 12 hrs straight. Further, I was independent from day 1 in a new field with no postdoc or senior grad student to hold my hand--in fact, I became the resident expert in the lab. I actually designed my thesis projects from scratch, and my advisor (a terrific mentor but very hands-off guy by principle who instructed on principles of experimental design) said "We will learn with you along the way as you make progress." I also took a couple of basic science classes with medical students and they were easier than running my thesis projects, although the research was clearly more fun.

My PhD was in biochemistry and molecular biophysics and I did lots and lots of thinking. And medical school is still rote memorization since you need the facts to think through stuff. Inasmuch as I hate rote memorization, I still believe that the more facts you know, the more efficient your thinking will be. So I still read a lot (sometimes I go beyond the class) and try to maintain a strong work ethic, although sometimes life and girls get in the way--I'm still fairly young. I'm also among the top in my med school class, mostly due to putting in effort. Medical school/medicine is more about hard work.

What makes the PhD hard is the research component, and that's due to the intrinsic difficulty in science. This popular article explains it very well: http://jcs.biologists.org/content/121/11/1771.full

MDs use basic science and clinical ideas to help patients. PhDs and some MDs do research to push things forward, but innovation is very hard to do, and that's why only a few people make the seemingly grand discoveries/innovations, which are themselves based on seemingly trivial prior small advances.
 
Nuel said:
What makes the PhD hard is the research component, and that's due to the intrinsic difficulty in science. This popular article explains it very well: http://jcs.biologists.org/content/121/11/1771.full
Click to expand...

emSjE.png
 
Also you can get a PhD online from the university ofphoenix.
 
Nuel said:
I have heard and seen the "extended vacation" comment quite a bit. I was shocked when I met an MSTP student who took 6 months off to tour some continent. That wouldn't have gone down well with me or my PI. The thing is that, the PhD is what you make of it. You can go in and try to get an easy project, get out fast and just learn the basics of doing research (depending on the lab). It's still not easy, but that works.

In the other case, you can embark on a challenging affair depending on your goals. I know an MD/PhD and two PhD colleagues who worked 14 hrs a day in lab non-stop, 6 days a week. They had no lives. I tried to maintain 8-14 hrs of efficient work 5 days week, so at times i would run 3 experiments in parallel so i could avoid staying in lab for 12 hrs straight. Further, I was independent from day 1 in a new field with no postdoc or senior grad student to hold my hand--in fact, I became the resident expert in the lab. I actually designed my thesis projects from scratch, and my advisor (a terrific mentor but very hands-off guy by principle who instructed on principles of experimental design) said "We will learn with you along the way as you make progress." I also took a couple of basic science classes with medical students and they were easier than running my thesis projects, although the research was clearly more fun.

My PhD was in biochemistry and molecular biophysics and I did lots and lots of thinking. And medical school is still rote memorization since you need the facts to think through stuff. Inasmuch as I hate rote memorization, I still believe that the more facts you know, the more efficient your thinking will be. So I still read a lot (sometimes I go beyond the class) and try to maintain a strong work ethic, although sometimes life and girls get in the way--I'm still fairly young. I'm also among the top in my med school class, mostly due to putting in effort. Medical school/medicine is more about hard work.

What makes the PhD hard is the research component, and that's due to the intrinsic difficulty in science. This popular article explains it very well: http://jcs.biologists.org/content/121/11/1771.full

MDs use basic science and clinical ideas to help patients. PhDs and some MDs do research to push things forward, but innovation is very hard to do, and that's why only a few people make the seemingly grand discoveries/innovations, which are themselves based on seemingly trivial prior small advances.
Click to expand...

I dont think you understood my earlier comment below....
not that PhD is easy by any means. But rather than simply being content with themselves and their choices, when people start making comparisons they forget that comparisons can go both ways
Click to expand...
 
MedPR said:
Also you can get a PhD online from the university ofphoenix.
Click to expand...


On a more realistic view: I'm sure the online PhD will be looked down especially if you are looking for employment (whether competitive or non-competitive). There is a reason that medical schools do not accept online courses. If an MD was an online course, the chances at competitive residencies would be very slim. But since there is a "shortage of doctors", I think it is in everyone's best interest to start making MD online degrees that are accredited. The MD online degree must be legitimate and the course material must be legitimate. Assuming it would be cheaper to attend online MD programs, the students wouldn't have to be forced into competitive residencies to pay off their debts. So the empty primary care spots for seeking MD's would be filled immediately through online programs. I personally would be up for it because I know that primary care is for me and I don't need all this debt. 😀 Honestly, I do not see myself doing primary care if I still have to go to physical medical school because it won't pay my debts. I would be willing to do any of the specialties, they are all fun! I understand that there are some programs in medical school that waive your medical school if you do primary care binding. But I do not want to go through all this competition in my undergrad years. I have always tested in the low IQ's 80's-90's (yet I have maintained a straight A average), I know I do not have what it takes to be a surgeon or equivalent--so I think that MD online degrees would be a nice alternative to low IQ MD seeking students. I was able to overcome this low IQ and grades problem through machine-like studying. If I don't do this, I fail miserably.

That's just my 2 cents.
 
omare61 said:
I only discovered a few months ago that an MD degree is "only" considered an undergraduate degree in canada
Click to expand...
Someone touched on this before, but let me clarify further: Countries that use the British system of medical training offer a Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery degree (MBBS). Students apply in their final year of high school. The program lasts for five to six years and covers all of the prereqs that American premeds would take during undergrad.

People with an MBBS have full practicing rights and are called "doctor" but an MBBS is NOT equal to a Doctor of Medicine degree (MD). In fact, countries under the British system offer an MD for those who are interested in academic medicine or research. Usually you will already need an MBBS or equivalent to apply for an MD program.

When you add up years needed for an MD (5-6 years MBBS + 3-4 years MD in the British system, 4 years UG + 4 years MD in the US system), you see that it takes longer than the average PhD, at least in Europe. (4 years UG + 2-3 years PhD in Europe, 4 years UG + 5-6 years PhD in the US). Add residency to the length of medical education, and it takes significantly longer to become a medical doctor in the US, too.
 
Last edited:
omare61 said:
On a more realistic view: I'm sure the online PhD will be looked down especially if you are looking for employment (whether competitive or non-competitive). There is a reason that medical schools do not accept online courses. If an MD was an online course, the chances at competitive residencies would be very slim. But since there is a "shortage of doctors", I think it is in everyone's best interest to start making MD online degrees that are accredited. The MD online degree must be legitimate and the course material must be legitimate. Assuming it would be cheaper to attend online MD programs, the students wouldn't have to be forced into competitive residencies to pay off their debts. So the empty primary care spots for seeking MD's would be filled immediately through online programs. I personally would be up for it because I know that primary care is for me and I don't need all this debt. 😀 Honestly, I do not see myself doing primary care if I still have to go to physical medical school because it won't pay my debts. I would be willing to do any of the specialties, they are all fun! I understand that there are some programs in medical school that waive your medical school if you do primary care binding. But I do not want to go through all this competition in my undergrad years.
Click to expand...

Srs?

omare61 said:
I have always tested in the low IQ's 80's-90's
Click to expand...

Ah, now it all makes sense.
 
If the prestige is that important to you, you're probably not going to be a very good fit in medicine.
 
SpecterGT260 said:
Its like freaking rule 34..... never fails
Click to expand...
No no, I just mean the first time you have three disimpactions on the same rotation your likely to get a nice steaming pile of prestige on your faceshield. I didn't mean to come off philosophically.
 
OCDOCDOCD said:
A PhD teaching at a high school is what would normally be called a "failed career". Considering that in some states you don't even need to have your BA/BS yet to start teaching I think it's safe to say that "high school teacher" isn't what most grad students are aiming for. And obviously a PhD can be in anything, but I don't think we're talking about humanities PhDs in this thread but rather scientists.

Also please tell me that this high school PhD teacher of yours was a chemist with lung cancer.


Using your logic all science needs are those few people and we'd have negligible loss of quality of life and progress.

What you seem to be missing here is that even the seemingly trivial stuff is important. Science is gradual with a leap every now and then that occurs whenever enough knowledge has come together. Famous scientists are famous because they happened to be looking at the right thing at the right time; there's no reason why it had to be them who made their discovery, they were just the first ones to realize it once it was capable of being realized. Hence why you often get multiple scientists reaching the same conclusions at the same time, and even doing the same experiments. This isn't just limited to science either, it happens in math too. For example, Newton and Leibiniz both came up with calculus at the same time.
Click to expand...

+1 Heisenberg taught me Chemistry.
Also good points all around. Science is certainly a gradual process of research. For instance, the idea of Evolution was talked about way before Darwin. We are on a medical forum, so the opinions on the site will be skewed.
 
PhD students are over saturated to the point of ridiculousness now. Even in the sciences you can go get a PhD in ecology from bumf**k university studying the differences in fin measurements between redfish pop 1 vs redfish pop 2. It's already been mentioned but there's plenty of research that's going nowhere even if we're only talking about science PhDs. As has already been mentioned, PhD "prestige" end up getting diluted because of all the crappy programs out there.

If we're including non-science PhDs well....there's a reason there's not widespread awe for some guy who spent 5 years locked in a room with old books to complete his thesis on "Historical Accounts on the Difference in Peen Size between King Louis XIII and King Louis XV" for his Medieval Studies PhD.
 
unleash500 said:
I did a phd first and now doing md...

Phd imo is so much easier to me. I am given so much time and all i have to worry about is results and understanding concepts. Md on the other hand i am always time crunched.

MD is at another league imo. It is more than academics.
Click to expand...

And I've also heard the complete opposite. Many times.

In reality, PhD programs, and their associated difficulties, vary WIDELY. EVEN WITHIN THE SAME LAB.

I think what it really comes to is... that it is *rare* to have a good mentor through your PhD -- it is a difficult pursuit and often times people (i.e. supervisors, committee members) see it as sink or swim. The rewards are also very few and far between (projects are often based on long-term outcomes), and these days, scientific journals expect more and more in order to publish.

Thus, I think, PhDs are less of an incentive for people because:
(1) they're difficult, and require self-directed studies into unexplored areas (whereas MD degrees do not!)
(2) the job prospects are horrible, both in academia and in industry
(3) it takes much longer.. usually 6 years of graduate school after a bachelor's
(4) it pays much less.

Just my 2-cents.
 
bearintraining said:
And I've also heard the complete opposite. Many times.

In reality, PhD programs, and their associated difficulties, vary WIDELY. EVEN WITHIN THE SAME LAB.

I think what it really comes to is... that it is *rare* to have a good mentor through your PhD -- it is a difficult pursuit and often times people (i.e. supervisors, committee members) see it as sink or swim. The rewards are also very few and far between (projects are often based on long-term outcomes), and these days, scientific journals expect more and more in order to publish.

Thus, I think, PhDs are less of an incentive for people because:
(1) they're difficult, and require self-directed studies into unexplored areas (whereas MD degrees do not!)
(2) the job prospects are horrible, both in academia and in industry
(3) it takes much longer.. usually 6 years of graduate school after a bachelor's
(4) it pays much less.

Just my 2-cents.
Click to expand...

I have said this time and time again across these boards... (so why not say it again, right?)

The smartest..... i.e. the absolute brightest among us, the geniuses, tend to be in GRADUATE SCHOOL. Hands down.

That said, even if we restrict to only science or even bio-medical science PhD programs, the selection process and criteria is much more varied than it is for medical school. Medical school selects for a very very narrow band of applicants very near the top of the academic/intellectual pool. PhD programs get those who are (by all metrics) well above this, but they have a vast quantity of people who are well below this. If we want to talk averages, MD>PhD pretty easily (again, even just restricting to biomedical or hard science programs), however the scope that PhD programs pull from fully encompasses that of MD in terms of distribution.

My point is this: varying widely doesnt really mean much as this is a discussion and comparison across populations. The prestige (going back tot he OP) comes from the tangible nature of what physicians do. The "front line" according to the lay person. You could be the guy who cured cancer, but once you start talking to Avg. Joseph about targeted therapies and receptor interactions his eyes will glaze over. According to Joseph, it was his physician who put his hands on him, put the drugs on him, and made him better. This is assuming we are still somehow talking about prestige, however, which should not be confused with importance under any circumstances. :prof:
 
SpecterGT260 said:
I have said this time and time again across these boards... (so why not say it again, right?)

The smartest..... i.e. the absolute brightest among us, the geniuses, tend to be in GRADUATE SCHOOL. Hands down.

That said, even if we restrict to only science or even bio-medical science PhD programs, the selection process and criteria is much more varied than it is for medical school. Medical school selects for a very very narrow band of applicants very near the top of the academic/intellectual pool. PhD programs get those who are (by all metrics) well above this, but they have a vast quantity of people who are well below this. If we want to talk averages, MD>PhD pretty easily (again, even just restricting to biomedical or hard science programs), however the scope that PhD programs pull from fully encompasses that of MD in terms of distribution.

My point is this: varying widely doesnt really mean much as this is a discussion and comparison across populations. The prestige (going back tot he OP) comes from the tangible nature of what physicians do. The "front line" according to the lay person. You could be the guy who cured cancer, but once you start talking to Avg. Joseph about targeted therapies and receptor interactions his eyes will glaze over. According to Joseph, it was his physician who put his hands on him, put the drugs on him, and made him better. This is assuming we are still somehow talking about prestige, however, which should not be confused with importance under any circumstances. :prof:
Click to expand...

Totally agree with all your points!
 
UnlikelyDoc said:
No no, I just mean the first time you have three disimpactions on the same rotation your likely to get a nice steaming pile of prestige on your faceshield. I didn't mean to come off philosophically.
Click to expand...

You, sir, win the internet.
 
omare61 said:
I pulled this from another thread, I thought it would be good to include in sdn:

I always wondered why so many more people want to be an MD than get a PhD. Even in society physicians are one of the most respected professions, much more so than uni profs etc...
I only discovered a few months ago that an MD degree is "only" considered an undergraduate degree in canada (ie. on par with a bachelors; btw in most of the world you are granted a bachelors of medicine degree. Apparently, the only reason you are called doctor is because you are able to diagnose medical conditions). Furthermore, in MD training, unless you are a complete idiot, you will eventually get your degree no matter what due to the fact that schools give a fair amount of leeway with grades (ie. you don't flunk out of med school if your flunk an exam, you always get a 2nd chance) and in a clinical setting you will always have someone above you watching your back (to varying extents, depending on your level of training) and making sure you don't kill someone (ie. you are constantly supervised).
Whereas with a PhD you are working a lot more independantly, and in my opinion doing a lot more critical thinking (as opposed to constantly following a memorized protocal from memorized S&S's etc...) and the timeline of training is basically the same as a primary care physician.
Also, there is no guarantee that all the work you put in will = a PhD (unlike med school where hard work will always pay off). My bio prof has more than one story of grad colleagues who put in between 3-5 years of research only to see their experiments fail and wind up with nothing (with PhD, unlike a Masters, no results = no degree).
Moreover, i think the learning material is at least equal in difficulty between the two streams (my chem prof showed us what he was required to memorize in his PhD program regarding michaelis-menten enzyme kinetics before he could begin his research, and it was totally disgusting).
I think maybe that is the reason sometimes why profs seem a little turned off at students asking for LOR for med school etc...
I just think very few people appreciate the work that goes into a PhD and how it is easily on par with an MD but they make a lot less money and get less respect, less prestige.
Click to expand...
It's not. They're two very different degrees, so there's no point in trying to rank one above the other.

Like asking if apples are better than oranges.
 
zeppelinpage4 said:
It's not. They're two very different degrees, so there's no point in trying to rank one above the other.

Like asking if apples are better than oranges.
Click to expand...

So things that are different cannot be compared? :laugh:

I can think of several very valid criteria for comparison as they pertain to the OP off the top of my head. For apples and oranges as well.
 
SpecterGT260 said:
So things that are different cannot be compared? :laugh:

I can think of several very valid criteria for comparison as they pertain to the OP off the top of my head. For apples and oranges as well.
Click to expand...
I never said that. I just stated that it's pointless to rank one above the other. 😉

If you have a legit explanation of whether or not applies > oranges or vice versa please go ahead and post it. Can the two be compared? Yes
Can one be placed above the other? Probably, but that's all personal opinion and I highly doubt that there is an objective way to actually say one is superior to the other.

Now replace apples with MD and oranges with PhD and this post is relevant.
 
zeppelinpage4 said:
I never said that. I just stated that it's pointless to rank one above the other. 😉

If you have a legit explanation of whether or not applies > oranges or vice versa please go ahead and post it. Can the two be compared? Yes
Can one be placed above the other? Probably, but that's all personal opinion and I highly doubt that there is an objective way to actually say one is superior to the other.

Now replace apples with MD and oranges with PhD and this post is relevant.
Click to expand...

There you go 😉
You guys act like that is somehow invalid just because it isnt completely objective. The fun part is that the conversation typically tries to assess PhD on MD terms. The OP is about prestige. PhDs typically only have prestige among their field. MDs have lay prestige. that is just kinda the way it is. Per the criteria set forth in the OP, MD>PhD :shrug:. The apples/oranges argument really doesn't apply when the criteria for comparison are defined at the get go 😉
 
SpecterGT260 said:
There you go 😉
You guys act like that is somehow invalid just because it isnt completely objective. The fun part is that the conversation typically tries to assess PhD on MD terms. The OP is about prestige. PhDs typically only have prestige among their field. MDs have lay prestige. that is just kinda the way it is. Per the criteria set forth in the OP, MD>PhD :shrug:. The apples/oranges argument really doesn't apply when the criteria for comparison are defined at the get go 😉
Click to expand...
Alright I'll agree on that point, the two can be compared, and in specific cases one is better than the other, as you said in the original post's case the MD>PhD, but overall, without knowing the specific situation, I would be reluctant to compare the two...far too many variables.🙂
 
The main difference between the PhD and MD career path is 1) when the selection occurs and 2) the difference in supply and demand.
 
Last edited:
Maybe because most people on this board are trying to get their MD and not their PhD so they act as if it is more prestigious.

Personally I think it is more difficult to obtain a PhD (for the most part) than to become an MD.

Mad respek to MD/PhD students.
 
Josh7 said:
Maybe because most people on this board are trying to get their MD and not their PhD so they act as if it is more prestigious.

Personally I think it is more difficult to obtain a PhD (for the most part) than to become an MD.

Mad respek to MD/PhD students.
Click to expand...

I value your obvious experience on the subject.
 
Josh7 said:
Maybe because most people on this board are trying to get their MD and not their PhD so they act as if it is more prestigious.

Personally I think it is more difficult to obtain a PhD (for the most part) than to become an MD.

Mad respek to MD/PhD students.
Click to expand...

Dude you have 0 experience on the subject ur premed. And if anything for the MD/PhD dual degree programs some consider that PhD to be watered down because they rush them through it and they don't get stuck in the lab for years like their pure PhD colleagues. They get their PhD in 3ish years.

And what do you know about difficulty to become an MD other than trying and possibly failing at getting into a program? Idc who tells you otherwise its not easy street once you start every year has been more and more difficult and time consuming.
 
It's a matter of supply and demand, money, and perception.

We have more PhDs than there are academic tenure track or high paying industry jobs.

The MDs have been smart enough to limit the number of medical schools, and there are the APA and lobbying.

And we never had much TV shows/narratives glamorizing sexy PhDs solving important scientific mysteries while getting involved romantically (or not) with the equally sexy fellow scientists.
 
doxycycline said:
Dude you have 0 experience on the subject ur premed. And if anything for the MD/PhD dual degree programs some consider that PhD to be watered down because they rush them through it and they don't get stuck in the lab for years like their pure PhD colleagues. They get their PhD in 3ish years.

And what do you know about difficulty to become an MD other than trying and possibly failing at getting into a program? Idc who tells you otherwise its not easy street once you start every year has been more and more difficult and time consuming.
Click to expand...

while true, most PhD students get their PhD after only about 3 years of research. The MSTP students are allowed to double dip their didactic courses in some cases and focus those 3 years strictly on research.

what people don't understand is that PhDs are largely variable. You can work your absolute ass off for the entire time you are there if you want. you can also not do that. You will still get that degree in the end. It may take a little while longer, but in general as long as you meet the requirements and fulfill your committee's expectations you will graduate. I am not saying you can kick back and hang out for 4 years at all. But there is a reason I don't get to go out for drinks with my grad school friends on weekdays.
 
Forgive me if someone has already brought this up-- I didn't take the time to fully read all the other comments. I think that MDs are perceived as being more prestigious because, to some degree, people need to see them that way. Doctors are responsible for taking care of patients, but more specifically, they're responsible for taking care of YOU and YOUR loved ones. It doesn't matter if some PhD slaving a lab far far away is completely incompetent, but if YOUR doctor is completely incompetent, you'd have a problem. Regardless of his/her actual degree of competence, people want to feel like their doctors are competent. And so they put doctors on pedestals. Because if they aren't amazing, intelligent, respectable people, how could they possibly be qualified to take care of you? And since you DO let them take care of you, they must be amazing, intelligent, respectable people. Call it confirmation bias if you'd like.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Is an August MCAT retake too late for MD?
Replies
8
Views
1K
Med Ed
Med Ed
dondeP
  • Question Question
Is MD still possible?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Obnoxious Dad
Obnoxious Dad
C
Is timing or English LOR more important?
Replies
2
Views
414
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
F
  • Question Question
Do you need more than 500 clinical experience hours?
Replies
3
Views
1K
LizzyM
LizzyM
A
Is this a nonclinical volunteering experience, or an academic/tutoring one?
Replies
2
Views
442
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
Top