"Why" MD/PhD

[Silverfalcon]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I'm just posting this to get some opinions as this is probably one of the questions that MD/PhD applicants have to answer. What I'm having the most trouble is not on explaining what I want to do or why I want to pursue the dual degree, but defending what MD/PhD does that just MD cannot do.

Can anyone fill this loophole for me? It seems like there's a consensus that you don't "need" to have PhD to do clinical research, and I'm sure interviewers are going to expect candidates to answer why someone would go through MD/PhD as opposed to just doing MD and becoming postdoctoral research fellows during/after residency. I just don't want to try to say something and realize that it's not accurate, and the only ones I know are true sound superficial (saves time and financially more stable)

 

[ravupadh]

Well I think there should be three parts to your answer:

1. MDs from what I know (correct me if I'm wrong) are only limited to clinical research and not laboratory research, because of the fact that NIH and other grants are so competitive to get that most people who get them have PhDs. So emphasize to the interviewer that you're not really interested in clinical research and feel the MD/PhD path is better for you. This takes care of just doing the MD alone part.

2. You should be able to emhpasize your love for laboratory science. You can do this by elaborating on research that you've done in the past. If your experiences were in areas such as molecular biology, genetics, etc. that's great. You can comment on how helpful the techniques and experiences (i.e. DNA sequencing, PCR, etc.) you've gained from such lab(s) will be helpful to your future career. If your research wasn't anything in the hard sciences (i.e. social sciences or epidemilogy), then make a statement on how the aspect of just being the laboratory itself will be helpful to you in the future, as well as any techinques you may have learned in such labs (i.e. writing papers, posters, etc.). Emphasizing the enjoyment you gained from such experiences in the ways I described above will justify your pursuit of a PhD.

3. Why not just do a postdoctoral fellowship after your MD? Well saving time is really a good answer here. I mean, don't say that, but tell the interviewer something along the lines of "Well at this point I'm set on conducting hard scientific research as well as devoting some time to treat patients, so I feel this streamlined option is really the optimum path for me right now." You are doing the MD/PhD to save time to do two things you really want, no?

 

[gstrub]

I'm just posting this to get some opinions as this is probably one of the questions that MD/PhD applicants have to answer. What I'm having the most trouble is not on explaining what I want to do or why I want to pursue the dual degree, but defending what MD/PhD does that just MD cannot do.

Can anyone fill this loophole for me? It seems like there's a consensus that you don't "need" to have PhD to do clinical research, and I'm sure interviewers are going to expect candidates to answer why someone would go through MD/PhD as opposed to just doing MD and becoming postdoctoral research fellows during/after residency. I just don't want to try to say something and realize that it's not accurate, and the only ones I know are true sound superficial (saves time and financially more stable)

Not to be cynical, but:
1. Use the search function, many threads exist on this topic
2. You should at least have a general idea if you are applying

If all else fails, say you're in it for the money.

 

[Neuronix]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=509177

 

[gstrub]

Or you could just have Neuronix go do your interview for you...

 

[Silverfalcon]

First, thank you ravupadh - that was really helpful. I appreciate it greatly.

Not to be cynical, but:
1. Use the search function, many threads exist on this topic
2. You should at least have a general idea if you are applying

If all else fails, say you're in it for the money.

No, what you say are fine, but I did search for this topic, and did not run into the one Neuronix found. I found threads like these:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=64591
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=143470
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=554620

So, I did read through other threads, but wanted to get additional commentaries, and now that I have gotten some, I really feel like it all comes down to just training of how one can switch back and forth between medicine and research (as opposed to just research for PhD and medicine for MD --> usually, this is of course a generalization) rather than physical differences.

Thank you all for the responses. 🙂

 

[PfNO22]

...I really feel like it all comes down to just training ... rather than physical differences.

I heard MD/PhDs were shorter on average

 

[soundnin]

First, thank you ravupadh - that was really helpful. I appreciate it greatly.

but his information was pretty misinformed

 

[Silverfalcon]

I heard MD/PhDs were shorter on average

Eh, folks take comments too literally. I haven't found AAMC statistics for height and BMI for MD/PhD yet so my bad for inaccurate statement.

but his information was pretty misinformed

Oh...

 

[peanut11]

Well I think there should be three parts to your answer:

1. MDs from what I know (correct me if I'm wrong) are only limited to clinical research and not laboratory research, because of the fact that NIH and other grants are so competitive to get that most people who get them have PhDs. So emphasize to the interviewer that you're not really interested in clinical research and feel the MD/PhD path is better for you. This takes care of just doing the MD alone part.

Plenty of MD's do lab-based research. Yes, NIH is competitive, but more PhD's get the $$ because more PhDs are in the pool.

I would advise against saying that you're not interested in clinical research because my follow up question would be why you want the MD then and not just a PhD.

You're response to the why question (which I always ask) should have something to do with translational research.