Why not research? MD

[crazytech]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

"Why not research? If you like science, why dont you do research?" For all those who have interviewed, what are appropriate responses to interviewers who are PhDers and are in the lab 24/7? This question has to be met with a certain charm and pizazz but cant be 'BS'ed. The fact that I want an MD and havent done research puts me in a tough position to answer this question. Besides the trad responses of research (excluding the sect of clinical research), "researchers dont deal with people as much as a clinical physician would" or "research doesnt provide as much instant gratification as treating patients", what are some "WOW responses" that are out there? Ciao

 

[chef_NU]

no incentives... i'm sure they would love to hear that one

 

[Law2Doc]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

"Why not research? If you like science, why dont you do research?" For all those who have interviewed, what are appropriate responses to interviewers who are PhDers and are in the lab 24/7? This question has to be met with a certain charm and pizazz but cant be 'BS'ed. The fact that I want an MD and havent done research puts me in a tough position to answer this question. Besides the trad responses of research (excluding the sect of clinical research), "researchers dont deal with people as much as a clinical physician would" or "research doesnt provide as much instant gratification as treating patients", what are some "WOW responses" that are out there? Ciao

Allergic to rats? 🙂

 

[LJDHC05]

If you say you like science but haven't done research, you're shooting yourself in the foot from the get-go. Bottom line is that you're not going to be asked that question unless you're a science major or have significant research experience. Plus the hard core lab rats don't do interviews...it would take away from their grant writing time.

Best answer I have is to say that the MD always keeps the door open for a research fellowship down the road (for lab work). You will inevitably have to publish if you want that department chair, though it will more likely be a clinical trial. You can't really escape research in medicine.

 

[Bluntman]

As you can imagine, this comes up in MSTP interviews a lot. Here is one of the reasons I give when I get asked "Why not just a PhD?" or "If you had to pick either the MD or PhD, which would it be?":

I'd pick the MD because it gives you the potential to have the best of both worlds. After all, an MD can always still do research, but a PhD can never treat patients.

Simple yet practical! 👍

 

[crazytech]

If you say you like science but haven't done research, you're shooting yourself in the foot from the get-go. Bottom line is that you're not going to be asked that question unless you're a science major or have significant research experience.

Best answer I have is to say that the MD always keeps the door open for a research fellowship down the road, because you will inevitably have to publish or perish if you want that department chair.

I am science major...but that doesnt mean i have an interest in research...I'd bet my life that there plenty of physicians who like science and the complexity of the human body who have no interest research..thanks for the responses 🙂

 

[arroser]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

"Why not research? If you like science, why dont you do research?" For all those who have interviewed, what are appropriate responses to interviewers who are PhDers and are in the lab 24/7? This question has to be met with a certain charm and pizazz but cant be 'BS'ed. The fact that I want an MD and havent done research puts me in a tough position to answer this question. Besides the trad responses of research (excluding the sect of clinical research), "researchers dont deal with people as much as a clinical physician would" or "research doesnt provide as much instant gratification as treating patients", what are some "WOW responses" that are out there? Ciao

My dad is a PhD at a medical school who does interviews of prospective medical students and he does ask this question. I would steer clear of the bolded answer, and especially its cousin "I want to work with people" as his response is always along the lines of "Who do you think is working in the lab with you?!"

BTW, I have no good answer to this question. If you haven't done research, how do you know you don't want to? 'Cause there's your answer.

 

[LJDHC05]

My point is that if you make a big deal about your love of science, it will get brought up in an interview. If you avoid it all together, you wont have the problem. If physicians didnt like science, we'd still be blood letting and trying to balance the humors.

 

[mjc48]

during this application cycle i actually applied to a mix of md only, mstp and phd only programs and have gotten just about every variation of this question you could imagine. my answer has been, in the md only situation:

academic research, especially in the basic science setting, is too abstract. working with model systems does not guarantee usable knowledge in the clinical setting, which is one of the goals i set for my career.

 

[Captain Fantastic]

Yeah, if you have zero experience in research it will be difficult to answer that question, but I'd go with something like while you recognize the importance of research and the advancement of clinical science, your personal interests fall in the application of medicine versus the processes of discovery. And then go into what it is that draws you to medicine.

It seems like the same question as "Why medicine?" just with a different spin on it. I think the interviewer wants to know that you have explored medicine and other careers so that you have a good understanding of why medicine is the career for you. If you truely love science surely you would have checked into what PhDs do before deciding on an MD, so you should be able to come up with an answer pretty easily.

 

[jbrice1639]

"with my limited time, i chose to concentrate on my volunteer work. while i would have had an interest in also doing some research, my schedule and obligations did not permit it."

 

[snobored18]

As you can imagine, this comes up in MSTP interviews a lot. Here is one of the reasons I give when I get asked "Why not just a PhD?" or "If you had to pick either the MD or PhD, which would it be?":

I'd pick the MD because it gives you the potential to have the best of both worlds. After all, an MD can always still do research, but a PhD can never treat patients.

Simple yet practical! 👍

This is probably the best answer you can find...if you hate research and actually have done some real research (not doing technical junk) you could be honest and say its just not for me...but i think the safe answer is above, you want the MD because you love science and want to work with PEOPLE.

 

[omgwtfbbq?]

I agree. I had an extensive research background in undergrad - 3 years in the lab, a summer fellowship in arizona, a summer fellowship at mayo, and i only applied MD

i was asked, why no research, and i honestly said the kind of research i was interesting involving myself in was mainly clinical and patient-related research.... sleep research, clinical trials, etc. and that I could better persue my goals with an MD. Also, it was my goal in undergrad to understand the science of what i am going to be doing, and although i love the science and always will, i would rather apply that knowledge to patients and work in a clinical setting, rather then work in the lab working to further the knowledge. as an md i'll get to do a little of both. its a matter of taste, which side of the lab door you'd rather be on. someone has to be on both sides, so as long as you're honest with your answer it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[gujuDoc]

This is probably the best answer you can find...if you hate research and actually have done some real research (not doing technical junk) you could be honest and say its just not for me...but i think the safe answer is above, you want the MD because you love science and want to work with PEOPLE.

I like Bluntman's response. I'd also say that some other things to take into consideration is that the job outlook for researchers is not as secuare as with an MD. If you are an MD or MD/PhD there is a better chance of job security, whereas if you have a PhD, the job outlook is harder. I've heard from some phd's that once you get your PhD, it isn't always easy to get an industry job. Some people will be going from one postdoc to another for several years before finding a truly stable job place to which they can use their talents and skills.

As an MD, however, the job outlook is greater and the chances of finding a stable job while looking into both research and clinical practice are greater. Also, with an MD you can branch out to much greater avenues then a PhD because you can be involved in both basic science research or clinical research, whereas a basic scientist only has the options of bench work.

I don't know that this is how I'd state it in an interview, but these are some things to think about.

 

[DrBowtie]

I like Bluntman's response. I'd also say that some other things to take into consideration is that the job outlook for researchers is not as secuare as with an MD. If you are an MD or MD/PhD there is a better chance of job security, whereas if you have a PhD, the job outlook is harder. I've heard from some phd's that once you get your PhD, it isn't always easy to get an industry job. Some people will be going from one postdoc to another for several years before finding a truly stable job place to which they can use their talents and skills.

As an MD, however, the job outlook is greater and the chances of finding a stable job while looking into both research and clinical practice are greater. Also, with an MD you can branch out to much greater avenues then a PhD because you can be involved in both basic science research or clinical research, whereas a basic scientist only has the options of bench work.

I don't know that this is how I'd state it in an interview, but these are some things to think about.

Guju...You should know that sometimes the practical answer is the wrong answer.

 

[Med Addict]

Some people will be going from one postdoc to another for several years

So true. Most PhD students in my lab have a mean stay time of 7 years! Dang, MDs can finish up with the residencies by then. Then if you jump from post doc to post doc, you could have specialized in surgery by then.

before finding a truly stable job place to which they can use their talents and skills.

There no such thing as a truly stable job in research unless its tenured professorship, imo. Parents are researches and they constantly worry about job security, ie. Merck, this enormous biotech, supposidly with great security laid off all their employees in San Diego in recent years. Analogous with Pfizer.

 

[Sanctuary]

As one who is doing research at a medical school, I am told that the reason applicants SHOULD do research is to learn how the whole process works, since it is a VITAL aspect of medicine. Most everything you are taught in medical school and pre-med for that matter, comes from research. By you doing research, it shows the committee that you have a WORKING understanding of how scientific research works, and that throughout your life, as you read hundreds and hundreds of new medical research findings, you'll be able to scrutinize the work much better; even question or challenge the findings.

 

[nibrocli]

definitely a tricky question. you don't want to say anything bad about the research path, since you are talking to a researcher. i like the idea about saying that MD would let you go either way.

also, you could say something about how your personal strengths point more toward the MD route.

 

[jebus]

you do understand that being a researcher and a physician are totally different jobs, right?
I mean, why not constitutional lawyer or assistant crack *****? (you'll be a full fledged crack ho when you're damn ready, bitch! You have to earn this sh¡t! You think you can just walk in here strutting around like miss thang and expect to just suck some dicks to get money to buy some rocks? F•ck you! I should cut you, bitch! Better recognize!)
Also, any professor with multiple students who spend 7 years in school is derelict in their duties. I offer a hearty cluck of my tongue and a forceful wag of the finger to register my displeasure.

 

[crazytech]

you do understand that being a researcher and a physician are totally different jobs, right?
I mean, why not constitutional lawyer or assistant crack *****? (you'll be a full fledged crack ho when you're damn ready, bitch! You have to earn this sh¡t! You think you can just walk in here strutting around like miss thang and expect to just suck some dicks to get money to buy some rocks? F•ck you! I should cut you, bitch! Better recognize!)
Also, any professor with multiple students who spend 7 years in school is derelict in their duties. I offer a hearty cluck of my tongue and a forceful wag of the finger to register my displeasure.

Thanks for throwing off the thread with a smartass comment...i guess you wanna be a physician so you try for even more attention...

 

[OctoDoc]

Just tell them the truth, but be tactful and diplomatic. For me, it was two-fold. I wanted to be hands-on, the one doing the research instead of writing grants and reports and dealing with the red tape of running a research group. I also wanted to practice medicine in a clinical setting. Being a clinician allowed me the freedom to see patients and still perform research. The compromise is that while I could still perform research, it would be within someone else's (e.g., an MD-PhD's) research program. I wouldn't have the time to have a program of my own. Considering that I no longer wanted to deal with the disconnection of running my own research program, that was fine with me.

Whatever you do, if you are interviewing with a research professor, do not denegrate the research position!

 

[Conqueror]

I was in your same boat earlier this year; I was applying to schools and had ZERO lab research experience. I knew I might be asked about it, so I had a knockout answer ready:

Interviewer: So I notice your BCMP GPA is a little low, and you've done no research..."
Me: Well, my view on the subject is that if I had spent an extra hour studying for a biology test, or practicing chemistry reactions, or poring over a petri dish in a lab, I might have gotten better grades or some practical experience, and it may have made a difference. But instead, I spent that extra hour serving dinner at the Rescue Mission, or building a wheelchair ramp for a disabled person, or planting a tree at the park, and I know I made a difference.

CQ

 

[OctoDoc]

I was in your same boat earlier this year; I was applying to schools and had ZERO lab research experience. I knew I might be asked about it, so I had a knockout answer ready:

Interviewer: So I notice your BCMP GPA is a little low, and you've done no research..."
Me: Well, my view on the subject is that if I had spent an extra hour studying for a biology test, or practicing chemistry reactions, or poring over a petri dish in a lab, I might have gotten better grades or some practical experience, and it may have made a difference. But instead, I spent that extra hour serving dinner at the Rescue Mission, or building a wheelchair ramp for a disabled person, or planting a tree at the park, and I know I made a difference.

CQ

Were you actually asked about it, and you gave that answer? I would think that your answer is dangerous, considering one could argue that you had enough time to devote to study or research (if all you needed was an hour or two) and to still volunteer.

 

[baseball34]

Has anyone on the forum without research experience been asked specifically at an interview why they hadn't done any? Also I could do public health research next fall or continue my failing quest to find a lab to work in. I'd rather do the public health research (more sociological than epidemiological type) but it seems from these forums and anecdotal evidence at my school that scientific research is a real important part of an application. I know, I know, do what I want to do not something just for med school but if its that important I wouldn't enjoy public health research that much more than lab stuff. Thoughts?

 

[crazy_cavalier]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

"Why not research? If you like science, why dont you do research?" For all those who have interviewed, what are appropriate responses to interviewers who are PhDers and are in the lab 24/7? This question has to be met with a certain charm and pizazz but cant be 'BS'ed. The fact that I want an MD and havent done research puts me in a tough position to answer this question. Besides the trad responses of research (excluding the sect of clinical research), "researchers dont deal with people as much as a clinical physician would" or "research doesnt provide as much instant gratification as treating patients", what are some "WOW responses" that are out there? Ciao

The only WOW response to this question is the following. Well, first, you need to appear to be thinking, as though you were constructing this response yourself instead of stealing it from someone on SDN, so just stay quiet for about half a minute or so and have a thoughtful look on your face. It's helpful to think about what your choices will be at lunch time; some sort of thought like that will give your face that "making a hard decision" look.

Then, in a very mature way, say:

"Well, you raise a good point. Yeah, I can see myself going into research. I can see myself going into many different fields, really; that's what's so troublesome! I love interacting with people and facing challenging problems, and everything from law and business to science and research could offer the sort of problems and team interactions that I seek. I guess, with medicine, I just feel there is a lot of potential for me to pursue many different options. For example, with an MD, I can do research if I choose to; but I could also be active in other fields, such as the development of biomedical technologies, or I could be involved with forensics and the justice system. I feel a career in medicine offers the sort of flexibility that would let me do any of these things. But, to answer your question, yes I do believe going into research as a scientist is a career I could also enjoy."

Etc. etc. Any variation on the answer I gave above in which you agree that other careers could be well-suited for you are acceptable. A response that insists medicine is the only thing is certain failure.


My final advice: Just don't come off as a typical premed whose life ambition is to go to a top U.S. MD school.

 

[crazytech]

anyone else?

 

[OctoDoc]

But, to answer your question, yes I do believe going into research as a scientist is a career I could also enjoy."

Etc. etc. Any variation on the answer I gave above in which you agree that other careers could be well-suited for you are acceptable. A response that insists medicine is the only thing is certain failure.

But you didn't answer the question! The question was, "Why not research? If you like science, why dont you do research?"

Saying (your words): "But, to answer your question, yes I do believe going into research as a scientist is a career I could also enjoy."

Etc. etc. Any variation on the answer I gave above in which you agree that other careers could be well-suited for you are acceptable. A response that insists medicine is the only thing is certain failure."

doesn't answer the question of why medicine and not research.

 

[gujuDoc]

Guju...You should know that sometimes the practical answer is the wrong answer.

Yeah that's why I don't know how I'd answer it in an interview. I guess I'd go with the standard best of both worlds answer, and expand upon that. But in reality, the other things that were listed in my post are up there too. 😛 😉

 

[crazy_cavalier]

But you didn't answer the question! The question was, "Why not research? If you like science, why dont you do research?"

doesn't answer the question of why medicine and not research.

I suggest you re-read my post and you will see the answer is there in plain sight.

"Well, you raise a good point. Yeah, I can see myself going into research. I can see myself going into many different fields, really; that's what's so troublesome! I love interacting with people and facing challenging problems, and everything from law and business to science and research could offer the sort of problems and team interactions that I seek. I guess, with medicine, I just feel there is a lot of potential for me to pursue many different options. For example, with an MD, I can do research if I choose to; but I could also be active in other fields, such as the development of biomedical technologies, or I could be involved with forensics and the justice system. I feel a career in medicine offers the sort of flexibility that would let me do any of these things. But, to answer your question, yes I do believe going into research as a scientist is a career I could also enjoy."

 

[OctoDoc]

I suggest you re-read my post and you will see the answer is there in plain sight.

Your very next sentence was:

"But, to answer your question, yes I do believe going into research as a scientist is a career I could also enjoy."

That doesn't answer the question. Furthermore, a Ph.D. doesn't lock one only into research. Those other fields you mentioned are also open to the Ph.D.

 

[crazy_cavalier]

Your very next sentence was:

"But, to answer your question, yes I do believe going into research as a scientist is a career I could also enjoy."

That doesn't answer the question. Furthermore, a Ph.D. doesn't lock one only into research. Those other fields you mentioned are also open to the Ph.D.

Whatever, dude. Obviously you have your own idea of what a good response would be, and I have mine.

I'm not sure you pick up on the point of what I'm trying to illustrate: that point being, if you insist that you MUST be a doctor, and that it's the ONLY thing for you, you wind up looking like a douche. A good response manages to show that you would be capable of another career, but that your talents are even better suited to medicine.

My interpretation of the OP's supposed "interviewer question" scenario is that the interviewer is asking, "Well, don't you think you could enjoy working as a science researcher?" The answer to this may or may not be yes, but that depends on what an honest response from you would be. This is why I end with "yeah, I could enjoy a career in that field as well." But guess what? I've already illustrated why medicine would be a better-suited career path.

QED.

 

[novawildcat]

Let's be honest here-hardly anyone wants to do research as an MD because researchers don't make the big $$$$$, that is unless of course your research leads to a cure for cancer or another new invention like the MRI.

 

[OctoDoc]

Whatever, dude. Obviously you have your own idea of what a good response would be, and I have mine.

I'm not sure you pick up on the point of what I'm trying to illustrate: that point being, if you insist that you MUST be a doctor, and that it's the ONLY thing for you, you wind up looking like a douche. A good response manages to show that you would be capable of another career, but that your talents are even better suited to medicine.

My interpretation of the OP's supposed "interviewer question" scenario is that the interviewer is asking, "Well, don't you think you could enjoy working as a science researcher?" The answer to this may or may not be yes, but that depends on what an honest response from you would be. This is why I end with "yeah, I could enjoy a career in that field as well." But guess what? I've already illustrated why medicine would be a better-suited career path.

QED.

I see your point. However, complimenting an interviewer's profession as a matter of course may come across as pandering. And that won't escape the attention of the interviewer. If what you say is honest, that is one thing. It will come across as sincere. But if you don't truly believe it (and I'm not accusing you of anything)....

That's my point.

 

[crazy_cavalier]

That doesn't answer the question. Furthermore, a Ph.D. doesn't lock one only into research. Those other fields you mentioned are also open to the Ph.D.

Okay sorry I didn't formulate an exhaustive list of examples. I forgot how anal premeds are. Just mention how much you really care about clinical stuff.


Why do I even leave the Lounge?

 

[OctoDoc]

Okay sorry I didn't formulate an exhaustive list of examples. I forgot how anal premeds are. Just mention how much you really care about clinical stuff.


Why do I even leave the Lounge?

I'm not anal. You're defensive.

 

[jebus]

I'm not anal. You're defensive.

how's this: you both suck.

 

[OctoDoc]

how's this: you both suck.

Be nice to the crackheads.

 

[jebus]

i only do what ghostface tells me to. it's thursday night and i come home from the gym to see you arguing for no good reason. f•ck that. i'm going out.

 

[Bluntman]

Ehhh, this thread was so nice when I left San Diego a couple hours ago to drive to LA. What happened?! 😕

 

[omgwtfbbq?]

ooooooooh, i admire your moxy, but thats a dangerous answer... they could see that turning into

well, I could have read up on how to properly perform this surgery in case i had the chance to save a life and make a difference, but instead, I gave a crying kid a lollipop during my walk home and i KNOW i made a difference .... um.... wait... what is that loud beep and flat line on the monitor?

just kidding with you 🙂 But seriously, that could so be taken the wrong way

doesn't everyone know by now that at an interview EVERY ANSWER IS THE WRONG ANSWER