Why research if I want to be a doctor?

[Deleted member 737595]

I'm 3 months deep into a research internship and am discovering that I do not enjoy scientific medical research so much that I would pursue it solely. In other words, it looks like I will lean towards the clinical/surgical side of things. This is good that I am discovering it now but I am worried about what this may mean bigger picture.

The reason I am drawn to the profession of physician is because of the caring and diagnosing of individual patient disease and difficulties. I value the interaction with other people, the hospital setting, and overall the actual healing that takes place in medicine vs the indirect impact of drug development or basic research.

I know that many top schools (all?) value a passion for research, but why? Why do the schools that are the most prestigious pride themselves on research when they are training physicians, not scientists? Should/Can I aim for top schools if my passion lies not in research but in the classical model of treating patients in the clinical setting?

Its a weird question, but bear with me. I'm trying to figure out if the whole pursuit of 'top schools' is really worth it, or if I should relax a little.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I know that many top schools (all?) value a passion for research, but why?

Because that is their mission. They exist to produce physician-scientists. They want to create the leaders of medicine, the physicians that will push the field into its next phase.

Why do the schools that are the most prestigious pride themselves on research when they are training physicians, not scientists?

They ARE training scientists.

Should/Can I aim for top schools if my passion lies not in research but in the classical model of treating patients in the clinical setting?

You will learn that there is a difference in going to the “best” school and the school that is best for you. Each school has a mission. Every USMD school will provide you with the necessary tools to get into the field you want. Top schools will turn you into a clinician just as well as anyone else, but they also expect a certain level of academic output. If you don’t want to do research then I wouldn’t focus too much on the schools that emphasize research.

Its a weird question, but bear with me. I'm trying to figure out if the whole pursuit of 'top schools' is really worth it, or if I should relax a little.

Everyone here should relax a little.

 

[Cyphix]

It sounds like you have a narrow view of what "research" is. Research doesn't have to be pipetting and running gels/PCRs. There is a whole world of clinical research that is conducted with a more direct context of clinical care (e.g. does antibiotic X vs. Y help patients recover from pneumonia faster; measuring complication rates for surgery A vs. B; etc.). So, it may be true that you don't have any interest in research at all. It's also possible that you haven't been exposed to a type of research you enjoy yet.

As for the top schools - being a physician and a scientist is not mutually exclusive. There is a reason why the top hospitals are all *academic* hospitals. The synergy between clinical care, research, and teaching is what makes these places thrive. If you want to attend one of these schools, there is something to be said about having at least enough research to "get your foot in the door." After that, interests diverge widely - some students who graduate from these schools plan on having purely clinical careers and are not interested in research, some want to do 80% research and 20% clinical work, and there's everything in between.

 

[Deleted member 737595]

It sounds like you have a narrow view of what "research" is. Research doesn't have to be pipetting and running gels/PCRs. There is a whole world of clinical research that is conducted with a more direct context of clinical care (e.g. does antibiotic X vs. Y help patients recover from pneumonia faster; measuring complication rates for surgery A vs. B; etc.). So, it may be true that you don't have any interest in research at all. It's also possible that you haven't been exposed to a type of research you enjoy yet.

As for the top schools - being a physician and a scientist is not mutually exclusive. There is a reason why the top hospitals are all *academic* hospitals. The synergy between clinical care, research, and teaching is what makes these places thrive. If you want to attend one of these schools, there is something to be said about having at least enough research to "get your foot in the door." After that, interests diverge widely - some students who graduate from these schools plan on having purely clinical careers and are not interested in research, some want to do 80% research and 20% clinical work, and there's everything in between.

I think you are right on the money. My research is exactly pipetting and running gels/PCRs, then analyzing data to see what targets work well and can go on the next phase. I really do not know if I would enjoy clinical research but if it had to do with the field I practiced in, I imagine it would be more meaningful to me.

So, the idea of trying out different treatment options and seeing which is more effective, or finding the best procedure for a surgery through collection of data and analyzing that seems like it would pique my interest more.

 

[maplecookie]

I also feel that being involved in research makes you more be more critically evaluative of data/information that is presented to you. For example, you're a doctor presented with a new promising drug with data to support its effectiveness. But before you make a recommendation to your patients, you should evaluate yourself the quality of that drug and its data-how well was the study conducted and the endpoints reached, is the data presented a way that might be skewed a certain way, etc. etc. If you've been in research, you yourself went through the decisions to create and present data and probably know a little better of what questions to ask than someone who's never been involved.

 

[RinShanKaiHo]

You need to understand SCIENCE, how new discovery is made, and how to deliver it to your patients to provide the best care to them.

This simply is no longer the era where you can sit on the knowledge you learned 30 yrs ago in school. You need to constantly learn how your colleagues are creating in lab if you are not creating anything.

As mentioned by other posters, the point of research is to learn the essence of it, not just pipetting.

If you are not intellectual enough to understand and appreciate the importance of science in modern medicine, you will become a terrible doctor.

 

[ChymeofPassion]

You need to understand SCIENCE, how new discovery is made, and how to deliver it to your patients to provide the best care to them.

This simply is no longer the era where you can sit on the knowledge you learned 30 yrs ago in school. You need to constantly learn how your colleagues are creating in lab if you are not creating anything.

As mentioned by other posters, the point of research is to learn the essence of it, not just pipetting.

If you are not intellectual enough to understand and appreciate the importance of science in modern medicine, you will become a terrible doctor.

I am so smart • r/iamsosmart

 

[Brawndo2016]

Research smeesearch....never did it, never will. Hope I don't kill people left and right from lack of intellectualism.

 

[deleted919448]

I'm 3 months deep into a research internship and am discovering that I do not enjoy scientific medical research so much that I would pursue it solely. In other words, it looks like I will lean towards the clinical/surgical side of things. This is good that I am discovering it now but I am worried about what this may mean bigger picture.

The reason I am drawn to the profession of physician is because of the caring and diagnosing of individual patient disease and difficulties. I value the interaction with other people, the hospital setting, and overall the actual healing that takes place in medicine vs the indirect impact of drug development or basic research.

I know that many top schools (all?) value a passion for research, but why? Why do the schools that are the most prestigious pride themselves on research when they are training physicians, not scientists? Should/Can I aim for top schools if my passion lies not in research but in the classical model of treating patients in the clinical setting?

Its a weird question, but bear with me. I'm trying to figure out if the whole pursuit of 'top schools' is really worth it, or if I should relax a little.

Why do schools like volunteering? Why do they like all the other stuuf? Its because schools want these "well rounded students", when in reality they are just creating students who get accumulate a bunch of hours and don't care. Are we making better physicians by requiring research, volunteering, etc., no we are not. Its just one of those things you have to do to get in. If you don't like it, plug your noose and pretend you enjoyed it but that it wasn't for you.

 

[Deleted member 737595]

Why do schools like volunteering? Why do they like all the other stuuf? Its because schools want these "well rounded students", when in reality they are just creating students who get accumulate a bunch of hours and don't care. Are we making better physicians by requiring research, volunteering, etc., no we are not. Its just one of those things you have to do to get in. If you don't like it, plug your noose and pretend you enjoyed it but that it wasn't for you.

Exactly. Though I do think at least some shadowing or volunteering can be important... every other EC is bogus.

 

[Deleted member 737595]

I am so smart • r/iamsosmart

Oh, I appreciate the vast body of medical literature out there. I just am not extremely keen on creating the next ibuprofen through extensive research into the matter.

Its like a car mechanic. He appreciates the engineering that went into making the car; I doubt he could actually make his own cars at the same level.

 

[Goro]

The wise DrMidlife on research: “you've preferably had some exposure to research so you can be convinced that Wakefield used malicious dirtbag methods and is not the savior of the world's children.”

The wise Crayola227 on research: So tired about the whining over the foundation of knowledge that is expected in a physician. We're applied scientists ffs. Own that. If you can't own it and take pride in it, gtfo.

As long as you're learning something about the scientific method, then it doesn't matter if you're doing something like studying clams off of Newfoundland.

 

[ChymeofPassion]

Oh, I appreciate the vast body of medical literature out there. I just am not extremely keen on creating the next ibuprofen through extensive research into the matter.

Its like a car mechanic. He appreciates the engineering that went into making the car; I doubt he could actually make his own cars at the same level.

Was not critiquing your concerns, see what I bolded in my quote.

 

[DubbiDoctor]

The reason I am drawn to the profession of physician is because of the caring and diagnosing of individual patient disease and difficulties. I value the interaction with other people, the hospital setting, and overall the actual healing that takes place in medicine vs the indirect impact of drug development or basic research.

So why not become a physician assistant? They care for and diagnose "individual patient disease and difficulties" and "value the interaction with other people, the hospital setting, and overall the actual healing that takes place in medicine". Physicians are expected to be the experts in their field. Do you not believe that gaining research experience will help you understand the latest research in your specialty and adjust your practice accordingly? Asking genuinely, would you rather see a physician who has been extensively involved in important projects related to his or her specialty or one that has never stepped foot in a research lab or been involved in a project?

 

[getdown]

So why not become a physician assistant? They care for and diagnose "individual patient disease and difficulties" and "value the interaction with other people, the hospital setting, and overall the actual healing that takes place in medicine". Physicians are expected to be the experts in their field. Do you not believe that gaining research experience will help you understand the latest research in your speciality and adjust your practice accordingly? Asking genuinely, would you rather see a physician who has been extensively involved in important projects related to his or her speciality or one that had stepped foot in a research lab or been involved in a project?

Most physicians outside of academic centers are neither actively involved in important projects related to his or her specialty nor has stepped foot in any research lab since med school at the latest. Furthermore, a majority of patients are seen in the community by non-academic physicians. So, I'm not sure what you're trying to imply here. As long as you at least keeping up with the literature and know what's new that should be sufficient. Being actively involved in research doesn't make you better than the next doc who's not when it actually comes to clinical skills.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

If you are not intellectual enough to understand and appreciate the importance of science in modern medicine, you will become a terrible doctor.

If you can’t talk down to people who don’t like research, you’ll never make it as a doctor.

 

[FroYoOreo]

I happened to edit one MD’s CV for a grant application a few days ago and he has 0 research experience. Not even experience from undergrad or med school (but he graduated a decade ago so things might be different now). My boss is his supervisor so I asked why was he hired in a research institute. My boss said that since everybody in the university is doing research and not 100% clinical (most MDs are not even 80% clinical if you take administration time into consideration) they need to hire someone who can see lots of patients. Everybody got to choose what they want to do right. Even after med school and residency, when you are negotiating your contract as a practicing MD, you can choose how much or how little research you want to do.

 

[Jdp00921]

You need to understand SCIENCE, how new discovery is made, and how to deliver it to your patients to provide the best care to them.

This simply is no longer the era where you can sit on the knowledge you learned 30 yrs ago in school. You need to constantly learn how your colleagues are creating in lab if you are not creating anything.

As mentioned by other posters, the point of research is to learn the essence of it, not just pipetting.

If you are not intellectual enough to understand and appreciate the importance of science in modern medicine, you will become a terrible doctor.

The OP never said he's clueless as to what's going on in his lab or that he didn't understand the underlying purpose of research. He simply stated he didn't enjoy performing bench research and is concerned this may hinder his chances of attending a top school.

You entire post missed the point of his post and is way over the top. I completed bench research during undergrad and while I didn't hate it, I will very likely never pursue that type of research during/after medical school. This will 100% not make me destined to be "a terrible doctor." Get a life.

 

[Deleted member 737595]

The OP never said he's clueless as to what's going on in his lab or that he didn't understand the underlying purpose of research. He simply stated he didn't enjoy performing bench research and is concerned this may hinder his chances of attending a top school.

You entire post missed the point of his post and is way over the top. I completed bench research during undergrad and while I didn't hate it, I will very likely never pursue that type of research during/after medical school. This will 100% not make me destined to be "a terrible doctor." Get a life.

Thanks brotha, that was heartfelt.

Exactly right. I have only done bench research up to this point, and like you, I don't HATE it. It just isn't something I can see myself doing for a living unless medical school went down the toilet. I would like to get into clinical research to see what's up.

It may also be that I am a sophomore in college and am not really conducting my own research projects but am helping someone else with theirs.

 

[Microbug]

How do you expect medicine to advance and move forward without research? As a physician, shouldn’t you also keep up with current research to better serve your patients? How can you judge the quality of research published if you have not been trained properly in how to do science? How do you judge the quality of information that you receive that may do wonders or harm for your patients?

 

[Brawndo2016]

There is a world of difference between conducting research and being able to evaluate the validity of a study. Step 3 is littered with statistics geared to this very thing. Having performed research in undergrad does no more to prepare a person for this than just understanding the how the data was gathered. That is how us non-research guys evaluate literature. Come to find out, that's also how the research guys evaluate literature as well. Funny how that works.

 

[Apothecary Aquinas]

I am so smart • r/iamsosmart

You forgot also - Gatekeeping • r/gatekeeping

 

[LavarBall]

If you are not intellectual enough to understand and appreciate the importance of science in modern medicine, you will become a terrible doctor.

If you’re arrogant to the point where you consider yourself more intellectual than OP because you like research and he/she doesn’t, you will become a terrible doctor.

 

[LiveCynic]

"I know that many top schools (all?) value a passion for research, but why? "

Because research brings in money. It brings in the Grant money that is used to pay and buy and self-promote how great the research is at your school to get more grant money.

 

[Dwan]

The "top" schools you are referring to are top per the research rankings. If you don't like research, no need to go to those.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

How do you expect medicine to advance and move forward without research? As a physician, shouldn’t you also keep up with current research to better serve your patients? How can you judge the quality of research published if you have not been trained properly in how to do science? How do you judge the quality of information that you receive that may do wonders or harm for your patients?

Did you not read the whole thread before responding?

 

[Microbug]

Did you not read the whole thread before responding?

Nope, just read OP

 

[Lucca]

Science is an important part of medicine, but medicine is a massive machine with a lot of moving parts and everyone has to find the right niche for them. It just so happens that the rankings which more or less determine who gets to call themselves a 'top school' are based largely on the research capacity of the medical school and its adjacent university.

Dont want to do research? Don't have to do it!

 

[RinShanKaiHo]

The OP never said he's clueless as to what's going on in his lab or that he didn't understand the underlying purpose of research. He simply stated he didn't enjoy performing bench research and is concerned this may hinder his chances of attending a top school.

You entire post missed the point of his post and is way over the top. I completed bench research during undergrad and while I didn't hate it, I will very likely never pursue that type of research during/after medical school. This will 100% not make me destined to be "a terrible doctor." Get a life.

Three months into research internship and didn't like it. The thing to do is not to conclude "research is not my thing, I want to go to top school but I don't want to do research"

The problem with op is to disregard the importance of science in medicine, and question why top schools value research experience. To OP it seems that research is not important for someone to become a good doctor.

If you don't like bench research but enjoyed clinical or translational, good for you. The important thing is to understand the principles of science in medicine and don't prescribe your patients outdated treatments like bloodletting. The hatred towards science and anti-intellectuality will damage a person's pursuit in medicine. It's OK to not become a physician who spend a portion of there time producing research, but it is a huge red flag, to probably most PDs, if you say you hate research.

In the end, I probably have a much happier and richer life than you in almost anyway. You should go get a life during the time when other students and resident docs are doing research.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

 

[RinShanKaiHo]

If you’re arrogant to the point where you consider yourself more intellectual than OP because you like research and he/she doesn’t, you will become a terrible doctor.

Don't see any logic behind your statement.
I like research and I like clinical work. I work hard and will only have a more well rounded application to a residency program and beyond.

I didn't say I am more intellectual than OP. What I meant was, people should treat research project with intellectualism and not blindly or prematurely reach a simple and naive conclusion, "research is not my thing."

If you don't enjoy your current research role, why not think critically about why, before posting online complaining about top med schools' love of research?

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

 

[RinShanKaiHo]

Thanks brotha, that was heartfelt.

Exactly right. I have only done bench research up to this point, and like you, I don't HATE it. It just isn't something I can see myself doing for a living unless medical school went down the toilet. I would like to get into clinical research to see what's up.

It may also be that I am a sophomore in college and am not really conducting my own research projects but am helping someone else with theirs.

I am not bashing your post. I am newly accepted to a med school so I am drawing from my experience which is not too much longer than yours.

I just hope you don't reach a conclusion about research too easily. I am glad you are open to doing more clinical research. Please take this thread as an intellectual debate, about the role of research experience and what you should try to gain from it.

Don't give up. Critical thinking is more important, yet easier to conduct, than the actual work in lab.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Phile98]

Gonna agree with @RinShanKaiHo here. Don't know why some of y'all are mocking him. Research demonstrates your ability to forge the future. If I was a top 20 school, I'd want leaders, not sheep.

 

[Deleted member 737595]

I am not bashing your post. I am newly accepted to a med school so I am drawing from my experience which is not too much longer than yours.

I just hope you don't reach a conclusion about research too easily. I am glad you are open to doing more clinical research. Please take this thread as an intellectual debate, about the role of research experience and what you should try to gain from it.

Don't give up. Critical thinking is more important, yet easier to conduct, than the actual work in lab.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

I see what you are talking about; the fact is when I posted I was feeling crappy about research since I don't get to do much yet. But now I'm realizing that actually engaging in projects I care about and have control over or know about is very satisfying. When I do someone else's work on the bench, that's what gets very boring which makes sense.

Anyways, yes, I would like to learn more about clinical research for sure. And thanks for the encouragement. Too often its easy to be close-minded and pigeon-hole oneself into what they think they are (I'm a research guy, I'm a service guy et cetera), but the reality is everything can be enjoyed on this good earth if effort is put in.

I'm probably sounding delirious, must be the benadryl

 

[Deleted member 737595]

Gonna agree with @RinShanKaiHo here. Don't know why some of y'all are mocking him. Research demonstrates your ability to forge the future. If I was a top 20 school, I'd want leaders, not sheep.

Darn right... sometimes its hard to step back and look at the bigger picture and realize how awesome it is to actually create new knowledge through observation, hypothesis, the scientific method.

 

[Jdp00921]

Three months into research internship and didn't like it. The thing to do is not to conclude "research is not my thing, I want to go to top school but I don't want to do research"

The problem with op is to disregard the importance of science in medicine, and question why top schools value research experience. To OP it seems that research is not important for someone to become a good doctor.

If you don't like bench research but enjoyed clinical or translational, good for you. The important thing is to understand the principles of science in medicine and don't prescribe your patients outdated treatments like bloodletting. The hatred towards science and anti-intellectuality will damage a person's pursuit in medicine. It's OK to not become a physician who spend a portion of there time producing research, but it is a huge red flag, to probably most PDs, if you say you hate research.

In the end, I probably have a much happier and richer life than you in almost anyway. You should go get a life during the time when other students and resident docs are doing research.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

Because of the ridiculousness of your post.... I feel the need to actually respond again, despite the fact that it is likely a waste of my time.

My issue with your first response to the OP was the fact that you are being way over-the-top... stating any doctor who is disinterested in research is a poor doctor. This is just blatantly false. I find it impossible to believe that there are not physicians out there that are making an extremely big difference through mostly (if not only) their clinical skills. Are you implying that the surgeon who focuses entirely on performing surgery, despite wonderfully positive outcomes, is a "poor physician" because he isn't performing research? That is just asinine. Again, I think you really need to get a life.

Now my issue with the quoted response... again... your blatant disregard for what is actually being said AND your extremist views. Firstly, you keep saying the OP is "disregarding science in medicine." That is a stupid statement in and of itself. Patient diagnosis is science, surgery is science, clinical medicine is science.... saying that disliking research is a "disregard of science in medicine" literally makes no sense and makes you sound stupid. Next, your ridiculous example of bloodletting..... Are you claiming that if I (or any physician for that matter) did not physically do the research in a lab, I (or they) would likely still be practicing bloodletting in 2018? That's absurd. No one here is claiming that keeping up with modern research isn't necessary. You are making it seem like that's the case. You do not need to literally perform the research itself in order to benefit from it - that's why we have journals. And to that end, since we're on the topic, I don't know about anyone else but my Epidemiology class has taught me a lot more about understanding what I'm reading in a research article than my undergraduate bench research. While undergrad research helped me to understand the process behind writing an article, I could most certainly understand what I'm reading without having ever done it. Thirdly.... "the hatred towards science and anti-intellectuality will damage a person's pursuit in medicine." This ridiculous statement isn't even worthy of any analysis... to claim a student is "anti-intellectual and hates science" because they simply alluded to not enjoying a research project? Seriously, again, get a life.

Lastly, if the fact that you plan on performing research throughout your practice will make you "happier and richer," more power to you.

For the record, I never (nor the OP) ever said he wasn't going to participate in some type of research. OP simply stated he wasn't enjoying his current research project and in the future, he would not "pursue research solely." You blew this entire thread out of proportion... and now I'm realizing I'm probably a little bit dumber for wasting my time responding. Both the OP and myself will almost 100% pursue some type of research, likely something that will make a difference in some way/shape/form.

I wish you luck in your godly pursuit of research.... I only hope all of the mere mortals who wish to focus more on clinical medicine will find a way to get by.... I guess they could always drive for uber, worst-case.

 

[RinShanKaiHo]

Because of the ridiculousness of your post.... I feel the need to actually respond again, despite the fact that it is likely a waste of my time.

My issue with your first response to the OP was the fact that you are being way over-the-top... stating any doctor who is disinterested in research is a poor doctor. This is just blatantly false. I find it impossible to believe that there are not physicians out there that are making an extremely big difference through mostly (if not only) their clinical skills. Are you implying that the surgeon who focuses entirely on performing surgery, despite wonderfully positive outcomes, is a "poor physician" because he isn't performing research? That is just asinine. Again, I think you really need to get a life.

Now my issue with the quoted response... again... your blatant disregard for what is actually being said AND your extremist views. Firstly, you keep saying the OP is "disregarding science in medicine." That is a stupid statement in and of itself. Patient diagnosis is science, surgery is science, clinical medicine is science.... saying that disliking research is a "disregard of science in medicine" literally makes no sense and makes you sound stupid. Next, your ridiculous example of bloodletting..... Are you claiming that if I (or any physician for that matter) did not physically do the research in a lab, I (or they) would likely still be practicing bloodletting in 2018? That's absurd. No one here is claiming that keeping up with modern research isn't necessary. You are making it seem like that's the case. You do not need to literally perform the research itself in order to benefit from it - that's why we have journals. And to that end, since we're on the topic, I don't know about anyone else but my Epidemiology class has taught me a lot more about understanding what I'm reading in a research article than my undergraduate bench research. While undergrad research helped me to understand the process behind writing an article, I could most certainly understand what I'm reading without having ever done it. Thirdly.... "the hatred towards science and anti-intellectuality will damage a person's pursuit in medicine." This ridiculous statement isn't even worthy of any analysis... to claim a student is "anti-intellectual and hates science" because they simply alluded to not enjoying a research project? Seriously, again, get a life.

Lastly, if the fact that you plan on performing research throughout your practice will make you "happier and richer," more power to you.

For the record, I never (nor the OP) ever said he wasn't going to participate in some type of research. OP simply stated he wasn't enjoying his current research project and in the future, he would not "pursue research solely." You blew this entire thread out of proportion... and now I'm realizing I'm probably a little bit dumber for wasting my time responding. Both the OP and myself will almost 100% pursue some type of research, likely something that will make a difference in some way/shape/form.

I wish you luck in your godly pursuit of research.... I only hope all of the mere mortals who wish to focus more on clinical medicine will find a way to get by.... I guess I could always drive for uber, worst-case.

You are just being illogical and almost none of your attacks against my statements make sense. Not going to waste more time arguing with you.

I have a wonderful life. Hope you do too. Thank you. Go away.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Jdp00921]

You are just being illogical and almost none of your attacks against my statements make sense. Not going to waste more time arguing with you.

I have a wonderful life. Hope you do too. Thank you. Go away.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk

Says the one who literally began the "attacks............"

 

[DocAdams]

Docs need to lay off the research. The ER wait times are getting out of hand.

 

[chemphysicsinstructor]

Because of the ridiculousness of your post.... I feel the need to actually respond again, despite the fact that it is likely a waste of my time.

My issue with your first response to the OP was the fact that you are being way over-the-top... stating any doctor who is disinterested in research is a poor doctor. This is just blatantly false. I find it impossible to believe that there are not physicians out there that are making an extremely big difference through mostly (if not only) their clinical skills. Are you implying that the surgeon who focuses entirely on performing surgery, despite wonderfully positive outcomes, is a "poor physician" because he isn't performing research? That is just asinine. Again, I think you really need to get a life.

Now my issue with the quoted response... again... your blatant disregard for what is actually being said AND your extremist views. Firstly, you keep saying the OP is "disregarding science in medicine." That is a stupid statement in and of itself. Patient diagnosis is science, surgery is science, clinical medicine is science.... saying that disliking research is a "disregard of science in medicine" literally makes no sense and makes you sound stupid. Next, your ridiculous example of bloodletting..... Are you claiming that if I (or any physician for that matter) did not physically do the research in a lab, I (or they) would likely still be practicing bloodletting in 2018? That's absurd. No one here is claiming that keeping up with modern research isn't necessary. You are making it seem like that's the case. You do not need to literally perform the research itself in order to benefit from it - that's why we have journals. And to that end, since we're on the topic, I don't know about anyone else but my Epidemiology class has taught me a lot more about understanding what I'm reading in a research article than my undergraduate bench research. While undergrad research helped me to understand the process behind writing an article, I could most certainly understand what I'm reading without having ever done it. Thirdly.... "the hatred towards science and anti-intellectuality will damage a person's pursuit in medicine." This ridiculous statement isn't even worthy of any analysis... to claim a student is "anti-intellectual and hates science" because they simply alluded to not enjoying a research project? Seriously, again, get a life.

Lastly, if the fact that you plan on performing research throughout your practice will make you "happier and richer," more power to you.

For the record, I never (nor the OP) ever said he wasn't going to participate in some type of research. OP simply stated he wasn't enjoying his current research project and in the future, he would not "pursue research solely." You blew this entire thread out of proportion... and now I'm realizing I'm probably a little bit dumber for wasting my time responding. Both the OP and myself will almost 100% pursue some type of research, likely something that will make a difference in some way/shape/form.

I wish you luck in your godly pursuit of research.... I only hope all of the mere mortals who wish to focus more on clinical medicine will find a way to get by.... I guess they could always drive for uber, worst-case.

Here is my opinion on research: If you like it, then good for you. I wish you the best if you pursue a research intensive career. In advising students, I tell them that doing research is beneficial since it helps them understand how to tackle a problem using the scientific method (including proper experimental controls and data analysis). Doing research teaches perseverance, planning, and patience. It also provides them an opportunity to delve into the medical literature. Teamwork and presentation skills are also learned. These are the things that one wants to mention on applications or in an interview.

 

[Jdp00921]

Here is my opinion on research: If you like it, then good for you. I wish you the best if you pursue a research intensive career. In advising students, I tell them that doing research is beneficial since it helps them understand how to tackle a problem using the scientific method (including proper experimental controls and data analysis). Doing research teaches perseverance, planning, and patience. It also provides them an opportunity to delve into the medical literature. Teamwork and presentation skills are also learned. These are the things that one wants to mention on applications or in an interview.

I complete agree! I simply responded to this tread because I found it a little extreme to claim physicians who favor clinic over research are destined to fail at their profession.