Would you go into medicine if academia was your only option?

[biogirl215]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just a question I've been toying with:
Would you go into medicine if you knew from the beginning that you could only go into research/acadmia and not practice clinically? Why or why not?

 

[PilSeungKorea]

Just a question I've been toying with:
Would you go into medicine if you knew from the beginning that you could only go into research/acadmia and not practice clinically? Why or why not?

y no options? y dont u just stick with PhD?

 

[Bacchus]

I would. For the sake of the profession, the interns and residents need to learn from an attending's POV. The first two years are nothing like real experience 😉 (or so I hear).

 

[gary yoghurt]

y no options? y dont u just stick with PhD?

Funding is easier with an accompanied MD, for obvious reasons.

<soapbox>Whatever, research is lame. Yeah, its cumulative effect may do something beneficial. But my God, the day to day work of research is the stuff of nightmares.</soapbox>

 

[GrumpyAlyson06]

no, i would not! I'm more of a people (specifically children) person!! 🙂

 

[PilSeungKorea]

I would. For the sake of the profession, the interns and residents need to learn from an attending's POV. The first two years are nothing like real experience 😉 (or so I hear).

Most attendings spend ~ 60% of their times clinically- seeing patients. The only field you do the academic stuff 100% is PhD. Go do PhD.

 

[Bacchus]

I'd want a healthy balance between the two. As academia I thought of being associated with a teaching hospital, not mandatory research.

 

[167649]

Most attendings spend ~ 60% of their times clinically- seeing patients. The only field you do the academic stuff 100% is PhD. Go do PhD.

Absolutely untrue, you need to do your homework before you post. And since when is a field "PhD."

The chair of the deparment I did research at for two years was an MD. Hadn't seen one patient since the 1960's. And one other faculty member was an MD who never did any clinical work at all. You can still do 100% basic science and teaching with an MD, and a lot end up choosing this.

 

[DeadCactus]

I may be mistaken, but I am pretty sure academia simply means you're working in an academic setting. It has no meaning as far as specifying what specifically you do in that setting. Research, administration, teaching, and clinical medicine are all part of academia...

 

[jochi1543]

No, in that case I'd rather become an NP.

 

[HumidBeing]

YES!!! Research/academia were my first, and remain my primary interests.

Biogirl, when you pose a question like this, it's only fair to share your own answer.

 

[biogirl215]

Well, my answer would be that the hypothetical applies to me--if I went in medicine, I would almost certainly be limited to teaching/research, as I would be unable to physically do most clinical work. Most med. students with physical disabilities seem to end up having to choose research/teaching for matters of sheer practicality. I wanted to see what others might do in the given situation without making it about me personally.

For those looking to go into research/teaching, why DID you chose MD (or MD/PhD) over a straight Phd. Easier funding? Better salaries? Stronger knowledge base (in your opinion)? Something else...?

 

[PilSeungKorea]

Well, my answer would be that the hypothetical applies to me--if I went in medicine, I would almost certainly be limited to teaching/research, as I would be unable to physically do most clinical work. Most med. students with physical disabilities seem to end up having to choose research/teaching for matters of sheer practicality. I wanted to see what others might do in the given situation without making it about me personally.

For those looking to go into research/teaching, why DID you chose MD (or MD/PhD) over a straight Phd. Easier funding? Better salaries? Stronger knowledge base (in your opinion)? Something else...?

Prestige and Honor. yay!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[HumidBeing]

For those looking to go into research/teaching, why DID you chose MD (or MD/PhD) over a straight Phd. Easier funding? Better salaries? Stronger knowledge base (in your opinion)? Something else...?

You could call my reason "stronger knowledge base," or broader knowledge base, or even more applicable knowledge base, because a medical school education is very appropriate for type of research I'm interested in. It's also because I believe it offers more flexibility. That's also important to me. I like having options.

It's not because I believe there is easier funding. I hadn't even heard that. Doesn't mean that it's not true, just that I haven't been exposed to that thought. The probability of a higher salary is playing little, if any, part in my current decision.

Actually, at this point, I can't even say that I've decided that one route or another is better for reaching my goals. I've intended, from the outset, to work toward research/academia. I'm still in the process of deciding which route is most appropriate for my own goals, interests, and abilities.

 

[biogirl215]

It's also because I believe it offers more flexibility. That's also important to me. I like having options.

Do you mean within research or in other areas?

(Great response, by the way!)

 

[UMP]

why not? stupid question... 😉

 

[Law2Doc]

Absolutely untrue, you need to do your homework before you post. And since when is a field "PhD."

The chair of the deparment I did research at for two years was an MD. Hadn't seen one patient since the 1960's. And one other faculty member was an MD who never did any clinical work at all. You can still do 100% basic science and teaching with an MD, and a lot end up choosing this.

Actually you are describing a small minority of MDs at academic teaching hospital settings. Most physicians at teaching hospitals are expected to do research on top of clinical practice, not instead. It would be rare for a department chair never to have practiced unless the department was a basic science, rather than a medical specialty department.

There are pure research jobs out there that MDs can obtain, but most would not term those an "academic medicine" job, any more than a PhD could be termed having an academic medicine job. You can use an MD to research just like you can use any other degree to research. But most of the clout and grant money comes from being/having been a practicing physician so if you know at the outset that you want to do research, a PhD is probably a surer path.

 

[Law2Doc]

Well, my answer would be that the hypothetical applies to me--if I went in medicine, I would almost certainly be limited to teaching/research, as I would be unable to physically do most clinical work. Most med. students with physical disabilities seem to end up having to choose research/teaching for matters of sheer practicality. I wanted to see what others might do in the given situation without making it about me personally.

For those looking to go into research/teaching, why DID you chose MD (or MD/PhD) over a straight Phd. Easier funding? Better salaries? Stronger knowledge base (in your opinion)? Something else...?

You may want to do a bit more research into the MD path. To become an MD, you will have two classroom basic science years in which you should have no problem, but then will have to make it through the two clinical years. Unless a school up front agrees to make accomodations, there would be an expectation that you can do any of the clinical work the school throws your way, which will include overnight call, holding surgical retractors and other tools still during multiple hour surgeries, rounding on patients with the team daily, chasing after residents as they rush from place to place, examining patients at uber early hours, and generally assisting the residents with their tasks. There isn't much a practicing clinician does physically that you wouldn't be asked to do as a med student in some form.

And as I mentioned above, most of the clout of an MD in terms of research grants, etc probably comes from being or having been a practicing and licensed physician, so most people who use their MDs to research have gone through some form of residency and become a licensed physician (the MD is not the license -- you get that in residency). Since residency is the absolute hardest few years of clinical tasks, this may be an obstacle for you, based on your above post. You may want to double check that the folks at the target job you seek actually have done so without a residency or licensure -- I suspect not, but who knows. If you know you want to exclusively do research, a PhD is probably the smarter path -- you won't be spending many years doing the clinical stuff you are trying to avoid. In terms of pay, I doubt an MD who exclusively researches and doesn't practice makes more, and for pure research it's hard to deny that a PhD's knowledge base will be better.

 

[neuro1617]

I thought clinical medicine is part of academia? If so and I could still practice clinically & teach residents/interns, then definitely. If it was only research, then no..definitely not..I'm going into medicine to treat people & if I couldn't diagnose them from labs, etc and work w/ them & help them, then I wouldn't be happy at all.

 

[jdh71]

Just a question I've been toying with:
Would you go into medicine if you knew from the beginning that you could only go into research/acadmia and not practice clinically? Why or why not?

Not a problem, and even a good idea for the guy who is interested in medically related research. The MD brings all of the ideas and concepts together in one place. This is unique to the MD/PhD as opposed to the PhD alone and allows the MD/PhD to research in many varied and interesting directions at once.

Can't speak for all specialties, but in Internal Medicine, there are normally 1-2 slots reserved for categorical research in your top school. I think remember seeing this at places like Vandy, UAB, UCSF, Mayo, Hopkins, B&W, Yale. These position are there for those interested in staying in research and academics only. You split your time between the lab and the ward, most programs are extended past 3 years obviously.

 

[biogirl215]

You may want to do a bit more research into the MD path. To become an MD, you will have two classroom basic science years in which you should have no problem, but then will have to make it through the two clinical years. Unless a school up front agrees to make accomodations, there would be an expectation that you can do any of the clinical work the school throws your way, which will include overnight call, holding surgical retractors and other tools still during multiple hour surgeries, rounding on patients with the team daily, chasing after residents as they rush from place to place, examining patients at uber early hours, and generally assisting the residents with their tasks. There isn't much a practicing clinician does physically that you wouldn't be asked to do as a med student in some form.

I know, and frankly don't know if med. school would be an option for me. However, upon researching the topic, it seems that med. SCHOOLS are much more willing to make accomodation than actual clinical jobs, which means that most disabled people that go to med. school usually end up in academia, doing little--or sometimes no--clinical work.

 

[AKN]

Would you go into medicine if you knew from the beginning that you could only go into research/acadmia and not practice clinically? Why or why not?

Not a chance. Why not? I'm an engineer. If I wanted to do research/academia, I could get there without 2 years of prereqs + 4 years of med school.

 

[armybound]

no, I'd not do it if I couldn't practice in the clinic.

 

[futuredrcrawfor]

no I love working with people and have wanted to be a doctor forever- if i had to teach I would go back to undergrad get the history degree that i couldn't get while taking so many med pre-reqs and then start traveling the world studying/teaching history!

 

[etf]

i'm actually really interested in research, particularly academic surgery. the only reason i didn't apply md/phd is because i def. don't have the numerical stats for it. i'm thinking i'll just apply for the non-funded version while i'm in med school.

 

[LikeClockWork]

If it were something like, I knew I would be physically handicapped as soon as I graduated med school I would still do it. I want to go to med school not only to be a clinical doctor, but also to have a command of the information that med school gives you. My second choice profession would be a teacher/professor, so it would a silver medal to be able to teach medicine.

 

[j-weezy]

In terms of pay, I doubt an MD who exclusively researches and doesn't practice makes more, and for pure research it's hard to deny that a PhD's knowledge base will be better.

This is true. A reason many MD researchers make more money than their PhD counterparts is because most of the time, the MD also sees patients and therefore gets a percentage (depending on how much time they spend seeing patients) of their salary paid by the 'hospital'. For MDs who switch over to full time research, all of their salary is now paid by the department and thus can depend heavily on grants, etc.

 

[MelnaisLacis]

not a snowball's chance in hell.😆

 

[biogirl215]

If it were something like, I knew I would be physically handicapped as soon as I graduated med school I would still do it. I want to go to med school not only to be a clinical doctor, but also to have a command of the information that med school gives you. My second choice profession would be a teacher/professor, so it would a silver medal to be able to teach medicine.

Interesting response. Do you intend to look into academic medicine (combining teaching/research/clinical work)?

😍your avatar by the way!