Hi, there...

I can't comment on the MD/PhD thing, because I am not doing that... I am considering adding an MPH to my medical school curriculum, however. Dual degree programs generally allow you to complete both degrees in an abbreviated time span, as opposed to taking both programs separately. That is the cool side of it. The tough side is that it is a longer haul. Depending on your undergraduate/graduate institution (I assume you are an undergrad, but your post doesn't say for certain), you may be able to find someone who will allow you to help out as a research assistant.

As far as your friend who told you not to take A&P because the med school wants to "teach it their way?" I say, most fervently and with much enthusiasm, HOOEY!!! A&P is A&P, the body doesn't change, the classwork does. That background could be helpful later!

Alas, I speak from some experience, here. I had a pre-medical advisor tell me much the same thing about both A&P and a microbiology course, and I regret having listened to him. He (a pretty nice fella, but a non-physician) posited that I would "get plenty of that" in medical school and I should focus on other things. I listened to him.

From where I sit now, I wish that I had 1) asked a medical student and/or physician for a second/third/fourth opinion, rather than just taking the word of a PhD, even one who is a "pre-med advisor"; and 2) taken the courses, even just as an audit. Heck, some advanced (graduate level) courses will even allow you to test out of that class in med school, and any freed up time is a bonus. Seriously. Even if they are undergraduate courses, however, you will have a level of familiarity with the material, which can only help when you have four @#$%()+! exams to study for in the same week. (Which WILL happen, and you WILL want that background. At least, that is my experience.)

If I were doing it again, I would take the A&P course -- in the interests of full-disclosure, however, I was a German major and I probably needed the exposure. That's just me. 😛

Good luck with your classes, no matter which one you choose!

Thank you, Thank you! That is exactly what I thought, how many ways can you teach A&P? I am sure having the background will be helpfull. I have the same problem with my advisor he is a Ph.D. and tries his best but I dont get much mentoring from him.

Cool. I would recommend talking with a couple of physicians about it, too, if you can. Younger ones, especially, since they have been there the most recently.

I got lucky as I was playing ice hockey with three physicians during my med school prep and application days -- one intern, one resident (and MD/PhD), and one practicing ophthalmologist. They gave me invaluable information, (some of which I didn't take, as you see in my post above!), but it helped a lot.

Whatever it is that you do, you can probably meet some people who have been there and will be able to help with information.

Good luck with everything!

I do have many physician friends but they are all shall we say seasoned, so they are used to different med-school standards. This has been a bit of a problem because they are great wealths of information from many different specialties but qualifications and expectations have changed so drastically that their advice for entering medical school is a little outdated. Anyway, thanks for the advice.

First, regarding course selection as an undergrad - I disagree with Corpsman-Up just a little as I'm of the philosophy that his advisor had - you get plenty of the basic science stuff in med school that I'd use the elective time you have as an undergrad to take things of interest that you won't get in med school. Now, I am a little biased based on the fact that my med school was completely pass/fail - meaning that my grades in the basic science classes didn't count for much, as long as I passed the classes. If I were getting grades, I would have wanted to be higher on the curve - and having the courses ahead of time would have helped. Additionally, if I had to choose between zoophysiology vs anatomy and physiology, I probably would select the anatomy and physiology class either way - I always had a very difficult time with anatomy and I'd rather be learning human anatomy as opposed to other animals' anatomy. So, even though I disagree a little, the suggestion is the same.

As for teaching it differently - it is in fact true that it can be taught differently, but I don't think that learning it one way will hurt you when exposed to it a different way - in fact, it will provide you with different perspectives and ways of remembering the information.

As for the MD/PhD route - I had interviewed and nearly started an MD/PhD program. One of the most enticing aspects of the MD/PhD programs is that they provide a huge amount of financial assistance. For example, the program I considered would have covered my tuition for the entire time, plus I would have received a stipend through the PhD phase of the training, and possibly I would have been eligible for funds for the past 2 clinical years. Ultimately, I decided against it because I felt I had an option to attend a much better med school, even though I'd have to pay. For me, I'm very glad I decided to do this for a variety of reasons.

First, I am very happy with where I went to medical school.

Second, I am glad I chose to not get the PhD. After around 3rd year, I realized I was happy that I'd be moving on to residency soon compared to friends that had taken the MD/PhD route and were still unsure how long it would be before they'd get to their third year. People who waited until after their PhD to complete their third year had a very difficult adjustment to the clinical work. Additionally, several had a difficult time with choosing residency programs - they wanted to spend their time in the lab churning out more papers as opposed to time on the wards. Ultimately, I think my friends are all very happy with the routes they took, but I think it was more challenging for them in spite of their amazing brilliance. For some people, though, that's the way to go. For me, I'm happy I chose a simpler route.

The MD/PhD route I think is good if you know you want to pursue research primarily. Most of the experience you get completing the PhD is going to be of limited value in a clinical practice. While it may potentially help get into a more competitive residency program, it is really overkill to complete it for that reason. However, if you are going to pursue a research career in medical sciences, having the MD + PhD will set you in a better position than someone without the MD. You'd be amazed at some of the ideas that the MD/PhD students got while on clinical rounds - they were able to make connections to the clinical work that were way above me. And I'm guessing would not have occurred to them if they had not had to do those clinical rotations. It truly gave them a unique perspective.

Third, as for the financial aspect of things - I justified this as basically being a wash in the grand scheme of things. The way I figured this was by factoring in that I could start clinical work 2-3 years earlier (which realistically could be 4 or even more years in some cases). In those 2-3 years, I would probably earn close to the amount that medical school would cost me. I don't know how good of a way this was to figure things, but given the other factors, I realized that I shouldn't base my decision on the financial factors. In spite of me saying that now, I think students do need to be well aware of the HUGE financial burden medical education can be - I clearly underestimated this when I was interviewing for medical schools.

So, if you are fairly certain you want to pursue a research career in the medical sciences, the MD/PhD route can be a good option, but a very challenging one.

Also, I do know of several MD/PhD students who went on to pursue careers in psychiatry - it winds up being a pretty good match as there are many different research opportunities in psychiatry.

I did research while in undergraduate college and medical school. I do recommend the experience. You can usually check with the department you are majoring in and see what the faculties research interests are. If there is some topic of interest to you, you can usually approach either your supervisor, or the faculty person directly to see if they have any suggestions for how you can help out on a project. Most faculty will be more than happy to find something for students to do. I can't recommend the experience enough.

My feeling is that med school involves an incredible narrowing of focus compared to college, and why rush ahead into the narrow when you have a wonderful opportunity to study and think about something other than what you will be thinking about for the next forty years. I'd take the zoophys, but if given a broader choice, I'd opt for history, humanities, art, etc.

On the MD/PhD: just to comment on how difficult it is to decide on a course of action that requires understanding what you are going to want 10, 20 or 30 years down the line.

but if given a broader choice, I'd opt for history, humanities, art, etc.

I definitely can agree with that!

Thanks for the advice everyone! I am well rounded in my degrees I have already completed a Psychology degree, and a Sociology minor so the arts and humanities are definatly taken care of. I have recently decided to go pre-med to pursue psychiatry so I am working on my Biology major and my Chemistry minor (its only one more class). I have a lot of research experience as well. I have collected data for, and collaborated on about 4 different research projects. My passion is the psychology part of my future career. To be blunt I would really like to be one of those amazing researchers in the field of psychiatry that really inspire people and make amazing breakthroughs. I truly believe that there are amazing revelations happening in psycholgy and we are closer than ever in concretely connecting biology and psychology in understanding of disorders and therapy. I just really want to be a part of that. Can you be a psychiatrist without the PhD and do research?

Certainly. I would think that the vast majority of psychiatrists doing research do not have PhD's.

Do you know of any psychiatrists that do research and practice?
How common is it to do research with a MD in Psychiatry?
When in my career would I have the opportunity to do research (besides in med-school)?
Will some medical schools offer me more research opportunities than others?

Also, I have a professor that is trying to talk me into doing a pre-clinical masters and then entering medical school. She feels as I do that I am not fufilled enough in psychology. Would this be an alternative to the MD/PhD while allowing me the opportunity to research and get more education in psychology? Or would it be a waste of time?

I know of psychiatrists doing research and maintaining a small clinical practice (about half-time each, from my understanding) -- they work for a large, New England university, in an affiliated research and treatment center. So, yeah, the opportunity is there, and this cannot be the only place offering such a set-up. I am sure that Dr. Polymath is right, and would also guess that most physician-researchers are probably NOT holders of both degrees.

In medical school, at least early on, your ability to do research might be a bit curtailed by the obscene amount of classwork you have. However, I have classmates who do research with our professors. Some of them have fewer classes to take because of prior academic work, some of them are just wicked brilliant bubbas, and some of them have no life outside of school.

Some medical schools will DEFINITELY offer more research opportunities than others, so it is good to make sure that you are an educated consumer in that regard! Also, some schools offer more research opportunities in some specific areas, and next-to-none in others. For example, at my school there are opportunities in pharmacology and diabetes and heart disease, but not much available in public health or preventive medicine.

I think that, unless there is a specific reason for you to want to add a master's degree to your premed resume, you will probably get plenty of excellent training in residency for whatever you want to do. That being said, I earned a master's degree before medical school, but it wasn't until grad school that I really figured out that I wanted to become a doc.

If you look at the articles in medical journals, there are plenty of researchers doing publishable work with just their medical degree. Sure, dual-degrees are cool, and they add letters to your nametag, (and, heck, in Germany they would actually call you Doctor-Doctor McGillicuddy, acknowledging both degrees), but it isn't an absolute requirement for the career path you have outlined. Remember that lots of psychiatrists don't have undergrad or graduate degrees in psychology at all... they went through med school, and then completed a residency in psychiatry. That seems to get the job done!

I would not try to talk someone out of a dual-degree program if that is what they want to do, but I would say that one should always be sure that they know all the angles first.

Finally, while Drs. Admin and Polymath disagreed with the reasons behind my idea of taking A&P before medical school, I do have to admit that I really-really-really enjoyed the classes I took instead of A&P... they were literature classes. (Maybe we didn't disagree that much after all!) 🙂