Hello all. Long time reader, first time poster here. Im humbly asking for advice from anybody who is willing to give it. Im a pre-med, almost done with pre-reqs and taking the MCAT soon. It's getting close to time for me to start getting my application affairs in order. I really CANNOT decide whether or not to go for MD/PhD or just the MD. I know Im still in undergrad, but this decision, unlike medical specialty decision, really is right around the corner. Here are my thoughts on the matter so far:
I really do want a research career, but I also want patient care. I have seen the 80/20 research/clinic figure floating around here, and I can say I definitely don't want that. I would like to keep it as close to 50/50 as possible.
If an MD can do fulfilling, innovative, effective research (both clinical and basic science), then I would prefer to just do the MD. I will start med school at age 26 (nontraditional), and seeing myself start my career in my early 40's is really hard. I would much prefer to keep it to mid to late 30's (I am neurobiology major right now and have participated in several research projects and would definitely like to do neurosurgery. If I did a PhD I would hope to study neuroscience or cancer biology and do work on neuro-oncology, etc. or maybe even spine/paralysis.)
So, any thoughts? A really big concern I have is whether or not there is a prejudice against MD only's doing research in academic medicine. Any comment on this? I just can't help but thinking it would be easier to become the editor-in-chief of a major neurosurgery journal with a PhD tacked on to the end of my name. But then again, I am totally ignorant. Also, comments on the future of NIH funding and such, and how that will affect MD's vs MD/PhD's? Again, I am really looking for a way to satisfy my research interests with an MD only, as that will lessen the length of schooling.
Sorry for the long post and THANKS SO MUCH.
I really do want a research career, but I also want patient care. I have seen the 80/20 research/clinic figure floating around here, and I can say I definitely don't want that. I would like to keep it as close to 50/50 as possible.
If an MD can do fulfilling, innovative, effective research (both clinical and basic science), then I would prefer to just do the MD. I will start med school at age 26 (nontraditional), and seeing myself start my career in my early 40's is really hard. I would much prefer to keep it to mid to late 30's (I am neurobiology major right now and have participated in several research projects and would definitely like to do neurosurgery. If I did a PhD I would hope to study neuroscience or cancer biology and do work on neuro-oncology, etc. or maybe even spine/paralysis.)
So, any thoughts? A really big concern I have is whether or not there is a prejudice against MD only's doing research in academic medicine. Any comment on this? I just can't help but thinking it would be easier to become the editor-in-chief of a major neurosurgery journal with a PhD tacked on to the end of my name. But then again, I am totally ignorant. Also, comments on the future of NIH funding and such, and how that will affect MD's vs MD/PhD's? Again, I am really looking for a way to satisfy my research interests with an MD only, as that will lessen the length of schooling.
Sorry for the long post and THANKS SO MUCH.