Which Specialty...

[hmmmm]

Which specialt-y(-ies) is accommodating to neurodegenrative disease research?

[thebouque]

Neurology or a Phd in neuroscience or neuropsychology (for the cognitive part of neurodegenerative diseases). The latter two aren't medical specialties.

[Satsuma]

I would also add

-physiatry

-geriatrics

-and potentially immunology (depending how you spin things, like say MS)

[bloh]

Add medical genetics to the list. But yeah, your best course of action is neurology.

[Lactic Folly]

Neuropathology

[hmmmm]

Very interesting, some specialties I have never heard of as well.

 

Neurology or a Phd in neuroscience or neuropsychology (for the cognitive part of neurodegenerative diseases). The latter two aren't medical specialties.

 

I am looking for medical specialty, as I already started my MD, and I definitely don't want to do a PhD after.

[A-Stark]

Med 1?

 

+1 on the "no PhD" plans.

[Doc2Law]

Med 1?

 

+1 on the "no PhD" plans.

 

Research with no Ph.D. ?

 

Have fun being the glorified coffee boy with an M.D...

[itimebomb2]

Perhaps developmental pediatrics, if you're interested in children specifically.

[itimebomb2]

Research with no Ph.D. ?

 

Have fun being the glorified coffee boy with an M.D...

 

In my limited experience, I happen to know a lot of MD medical researchers who don't have PhDs. Actually, through the process of doing research often you can easily get a Master's, or eventually even a PhD. I wouldn't worry too much about it - the PhDs NEED you to do their research. MD's rarely need PhDs.

[Doc2Law]

In my limited experience, I happen to know a lot of MD medical researchers who don't have PhDs. Actually, through the process of doing research often you can easily get a Master's, or eventually even a PhD. I wouldn't worry too much about it - the PhDs NEED you to do their research. MD's rarely need PhDs.

 

Ph.D.'s don't need MD's for research, they often look for some consultation.

 

Regarding research, let's say that a man who studied Neuroscience in 3 cycles and who wrote the mother of all essays (100,000 words avg) to earn a Diploma is far more credible that a Medical Doctor having a Masters and not 3rd cycle thesis.

[Satsuma]

PhDs definitely don`t need MDs to do their research...they have grad students for that!

 

MDs may have a harder time getting grants without a PhD (depending on the type of research they are wanting to do). However, you can often find a PhD to be a "co-researcher" with your for well...several years probably. After a while you may build up a good reputation and be able to secure grants on your own. But if you are seriously interested in research a PhD or an MSc is certainly worthwhile for the training and independence. And there is nothing easy about obtaining an Msc or PhD...it involves quite alot of work.

[Ubiquitine]

PhDs definitely don`t need MDs to do their research...they have grad students for that!

 

[...].

 

LOL you really made my day

[itimebomb2]

PhDs definitely don`t need MDs to do their research...they have grad students for that!

 

MDs may have a harder time getting grants without a PhD (depending on the type of research they are wanting to do). However, you can often find a PhD to be a "co-researcher" with your for well...several years probably. After a while you may build up a good reputation and be able to secure grants on your own. But if you are seriously interested in research a PhD or an MSc is certainly worthwhile for the training and independence. And there is nothing easy about obtaining an Msc or PhD...it involves quite alot of work.

 

Perhaps we were looking at the issue from different points of view-- im talking from a more bureaucratic perspective. What I meant by PhDs "needing" MDs is that when it comes to clinical research, an MD diagnosis is often necessary. For example, in the research I did on children with CP - CP cannot be diagnosed by a PhD - therefore everything from the methodology and clinical applicability of the research to the day to day recruitment of subjects requires an MD.

 

Clinical research is also highly political - not having an MD on the team makes it hard to get respect and recognition from the medical community. Not to mention for any type of interventional study, it makes it very difficult to recruit physicians.

 

Obviously MD training doesn't include the expertise that graduate programs include in the way of actually conducting or putting together studies. I'm not trying to undermine PhDs here. They play very different roles, and the point I was trying to make is that the PhD cannot replace the role and expertise of the MD in the clinical research environment.

[Biochemist1]

Research with no Ph.D. ?

 

Have fun being the glorified coffee boy with an M.D...

 

Between MD, MD-PhD or PhD, I think that if you're very bright, obtain funding and work hard, any of them can succeed in basic research... At the end, there are no BIG differences if you decide to get 100% involved in this kind of research ...

 

There are a lot of examples of MDs with no PhD who had a lot success in basic research, where extremely productive and even won nobel prizes...

 

Coming to my mind are big names like Robert Leftkowitz, Harold Varmus (nobel prize) , Solomon Snyder, Richard Axel (nobel prize) just to name a few... The list could go on and go on... Go call them glorified coffee boys Doc2Law.

 

If you are good, you are good.

[Doc2Law]

Between MD, MD-PhD or PhD, I think that if you're very bright, obtain funding and work hard, any of them can succeed in basic research... At the end, there are no BIG differences if you decide to get 100% involved in this kind of research ...

 

There are a lot of examples of MDs with no PhD who had a lot success in basic research, where extremely productive and even won nobel prizes...

 

Coming to my mind are big names like Robert Leftkowitz, Harold Varmus (nobel prize) , Solomon Snyder, Richard Axel (nobel prize) just to name a few... The list could go on and go on... Go call them glorified coffee boys Doc2Law.

 

If you are good, you are good.

 

The thing is, if you're REALLY into research, why get an M.D. and subject yourself to more problems than just doing a Ph.D. ?

 

I don't know if it's just me but if you think an M.D. will open research spots just as fast as Ph.D...then there's a real problem.

[Lactic Folly]

The thing is, if you're REALLY into research, why get an M.D. and subject yourself to more problems than just doing a Ph.D.?

The MD confers greater job security in case one's grant applications are not successful, tenure-track position not available, etc.

[AndrewB]

The thing is, if you're REALLY into research, why get an M.D. and subject yourself to more problems than just doing a Ph.D. ?

 

I don't know if it's just me but if you think an M.D. will open research spots just as fast as Ph.D...then there's a real problem.

 

You are a really ignorant anesthesiologist...and you write like a high school kid.

 

Kinda weird for a medical doctor/attorney/know-it-all.

 

Just sayin'

[thebouque]

Ph.D.'s don't need MD's for research, they often look for some consultation.

 

Regarding research, let's say that a man who studied Neuroscience in 3 cycles and who wrote the mother of all essays (100,000 words avg) to earn a Diploma is far more credible that a Medical Doctor having a Masters and not 3rd cycle thesis.

 

Publications count way more than the actual thesis. Way more.

And I wish Moo was here to talk about his experience. I trust this guy a lot.

[Doc2Law]

You are a really ignorant anesthesiologist...and you write like a high school kid.

 

Kinda weird for a medical doctor/attorney/know-it-all.

 

Just sayin'

 

Everyone is a "know-it-all" to easily offended Medical Students who think they really know what's it like to be a Physician when they didn't even experience an 80 hours work week even once.

 

Your writing is not this impressive as well...

 

"Just sayin'"

[AndrewB]

Everyone is a "know-it-all" to easily offended Medical Students who think they really know what's it like to be a Physician when they didn't even experience an 80 hours work week even once.

 

Your writing is not this impressive as well...

 

"Just sayin'"

 

Umm okay. I just find it hard to believe that an "anesthesiologist with 10 years experience" thinks that MD researchers are laughed at by the scientific community. That's ridiculous. I did research with both PhD and MD scientists - they are equally capable and degree doesn't mean much. However, MD scientists often have an advantage when it comes to formulating clinically based hypotheses because of what they observe in practice.

 

But since you've been working 80 hour weeks for 10 years, you would know. MDs must just get the coffee.

[Doc2Law]

Umm okay. I just find it hard to believe that an "anesthesiologist with 10 years experience" thinks that MD researchers are laughed at by the scientific community. That's ridiculous. I did research with both PhD and MD scientists - they are equally capable and degree doesn't mean much. However, MD scientists often have an advantage when it comes to formulating clinically based hypotheses because of what they observe in practice.

 

But since you've been working 80 hour weeks for 10 years, you would know. MDs must just get the coffee.

 

You do realize that what i said about "coffee boys" was just a expressive joke right ?

 

Heck...i thought you guys had a sense of humor...

[AndrewB]

You do realize that what i said about "coffee boys" was just a expressive joke right ?

 

Heck...i thought you guys had a sense of humor...

 

Alright, fair enough if it was a joke. But regarding your comment earlier about research opportunities not being as available to MDs, that is entirely false. Almost all specialty programs require original research and MD professors carry out clinical or basic research through their careers. As well, some MDs have an easier time obtaining grants because their research is clinically translatable and will change practice standards/guidelines. I guess I just find it strange you represent yourself as a specialist MD but make generalizations in many threads that lack any semblance of real experience.

[hmmmm]

Well, this thread has gone completely sideways .

 

I know for a fact that I want to do clinical medicine, and I also have a interest in research. SO just wanted to get some ideas on specialties which may allow for research into NEURODEGENRATIVE diseases. I know some specialties, namely neurosurgery, "require" MSc or PhD completion during postgraduate training. Although there are specialized programs provide clinicians with training in research post residency (there is one at U of T).

 

If you have any other idea please post .

[cheech10]

The question is: are you interested in basic science research (molecular mechanisms, genetics, etc.) or clinical research (does treatment A work better than the current standard)? These are very different fields.

 

For basic science research, a PhD is essentially required. Very few MDs will be able to get tenure at a University as well as lab space and grad student funding to conduct basic science research unless they also have a PhD.

 

On the other hand, clinical research is performed much more commonly by MDs. The resources required to get started are typically funding (from grants or drug companies) and research nurses, both of which are much easier to obtain than lab space for MDs. Many MDs that do clinical work have no other degrees, although it's becoming much more common (and in some cases required) for them to pursue a Masters or PhD in Clinical Epidemiology to help with study design and conduct.

 

There is also educational research available, which looks into things like simulation or other course/seminar design. A Masters of Education is often pursued by those interested in this field.