Hi I was just wondering if anyone could tell me the difference between an MD and PhD? Im currently in the second year of my PhD and Im finding it really hard work. Recently we have had a student who is in the first year of medical school working in our lab and they are really annoying me. They keep saying that they are going to do an intercalated PhD and complete in less than two years as "it can't be that difficult as long as you work hard" (he's incredibly arrogant). I don't understand how you can complete (write up, submit and viva) a PhD in just two years (unless you are very lucky or very brilliant), does he mean he is doing the MD? At my uni you can do MD, MPhil or PhD, but MD and MPhil take the same amount of time (2 years full time) therefore I assumed that the MD was not as good as the PhD. Can anyone shed some light on this, please?

Thanks

Just wrote a long reply and it was deleted......

There is someone in my dept doing a intercalated PhD (which is when you go to your undergrad degree, then do a PhD and then go back and finish medical school...in effect you end up with PhD and MD) but she had to do a MSc first...as far as I am concerned a PhD and MD are equal... it think if anyone thinks that they can complete a PhD in two years they're mad.

I think it depends on what subject you do, I know some PhDs are very time consuming i.e. lots of data collection, others are just linking existing data together with theories, so can only take 2 years of even less.

My University won't let you submit until a minimum of 2.5 years, so to do it in 2 years would be impossible where I am. Also, even if you're just linking existing data to theories, I still think 2 years would be unacheivable. It takes you ages to get up to speed in an area (even if you've worked in it previously, but at a lower level) and then something is bound to go wrong, whether your lab experiment blows up or somebody publishes a book on your obscure area of late medieval history in Cornwall. Then the write up, for me at least is taking ages.

So yep, he is a twit :p

I was under the impression that an MD was like a 'PhD lite' that enabled clinicans to gain a decent amount of research experience without taking so long out of their clinical work. Thus, it ticks a similar box, career wise, to a PhD, but won't contain quite as much research, as it's only two years not three. So it's not really equivalent, but it is 'enough'. I do know some clinicians who've done conventional PhDs rather than MDs, and it takes them the same 3-4 years as it would anyone else.

======= Date Modified 03 Sep 2008 10:39:47 =======
============= Edited by a Moderator =============
======= Date Modified 02 Sep 2008 20:13:12 =======
======= Date Modified 02 Sep 2008 20:05:12 =======
Actually this true. Select medical students can do a "fast track" PhD that lasts 2 years in between their medical school curriculum. This follows on from their 4-5 month BMedSci degree, so roughly 2 1/2 years to PhD. These students compete for these places, so not all Tom, Dick amd Harrys can do this program.

Admittedly some "medics" can be t***s.
Not all of us are though! ;-)