I finished medical school and a master course in spain. Now I intend to apply for a higher degree in cancer before doing haematology in spain.
As in the future I wish to observe patients does anyone knows who is the most appropriate - MD or a PhD in haematology?
What's the real difference between them?
Do we get medical training in any of these postgraduations in the UK?
Thanks in advance.

How about a Google search? This is ridiculous, Mann

Maybe it sounds ridiculous but it isn't easy to tell the difference. From what I saw, both are research based but can we observe patients? Do you know if we get some medical training during the course?
Maybe for you - man- it's easy when you were born in a country where words such as MD, PhD, MPhil, DPhil etc were explained to you by someone who offered you the book "Doctorate expressions explained for dummies"...Unfortunately it's sold out.

MD is reserved for qualified physicians although in effect it is the equivalent of a PhD. If you are not medically qualified the chances are you will only be able to gain entry onto a PhD program. There may be exceptions to this rule that I am unaware of however!

sorry, just re-read your post! As you are a doctor and appear to be interested in clinically orientated research i would imagine an MD would be best, although there would be nothing stopping you doing a PhD these might be more basic science orientated than what you are after

Jouri,
That's a little bit harsh. I take it you get out of the wrong side of bed that morning. I think its a fair question. I understand an MD is the medical equivilent of a PhD ( in the UK ) but what exactly is the difference I wonder. I am assuming its research carried out during clinical practice whereas a doctor would need to take time out to do a PhD.

wikipedia had an informative article on the subject matter.

MD is a professional doctorate, ie suitable for practitioners; whereas PhD can be obtained by nonexperienced academics. Both are research degrees as you would expect.

Soza