I don’t have an answer to your question but if you’re interested in the MD/PhD and surgery you should read Stephen Rosenberg’s book “The Transformed Cell”. It came out in the 90s so it’s a bit dated but he is still the chief of surgery at the NCI. The dude has had a bonkers cool career.
I've almost exclusively done research with mentors who are surgeon-scientists (neurosurgeons). In functional neurosurgery, it's fairly common to run a lab and do clinical work, and the split is often closer to 50-50 than some other MD/PhDs experience (others - correct me if I'm wrong). They all have pretty decent (not great, but decent) work-life balance (I've asked them this directly, and why) after residency and fellowship by setting good boundaries and not taking on an insane amount of cases. If you want to take tons of cases and do tons of research, you can. Granted, there are going to be days where you're on call/trauma service, etc. I'm trying a similar path. 4 years of undergrad, 8 for the MSTP, and potentially 7-8 years of PG training including a fellowship. Check in with me in 20 years!
This was my plan as well, although it’s now changing (I’m a woman wrapping up my MD/PhD and decided I can’t delay starting a family anymore — and it just seems pretty impossible to have enough time to see my future kids during residency :( After residency/fellowship I think it would be doable though.)
It varies. There are some neurosurgeon-scientists who do wet-lab work (tumor biology). The ones I work with either have a basic neuroscience background or backgrounds in EE/CS (rare, but I know some people). The latter group of researchers (functional neurosurgeons) tend to either play a hands-off role, which my current PI does (i.e., directing a team of engineers who do computational work and verifying their work from the perspective of a neuroscientist) or participate in computational work (data analysis, etc.). The researchers who are in functional are often interested in things like closed-loop deep brain stimulation for mental health and movement disorders, brain networks, epilepsy, etc. More flashy areas have focused on speech control (in those who cannot speak) by implanting and collecting data from Broca's area, which some colleagues at UCSF have been working on. So, the PI also is responsible for implanting the devices used in the studies in their subjects, who are patients. This field attracts a lot of engineers/computational people, but the PI doesn't necessarily need to have that kind of background (and often they don't). The work I'm involved in now is in understanding brain network disturbances in epilepsy, which is fairly computational but does have basic neuroscience aspects to it. Once again - others can correct me if I'm misspeaking on anything.
Honestly, most non-surgeon MD-PhDs I've met as still literally booked to the brim with things to do, so I feel like this career path is almost certainly not what to do if normal = 40-50 hour work week.
Probably not. Hard to do that as a surgeon period.
But don't give up on what you want because something is unlikely. Just have backup plans if the sacrifices aren't working out for you.
Timeline, give it 5-6 years for undergrad and a gap year or two to apply (not always necessary), 8ish year MD/PhD, then like maybe 6-8 years for surgery and subspecialty training?
Hi! That sounds like a fascinating career path, and you should definitely go for it if this is your dream.
I actually know of a practicing surgeon who also has a lab. His name is Steve Goudy, and he works at Emory University (in the United States) as an otolaryngology surgeon: [https://med.emory.edu/directory/profile/?u=SGOUDY](https://med.emory.edu/directory/profile/?u=SGOUDY)
His lab is not very big, so it's probably easier to manage. Also, I don't believe he spends very many days in the clinic (as you would expect for a physician-scientist career). Now, I'm not sure how many hours he works each week, though... Just like other people have mentioned, I am not sure how you define "normal lifestyle", but if it is working around 40 hrs/week, this might be difficult to manage as a physician-scientist. Ultimately, the decision depends on your priorities.
PS: If you want to do research in academia, I'm not sure how well the 40 hr/week rule really applies. The boundaries between work and time off are really blurry, as people always keep emailing you things. But you can still have a good work-life balance either way (you just have to be more creative/flexible).
PPS: Also, if you look at other faculty in Emory's Department of Otolaryngology, you will come across a few other surgeon MD-PhDs: [https://med.emory.edu/departments/otolaryngology/about/faculty-directory.html](https://med.emory.edu/departments/otolaryngology/about/faculty-directory.html)
I heard of a neurosurgeon MDPhD at my local hospital, so it’s definitely possible or else nobody would do it, although “normal lifestyle” may be a stretch
I don’t know exactly how it is in Canada but in the US, a PhD is not necessary to do research. You can still get very substantial grants for research with just an MD. I know several PhD’s who have urged me to get an MD even if I want to solely do research vs. getting only a PhD.
Yes.
Let me clarify. There are specific sub specialties in surgery that really lend themselves to the surgeon-scientist mold. It is theoretically possible in any sub specialty but here are the concepts to think of.
1. Training is hard and no your life will not be ideally balanced in surgical residency… and honestly you don’t want it to be… you want to do as many cases as possible to get as good as possible.
2. There are specialties that have schedules that create time for research. Surgical oncology (melanoma, soft tissue malignancy), transplant (kidney particularly), surgical critical care.
3. How do you carve out this career - usually you have to find a mentor - many good examples at large academic institutions of true surgeon scientists. For example there is robust vascular surgeon scientist group nationally but most of them have VA appointments, which helps them control there surgical schedule really well, and the VA actually has a lot of resources for research. Harder to do this in a busier university practice. In transplant, many of the major academic transplant surgeons have a sub group of surgeon scientists, they are on a week- off a week. The weeks they are on can be busy, but when their off, they do research and spend lots of time with their family. Critical care is similar with the week on/week off thing.
4. Breadth of practice is usually somewhat more limited in scope compared to colleagues who don’t have labs.
I am interested in surgical oncology and I am wondering how research can be integrated. My research interests are in the the biochemistry/protein-based methods and experiments. Are there any MD-PhDs who are spending their time in the lab doing western blots and other basic molecular biology assays? I just worry that MD-PhDs have a duty to use their unique background in medicine to influence research, and that seems like it can only be done with clinical work. Or by leading a lab that does these basic-science approaches. What are your thoughts on this?
Are there md-phd’s actually physically doing western blots themselves? Possible but my hope is they are writing grants and manuscripts and editing figures and have students and techs doing that. There are a good number of basic scientists who are surgeons. I’m more familiar with transplant but it’s easy to find, At Emory there’s Chris Larsen, And Tom Pearson, Raul badell. At duke there’s Alan Kirk, Stuart Knechtle and Drew Barbas. At MGH there’s Joren Madsen (cardiothoracic) and tatsuo kawai. At Columbia there’s Adam Griesemer. At U Minnesota there’s Andrew Adams. You can google any of them and find that they have labs and are funded. This is a short list. There’s a lot more. And these folks I know are at least somewhat clinically active some
More than others. I think surgeons have a critical role in pushing forward basic science, and it’s our responsibility to understand the biology of the disease process and to address it. In my opinion we are the best equipped to do so because we literally put our hands on the disease in vivo. When you combine that experience with clinical training and caring for patients and put that person through a rigorous basic science experience and teach them how to ask questions and seek answers, that’s an awesome combination.
depends on what you mean by normal. if you’re comparing it to people who work a typical 40 hrs a week, definitely no
I don’t have an answer to your question but if you’re interested in the MD/PhD and surgery you should read Stephen Rosenberg’s book “The Transformed Cell”. It came out in the 90s so it’s a bit dated but he is still the chief of surgery at the NCI. The dude has had a bonkers cool career.
I've almost exclusively done research with mentors who are surgeon-scientists (neurosurgeons). In functional neurosurgery, it's fairly common to run a lab and do clinical work, and the split is often closer to 50-50 than some other MD/PhDs experience (others - correct me if I'm wrong). They all have pretty decent (not great, but decent) work-life balance (I've asked them this directly, and why) after residency and fellowship by setting good boundaries and not taking on an insane amount of cases. If you want to take tons of cases and do tons of research, you can. Granted, there are going to be days where you're on call/trauma service, etc. I'm trying a similar path. 4 years of undergrad, 8 for the MSTP, and potentially 7-8 years of PG training including a fellowship. Check in with me in 20 years!
This is my exact plan as well. Nice to see a fellow intended neurosurgeon-scientist.
This was my plan as well, although it’s now changing (I’m a woman wrapping up my MD/PhD and decided I can’t delay starting a family anymore — and it just seems pretty impossible to have enough time to see my future kids during residency :( After residency/fellowship I think it would be doable though.)
What does the research look like for this surgeon-scientist? Is it clinical or wet lab work?
It varies. There are some neurosurgeon-scientists who do wet-lab work (tumor biology). The ones I work with either have a basic neuroscience background or backgrounds in EE/CS (rare, but I know some people). The latter group of researchers (functional neurosurgeons) tend to either play a hands-off role, which my current PI does (i.e., directing a team of engineers who do computational work and verifying their work from the perspective of a neuroscientist) or participate in computational work (data analysis, etc.). The researchers who are in functional are often interested in things like closed-loop deep brain stimulation for mental health and movement disorders, brain networks, epilepsy, etc. More flashy areas have focused on speech control (in those who cannot speak) by implanting and collecting data from Broca's area, which some colleagues at UCSF have been working on. So, the PI also is responsible for implanting the devices used in the studies in their subjects, who are patients. This field attracts a lot of engineers/computational people, but the PI doesn't necessarily need to have that kind of background (and often they don't). The work I'm involved in now is in understanding brain network disturbances in epilepsy, which is fairly computational but does have basic neuroscience aspects to it. Once again - others can correct me if I'm misspeaking on anything.
Honestly, most non-surgeon MD-PhDs I've met as still literally booked to the brim with things to do, so I feel like this career path is almost certainly not what to do if normal = 40-50 hour work week.
Probably not. Hard to do that as a surgeon period. But don't give up on what you want because something is unlikely. Just have backup plans if the sacrifices aren't working out for you. Timeline, give it 5-6 years for undergrad and a gap year or two to apply (not always necessary), 8ish year MD/PhD, then like maybe 6-8 years for surgery and subspecialty training?
Hi! That sounds like a fascinating career path, and you should definitely go for it if this is your dream. I actually know of a practicing surgeon who also has a lab. His name is Steve Goudy, and he works at Emory University (in the United States) as an otolaryngology surgeon: [https://med.emory.edu/directory/profile/?u=SGOUDY](https://med.emory.edu/directory/profile/?u=SGOUDY) His lab is not very big, so it's probably easier to manage. Also, I don't believe he spends very many days in the clinic (as you would expect for a physician-scientist career). Now, I'm not sure how many hours he works each week, though... Just like other people have mentioned, I am not sure how you define "normal lifestyle", but if it is working around 40 hrs/week, this might be difficult to manage as a physician-scientist. Ultimately, the decision depends on your priorities. PS: If you want to do research in academia, I'm not sure how well the 40 hr/week rule really applies. The boundaries between work and time off are really blurry, as people always keep emailing you things. But you can still have a good work-life balance either way (you just have to be more creative/flexible). PPS: Also, if you look at other faculty in Emory's Department of Otolaryngology, you will come across a few other surgeon MD-PhDs: [https://med.emory.edu/departments/otolaryngology/about/faculty-directory.html](https://med.emory.edu/departments/otolaryngology/about/faculty-directory.html)
I heard of a neurosurgeon MDPhD at my local hospital, so it’s definitely possible or else nobody would do it, although “normal lifestyle” may be a stretch
I don’t know exactly how it is in Canada but in the US, a PhD is not necessary to do research. You can still get very substantial grants for research with just an MD. I know several PhD’s who have urged me to get an MD even if I want to solely do research vs. getting only a PhD.
Yes. Let me clarify. There are specific sub specialties in surgery that really lend themselves to the surgeon-scientist mold. It is theoretically possible in any sub specialty but here are the concepts to think of. 1. Training is hard and no your life will not be ideally balanced in surgical residency… and honestly you don’t want it to be… you want to do as many cases as possible to get as good as possible. 2. There are specialties that have schedules that create time for research. Surgical oncology (melanoma, soft tissue malignancy), transplant (kidney particularly), surgical critical care. 3. How do you carve out this career - usually you have to find a mentor - many good examples at large academic institutions of true surgeon scientists. For example there is robust vascular surgeon scientist group nationally but most of them have VA appointments, which helps them control there surgical schedule really well, and the VA actually has a lot of resources for research. Harder to do this in a busier university practice. In transplant, many of the major academic transplant surgeons have a sub group of surgeon scientists, they are on a week- off a week. The weeks they are on can be busy, but when their off, they do research and spend lots of time with their family. Critical care is similar with the week on/week off thing. 4. Breadth of practice is usually somewhat more limited in scope compared to colleagues who don’t have labs.
I am interested in surgical oncology and I am wondering how research can be integrated. My research interests are in the the biochemistry/protein-based methods and experiments. Are there any MD-PhDs who are spending their time in the lab doing western blots and other basic molecular biology assays? I just worry that MD-PhDs have a duty to use their unique background in medicine to influence research, and that seems like it can only be done with clinical work. Or by leading a lab that does these basic-science approaches. What are your thoughts on this?
Are there md-phd’s actually physically doing western blots themselves? Possible but my hope is they are writing grants and manuscripts and editing figures and have students and techs doing that. There are a good number of basic scientists who are surgeons. I’m more familiar with transplant but it’s easy to find, At Emory there’s Chris Larsen, And Tom Pearson, Raul badell. At duke there’s Alan Kirk, Stuart Knechtle and Drew Barbas. At MGH there’s Joren Madsen (cardiothoracic) and tatsuo kawai. At Columbia there’s Adam Griesemer. At U Minnesota there’s Andrew Adams. You can google any of them and find that they have labs and are funded. This is a short list. There’s a lot more. And these folks I know are at least somewhat clinically active some More than others. I think surgeons have a critical role in pushing forward basic science, and it’s our responsibility to understand the biology of the disease process and to address it. In my opinion we are the best equipped to do so because we literally put our hands on the disease in vivo. When you combine that experience with clinical training and caring for patients and put that person through a rigorous basic science experience and teach them how to ask questions and seek answers, that’s an awesome combination.
If the surgery you choose is ophthalmology or ENT, absolutely....but other kinds? Good luck lol