<p>So I want to fight cancer as a Clinician and as a Researcher. Do any of you guys think that Medicine would be the most ideal career for my aspirations? Thanks a lot.</p>
<p>You don't need an MD to be a researcher. If you want to be a clinician, though, you will have to get an MD.</p>
<p>At this point, though, I'm more curious about why you want to fight cancer. Why cancer in particular?</p>
<p>I lost my mom a couple of years ago to Pancreatic Cancer. From that moment on, I've been deeply motivated to help others who are currently suffering from this dreadful disease. I want to specifically help people who suffer from Cancer both clinically and through research. But I want to know if Medicine allows for this type of flexibility. What do you think?</p>
<p>how about MD/PhD. you can do clinical and research</p>
<p>Absolutely. I would begin with shadowing an Oncologist to start with. Follow up with internship in Onco during your College years in combination with research in Oncology if you like.</p>
<p>As Shades mentions you can be either a Clinical Oncologist or work in Pharma or Academia in Oncology research. There is tremendous amount of Onco research ongoing at the moment. This area is has a great deal of promise.</p>
<p>Yes an MD will allow you to do both. Generally though, your research is going to be coming from a more clinical angle (clinical trials, outcomes research) but there are MD's who do bench research or at least more "physician scientist" type exploration (proof of concept, in vivo trials of in vitro effects, etc). A PhD will allow you to do research from either a bench sort of angle (molecular or genetic factors impacting cancer) or as part of a clinical team (but you won't really be a part of the diagnosis/treatment pathway that most people think about when they say they want to be an oncologist). An MD/PhD provides the most flexibility (duh!) but obviously is a lot longer and in my opinion is usually not the right choice for most students unless they have a real passion for bench research or a desire to sort of vertically integrate a specific problem (though they don't have to know what it is when they start) from basic understanding of disease through to treatment.</p>
<p>From what you said, I think it's pretty apparent you need an MD to do what you want to do. The flexibility issue is irrelevant because if medicine wasn't the answer, I don't know what would be. Whether you need an MD/PhD is another question, one that you need to further expound upon what you mean by "help people...through research". What sort of research do you see yourself doing? If it's through experimentation with new drug protocols or new surgical techniques, I don't see a need for a PhD. If it's through developing new monoclonal antibodies for use as a new medication, (starting with identifying the particular cellular protein you want to attack, figuring out how to make the antibody, determining the effectives, etc) then you probably do. If you just want to be at the end point of asking "does this antibody therapy work" then probably not. </p>
<p>It's okay if you don't know the answers, and it's okay to say you don't want to do MD/PhD...but you do need to be thinking about the general thrust of your interests.</p>
<p>Thank you all for the feedback! I Definitely see myself doing more clinical/translational research and I guess there would be no need for me to purse an MD/PhD. Looks like I'll be pursing Medicine for the next couple of years. Thanks again everyone!</p>
<p>good luck with what you do. My dad just got diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma today =(. I'll be fighting the same battle with you. Plus, I hope to become an oncologist myself someday as I have already lost 3 family members, 1 friend, and a parent of a friend to cancer.</p>