The nursing PhDs I know are nursing professors.
The real fucking problem with that is that a Ph. D in Nursing even exists.
I realize you're semi-trolling, but to answer your question - not at all. Some of the best physicians I know are DOs. While it's fair to speak in generalizations, I'm not on board with degrading the degree.
Someone else pointed it out already, but in many states the bar has concluded that it's unethical for lawyers to advertise themselves as "doctors."
I think we can all agree that medical docs are at the top of the heap in terms of training/rigor/stature/professional demands. PhDs are somewhere after them, depending on the discipline. I've known plenty of PhDs who were dumb as stumps. It's not that hard to land a PhD in certain fields. To my continual amazement there are programs out there that don't even require a major piece of scholarship to get the degree.
The MD/PhD distinction is that I don't save lives.
The MD/PhD distinction is that I don't save lives.
That really depends on the field of Ph.D. you are talking about. I have mine in Pathology and got it at a medical school. This included 3 years of solid classwork plus 40+ hours in lab, then after classes just a lot of time in lab. Our department required two first author publications in "important" peer reviewed journals (they had a list of approved ones). When it was all said and done, most Ph.D.s took about 5.5 years. Then it is followed by another 4-6 years (getting a bit longer these days with poor funding) as a postdoctoral fellow before one can realistically build up the C.V. to apply for a research professorship. So no, I disagree. I know M.D.s, Ph.D.s, and M.D./Ph.D.s and, at least in the biomedical sciences, many would agree the Ph.D./faculty route is just as difficult as an M.D. Some of my research colleagues with M.D./Ph.D.s talk about how they found the Ph.D. portion harder and they look forward to their clinical time because they find it less stressful to work with patients than reading scientific articles and writing grants. In any case, I do not think it is near a universal rule that an M.D. is always a harder degree than Ph.D.
That really depends on the field of Ph.D. you are talking about. I have mine in Pathology and got it at a medical school. This included 3 years of solid classwork plus 40+ hours in lab, then after classes just a lot of time in lab. Our department required two first author publications in "important" peer reviewed journals (they had a list of approved ones). When it was all said and done, most Ph.D.s took about 5.5 years. Then it is followed by another 4-6 years (getting a bit longer these days with poor funding) as a postdoctoral fellow before one can realistically build up the C.V. to apply for a research professorship. So no, I disagree. I know M.D.s, Ph.D.s, and M.D./Ph.D.s and, at least in the biomedical sciences, many would agree the Ph.D./faculty route is just as difficult as an M.D. Some of my research colleagues with M.D./Ph.D.s talk about how they found the Ph.D. portion harder and they look forward to their clinical time because they find it less stressful to work with patients than reading scientific articles and writing grants. In any case, I do not think it is near a universal rule that an M.D. is always a harder degree than Ph.D.
The MD/PhD distinction is that I don't save lives.
Being an MD also involves greater responsibility.
You just seem downright stupid, Knight.
You and I have diametrically opposed world views.
I hope that they are due to experience, but I surmise they are due to a combination of experience and education.
Name-calling is the lowest form of logical discourse. Townie used to have the ability to present facts and defend his positions, but I guess hes just gotten intellectually lazy.