are you a doctor when you get a phd

All Things Considered

Listen live.

Marketplace

Marketplace focuses on the latest business news both nationally and internationally, the global economy, and wider events linked to the financial markets. It is noted for its accessible coverage of business, economics and personal finance.

• Health Care
• Higher Education

Who gets to be called ‘doctor’?

Go to med school, earn an m.d. and the “dr.” honorific gets tacked on to your last name. some women — and ph.d.s — say they get the courtesy title, and respect, less often..

We call physicians "doctor." Should we do the same for people with PhDs? (Credit: Bigstock)

This story is from The Pulse , a weekly health and science podcast.

Subscribe on Apple Podcasts , Stitcher or wherever you get your podcasts.

Molecular biologist Adam Ruben has a Ph.D.

There was one time when he made a conscious choice to refer to himself as Dr. Ruben — when he emailed an airline to complain about a messed up flight.

“We had to spend a night in some city and I was trying to get a refund for our hotel bill, so I signed the email Dr. Ruben,” he said. “And I know that’s kind of an icky thing to do but I have heard that you get better service when you use the term doctor.”

It kind of worked: He got his refund — after three months.

“It’s not outright wrong and the world should forgive me,” he said.

Ruben has been thinking about the doctor honorific for a while. He polled his friends and acquaintances with Ph.D.s on Facebook and Twitter about whether or not they call themselves doctor.

Some said they’ve earned it. Others said it seems a little pretentious.

“A surprising number of people all had the same concern about using the term doctor: if they were going to be on an airplane when somebody needs a doctor,” Ruben said.

This sort of happened to Ruben several years ago, but when he was on the ground.

Besides being a biologist, he’s also a writer and comedian. He was at a Story Collider storytelling event, performing for an audience of mostly graduate students.

“And somebody actually had a medical emergency in the middle of the show. He fainted and needed an ambulance,” Ruben recalled.

As he described it at the time, someone asked if there was a doctor in the room and about 200 people with Ph.D.s kind of looked around at each other frantically.

Some EMTs helped the guy.   He was okay in the end and the show went on .

Subscribe to The Pulse

Stories about the people and places at the heart of health and science.

After checking in on social media, Ruben wrote about his informal poll for the journal Science. He heard from female engineers with Ph.D.s who said they are under-represented in their field, and feel like they need to put doctor in front of their names to get the same respect that male engineers get.

Epidemiologist Beth Linas also earned a Ph.D., and she wants media outlets to refer to people with Ph.D.s as doctor, especially if we’re interviewing them about their area of expertise.

“Someone comes up [to me] on the street and says hello to me, they can address me as Beth, but if I’m being called upon for my background in infectious disease, epidemiology or digital health which is the other area that I study, I think I should be recognized as Dr. Beth Linas.”

Linas has been thinking about this issue and wrote a commentary about the congressional hearings with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and research psychologist Christine Blasey Ford, who accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were in high school.

“There was a lot of chatter online and on Twitter about how in written media, she wasn’t being addressed as Doctor Ford, I started noticing it in other publications and other outlets,” said Linas.

Some NPR listeners complained about the “insidious bias” of the radio network calling Kavanaugh “Judge Kavanaugh” but not calling Ford “Dr. Ford.”

The NPR ombudsman explained that like many media outlets, NPR follows the Associated Press stylebook, which says if someone practices medicine, NPR calls them doctor. If it’s someone with a Ph.D., it’s up to the individual media outlet.

On the radio, we don’t have a lot of time, and every word counts. Saying someone is a doctor or saying they have a Ph.D. can be a little vague. Ultimately that doesn’t give the listener much information. So for clear and efficient communication, our policy at “The Pulse” is to introduce someone as an epidemiologist, or pediatrician — being specific about a person’s expertise when we can.

Linas said her concern comes from an issue of representation.

“There are a lot of women, and particularly women of color that really struggle to make their way in science and stay in science, and we face a lot of obstacles, and I think it’s important for women also to be recognized.”

There’s a study that backs her up: researchers found that male doctors introduce their male colleagues as “Dr.” around 70 percent of the time, but introduce their female colleagues as doctor a little less than half the time.

Linas says if media outlets refer to people with Ph.D.s as doctor, especially when we’re interviewing them about their area of expertise, then it shouldn’t be that hard to tell who is the kind of doctor who can help you when someone needs an ambulance — and who’s best suited to give you statistics on the next flu outbreak.

WHYY is your source for fact-based, in-depth journalism and information. As a nonprofit organization, we rely on financial support from readers like you. Please give today.

Brought to you by The Pulse

Hosted by Maiken Scott

Subscribe for free

More segments from what we call things and why it matters, for some people who stutter, fluent speech is overrated, what makes addiction a disease, should we call little girls beautiful, you may also like.

Advocates cheer new standards that could save horseshoe crabs from bloodletting

Up to 1 million horseshoe crabs in the U.S. are harvested for biomedical purposes. A synthetic alternative could mean less harvesting of the “living fossils.”

The Wistar Institute will build a new biomedical center in West Philly dedicated to HIV cure research

There is no general cure for HIV, a chronic disease that affects more than 39 million people globally, including more than 18,000 in Philadelphia.

2 weeks ago

Three Pa. med schools tapped for medical marijuana research programs

The Health Department says it plans to approve five more partnerships between marijuana growers and research centers this summer.

5 years ago

About Alan Yu

Want a digest of WHYY’s programs, events & stories? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Together we can reach 100% of WHYY’s fiscal year goal

• Account Settings

FEATURED INSIGHTS

• Provider operations
• Site-of-care shifts
• Specialty care
• State of the healthcare industry
• Value-based care
• View all featured insights

RESOURCES BY SECTOR

• Digital health
• Health plans
• Hospitals and health systems
• Medical device
• Physicians and medical groups
• Professional services
• View all sectors

NEWS & INSIGHTS

• Daily Briefing
• Radio Advisory
• Advisory Board tools

PRODUCTS & SERVICES

• Research Membership
• Custom Research
• Expert Support
• Advisory Board Fellowship
• On-Demand Courses
• Sponsorship

FEATURED CONTENT

Truly personalized care is possible. here's how to make it a reality..

Learn to navigate 4 key obstacles to improve patient access to innovative care.

• AskAdvisory

Our direct-to-expert service is here to help you navigate your membership, our research, and your most pressing challenges in healthcare. No question is too big or too small.

| Daily Briefing

Who gets to be called 'doctor?' Why the controversial question divides journalists, academics, and more.

Editor's note: This popular story from the Daily Briefing's archives was republished on Jul. 18, 2023.

Read Advisory Board's take: How this mirrors the debate over what to call APPs

The public's perception of who qualifies as a "doctor" can be heavily influenced by the media, but few news outlets apply the title to experts who hold doctoral degrees, such as Ph. D's in science—and one epidemiologist in blog for the Scientific American argues this oversight diminishes the authority of experts with advanced degrees.

Why news outlets do not refer to PhD holders as doctors

Several publications—such as NPR and Scientific American —follow the Associated Press (AP) Stylebook, which outlines English grammar, usage, and style and lays out standards for referring to experts who hold a doctor of philosophy (Ph.D.).

Elizabeth Jensen, NPR's ombudsman and public editor, in an opinion piece explained how NPR and many other publications apply the AP Stylebook's standards when referring to doctors and Ph.D. holders. Jensen wrote, "Longstanding NPR policy," based on the standards in the AP Stylebook, "is to reserve the title of 'Dr.' for an individual who holds a doctor of dental surgery, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatric medicine, or veterinary medicine."

Jensen noted the AP further clarifies, "If appropriate in the context, Dr.   also may be used on first reference before the names of individuals who hold other types of doctoral degrees. However, because the public frequently identifies Dr. only with physicians, care should be taken to ensure that the individual's specialty is stated in first or second reference. The only exception would be a story in which the context left no doubt that the person was a dentist, psychologist, chemist, [or] historian."

One epidemiologist's argument against AP Stylebook guidelines on doctors

However Beth Lina, an infectious disease scientist with a Ph.D. in epidemiology, in the Scientific American argues the AP Stylebook's standards for referring to doctors and Ph.D. holders are not appropriate.

Lina writes, "I was extremely disheartened and disappointed to learn that news organizations follow such a simplistic, flawed, and misguided recommendation, particularly as national sentiment suggests that experts are increasingly unnecessary." Lina argues, "By refusing to use the titles scientists have earned, news outlets contribute to the delegitimization of expertise."

According to Lina, NPR's use of the AP standard is at odds with the publication's mission "to create a more informed public, one challenged and invigorated by a deeper understanding and appreciation of events, ideas, and culture within the United States and across the globe," because the rule fails to inform the public.

In fact, Lina writes the AP rule "stand[s] to create potential harm to the scientific method and to the individuals who dedicate their lives to acquiring expertise and advancing science and policy." Lina notes "Dr." is not an "honorifi[c] or simple job descriptio[n]." She writes the title "is earned only upon demonstration of a deep independent understanding of a specific narrow topic."

Lina notes, "The academic credential is particularly important in the case of women in science, as many face extra obstacles to success that most men don't have to contend with."

"But this isn't just a feminist issue," Lina writes, adding, "It's an issue of recognizing achievement and knowledge." She concludes, "If news organizations strive to be leaders in creating a more informed public, it is incumbent upon them to lead by example. Though our titles are not why we continue to pursue scientific discovery, it is only appropriate to recognize us for the experts we are. We have doctorates of philosophy. Please call us 'Doctor'"(Linas, " Observations ,"  Scientific American , 10/22; Jensen,  NPR , 9/28).

Editor’s note: In case you’re curious, the Daily Briefing’s practice is not to use the title of ‘Dr.’ as an honorific, but rather to cite an individual’s degrees or training as appropriate to the story.

Advisory Board's take

Julie Riley , Practice Manager , Physician Practice Roundtable and Sarah Hostetter , Consultant , Physician Practice Roundtable

As this debate shows us, titles can have tremendous power—particularly in the health care field where expertise and trust are so important. When I think about titles in health care, I think about another important question that I often get from members: What should nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) be called in medical practices?

“Many of the alternative terms can belittle their important contribution to the care team”

We know that this group can be essential to expand access, improve quality, and offset physician workloads, and NPs and PAs are increasingly taking on more autonomous roles in practices.  So while they’re often taking on this provider role, they are not doctors by training—and we shouldn’t call them doctors. However, many of the alternative terms that are often used can belittle their important contribution to the care team.

For instance, terms like 'mid-level provider' and 'physician extender' seem tied to an outdated understanding of the role these practitioners actually play in care delivery. More specifically:

• 'Mid-level provider' suggests that they have either a lower hierarchical standing (relative to 'high-level' physicians) or offer lower quality care. But our research has shown that across the country, these practitioners are assuming greater autonomy and taking on their own panels , while evidence demonstrates that APPs offer care of  comparable quality  to that of physicians; and
• The term 'physician extender' is even less applicable, since it fails to capture the provider-level work that APPs frequently perform. Indeed, where medical groups use APPs to just "extend" the physician, they likely are underutilizing their APPs, and could task RNs, LPNs, or others with those assistant duties.

“While this nomenclature may seem inconsequential, we know that names have power”

While this nomenclature may seem inconsequential, we know that names have power—both over the existing culture and the culture that your practice wants to build. There's a clear rationale for choosing a more empowering term. Our research suggests that medical groups that use their APPs most extensively and effectively also bestow titles commensurate to their role and value. Indeed, groups that are working toward deploying APPs consistently at top-of-license consider a change in terminology as part of their broader effort.

In our research, we use the term 'advanced practice provider' (APP), though some organizations prefer 'advanced practice clinicians' or other variants on the theme. This helps convey the value of APPs and highlights their role within the organization—to themselves, their care teams, and patients.

Want to learn more about how to make the most of your advanced practice providers? If you're a Physician Practice Roundtable or Medical Group Strategy Council member, view our toolkit to access resources to help you develop a high-value, scalable, APP model.

Access the Toolkit

Not a part of those memberships? View our slide deck and on-demand presentation on How to Get the Most Value from Your Advanced Practice Providers.

Get the Slides

Is this content helpful?

Posted on November 30, 2018

Updated on July 18, 2023

The 10 signs of 'BS' in health care, according to Wharton economists

How to prepare for (and prevent) a hospital shooting, according to experts, 'a new paradigm': newly approved drug treats gene mutation rather than a type of cancer.

We help leaders and future leaders in the healthcare industry work smarter and faster by providing provocative insights, actionable strategies, and practical tools to support execution.

• All Resources
• Our History
• Legal Disclaimer
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

Don't miss out on the latest Advisory Board insights

Create your free account to access 1 resource, including the latest research and webinars.

Want access without creating an account?

You have 1 free members-only resource remaining this month.

1 free members-only resources remaining

You've reached your limit of free insights

Become a member to access all of Advisory Board's resources, events, and experts

Never miss out on the latest innovative health care content tailored to you.

Benefits include:

Is a PhD a Doctor? [The full guide]

The term “Dr” is very prestigious and projects expertise and respect in those who use it. There is a long and complicated history with the doctor title and who should (and shouldn’t) use it. Medical doctors, lecturers, and other medical professionals use it, but where did it come from and is a PhD a doctor?

Yes, a person with a PhD is a Doctor and use the “Dr” title before their name. This is not to be confused with a medical doctor. There is a complex history with this term but is currently accepted for people who hold a PhD as well as a wide range of other professions.

I have a PhD in chemistry and I call myself Doctor Stapleton in professional settings and when I want to let certain entities know that I have been awarded a PhD. In my experience, other PhD holders mainly use their titles in a similar way.

This article will cover everything you need to know about the Dr title and who can and cannot use it.

There have been people who have argued that the term doctor should be reserved for people who have studied and are practising medicine so that there is little confusion about the people suitably qualified to make health care decisions for you.

However, as you will see through this article the doctor title has a very long history that has nothing to do with the medical field at all.

Where the term Doctor comes from

For those that love a little bit of word history:

The word doctor comes from the Latin verb ”docere” which means to teach or is used to refer to a scholar.

In history the doctor title was invented to signify that a person was an imminent scholar. The doctorates date as far back as the 1300s and those who were able to get the doctor title in front of their name were rewarded with a lot of respect and prestige.

These people were often the lecturers of their day and would therefore teach many students in their areas of expertise.

Therefore, I think it is reasonable to conclude that the original intended use of doctor was for academics and scholars.

As time went on, the doctor title was awarded to other professions that wanted to elicit the same level of respect and prestige.

Health professionals receive an undergraduate degree in medicine and can call themselves doctor. However, these are professional degrees (undergraduate qualifications) and not really considered doctorates in the true sense of the word – it is more of an honorary title.

I don’t think that anyone with a PhD really cares about who is using it and accept that the majority of the public think that anyone with a doctor title has a medical degree.

I know that I was very excited to receive my doctor title but the excitement soon wears off when you realise that it doesn’t really matter in everyday life – but it still makes you and your parents proud.

These days, the doctor title is used by a variety of non-academic professions and it can get a little bit confusing.

So let’s have a look at who can actually use the doctor title and where it came from.

Who can use “doctor”

Even though the original use of the doctor title was for imminent scholars, nowadays there are several different professional qualifications that can use the doctor title.

It’s no surprise that more professional qualifications want to use the doctor title as it indicates many years of study, status and makes parents very proud.

A 2016 peer-reviewed publication submitted to the Canadian Medical Association Journal asks who is entitled to the title of Doctor?

Exactly who can use this term is starting to get a little bit confusing for the public.

There are many honorific doctor titles, including those found in the table below.

The use of the doctor term for many healthcare-related qualifications can cause a fair bit of confusion about what qualification the person has achieved.

That is why the title of a person is only the second most important thing to look at.

If in doubt, have a look at the letters after their name to really understand what the doctor title is referring to.

There are some interesting deviations in the doctor title and interestingly, in the UK, surgeons do not refer to themselves as doctor but rather use the term Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms etc. I had a family friend who was a brain surgeon who was a medical doctor and, after becoming a surgeon, changed back to Mr – a prestigious indicator in the medical field.

It’s strange to me how each field has its own customs to denote prestige.

There are arguments that in a professional and medical setting that the term doctor should be reserved for those who are medical doctors.

This can be difficult as many other healthcare professionals have also received doctorates in their specialisation and would want recognition for that effort and achievement.

In a 2011 article in the New York Times , physicians said that they were worried about losing control over the title of doctor because it could lead to a loss of control over the perception of the medical profession itself.

Anything that makes it more difficult for patients to make an informed decision about their healthcare could be very dangerous.

However, the fact that they are using this doctor title at all is a deviation from its original intention. Here is why the doctor title really is only meant for holders of a Doctor of Philosophy.

PhDs – the original doctors(?)

PhD stands for Doctor of Philosophy and, arguably, accounts for the only true use of the doctor title.

Being awarded a PhD means that you have completed postgraduate original and/or applied research that adds a significant contribution to the knowledge in a particular field.

It could be a PhD gained at a university or a professional doctorate but should signify that the owner of the title has completed the highest qualification obtainable in their field.

I talk about this in my short YouTube video:

You don’t necessarily have to use your doctor title after you have your PhD.

I know that there are many people who only use their Dr title in professional settings or as a way to stand out in other settings.

I only use my PhD title when I am in a setting where it is traditionally used. For example, I use my doctor title if I am giving a talk at a university or I am applying for funding within my field of expertise.

Some PhD holders find it a little bit awkward using their Dr title in everyday life whilst others use it on everything from rental applications to restaurant bookings.

How people use their Dr title once they have one is completely up to personal and individual choice. Initially, I was very excited to use my doctor title in as many situations as possible but quickly became wary of using it when it wasn’t required.

However, one of my guilty pleasures is seeing my doctor title on a plane ticket – I’m not quite sure why that is!

What you should call a PhD holder/your lecturers

One of the most common questions that I get asked when I am lecturing at a university is what students should call their lecturers.

Students can get confused with all of the formalities – especially if they have never been in a university before.

Professors, associate professors, doctors, lecturers, researchers – what does it all mean and how should you refer to academics?

Ultimately, it depends on the person.

Some PhD holders who lecture in a university want to be called by their official title and surname during every interaction.

Other lecturers and PhD holders are happy with students calling them by their first name. I certainly didn’t mind people calling me Andy during my workshops or lectures.

Also, some cultures are much more formal than others and wish to show respect by always using the official title of an academic.

Feel free to use whichever mode of interaction you wish – but, as a general rule, always err on the side of caution and use the more formal term for safety. Quite often, I have seen academics prompt students to use their first name as they also feel a little bit awkward being called their professional titles.

Doctor vs professor

When you graduate from a PhD you are entitled to call yourself by the doctor title.

All PhD holders are called Doctor in their professional setting. This can be on business cards, newsletters, websites, and other official documentation.

Universities in some countries also have a graduated career progression title system which denotes the expertise and seniority of the academic.

For example, in Australia the academic system is graduated like this:

• Senior lecturer
• Associate Professor

Therefore, in Australia it is not always appropriate to call someone in a university professor. Even if they are teaching your subject.

Professor is reserved for those who have achieved demonstrated expertise and outcomes in a variety of academic areas such as administration, teaching, research, and community outreach.

In other countries, however, you are automatically deemed a professor if you are teaching at a university. For example, in America your students will refer to you as a professor no matter your seniority in your university.

One of the first things you should do if you want to talk to your lecturer in a university setting is ask what their preference would be to be called.

Ask your lecturer about their preference

Whenever I gave a lecture, I would always start by saying that people can call me by my name (Andy), or they can choose to use Dr Stapleton if they feel that is more appropriate.

In my experience, most academics will not mind if you call them by their first name and, in countries like Australia, it seems to be the most common way for students to interact with their teachers.

It is not uncommon for the opposite to be true – and, like I have mentioned above, always start with the formal interactions. It is likely that you will be invited to call the PhD holder by their first name.

Outside of a formal setting most PhD holders really don’t mind how you talk to them.

The things a PhD student needs to do to become a doctor

The reason a PhD can call themselves doctor is because they have been awarded the highest qualification possible in their field.

A PhD requires you to perform research and produce a thesis or dissertation. The new information must contribute significantly to the field and report novel and new findings.

The PhD thesis is examined by other experts in the field (known as peers) and these other experts are responsible for telling the university whether or not you have satisfied the criteria to become a PhD.

There are other, more modern, ways of reporting your findings including peer-reviewed journals and professional doctoral reports.

Either way, admission to a PhD requires many years of hard work and dedication to answering a unique and unanswered question in your field.

I think that this satisfies the original use of the term doctor and is a great accomplishment for anyone.

It’s hard work but with the right guidance and dedication it is achievable by almost anyone.

Wrapping up

This article has covered everything you need to know about whether a PhD is a doctor.

The original term was introduced in the 1300s to denote an imminent scholar. This scholar would teach and pass on information to their students.

In modern times, the term doctor has been used as an honorary title for other professional careers in recognition of the hard work that they have put in to achieve their position.

However, there are fears that the doctor title is slowly becoming used for too many health professional areas leading to confusion around who is a medical doctor and who has other health-related qualifications such as dentistry, naturopathy, and others.

Nonetheless, people without an understanding of the convention can still get confused between medical doctors and holders of a higher degree PhD.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

• Skip to Nav
• Skip to Main
• Skip to Footer

Should All Ph.D.'s Be Called 'Doctor'? Female Academics Say Yes

Please try again

On the first day of class, Debbie Gale Mitchell, a chemistry professor at the University of Denver, introduced herself to her students, telling them about her Ph.D. and her research. She told her students they could call her either “Dr. Mitchell” or “Debbie.” A male colleague had told her that he went by his first name and that students were friendlier as a result, so Mitchell decided to try it. Many students chose to call her “Debbie.”

Then one day a student asked if she thought she’d ever get a Ph.D.

“I discovered that for me, the use of my title is VITAL to remind students that I am qualified to be their professor,” Mitchell wrote on Twitter.

Mitchell’s story was just one among hundreds shared last summer on social media calling attention to the way gender affects how professionals are addressed, especially those who hold a doctorate.

The discussion comes at a time when research studies into gender bias are increasingly confirming that how a person is addressed is linked to perceptions of their status.

The Twitter conversation branched from multiple roots. On June 7, Eric Kelderman, reporter for the Chronicle of Higher Education, sent out a critical tweet of a female academic who responded to his media inquiry by suggesting that he should have used “Professor” or “Doctor” (the tweet has since been deleted). The next day, a doctor from the U.K., David Naumann, criticized doctors, medical or otherwise, who use their title in a nonprofessional setting. And a few days later the Globe and Mail, a Canadian newspaper, announced revised style guidelines wherein only medical doctors would be referred to using “Dr.”, a convention that is already used most of the time by the Associated Press and news outlets that follow AP Style  (including KQED). What followed was an explosion of opinions and experiences revolving around titles, expertise, and gender and racial bias.

Many Ph.D. holders are fine with reserving the title for medical doctors in common parlance, viewing insistence on the title as arrogant and elitist, and do not use their titles even in a scholarly setting. But for women and people of color, an academic title can be a tool to remind others of their expertise in a world that often undermines it.

Some Ph.D. holders who insist on titles say that they actually prefer their first names. But given the discrepancy in usage, some women feel they must use and defend their titles, especially where the alternative is a gendered title like “Ms.”, “Mrs.”, or “Miss”. Fern Riddell, a Ph.D.-holding historian, wrote:

My title is Dr Fern Riddell, not Ms or Miss Riddell. I have it because I am an expert, and my life and career consist of being that expert in as many different ways as possible. I worked hard to earned my authority, and I will not give it up to anyone. — Dr Fern Riddell (@FernRiddell) June 13, 2018

Following backlash to the tweet, which described her as “arrogant” and “immodest,” Riddell coined the hashtag #ImmodestWomen, encouraging hundreds of women to change their Twitter handles to include “Dr.” or share experiences of bias. Riddell later wrote about the rationale behind the hashtag, saying that “we define women by their ability to be well behaved.” #ImmodestWomen was “retaliation.”

The tweets show “Dr.” is preferred by many women because it is both unrelated to marital status and gender-neutral, unlike “Mrs.”, “Miss”, or “Ms”. Several tweets described situations where a woman’s husband or colleague was referred to as “Dr.” (whether or not he actually had a doctorate) while she got “Mrs.” or a first name.

My pastor has her PhD. She was interviewed by a local newspaper along with another male member of clergy, NOT a PhD.. HE was referred to as “Reverend Smith”, SHE was called “Paula”. Seriously. — Head To Toe Organizers (@HTTOrganizers) June 11, 2018

In other anecdotes, female doctors (M.D. and Ph.D. alike) were met with utter confusion when they answered the phone to a caller looking for “Dr.”, or presented an airline ticket bearing the title. Even in 2018, with women making up 34 percent of active physicians and more than half of medical school matriculants and doctorate recipients , many people assume that “Dr.” refers to a man.

Bias in forms of address and use of titles is not limited to gender, many participants in the Twitter discussion pointed out. People of color with doctorates are also often not given the courtesy of their title, which echoes a long history of racially biased uses of titles. History professor Charles W. McKinney wrote:

Wanna know why my students will always call me “Dr. McKinney”? Because one day in 1980 I went to the store with my 75 yr old Grandmother Melida Thomas. Clerk greeted two 20 yr old, white women in front of us with “Mrs” and said “Well, hello Melida” to my Grandmother. That’s why. — Charles W. McKinney (@kmt188) June 10, 2018

The bias reflected in these stories is backed up by data. Last year, a study from the Mayo Clinic found that female doctors were introduced by their first names, rather than a professional title, much more often than male doctors. And on June 25, researchers from Cornell University published results showing that female professionals are half as likely as their male colleagues to be referred to by their last names, a practice that is associated in the study with lower status.

“The way that we speak about others influences and is influenced by the way that we think about them,” wrote Stav Atir and Melissa J. Ferguson, authors of the recent paper.

Atir and Ferguson described eight different studies, covering forms of address in professor evaluations, talk radio and under experimental conditions. Across the board, female professionals were less likely to be referred to solely by their last name. They even found that fictional researchers who were described with last name only were perceived as better known, more eminent, higher status, and more deserving of awards.

Thanks for signing up for the newsletter.

The researchers proposed several explanations for their results. It may be more culturally common to refer to men by their last names because they are thought to be more permanent, since women may change their last names when they marry. Alternatively, it could be that speakers use first names to identify a subject’s gender, and this is more common for women in male-dominated professions, where male is the assumed default. This type of bias could even result from attempts to highlight women’s participation by identifying their gender using first names.

“The consequences may be ironic,” wrote Atir and Ferguson, “leading to lower judgments of eminence, status, and deservingness.”

As Mitchell, the chemistry professor from the University of Denver, and other academics related on Twitter, one way of fighting this type of bias is to insist upon the title “Dr.”

But other Ph.D. holders question whether insisting on titles is the best strategy. Meena Kandasamy, a poet and writer with a Ph.D. in sociolinguistics, rarely uses her title and did not change her Twitter handle. She questioned the practice of elevating those who earned doctorates over those who have not had the opportunity to do so:

For every one of us who has managed to float up and breathe from that cesspool with a doctorate degree above our heads–we must remember our sisters sent home, their dreams crushed, their futures messed up, academia behaving like one petty thug-gang to have the backs of a few men — meena kandasamy (@meenakandasamy) June 14, 2018

Critics argue that titles do not necessarily reflect how hard one has worked or even level of expertise, and that the most equal solution is fewer titles, not more. But supporters say that claiming the titles is the best choice under the present circumstances. Elissa Harbert, a musicologist, wrote:

I support #ImmodestWomen . As a PhD and professor, I currently use Dr. as my title professionally. My relationships with students improved when I switched to Dr., even though in a perfect world I’d use my first name. It’s not a perfect world. — Dr. Elissa Harbert (@KyrieElissa) June 14, 2018

In some instances, women are less likely to exhibit bias in form of address. The Mayo Clinic study found female medical doctors introduced both men and women with a title more than 95 percent of the time. Men introduced their female colleagues with a title 49 percent of time, compared with 72 percent of the time for a male colleague. In the Atir and Ferguson study, male speakers on talk radio referred to women by last name less than half as often as they did for men, while female speakers did not have such a strong contrast. In other research on gender bias in academia and medicine, women were just as likely to treat men and women differently. As research epidemiologist Chelsea Polis related, implicit bias can extend to usage of titles for speakers and writers of any gender:

I was once quoted in a story where all men w/PhDs were “Dr. X” & all women w/PhDs were untitled. Writer (a woman) was mortified when I pointed it out. Claiming our titles publicly raises consciousness than women can/do have these credentials. I want young girls/women to see that. — Chelsea Polis, PhD (@cbpolis) June 10, 2018

While the evidence points to persistent bias in professional forms of address, the solution is not so clear. Highlighting women with doctorates, medical or otherwise, may provide an important reminder that woman are now earning nearly half of medical and research-based doctoral degrees. But bias in use of doctoral titles is just one example of the larger issue of gender bias, as Atir and Ferguson’s study demonstrates.

“We find evidence of a gender bias in the way that we speak about professionals in a variety of domains,” wrote Atir and Ferguson. Addressing the problem may require attention to bias in all arenas, from the classroom to the boardroom.

To learn more about how we use your information, please read our privacy policy.

Doctorate vs. PhD: Understanding the Key Differences [2024]

If you’re interested in pursuing a doctoral degree, you may wonder about the differences between a doctorate vs. PhD.

A doctorate and a PhD are both terminal degrees that allow you to develop specialized knowledge and skills in your chosen field. But these degrees typically have different areas of focus, requirements, and career outcomes.

Editorial Listing ShortCode:

Understanding the difference between PhD and doctorate can help you pick the degree that most aligns with your career aspirations and interests.

What’s the Difference Between Doctorate vs. PhD Degrees?

A doctorate and a Ph.D. are the highest college degrees students can earn. Graduates of both types of programs receive the title of “doctor” and may qualify for specialized careers in their fields.

But, while doctorate programs focus on professional competencies and knowledge, PhD programs prioritize academic research.

What Is a Doctorate Degree?

A doctorate degree is a professional degree that enables students to become experts in a specific field or industry. This degree focuses on applying academic research and theories in the workplace to improve performance and solve problems.

Courses vary by field and program but typically emphasize professional skills like collaboration, leadership, and project management. Additionally, many doctorate programs require students to complete a capstone project that addresses real issues affecting their industry.

Graduates often qualify for advanced administrative, leadership, and managerial positions in their fields.

What Is a PhD Degree?

A Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree is an opportunity to strengthen your academic research skills and generate original knowledge. This degree trains students to become independent scholars who conduct cutting-edge research in their areas of expertise.

PhD curriculums cover advanced concepts and theories in a discipline. They also teach students qualitative and quantitative methodologies to design studies and conduct research. Additionally, most PhD programs require students to produce a dissertation that contributes fresh knowledge to the field.

Current professionals with PhDs often work as academic researchers and professors. They may also secure government and industry jobs.

Key Differences Between a PhD vs. Doctorate Degree

What’s a PhD degree ? What’s a doctorate degree? The main difference between a doctorate and a PhD is their area of focus. A doctorate prioritizes applied knowledge and professional skills, while a PhD emphasizes academic research. Let’s compare some more differences between a professional doctoral degree vs. PhD.

A doctorate enables students to become expert practitioners in their discipline. Students study existing concepts and theories and learn how to apply these ideas in the workplace.

By contrast, a PhD prepares students to conduct innovative research and educate others.

Goals and Outcomes

Doctorate programs help prepare students for senior administrative and leadership positions in their industries. They also help students enhance their professional competencies and tackle industry-specific challenges.

Students who pursue PhDs aim to advance their disciplines by generating new knowledge. They may also publish peer-reviewed research and teach undergraduate courses.

Student Population

Doctorate degrees are designed for current or aspiring working professionals who want to become industry leaders. These programs also enable students to increase their knowledge and credibility.

PhD programs attract students who want to expand their knowledge of research methodologies and theories. These learners also frequently pursue academic careers.

Admissions Requirements

Doctorate and PhD programs typically require students to have bachelor’s and master’s degrees.

Additionally, prospective doctorate students may be asked to provide evidence of work experience, while PhD students might demonstrate their research abilities with a writing sample.

Program Length

Requirements vary by program, but full-time students typically complete a doctorate in 3 to 5 years. Programs that require a capstone project may take longer. For those considering quick degrees, a number of universities now offer accelerated doctoral programs online .

PhD programs often take 4 to 7 years to finish. The speed at which students research and write their dissertations can significantly impact the timeline.

The curriculum for doctorate programs typically centers on practical skills and contemporary issues in the field. Topics may include communication, ethics, and leadership.

PhD programs offer classes on research methods, theories, and disciplinary trends. Students also learn how to write journal articles and present at conferences.

Assessment and Completion Requirements

Doctorate and PhD students both complete 2 or more years of coursework. They also demonstrate their knowledge during comprehensive exams.

Doctorate students may produce a capstone project that applies their knowledge to real problems. By contrast, PhD students write dissertations based on original research.

If You Have a PhD, Are You a Doctor?

Is a PhD a doctor ? While graduates who earn a PhD are referred to as doctors, a PhD is different from a Doctor of Medicine (MD).

Doctors with MDs are medical doctors who can legally prescribe medications, perform surgery, and treat patients. They typically apply existing medical knowledge instead of conducting research. Doctors with PhDs don’t have any of these abilities. Instead, they have specialized knowledge and perform academic research in a particular field.

PhD or Doctorate Degree – Which Is Right for You?

Understanding the difference between a doctorate and a PhD can help you select the right degree for you.

Professional doctorate degrees help students become leading practitioners and problem solvers. By contrast, PhD degrees enable students to hone their research skills and learn advanced concepts. Both degrees allow you to enrich your understanding of your chosen discipline or profession. They also help you boost your credentials and develop new skills.

After you decide between a doctorate degree vs. PhD, you can explore program options from accredited schools to find the best fit.

What is the Real Difference between an MD and PhD?

Phds advance knowledge, whereas mds merely apply existing knowledge..

Posted March 7, 2011 | Reviewed by Kaja Perina

If you ask someone in the psychology world how people with PhDs (Doctor of Philosophy ) differ from those with MD (Doctor of Medicine) you may get an answer like "MDs can prescribe medication , whereas PhDs cannot." That is true. Another difference is that MDs generally make more money in the United States.

MDs are consider by many to be the "real doctors" because they can help with physiological medical problems. That too is true. I certainly don't refer to myself as "Dr. Kelly" in any context other than an academic setting, because people might get the false impression that I could jump in and help in the event of a broken foot or migraine headache.

All that sounds pretty bad for the PhD. But here's the most essential difference between the two degrees: PhDs advance knowledge, whereas MDs merely apply existing knowledge. Unlike the MD who does not need to produce any original research, the person earning a PhD must produce original research and write it up in a thesis or dissertation. Then a committee of experts must deem that thesis as offering an acceptable advancement of knowledge before the PhD is conferred. It typically takes a couple of years longer to earn a PhD than an MD. Part of the reason it takes so long is that the person earning the PhD is being trained on how to think critically about existing knowledge, and it can take a while to find one's niche and fill a gap in the knowledge base.

If you yourself want to make important scientific discoveries and then tell the world about them, you will be much better prepared by getting a PhD than an MD. You also will be much better prepared to criticize studies you read about in virtually any field because you will be trained in critical thinking and writing.

If you are deciding which degree is right for you, ask yourself if you will be content with applying the knowledge you learn (MD) from other people, or if you would like to get in on the action of making the discoveries yourself (PhD). For instance, would you like to be one of the scientists who are figuring out how to reverse the aging process (PhD)? Would you like to see if giving aging mice a particular the enzyme (one that you discover) makes their hair shiny again and restores their fertility (PhD)? Or would you be content giving your future medical patients the proper dose of the medications that arise from this research and then seeing the signs of youth return in your patients (MD)? These are the kinds of questions that college students everywhere should be asking themselves, and yet I have never seen them do so.

This difference in training also means that if you want to know what the cutting -edge knowledge is in a given field, you have to ask a PhD in that field, not an MD. So for instance, let's say you or your mate is having trouble getting pregnant . If you just ask your local obstetrician or gynecologist what the cutting edge discoveries are regarding fertility, that MD is not likely to know. That MD can give you fertility treatments that he or she has learned about and tried with other patients. It should be noted, however, that many MDs make an effort to remain abreast of scientific research long after their degree has been conferred.

The upshot of my message is this: We need both kinds of people, those who apply existing knowledge (such as the MD does in the medical field) and those who advance it (PhDs). But if you think a PhD is less qualified than an MD when it comes to having cutting-edge knowledge, you have that backwards.

Anita E. Kelly, Ph.D., is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame. She is author of The Clever Student and The Psychology of Secrets.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• October 11, 2023
• Education Advice

Ph.D. vs. Doctorate: What are the Differences?

UOTP Marketing

For those who have a deep-seated attitude, pursuing a doctoral degree can be a tough yet beneficial journey. Currently enrolled in a doctorate program means that a person has already scooched over college admissions, went through high stake tests and exams, and finished all those research papers and long hours spent in university libraries hitting the books. While studying for a doctorate entails asserting oneself to an extensive amount of quality time and money , its significance and purpose usually pave the way to a lucrative end.

After having finished the Master’s Degree , students begin to think about their next step in their academic career. Then, paradoxically, while navigating through academia, they find themselves baffled by the immense terms and terminologies used to label specific degrees. Because the terms “Doctorate” and “Ph.D.” are somehow interlocked and overlap, and because “PhD” is sometimes used inconsistently, it can lead to considerable confusion. Ph.D. vs. Doctorate? You might wonder what their difference is, and why they are important. E xplaining what each of these terms stands for, the difference between them, and why they are valuable, can help you steer yourself down the right path from the outset.

Doctorate Degree vs. Ph.D.

At first glance, it is pretty easy to confuse these two terms. But it is important for everyone to be able to make a distinction between the two. In this article, we will discuss the difference between Ph.D. and Doctorate in detail in order to get rid of any confusion you may have. In the academic world, the terms Doctorate and Ph.D. are currently used interchangeably. Both of them are the top cap of the ladder. However, a doctorate is mostly used as an umbrella term covering many fields ranging from professional degrees, humanities, and scientific disciplines.

A Ph.D. or Doctor of Philosophy, on the other hand, is a subcategory of a doctoral degree, it is much more distinct and clear-cut and is usually narrower in nature encompassing only humanities and scientific fields. In plain English, when someone says they are enrolling on a doctoral degree, it means they are doing a Ph.D. in a specific field. So, technically, in common parlance, there is no difference between the two terms.

But at the other end of the spectrum, one should be careful not to confuse a professional doctoral degree with a Ph.D. The former is more practical and is designed to prepare students to apply existing knowledge to find solutions to real-life problems and has a direct application to a particular profession.

A Ph.D. is theoretical by nature and is more academic and research-focused. it is often fixed on disseminating knowledge by conducting authentic research which means reviewing and identifying gaps in current literature and evaluating the relevance of existing and emerging theories within a particular field.

What Is a Ph.D. Degree and Why Should You Go for It?

Students who acquire a Ph.D. are justly proud — they wear it as a badge of identity in the academic elite. Traditionally, a Ph.D. was associated with teaching, which from Latin licentia docendi meant “license to teach”. However, the concept of Ph.D. has been on shifting sands nowadays and has become a more general term that isn’t necessarily confined to teaching only.

The Value of a PhD

Obtaining a Ph.D. helps you capitalize on the emerging academic opportunities making you more easily identifiable to employers or businesses seeking to fill professional, higher-level job positions. Many of these career options, conversely, are not available to those who do not belong to the Ph.D. club. While pursuing a Ph.D. requires devoting a tremendous effort and time and making significant personal sacrifices pushing the boundaries of knowledge, it’s all in service of the area of study you’re most passionate and zealous about. Ultimately, once you’ve attained your Ph.D., you will have achieved the pinnacle of education— something not too many people have or are able to accomplish.

FREE RESOURCE

A Guide to Choosing and Applying to Ph.D. Programs

Learn everything you need to know about selecting and applying to Ph.D. programs. Learn tips and tricks for a successful application and find your ideal program today!

What Is a Doctorate Degree?

A doctoral or doctorate degree is usually the most advanced degree one can earn in an academic discipline. Many pursue a doctorate degree to increase their professional credibility, be acknowledged as an expert in a specific field, and improve their resume.

A doctorate degree is a graduate-level credential that is usually earned after multiple years of graduate school. Earning a doctoral degree requires a significant level of research and work. In order to get this degree, one has to research a subject thoroughly, conduct new research and analysis, and provide a solution or interpretation into the field. But what types of doctoral degrees are available?

Types of Doctorate Degrees

There are two categories of doctorate degrees: an academic degree and a professional doctorate degree. An academic degree focuses on research, data analysis, and the evaluation of theory. A professional doctorate degree, on the other hand, is considered a terminal degree, which means that one has achieved the most advanced degree in the field. This degree is specifically designed for working professionals who want to grow in their careers.

Professional Doctorate Degrees

A professional doctorate is designed for working professionals who have experience in the field and want to increase their knowledge, improve their credibility, and advance their careers. This degree focuses on applying research to practical issues, coming up with interpretation and solutions, as well as designing effective professional practices within a particular field.

Professional doctoral degrees include:

Doctor of Business Administration (DBA)

The DBA degree is ideal for students who already have a general business background and are interested in delving deeper into the practical and theoretical aspects that underpin business education. More to the point, in DBA you will develop the ability to solve real-life problems, discover the relevant expertise to innovate and uphold complex business issues and so much more. Upon completion, DBA students will possess enhanced leadership and strategic skills as well as the tools to propel their careers in today’s marketplace. The Business Administration industry is keen on finding such graduates with business skills and this is indicated by the immense job positions currently available.

Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)

If you are interested in setting your eyes on creating lifelong learning among your students, making a positive influence in educational culture, contributing to the growing body of research in the education realm , or just enhancing your subject matter expertise, the Doctor of Education program ticks all the boxes. This degree maintains a rigorous approach in academic education that prepares graduates to showcase the skills and expertise to devise solutions in tackling the challenges in contemporary education practice and become transformational leaders in the industry.

Doctor of Computer Science (DCS)

The demand for computer scientists has reached its peak and it is among the most sought-after positions nowadays. With a degree in DCS, you will have the opportunity to design, apply innovative experiments, predict trends and, ultimately, develop a richer understanding and contribute to your area of expertise. After all, who doesn’t want an exciting and financially stable career?

Interested in pursuing a degree?

Fill out the form and get all admission information you need regarding your chosen program.

This will only take a moment.

Message Received!

Thank you for reaching out to us. we will review your message and get right back to you within 24 hours. if there is an urgent matter and you need to speak to someone immediately you can call at the following phone number:.

By clicking the Send me more information button above, I represent that I am 18+ years of age, that I have read and agreed to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy , and agree to receive email marketing and phone calls from UOTP. I understand that my consent is not required to apply for online degree enrollment. To speak with a representative without providing consent, please call +1 (202) 274-2300

• We value your privacy.

Doctor of Medicine (M.D.)

The Doctor of Medicine degree is designed to prepare you for various medical challenges in different settings nationally and internationally. This program will further develop your critical thinking and clinical reasoning skills required for safe, high-quality medical practices. It will also improve your leadership, communication, and teamwork skills for collaborative patient care.

Doctor of Optometry (O.D.)

This professional degree typically requires four years of study. It focuses on basic biological sciences such as anatomy and physiology, microbiology, neuroanatomy, and so on. This doctoral degree will prepare, educate, and train professionals to practice at the highest level of proficiency, professionalism, and integrity.

Doctor of Psychology (PsyD)

The Doctoral of Psychology degree concentrates on the clinical and applied aspects of psychology. This type of doctorate prepares students for professional practice and clinical placement. This degree will be highly beneficial when working directly with patients who need psychology services. In addition, this degree allows doctors of psychology to confidently function as researchers and clinicians.

How to Choose a Ph.D. Program?

Choosing a Ph.D. program can be pretty challenging; it is a big academic decision and investment that requires commitment and perseverance. But how can you pick the right Ph.D. program for you? Well, there are some tips to help you choose the best fit for your goals and preferences:

• Think about the reasons why you want a Ph.D., what you expect to gain from it, and whether it is compatible with your professional goals.
• Consider your research environment.
• Take your time to research, compare, and consider multiple opportunities carefully.
• Pick a subject that interests and motivates you but is also practical.
• Ask your professors and other scholars in the field for advice.

All in all, the terms “Doctorate’’ and “Ph.D.” are in essence the same, which means all Ph.D. students are Doctoral students as well. On the other hand, earning a Ph.D. degree is no joke. If anything, Ph.D. students have the tenacity, patience, persistence, and years of hard work that you can vouch for. Ultimately, deciding what type of doctoral degree you should hop on, depends on your career goals, what you are passionate about and how you are going to achieve it.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between a doctorate and a ph.d..

In academic contexts, the terms “Doctorate” and “Ph.D.” are often used interchangeably, but there is a distinction. A Doctorate is an umbrella term covering a wide range of fields, including professional degrees, humanities, and scientific disciplines. A Ph.D., or Doctor of Philosophy, is a specific type of doctoral degree, typically focused on research and academic pursuits in the humanities and scientific fields.

Why should I pursue a Ph.D.?

Pursuing a Ph.D. can be a valuable endeavor, as it opens up academic and research opportunities, enhances your expertise in a specific field, and makes you more attractive to employers seeking candidates for high-level positions. It’s a chance to push the boundaries of knowledge and become an expert in your chosen study area.

What are the benefits of a professional doctorate?

Professional doctorate degrees, such as Doctor of Business Administration (DBA) or Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), are designed for working professionals who want to apply research to practical issues in their field. These degrees can enhance your career prospects, leadership skills, and problem-solving abilities within your profession.

How do I choose the right Ph.D. program?

To choose the right Ph.D. program, consider your career goals, research environment, and personal interests. Take your time to research and compare programs, seek advice from professors and experts in your field, and ensure that the program aligns with your professional aspirations.

What are the main differences between academic and professional doctorate degrees?

Academic doctorate degrees focus on research, theory evaluation, and data analysis, often leading to careers in academia or research. Professional doctorate degrees are more practical, designed for working professionals, and concentrate on applying research to real-world problems within a specific field.

Can I earn a Ph.D. in any field?

Ph.D. programs are available in various fields, including humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, engineering, and more. However, the specific availability of Ph.D. programs may vary by field and university.

Is a Ph.D. a challenging journey?

Yes, pursuing a Ph.D. can be a challenging journey that requires dedication, patience, and years of hard work. It involves conducting original research, writing a dissertation, and often teaching or assisting in courses. It’s a significant commitment, but it can be highly rewarding.

What are the potential career opportunities after earning a Ph.D.?

With a Ph.D., you can pursue careers in academia as a professor or researcher, work in research and development roles in various industries, or take on leadership positions in organizations. The specific career path will depend on your field of study and personal interests.

Share it with your friends!

Explore more.

Accounting vs. Finance Degree: Which Major to Choose?

12 Important Bookkeeping Skills You Need for a Successful Career

Recent resources.

14 Essential Web Developer Skills You Need to Master

How to Become a Software Developer?

10 Essential Cybersecurity Skills You Must Have

How Many Credits to Graduate College? An In-Depth Guide

INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE?

Chat with an Admissions Officer Now!

• Associates Degree
• Bachelors Degrees
• Masters Degrees
• Doctoral Degrees
• Faculty & Staff
• Accreditation
• Student Experience

QUICK LINKS

• Admission Requirements
• Military Students
• Financial Aid

• Online Degrees
• Tuition & Financial Aid
• Transferring Credit
• The Franklin Experience

Request Information

We're sorry.

There was an unexpected error with the form (your web browser was unable to retrieve some required data from our servers). This kind of error may occur if you have temporarily lost your internet connection. If you're able to verify that your internet connection is stable and the error persists, the Franklin University Help Desk is available to assist you at [email protected] , 614.947.6682 (local), or 1.866.435.7006 (toll free).

Just a moment while we process your submission.

Popular Posts

Applied Doctorate vs. Ph.D.: What are the Differences?

Making a choice between two similar but different things can be a challenge.

Oh, sure, some things don’t fall under the “do-or-die” category of decision making. With some things, there simply is no wrong choice.

Take a sports car versus an SUV, for example. Either is a great choice, depending on your budget, your lifestyle and your personal preferences.

What about an angus beef burger versus a textured soy protein patty? When it comes to radically opposing food choices, there’s usually a clear-cut winner.

Yet what about the more important things in life … like your career, your future and your doctoral education?

You already know the drill when it comes to deciding if a Ph.D. or doctorate is right for you:

• Investigate each type of degree program.
• Make a list of personal and professional pros and cons for each type of degree.
• Seek the wise counsel of colleagues, academic advisors and professional mentors.
• Make a confident decision about which degree is right for.

But first, let’s define the Ph.D. and the professional doctorate and then look at how they’re different from one another.

What is a Ph.D.?

A Ph.D., or Doctor of Philosophy, is a high-level degree earned after a period of three or more years of graduate-level study, culminating in the creation, submission, presentation and defense of a research dissertation.

The Ph.D. can be awarded in a wide variety of fields, including the sciences, engineering and humanities. The term “philosophy,” according to Wikipedia, “does not refer solely to the field or academic disciple of philosophy, but is used in a broader sense in accordance with its original Greek meaning, which is ‘love of wisdom.’”

For some professions, such as university professor or researcher, the Ph.D. is pretty much de rigueur. Most Ph.D.s are earned as a means of contributing original research findings to an academic community, field of study or professional discipline.  

Earning a doctorate is challenging and rewarding, but do you know what to really expect? Download this free guide for tips and insights to help you prepare for success.  

What is an applied professional doctorate.

This doctorate is an advanced, high-level degree, too, earned after a period of three or more years of graduate-level study across a wide variety of disciplines. Like the Ph.D. it, too, culminates in the creation, submission, presentation and defense of a research dissertation or similar type of comprehensive final project.

The professional doctorate is also a research-based degree, only it emphasizes looking at existing bodies of knowledge and raising questions for the purposes of solving a problem and applying theories to a real-world setting.

Applied doctorate degrees first became well established in the United Kingdom and Australia and were initially offered in the United States by for-profit colleges and universities. Employer demand for higher skill levels and actionable problem-solving, however, opened up new programs at accredited non-profit institutions.

Different than a theoretical, Ph.D. degree, the professional doctorate is often the best terminal degree for the working professional who’s driven to lead and innovate.

Applied doctoral degree programs offer the opportunity to earn a practical degree that enables both subject mastery and field application.

What is the difference between the Ph.D. and doctorate?

It’s often assumed that a Ph.D. is a teaching-only degree while a professional doctorate is for the corporate player. The truth is, either degree can be valued in an academic or professional setting, depending on the type of institution or organization. Furthermore, either degree could be right for you.

Dr. Christopher Washington, Franklin University’s provost and chief academic officer explains the fundamental difference between the Ph.D. and the applied professional doctorate degree this way:

“With a Ph.D., you generate new theory. With the professional doctorate, you start from a place of practice and what’s going on in the world. You look at existing bodies of knowledge to see what theories have been created. Then you raise questions to determine how to design experiences that test theory to practice. In cultivating these types of practitioner-oriented scholars, there’s potential for a stronger and better relationship between the scholar and the community he or she serves. Such a connection helps us convene people to tackle the hard questions.”

Here we offer a side-by-side comparison of the Ph.D. and the professional doctorate to further demonstrate the differences (and similarities):

As you can see, the differences between the Ph.D. and the applied doctorate are few – and many – most of which are directly related to how earning the degree will impact your career.

Here are a few questions to ask yourself before deciding which degree is right for you :

• Do you want to conduct research or analyze and apply it?
• Do you want to work in an academic or professional setting?
• Do you want to identify problems or lead solutions to them?

Explains Dr. Washington, “If you want to generate new theory and conduct pure science within the pursuit of an academic life, then the Ph.D. is probably more in line with what you’ll need. If, however, you want to advance knowledge within a complex, global practice context while challenging yourself professionally, consider the applied doctorate degree.”

Related Articles

Franklin University 201 S Grant Ave. Columbus , OH 43215

Local: (614) 797-4700 Toll Free: (877) 341-6300 [email protected]

Copyright 2024 Franklin University

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Mol Biol Cell
• v.29(8); 2018 Apr 15

Is an MD/PhD program right for me? Advice on becoming a physician–scientist

We are living in a golden age of biomedical research in which it is increasingly feasible to translate fundamental discoveries into new diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to human illnesses. Inherited diseases are being cured with gene therapy. Cancer cells are being eliminated with less toxic small molecule inhibitors and reengineered T-cells. Direct connections are being made between the central nervous system and prosthetic devices. These efforts are being led by scientists and engineers, some of whom are also physicians. This article is intended to help anyone considering a career as a physician–scientist, but unsure about how best to begin. It is also intended for faculty, staff, and parents who are on the front lines of advising talented students about the options that they have for their future. With this in mind, I have tried to answer common questions about MD/PhD programs, but I have also included information about other paths to becoming a physician who does research.

INTRODUCTION

Because this is a perspectives piece, I will begin it with a confession: I have been a physician–scientist for more than 30 years and I like what I do. I am also a graduate of one of the earliest MD/PhD programs and have been director of the University of Pennsylvania’s MD/PhD program for 20 years. Being a physician who is also a scientist already makes me atypical. According to the American Medical Association, only 14,000 U.S. physicians (out of nearly 1 million) consider research to be their major job, and a search of National Institutes of Health (NIH) databases in 2012 turned up only 8200 physicians who were principal investigators on NIH research grants ( Ginsburg et al. , 2014 ). To put that number in context, there were 28,000 total investigators with NIH grants in 2012. In other words, most NIH principal investigators are PhD scientists, not physician–scientists (MD or MD/PhD).

My primary day (and sometimes night and weekend) job as a card-carrying physician–scientist is overseeing an NIH-funded research team. My clinical responsibilities include taking care of patients with the kinds of bleeding and blood clotting disorders that we study in the lab. Some of these patients have medical problems that are common in the United States. Some of them are true “zebras,” the kinds of patients who get referred to a well-respected academic medical center because physicians are unsure how best to proceed or lack the resources to manage the patient’s problem. I also teach medical students and graduate students, and I direct a very large MD/PhD program. In my spare time, I talk to lots of undergraduates and recent college graduates who are thinking about becoming physician–scientists and wondering whether they should be applying to MD/PhD programs. I meet them at Penn, but also on visits to other colleges and universities. This article is a distillation of some answers to questions that I am commonly asked. If you are an undergraduate trying to decide whether to go to medical school, graduate school, or both, this article may help you. Whatever you decide, I wish you success.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MD/PhD TRAINING?

MD/PhD programs were established in the 1950s to combine training in medicine and research. They were specifically designed for men and women who wanted to become research physicians, also known as physician–investigators or physician–scientists. Most of the graduates of MD/PhD programs in the 60-plus years since then have become faculty members at medical schools and universities, investigators at research institutes such as the NIH, or leaders in in the pharmaceutical and biotech industries ( Brass et al. , 2010 ). Regardless of where they eventually end up, MD/PhD trainees are being prepared for careers in which they will spend most of their time doing research or translating that research into new therapeutic and diagnostic approaches. It is a busy, challenging, and hugely rewarding career. A study of what has happened to MD/PhD program graduates from 24 schools appeared in Academic Medicine in 2010 and is worth reading not only for the data set, but also for the discussion of what the data mean ( Brass et al. , 2010 ). An even larger outcomes study that includes data on over 10,000 MD/PhD program graduates is scheduled for publication as a AAMC report in April 2018 ( Akabas et al. , 2018 ).

HOW CAN ONE PERSON DO TWO JOBS?

When I was an undergraduate and trying to decide what to do with my life, my mentors told me that I could become a doctor or a scientist, but that trying to combine two busy professions was futile. Many years later, I know that many current undergraduates are being told the same thing. However well-meant, that advice misses the point. The goal of MD/PhD program training is not to prepare you for two unrelated full time jobs. Instead, you should think of physician–scientists as chimeras—blends of a physician and a scientist with the two parts fitting closely together. A more relevant question is: if you are going to become a physician–scientist, do you have to go through an MD/PhD program? I will try to answer that one a bit later in this article. First, I’ll provide some definitions.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN MD/PhD PROGRAM, A COMBINED DEGREE PROGRAM, AND AN MSTP PROGRAM? A BIT OF HISTORY AND A WORD ABOUT FUNDING

None. Programs designed to train physician–scientists go by all of these names. For the most part, the terms are interchangeable, although at some schools “combined degree” programs can include MD/JD and MD/masters programs as well—also VMD/PhD programs, which train veterinary physician–scientists. A list of MD/PhD programs can be found at http://www.aamc.org/students/research/mdphd/applying_MD/PhD/61570/mdphd_programs.html . The NIH uses the term MSTP (short for “medical scientist training program”) to refer to programs at schools that have been competitively awarded special training funds to help support MD/PhD candidates. There are currently 46 MD/PhD programs that receive support from the National Institute of General Medical Studies. A list can be found at http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/InstPredoc/PredocOverview-MSTP.htm .

When they first started, there were only a handful of MD/PhD programs. I can clearly remember reading a small booklet about applying to medical school that had a single page at the back about MD/PhD programs. Over time, the number of programs has grown. Now there are ∼90 active MD/PhD programs that admit anywhere from a few students per year to 25 or more. The average size of an MD/PhD program in 2017 was ∼90 students in all stages of training. Compared with the many thousands who apply to medical school in each year, only 1900 (∼3%) apply to MD/PhD programs. About one-third of the applicants are accepted, which is similar to the acceptance rate for medical school. 1 When I began medical school, there were very few MD/PhD trainees—I was one of two in my entering class. That has changed considerably. There are currently ∼5500 men and women in training in MD/PhD programs.

Most MD/PhD programs provide tuition waivers for both medical school and graduate school plus a stipend to help cover living expenses. Such fellowships are exceedingly valuable for trainees and very expensive for medical schools and the NIH, so admissions committees work hard to pick the right students for their programs. Despite the high training costs, when I visit other MD/PhD programs to conduct reviews, it is not uncommon to hear deans refer to their MD/PhD program as “the jewel in the crown.” One can easily argue that the existence of MD/PhD programs is evidence of the high value that our society places on physician–scientists.

ARE MD/PhD PROGRAMS LIMITED TO THOSE INTERESTED IN LABORATORY RESEARCH?

The answer varies from school to school. Not all schools offer PhD programs in all disciplines. The majority of MD/PhD students receive their PhD in biomedical laboratory disciplines such as cell biology, biochemistry, genetics, immunology, pharmacology, neuroscience, and biomedical engineering. The names of departments and graduate programs vary from school to school. At some schools, MD/PhD trainees do their graduate work outside of the laboratory disciplines, in fields such as economics, epidemiology, health care economics, sociology, medical anthropology, or the history of science. This is not an exhaustive list, and you should check before you apply to see what is actually offered at any particular school.

Although there is no fully up-to-date and reliable list of which MD/PhD programs offer training in which graduate disciplines, a place to start is at the Website of the AAMC MD/PhD section (which is a good source for other types of information as well). 2

ARE THERE OTHER WAYS TO BECOME A PHYSICIAN–SCIENTIST?

Yes. Definitely. MD/PhD programs are a great choice for people who decide early that that they want to be physician–scientists and have built the necessary track record of academic success and research experience before they apply. Not everyone does this, however, either because he or she did not learn about the option early enough, he or she did not make a decision in time, or he or she does not have an academic and research experience record that supports an application. Not finding out early enough turns out to be a common problem. In my experience, college prehealth advisors know much less about MD/PhD training than MD training—not surprisingly, since only 3% of medical school applicants in the United States every year apply for MD/PhD training. As a result, some people choose (or are obliged) to do MD/PhD training in series, rather than parallel—finishing one degree and then starting the other. The disadvantages of this approach include taking longer to finish training and the likely need to cover the cost of medical school on your own.

I am frequently asked about the strategy of starting medical school and then applying to graduate school as a medical student. Some schools will consider you for transfer into their MD/PhD programs after you have completed a year or two of medical school or graduate school at the same university. Although it is very rare that an MD/PhD program will consider accepting a medical or graduate student from a different school, it does occasionally happen when faculty move from one institution to another and want to bring their students with them. The rules and requirements vary from school to school.

Other programs worth checking out include the NIH MD/PhD program that provides support for the PhD phase at the NIH campus or in Oxford/Cambridge, with the MD training taking place at one of the participating MSTP-designated programs. Note that not all of the MSTP programs have chosen to participate, so if you have your heart set on a specific medical school, you should be sure to ask. 3

Another option is to complete medical school and residency training before doing an extended period of supervised research. A number of Nobel Prize–winning physician–scientists did just that. However, with the increase in the number of MD/PhD training programs nationwide, most people who make the decision to become physician–­scientists while still in college should think hard about doing both degrees together in an integrated MD/PhD program that combines graduate school and medical school into a joint program that currently takes 8 years on average to complete ( Akabas et al. , 2018 ).

DO I REALLY NEED A PhD TO DO RESEARCH? CAN I SAVE TIME BY SKIPPING IT?

The answer to the first of these questions is “Clearly not.” However, while medical school will put you firmly on the path to becoming an accomplished clinician, it does not provide training in how to do research. At some point you will benefit from that additional piece of your education if you intend to become a physician–scientist.

As noted above, in years past it was not uncommon to learn how to do research by doing an extended postdoctoral fellowship after (or instead of) a clinical residency. I am often asked whether it is possible to save time on the path to becoming a physician–scientist by skipping graduate school and just going to medical school. The available data suggest that the answer to this one is “No.” Physician–scientists get their first jobs in academia and their first independent NIH grants at approximately the same age regardless of whether they completed an MD/PhD program or went solely to medical school and then did a more extended postdoc ( Ginsburg et al. , 2014 ). As a result, I normally tell undergraduates that if they are ready to make the commitment before starting medical school, MD/PhD programs offer many advantages, including integrated training, mentored research training, and medical school tuition waivers. On the other hand, if you are sure you want to be a doctor, but less sure about being a scientist, then my advice is to go to medical school and figure out the rest of what you need when you know more about the opportunities that being a physician provides.

HOW DOES MD/PhD TRAINING WORK AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE?

The answer varies from school to school, but historically students begin with 2 years of medical school, switch to graduate school in the third year of the program, and then return to finish medical school after completing (and defending) a thesis research project. When I was an MD/PhD student in the 1970s, there was little, if any, communication between the medical and graduate phases of the program. That has changed considerably. Now most programs emphasize integration of the MD and PhD parts of the training, with graduate school courses during years 1 and 2 and clinical experiences during graduate school. Some programs allow completion of 3–12 months of clinical training before the start of full-time graduate training. Be sure to ask how things are organized at schools that you are considering. In programs leading to a PhD in laboratory science, MD/PhD trainees usually spend the summer between the first and second years of medical school working in the laboratory of the faculty member they are considering as a potential thesis advisor. Some programs also ask students to do one of these “lab rotations” in the summer before starting medical school classes as well. Depending on the number of clinical months completed before starting the thesis research, students returning to medical school will need 1–2 years to finish their training and meet the requirements for medical licensure. The stated goal is to complete an MD/PhD program in 7 or 8 years. However, numbers from across the country show that some students finish in 6 years, while others take 10 years (or more). The average currently is 8 years ( Akabas et al. , 2018 ). Note that medical education in the United States continues to evolve. One trend is away from the classic two years of preclinical education followed by 2 years of clinical education. The earlier start in clinical training made possible by shortening preclinical time enables some MD/PhD programs to offer full-time clinical experiences before the start of graduate school. However, some schools are choosing not to do this. The only way to find out what is being done is to ask, if it is not evident from the program’s Website.

HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO COMPLETE TRAINING AFTER GRADUATING FROM AN MD/PhD PROGRAM?

Corny as this may sound, the process is never really finished. Your education will continue throughout your career. A more pragmatic answer is that training will extend beyond medical school and graduate school as you complete your post graduate education. Here are some typical numbers: MD/PhD program, 8 years. Residency, 3–6 years. Postdoctoral fellowship, 3–6 years. For most people the term “postdoctoral fellowship” includes another year or two of clinical training, followed by a return to research for 2 or more years ( Figure 1 ). For example, I completed an MD/PhD program in 6 years, followed by a residency in internal medicine (3 years) and a fellowship in clinical hemato­logy and oncology that was combined with postdoctoral training back in a lab (3 years). After that I became an assistant professor and started my own lab. That timing was fairly typical when I did it. Now it would be considered fast. On the other hand, my job description when I finished included running a research team, looking after postdocs and graduate students, and taking care of sick people with complicated medical problems, so maybe all of that training time was necessary.

Paths to becoming a physician who is also a scientist. Integrated MD/PhD training programs that combine research and medical training are not the only path to becoming a physician–scientist. Alternatives begin with doing a research year in medical school (MD+ in the figure) or just doing the standard four-year medical school education. These save time at the start, but usually require a longer period of postgraduate clinical and research training to reach the point where a job as a physician–scientist in academia becomes feasible. As a result, physician–scientists often arrive at the “get a job” point at about the same age whether they began as medical students, MD+ students, or MD/PhD students, although usually with greater student debt if they have not been in an MD/PhD program. See the text for details.

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE GRADUATES OF MD/PhD PROGRAMS?

Short-term, nearly all do additional clinical training. Those who do not are usually headed toward careers at research institutes or outside clinical medicine entirely. Those who do apply for residencies often find that their MD/PhD training makes them particularly appealing to residency programs at top institutions. Long-term, most program graduates end up with careers in which they combine patient care and research. The research may be lab-based, translational, or clinical. Most (75–80%) end up at academic medical centers, at research institutions such as the NIH, or in the pharmaceutical/biotech industry ( Figure 2 ; Brass et al. , 2010 ; Akabas et al. , 2018 ). A much higher percentage of MD/PhD program graduates have ended up in academia than of medical school graduates in general ( Brass et al. , 2010 ). Those who build research careers and apply for NIH research grants find that having the PhD in addition to the MD improves their chances of obtaining funding ( Ginsburg et al. , 2014 ).

Where are they working? Data from 2202 MD/PhD program alumni who have completed all phases of postgraduate clinical and research training. Adapted from Brass et al. (2010) . Industry includes the biotech and pharmaceutical industries. Pvt Practice refers to full-time clinical practice outside of an academic medical center.

HOW DO I APPLY?

The process of application varies from school to school. Some schools have an MD/PhD-focused committee that will screen your application and coordinate the interview and admission process. Other schools consider MD/PhD applicants only after a decision has been made about MD admissions. Finally, some schools consider students for the MD/PhD program only after they have completed a year or more of medical school. Schools that subscribe to AMCAS will ask you to indicate your interest in an MD/PhD program and then to provide additional information as part of a secondary application.

WHEN DO I APPLY?

Most people apply after finishing their junior year in college, but a growing number of applicants finish college and work for a year or more before applying. Some people use the time after college to take courses needed for medical school admission or to gain more full-time laboratory research experience. Some people simply were not ready to make decisions about their future careers and postponed choosing beyond the finish of college. It is a mistake to assume that MD/PhD programs are interested only in applicants who have worked in a lab for a year or more after college. That is clearly not the case, and some of us who direct MD/PhD programs are concerned about the growing percentage of applicants who have waited to apply after they graduate in the mistaken impression that it will improve their resumes. My advice is that for a training path that lasts as long as this one does, it is best to get started as soon as possible.

WHAT DO ADMISSIONS COMMITTEES LOOK FOR?

The answer clearly varies from school to school, but some basic principles apply. In general, admissions committees will look for evidence of academic success, extended research experience, letters of recommendation from people who know you well, and your plans for the future.

• Evidence of academic success. This includes your GPA and MCAT scores, but is not limited to them. Admission committees use a holistic approach and will undoubtedly consider where you went to college and what types of courses you took. They will not necessarily be dismayed if you got off to a slow start, as long as you did well later. They will place the greatest emphasis on courses that are relevant to your chosen area of graduate school training. I have not encountered a program director who seriously believed that the MCAT tests your ability to be a physician–scientist. Nonetheless programs use MCAT scores in a variety of ways, including seeing how you compare with the national pool of applicants and predicting how you will do on the numerous standardized tests that all of us have to take in medical school and beyond.
• Extensive research experience. If you plan to get a PhD in one of the laboratory sciences, then prior laboratory experience counts heavily, particularly if you spent a year or more in the same laboratory. Summer laboratory experience can be helpful because they are usually opportunities to do research full time, but summers are short. Whenever possible, you should try to do research during the academic year, or at least spend multiple summers in the same lab. If you are planning a PhD outside of the laboratory sciences, seek equivalent experiences. The idea is to be sure you like the experience and to create a track record upon which your past performance can be judged and your future success predicted.
• Letters of recommendation. The most important letter(s) are from the faculty members or other senior investigators with whom you worked. The letters should ideally comment on your talents, skills, and potential for success as an independent investigator. If you are working with a senior faculty member, it is very helpful if he or she can compare you with other students with whom he or she has worked. Note that such a letter is not necessarily the most appropriate for an MD-only application. MD/PhD program admissions committees are usually most interested in your talent and ability as a physician–scientist, although they will definitely also consider whether you are likely to become a successful and caring physician. Fortunately, medical schools allow you to submit more than one letter of recommendation.
• Your plans for the future. Because training to be a physician–­investigator is so costly in terms of your time and the school’s resources, your career goals should be compatible with MD/PhD training. Becoming a full-time practitioner is a laudable goal, but does not require a PhD in addition to an MD. Your goal as a trained physician–investigator should be to spend at least 75% of your time on research. You do not need to know the specific problem you want to work on at this point (many do not, and it is likely to change), or with whom you would like to train, but your commitment to becoming an investigator should be clearly communicated in your essays and interviews, and you should have given thought to what will be required.

HOW DO I DECIDE WHERE TO APPLY?

Some applicants have decided that they want to work in a particular field or with a particular faculty member. For them, choosing where to apply is defined by where that faculty member works or where the field is best represented. Most applicants have only a general idea of what they might want to work on in the future and know that their interests are likely to evolve as they are exposed to new things. For them, choice will be defined by issues such as the reputation of the school (hopefully not based solely on U.S. News and World Report rankings!), the success of the graduates of the program (be sure to ask!), and geography. Schools vary in the difficulty of gaining admission. The directors and nonfaculty administrators of MD/PhD programs nationwide are a large pool of resources that you can tap. Most of us get e-mail from future applicants all the time. Take advantage of our willingness to talk with you. Ask questions about the things that are important to you.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I began this perspective with the confession that I am a physician–scientist and I like what I do. It is not unusual these days to encounter articles and opinion pieces that lament the difficulty of becoming and remaining a physician–scientist. I will not cite them here—you can find them on your own. Fortunately, our society is still willing to make a large investment in biomedical research through the NIH and through numerous foundations. If you want to become a physician who discovers the new stuff, there are jobs waiting to be filled. However, you will need good training and great mentorship as you learn the skills needed to be a physician and a research team leader. Good luck with your decision.

Acknowledgments

My thanks to my colleagues who direct MD/PhD programs, the NIH for supporting physician–scientist training (including my own), and the hundreds of MD/PhD candidates and alumni who have taught me so much over the past 20 years.

Abbreviations used:

DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E17-12-0721

1 www.aamc.org/data/facts/enrollmentgraduate/ .

2 www.aamc.org/students/research/mdphd/ .

3 http://mdphd.gpp.nih.gov .

• Akabas MH, Tartakovsky I, Brass LF. (2018). The National MD–PhD Program Outcomes Study. American Association of Medical Colleges Reports.
• Brass LF, Akabas MH, Burnley LD, Engman DM, Wiley CA, Andersen OS. (2010). Are MD–PhD programs meeting their goals? An analysis of career choices made by graduates of 24 MD–PhD programs . Acad Med , 692–701. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ginsburg D, Shurin SB, Mills S. (2014). NIH Physician–Scientist Workforce (PSW) Working Group Report. [ Google Scholar ]

How to Correctly Use the Titles Dr. & PhD With a Name

How to Reference a Person With a PhD

When someone has earned a Doctor of Philosophy, or Ph.D., degree, that person is subsequently referred to as “doctor” in formal speech. The same is true of a person who is a medical doctor, psychologist, dentist or veterinarian. In formal speech, that person should be referred to as “doctor.” However, the rules are different in written form when addressing someone who is called “doctor” in formal speech. In written form, the titles “Dr.” and “Ph.D.” are not interchangeable.

Determine the Type of Doctor

First, you should identify what type of doctor you are addressing. Doctors of medicine and psychology, doctors of dentistry and doctors of veterinary medicine must be addressed differently in comparison to academic doctors who have earned a Doctor of Philosophy doctoral degree. Be advised that there are different types of doctoral degrees. A Doctor of Philosophy degree is just one kind of doctoral degree. There’s also, for example, a Doctor of Education doctoral degree and a Doctor of Psychology doctoral degree. The titles associated with the various doctoral degrees are not interchangeable. Only a person who has earned a Doctor of Philosophy degree should be addressed as Ph.D.

Addressing a Doctor in Writing

Place the title of “Dr.” before the name of a person who is a doctor of medicine or psychology, doctor of dentistry, or doctor of veterinary medicine. For example Dr. George Ross. Always write the word “doctor” in its abbreviated form when it goes before the person’s name. Never write, for example, Doctor George Ross. Do not combine the title of “Dr.” with any other title even if the person could appropriately be addressed by a different title. Never write, for example, “Dr. George Ross, Ph.D.,” even if the person is a medical doctor who has also earned a Doctor of Philosophy degree. Pick one title. Do not use the “Dr.” title when referring to someone who is solely an academic doctor.

Put a comma followed by the title “Ph.D.” after the name of a person who has earned a Doctor of Philosophy doctoral degree. For example Stacey Childs, Ph.D. Do not combine the title of “Ph.D.” with any other title even if the person could appropriately be addressed by a different title. For instance, even if the person being addressed is a doctor of medicine who has also earned a Ph.D., never write, for example, Dr. Stacey Childs, Ph.D. Pick one title. Do not use the “Ph.D.” title when referring to someone who not earned a Doctor of Philosophy doctoral degree.

Related Articles

How to sign your name when you have a bachelor of science in criminal ....

Proper Way to Notate College Degrees

How to Address a DVM

Different Types of Doctoral Degrees

How to Address Multiple Ladies in a Letter

The Difference Between a Doctoral Degree and a Ph.D.

The Difference Between a PhD & DLitt

Doctorate Degrees That Don't Require a Dissertation

• The Emily Post Institute: What are some professional titles to know?

Maya Austen began freelance writing in 2009. She has written for many online publications on a wide variety of topics ranging from physical fitness to amateur astronomy. She's also an author and e-book publisher. Austen has a Bachelor of Arts in communications from the New England Institute of Art and currently lives in Boston, Mass.

Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox , Microsoft Edge , Google Chrome , or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback .

We'd appreciate your feedback. Tell us what you think! opens in new tab/window

9 things you should consider before embarking on a PhD

June 23, 2021 | 15 min read

By Andy Greenspon

The ideal research program you envision is not what it appears to be

Editor's Note:  When Andy Greenspon wrote this article, he was a first-year student in Applied Physics at Harvard. Now he has completed his PhD. — Alison Bert, June 23, 2021

If you are planning to apply for a PhD program, you're probably getting advice from dozens of students, professors, administrators your parents and the Internet. Sometimes it's hard to know which advice to focus on and what will make the biggest difference in the long-run. So before you go back to daydreaming about the day you accept that Nobel Prize, here are nine things you should give serious thought to. One or more of these tips may save you from anguish and help you make better decisions as you embark on that path to a PhD.

1. Actively seek out information about PhD programs.

Depending on your undergraduate institution, there may be more or less support to guide you in selecting a PhD program – but there is generally much less than when you applied to college.

On the website of my physics department, I found a page written by one of my professors, which listed graduate school options in physics and engineering along with resources to consult. As far as I know, my career center did not send out much information about PhD programs. Only after applying to programs did I find out that my undergraduate website had a link providing general information applicable to most PhD programs. This is the kind of information that is available all over the Internet.

So don't wait for your career center or department to lay out a plan for you. Actively seek it out from your career center counselors, your professors, the Internet — and especially from alumni from your department who are in or graduated from your desired PhD program. First-hand experiences will almost always trump the knowledge you get second-hand.

2. A PhD program is not simply a continuation of your undergraduate program.

Many students don't internalize this idea until they have jumped head-first into a PhD program. The goal is not to complete an assigned set of courses as in an undergraduate program, but to develop significant and original research in your area of expertise. You will have required courses to take, especially if you do not have a master's degree yet, but these are designed merely to compliment your research and provide a broad and deep knowledge base to support you in your research endeavors.

At the end of your PhD program, you will be judged on your research, not on how well you did in your courses. Grades are not critical as long as you maintain the minimum GPA requirement, and you should not spend too much time on courses at the expense of research projects. Graduate courses tend to be designed to allow you to take away what you will find useful to your research more than to drill a rigid set of facts and techniques into your brain.

3. Take a break between your undergraduate education and a PhD program.

You are beginning your senior year of college, and your classmates are asking you if you are applying to graduate school. You think to yourself, "Well, I like studying this topic and the associated research, and I am going to need a PhD if I want to be a professor or do independent research, so I might as well get it done as soon as possible." But are you certain about the type of research you want to do? Do you know where you want to live for the next five years? Are you prepared to stay in an academic environment for nine years straight?

Many people burn out or end up trudging through their PhD program without a thought about what lies outside of or beyond it. A break of a year or two or even more may be necessary to gain perspective. If all you know is an academic environment, how can you compare it to anything else? Many people take a job for five or more years before going back to get their PhD. It is true though that the longer you stay out of school, the harder it is to go back to an academic environment with lower pay and a lack of set work hours. A one-year break will give you six months or so after graduation before PhD applications are due. A two-year gap might be ideal to provide time to identify your priorities in life and explore different areas of research without having school work or a thesis competing for your attention.

Getting research experience outside of a degree program can help focus your interests and give you a leg up on the competition when you finally decide to apply. It can also help you determine whether you will enjoy full-time research or if you might prefer an alternative career path that still incorporates science, for example, in policy, consulting or business — or a hybrid research job that combines scientific and non-scientific skills.

I will be forever grateful that I chose to do research in a non-academic environment for a year between my undergraduate and PhD programs. It gave me the chance to get a feel for doing nothing but research for a full year. Working at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in the Space Division, I was the manager of an optics lab, performing spectroscopic experiments on rocks and minerals placed in a vacuum chamber. While my boss determined the overall experimental design, I was able to make my own suggestions for experiments and use my own discretion in how to perform them. I presented this research at two national conferences as well — a first for me. I was also able to learn about other research being performed there, determine which projects excited me the most, and thus narrow down my criteria for a PhD program.

4. Your current area of study does not dictate what you have to study in graduate school.

You might be studying the function and regulation of membrane proteins or doing a computational analysis of the conductivity of different battery designs, but that doesn't mean your PhD project must revolve around similar projects. The transition between college or another research job to a PhD program is one of the main transitions in your life when it is perfectly acceptable to completely change research areas.

If you are doing computation, you may want to switch to lab-based work or vice versa. If you are working in biology but have always had an interest in photonics research, now is the time to try it out. You may find that you love the alternative research and devote your PhD to it, you might hate it and fall back on your previous area of study — or you may even discover a unique topic that incorporates both subjects.

One of the best aspects of the PhD program is that you can make the research your own. Remember, the answer to the question "Why are you doing this research?" should not be "Well, because it's what I've been working on for the past few years already."While my undergraduate research was in atomic physics, I easily transitioned into applied physics and materials science for my PhD program and was able to apply much of what I learned as an undergraduate to my current research. If you are moving from the sciences to a non-STEM field such as social sciences or humanities, this advice can still apply, though the transition is a bit more difficult and more of a permanent commitment.

5. Make sure the PhD program has a variety of research options, and learn about as many research groups as possible in your first year.

Even if you believe you are committed to one research area, you may find that five years of such work is not quite what you expected. As such, you should find a PhD program where the professors are not all working in the same narrowly focused research area. Make sure there are at least three professors working on an array of topics you could imagine yourself working on.

In many graduate programs, you are supposed to pick a research advisor before even starting. But such arrangements often do not work out, and you may be seeking a new advisor before you know it. That's why many programs give students one or two semesters to explore different research areas before choosing a permanent research advisor.

In your first year, you should explore the research of a diverse set of groups. After touring their labs, talking to the students, or sitting in on group meetings, you may find that this group is the right one for you.

In addition, consider the importance of who your research advisor will be. This will be the person you interact with regularly for five straight years and who will have a crucial influence on your research. Do you like their advising style? Does their personality mesh with yours? Can you get along? Of course, the research your advisor works on is critical, but if you have large disagreements at every meeting or do not get helpful advice on how to proceed with your research, you may not be able to succeed. At the very least, you must be able to handle your advisor's management of the lab and advising style if you are going to be productive in your work. The Harvard program I enrolled in has professors working on research spanning from nanophotonics to energy materials and biophysics, covering my wide range of interests. By spending time in labs and offices informally chatting with graduate students, I found an advisor whose personality and research interests meshed very well with me. Their genuine enthusiasm for this advisor and their excitement when talking about their research was the best input I could have received.

6. Location is more important than you think — but name recognition is not.

The first consideration in choosing a PhD program should be, "Is there research at this university that I am passionate about?" After all, you will have to study this topic in detail for four or more years. But when considering the location of a university, your first thought should not be, "I'm going to be in the lab all the time, so what does it matter if I'm by the beach, in a city, or in the middle of nowhere." Contrary to popular belief, you will have a life outside of the lab, and you will have to be able to live with it for four or more years. Unlike when you were an undergraduate, your social and extracurricular life will revolve less around the university community, so the environment of the surrounding area is important. Do you need a city atmosphere to be productive? Or is your ideal location surrounded by forests and mountains or by a beach? Is being close to your family important? Imagine what it will be like living in the area during the times you are not doing research; consider what activities will you do and how often will you want to visit family.

While many of the PhD programs that accepted me had research that truly excited me, the only place I could envision living for five or more years was Boston, as the city I grew up near and whose environment and culture I love, and to be close to my family.

While location is more important than you think, the reputation and prestige of the university is not. In graduate school, the reputation of the individual department you are joining — and sometimes even the specific research group you work in — are more important. There, you will develop research collaborations and professional connections that will be crucial during your program and beyond. When searching for a job after graduation, other scientists will look at your specific department, the people you have worked with and the research you have done.

At the Asgard Irish Pub in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Andy Greenspon talks with fellow graduate students from Harvard and MIT at an Ask for Evidence workshop organized by Sense About Science. He grew up near Boston and chose to go to graduate school there.

7. Those time management skills you developed in college? Develop them further.

After surviving college, you may think you have mastered the ability to squeeze in your coursework, extracurricular activities and even some sleep. In a PhD program, time management reaches a whole new level. You will not only have lectures to attend and homework to do. You will have to make time for your research, which will include spending extended periods of time in the lab, analyzing data, and scheduling time with other students to collaborate on research.

Also, you will most likely have to teach for a number of semesters, and you will want to attend any seminar that may be related to your research or that just peaks your interest. To top it all off, you will still want to do many of those extracurricular activities you did as an undergraduate. While in the abstract, it may seem simple enough to put this all into your calendar and stay organized, you will find quickly enough that the one hour you scheduled for a task might take two or three hours, putting you behind on everything else for the rest of the day or forcing you to cut other planned events. Be prepared for schedules to go awry, and be willing to sacrifice certain activities. For some, this might be sleep; for others, it might be an extracurricular activity or a few seminars they were hoping to attend. In short, don't panic when things don't go according to plan; anticipate possible delays and be ready to adapt.

8. Expect to learn research skills on the fly – or take advantage of the training your department or career center offers.

This may be the first time you will have to write fellowship or grant proposals, write scientific papers, attend conferences, present your research to others, or even peer-review scientific manuscripts. From my experience, very few college students or even PhD students receive formal training on how to perform any of these tasks. Usually people follow by example. But this is not always easy and can be quite aggravating sometimes. So seek out talks or interactive programs offered by your department or career center. The effort will be well worth it when you realize you've become quite adept at quickly and clearly explaining your research to others and at outlining scientific papers and grant proposals. Alternatively, ask a more experienced graduate student or your advisor for advice on these topics. In addition, be prepared for a learning curve when learning all the procedures and processes of the group you end up working in. There may be many new protocols to master, whether they involve synthesizing chemicals, growing bacterial cells, or aligning mirrors on an optical table. In addition, the group may use programming languages or data analysis software you are unfamiliar with. Don't get discouraged but plan to spend extra effort getting used to these procedures and systems. After working with them regularly, they will soon become second nature. When I first started my job at Johns Hopkins, I felt overwhelmed by all the intricacies of the experiment and definitely made a few mistakes, including breaking a number of optical elements. But by the end of my year there, I had written an updated protocol manual for the modifications I had made to the experimental procedures and was the "master" passing on my knowledge to the next person taking the job.

9. There are no real breaks.

In a stereotypical "9-to-5" job, when the workday is over or the weekend arrives, you can generally forget about your work. And a vacation provides an even longer respite. But in a PhD program, your schedule becomes "whenever you find time to get your work done." You might be in the lab during regular work hours or you might be working until 10 p.m. or later to finish an experiment. And the only time you might have available to analyze data might be at 1 a.m. Expect to work during part of the weekend, too. Graduate students do go on vacations but might still have to do some data analysis or a literature search while away.

As a PhD student, it might be hard to stop thinking about the next step in an experiment or that data sitting on your computer or that paper you were meaning to start. While I imagine some students can bifurcate their mind between graduate school life and everything else, that's quite hard for many of us to do. No matter what, my research lies somewhere in the back of my head. In short, your schedule is much more flexible as a PhD student, but as a result, you never truly take a break from your work.

While this may seem like a downer, remember that you should have passion for the research you work on (most of the time), so you should be excited to think up new experiments or different ways to consider that data you have collected. Even when I'm lying in bed about to fall asleep, I am sometimes ruminating about aspects of my experiment I could modify or what information I could do a literature search on to gain new insights. A PhD program is quite the commitment and rarely lives up to expectations – but it is well worth the time and effort you will spend for something that truly excites you.

Contributor

Andy greenspon.

• Smarter Living
• Entertainment
• Relationships

This content includes information from experts in their field and is fact-checked to ensure accuracy.

Our team of editors strives to be objective, unbiased, and honest.

We are committed to bringing you researched, expert-driven content to help you make more informed decisions as it pertains to all aspects of your daily life. We constantly strive to provide you with the best information possible.

6 Signs You're Eating Too Much Protein, According to Doctors

Overdoing it can cause a surprising set of symptoms.

We've all heard that high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets can aid in weight loss—but are they actually good for you? Though your body undoubtedly needs protein to function, it's possible to have too much protein.

Protein is an essential nutrient made up of chemical building blocks known as amino acids. Your body needs dietary protein in order to perform basic functions, most importantly the creation and maintenance of every cell in the body, including those in the muscles, bones, and tissues.

Eating a wide range of whole foods that combine lean sources of protein with carbohydrates, healthy fats, fiber, vitamins, minerals, and ample water is considered optimal for health. Balance—rather than an over-reliance on any one nutrient like protein—is key, doctors say.

"It's important to adjust your protein intake to match your lifestyle and other nutrient needs, making sure your body gets what it needs without overdoing it," says Chris Mohr , PhD, RD, a fitness and nutrition advisor at Fortune Recommends Health .

Wondering exactly how much is too much, and what problems that can cause? Read on to learn the six signs that you're eating too much protein.

RELATED:  7 Protein Deficiency Symptoms, According to Doctors .

How much protein do you actually need?

The amount of protein you need depends on your age, sex, weight, and activity level, explains Raj Dasgupta , MD, a medical reviewer for NCOA and an ABIM quadruple board-certified physician specializing in internal medicine, pulmonology, critical care, and sleep medicine.

"Generally, adults need about 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight. Athletes and very active people may need more, around 1.2 to 2.0 grams per kilogram. Older adults and those recovering from illness might also need more protein to stay healthy," he tells Best Life.

Not sure how to calculate your weight in kilograms? Simply divide your weight in pounds by 2.2.

Getting too little protein can also cause symptoms, Dasgupta notes. "In the short term, you might feel fatigued, have muscle weakness, and/or a weakened immune system," he says. "Over time, chronic protein deficiency can cause muscle wasting, impaired growth and development in children, and edema (fluid retention)."

Mohr adds that it's especially important for older adults to eat enough protein to maintain muscle strength, prevent infection, and promote overall health.

That said, when your diet includes more than two grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day, you may begin to experience symptoms. These can include the following.

RELATED: 6 Signs You're Getting Too Much Calcium, According to Doctors .

1 Kidney problems

According to Dasgupta, if you already have kidney disease, following a high-protein diet may worsen your kidney function because the body may not be able to get rid of all the waste products associated with proteins.

In fact, some recent research suggests that even those without previously impaired kidney function might experience kidney symptoms. A 2020 study published in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (JASN) linked high-protein diets with an increased incidence of de novo (new onset) chronic kidney disease (CKD).

2 Dehydration

3 Heart disease

Your heart health can also suffer when you eat more protein than you need, some research suggests.

"High-protein diets, especially those with a lot of red and processed meat, can increase your risk of heart disease due to higher fat and cholesterol," says Dasgupta.

In fact, a 2024 study published in Nature Metabolism found that consuming more than 22 percent of your daily calories from protein can increase your risk of atherosclerosis. This is when the arteries become thickened or hardened due to a buildup of plaque in the arteries' inner lining.

RELATED: 5 Side Effects of Taking Too Much Magnesium .

4 Nutritional deficiency or imbalance

Lean sources of protein are an important part of any balanced diet, but getting too much protein can lead to a nutritional deficiency or imbalance.

"Protein is very filling and with a focus solely on protein, it could displace other nutrient-dense foods like quality carbohydrates and fats," explains Mohr. "This can ultimately lead to a risk of not getting enough of other nutrients like fiber, vitamins, and minerals, which can affect overall health."

5 Gastrointestinal upset

Excess protein—especially if you're eating it in the place of other nutrients—can also cause gastrointestinal upset. This can take the form of nausea, diarrhea, indigestion, constipation, and digestive discomfort, the experts say.

6 Bad breath

Consistently eating excessive amounts of protein in your diet can also lead to bad breath.

According to the JASN study, "high dietary intake of protein may lead to higher levels of urea and other nitrogenous waste products."As the body breaks protein down during the digestive process, it produces ammonia if there is excess urea present, leading to an unpleasant odor.

Speak with your doctor or dietitian to learn more about striking the right nutritional balance, including how to get the right amount of protein for your body.

We offer the most up-to-date information from top experts, new research, and health agencies, but our content is not meant to be a substitute for professional guidance. When it comes to the medication you're taking or any other health questions you have, always consult your healthcare provider directly.

• Source: JASN: The Effects of High-Protein Diets on Kidney Health and Longevity
• Source: Nature Metabolism: Identification of a leucine-mediated threshold effect governing macrophage mTOR signalling and cardiovascular risk

5 Foods a Gastroenterologist Eats Every Day

15 Best Foods If You Have High Blood Pressure

8 Best Mediterranean Diet Foods for Weight Loss

10 Most Hydrating Foods to Eat This Summer

7 Healthy Fats to Eat for Weight Loss

7 Hidden Dangers of Taking Zinc Supplements

7 Best Supplements for Gut Health

8 Foods Most Likely to Cause Food Poisoning

Cardiac Surgeon Shares 4 Foods He Avoids

Everything You Need to Know About Ikigai, The New Hygge

Dollar Tree Has $15 Beauty Items for $1.25

You'll want to check your store soon.

I Lost 100 Pounds Eating This "Giant" Dinner

You may start looking at salads differently.

Baby Chain Starts Re-Opening of 200 Locations

They'll be inside existing Kohl's stores.

25 Books That Will Make You Super Interesting

You'll be ready to impress.

10 Olympic Events You Have to See This Week

Don't miss team USA compete for the gold.

UNIQLO is Opening New Locations in 14 Cities

They hope to reach 200 stores here by 2027.

Copyright 2024 Galvanized Media . All Rights Reserved. Best Life is part of the Dotdash Meredith Publishing Family.

FDA approves blood test to screen for colon cancer

The Food and Drug Administration on Monday approved Guardant Health’s blood test, called Shield, to screen for colon cancer. The test isn't meant to replace colonoscopies, but is generating enthusiasm among doctors who say it has the potential to boost the dismal rate of screenings for the  second-highest cause of cancer death  in the United States.

Shield has previously been available to doctors as a screening tool, at an out-of-pocket cost of $895. With the FDA approval, Medicare and private insurance companies are much more likely to cover the cost of the blood test, making it more widely accessible for patients.

Dr. Arvind Dasari, an associate professor in the department of gastrointestinal and medical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, called the approval a “welcome development.”

But, he cautioned, “we’ll have to wait and see what the impact will be in terms of improving screening and reducing the incidence of mortality.”

The American Cancer Society estimates that more than 53,000 people will die of colorectal cancer this year.

Research published in March showed Shield was 83% effective in finding colorectal cancers. It works by detecting the DNA that cancerous tumors release into the bloodstream.

It’s most effective in finding later-stage cancers, when tumors release more of that DNA. The study found that Shield only detected 13% of earlier-stage polyps.

The test would need to be given at least every three years, starting at age 45 — the same age it's recommended to begin colorectal screening.

A positive test isn’t necessarily a diagnosis. If the results indicate cancer is present, patients would still need a colonoscopy so doctors can see where tumors are and how far they’ve progressed.

“People have to understand that a positive Shield test requires a colonoscopy to confirm that you have an advanced lesion or colorectal cancer, or that the results were false,” said Robert Smith, senior vice president of Early Cancer Detection Science at the American Cancer Society. “A test like this is not complete if it’s positive and you have not had a colonoscopy.”

This is the second blood test to screen for colon cancer; Epigenomics’ Epi proColon was approved in 2016. But it’s rarely used, Smith said, because of concerns about its accuracy. It's also not covered by Medicare or private insurance.

Since the mid-1990s there’s been a troubling rise in colon cancer in people younger than 55, with rates increase increasing by 1% to 2% per year among that age group. At the same time, cases and deaths among adults 60 and older have been declining, according to the American Cancer Society .

“What breaks my heart is that it’s preventable,” said Dr. William Grady, a gastroenterologist at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle. “One of my biggest joys is when I’m doing colonoscopy and I can take out polyps” that, if left alone, would have progressed to cancer.

Indeed, colorectal cancer is one of the only cancers that can be prevented with screening, and colonoscopy is, by far, the most accurate way to detect it. But screening rates are extraordinarily low. Fewer than 60%  of people who are eligible have had their recommended screening.

“The biggest problem with colon cancer right now is that there’s a significant part of the population that’s not getting screened,” said Dr. Sapna Syngal, director of strategic planning for prevention and early cancer detection at the Dana-Farber Cancer Center in Boston. “If this test increases the number of people getting screened, it’s going to have a huge impact.” 

Grady, who led the March study of the Shield test, said it’s often adults in their 40s and 50s who are least likely to be compliant with screening.

“These are people who are employed, many have families, and so you have all of these other life responsibilities that get in the way of taking care of themselves, he said.

Colonoscopy is time-consuming, forcing people to take at least one day off work. There’s also a certain “ick” factor that many people find unpalatable. During the procedure, doctors insert a tiny camera into the rectum to look for tumors or spots that may become cancerous in the future.

That camera needs a clear view of the colon. The day before the colonoscopy, patients have to take a strong dose of laxatives. That is, they spend a lot of time in the bathroom.

“Many people don’t like the messiness of dealing with stool and many people really don’t like the colonoscopy — mostly the prep,” said Electra Paskett, deputy director for population sciences and community outreach at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. “I think a blood test would be ideal for many people.”

Another colon cancer screening method includes fecal occult blood tests that  detect blood  in the stool, which can be a warning sign of colon polyps or cancer. The FIT-DNA tests, such as Cologuard, are very effective at detecting cancer, but are less effective at detecting precancerous polyps. 

John Gormly, 77, of Newport Beach, California, had avoided colonoscopy screening for years. When his doctor gave him the option of the Shield blood test, he took it.

“He called me a day or so later and said, ‘I don’t like the results whatsoever. I’m going to send you off to get a colonoscopy,’” Gormly recalled. “Turns out I had stage 2 colon cancer.” Surgeons were able to remove the tumor completely.

“Thank God I had taken that blood test,” Gormly said. “I never felt anything, never knew anything was wrong. Short of that blood test, I don’t know how it would have turned out.”

Erika Edwards is a health and medical news writer and reporter for NBC News and "TODAY."

News That Matters Support us

Hawaii News

Investigative stories and local news updates.

• Latest News
• Environment
• Legislature
• Honolulu Rail
• Browse All Topics

2024 Elections Guide

Latest elections news, candidate info, ballot drop box locations, how to register to vote, financial disclosures and more.

• Candidate Q&As
• The 2024 Ballot
• Financial Disclosures
• Latest Stories

Coverage of the 2023 wildfire destruction of Lahaina.

Top Stories

• The Lives We Lost
• The Long Road Home
• Maui Events

Commentary, Analysis and Opinion.

• Community Voices

Special Projects

Award winning in-depth reports and featured on-going series.

• Browse Projects & Series

Newsletters

Get the week’s news delivered straight to your inbox.

• Terms of Service
• Reprint Policy
• About Civil Beat
• Jobs at Civil Beat
• Our Supporters

There Are So Few Doctors In Maui County That Even Medical Workers Struggle To Get Care

More than two-thirds of Maui County residents experienced delays accessing health care last year, according to a new report.

For nearly a year, Hannah Litt has provided free women’s health care to individuals impacted by the Lahaina wildfire through a state-funded reproductive program at the University of Hawaii Maui College. 

As the director and sole provider at the college’s health center, she has seen around 80 fire survivors, most of whom sought help accessing birth control.

“It was the need to pick up where they left off,” Litt said, pointing out that some women lost access to medication because of the disaster, “and recognizing that it was not a great time to get pregnant.”

There has long been a shortage of women’s health care providers — and health care providers in general — in Maui County, said Litt, who has worked as a nurse practitioner and certified nurse midwife on Maui since 2018.

Rising housing prices, the loss of key doctors, ongoing struggles with interisland transportation and the 2023 Maui fires have exacerbated the problem.

Today, residents are increasingly finding it difficult to get routine care. More than two-thirds of county residents experienced a delay in accessing health services in the last year, according to a recent report published by the Hawaii State Rural Health Association — a 21% increase from 2022.

A whopping 81% of medical professionals surveyed said they and their families struggled to get the appointments they needed.

Access Worse On Molokai And Lanai

Health care costs, a lack of transportation and challenges with language access are among the problems identified by health care providers in the report. However, an overwhelming 93% of respondents in the medical field pointed to a lack of providers as the biggest issue preventing the community from accessing health care.

“If I hired five new physicians today, my belief is that their panels will be full of patients within six to nine months,” said Cliff Alakai, administrator of Maui Medical Group. “There’s just a lot of people looking for health care out there.”

The issues are worse on Lanai and Molokai, which is still reeling from the loss of two primary care providers in 2022. Nearly everyone on Molokai — 97% of respondents — said there is a doctor shortage on the island. The remaining 3% were unsure. 

“There was nobody saying, ‘Yes, we have enough,’” said lead researcher Lisa Grove. “As a pollster, it is never the case where you get that many people agreeing with one thing. You just don’t get that sort of unanimous consensus that there’s a problem.”

Transportation was the top health care-related concern among residents of Lanai and Molokai.

Unreliable interisland air transportation continues to be at the core of the issue. Respondents expressed frustration about limited flight options, highlighting delays and cancellations on Mokulele Airlines.

Grove, a Lanai resident, said that it is the “hit-or-miss” situation that creates stress.

Patients often fly out to Maui or Oahu a day in advance to ensure they make it to their doctor’s appointment on time, Grove said. This creates an added expense for lodging and food, easily amounting to hundreds of dollars for a single appointment that would take weeks to get reimbursed through insurance.

To make matters worse, airline issues are not just making it difficult for patients to leave the islands; health care providers primarily practicing on other islands are also finding it challenging to travel to Molokai and Lanai to serve patients. 

“They either can’t get there, or they can’t get back,” said Lisa Rantz, president of the Hawaii State Rural Health Association. “Then all the patients that they were supposed to have the next day, they also need to be rescheduled. It’s just a logistical nightmare.”

Alakai said that patients from Lanai used to take a ferry to visit the group’s Lahaina clinic on Maui. It was a relatively convenient way for Lanai residents to see a physician because the Lahaina Small Boat Harbor was within walking distance of the clinic. 

But last year’s fire, which obliterated the harbor, severed this lifeline connecting the two islands. While the ferry service has been restored, boats from Lanai now dock at Maalaea Small Boat Harbor, which is approximately 16 miles southeast of Lahaina and requires patients to arrange an additional car ride to the clinic.

Insufficient OB-GYN Care

While most of Litt’s new patients from fire-affected communities sought birth control, some reached out to her after wrestling with other delayed services such as follow-up appointments for Pap smear tests. 

Some of the issues predate the fire. In March of 2023, Maui Lani Physicians and Surgeons, one of the island’s largest clinics providing obstetrics care, announced that it would end its OB practice.

The sudden decision put a burden on the two remaining major clinics, Malama I Ke Ola Health Center and Kaiser Permanente, as they strived to accommodate a surge of new patients.

This change has prompted some women from Maui to fly to Oahu for prenatal care, something women from Molokai and Lanai have been doing for years. Litt said flying for prenatal care can be problematic — especially in later stages of pregnancy when doctor visits are needed more frequently. 

“It disrupts families, and it creates economic hardships as folks are parked on another island, waiting to deliver a baby,” Grove said. 

Some acute problems that residents are currently struggling to get treatment for, such as breast cancer, can be traced back to the Covid-19 era, Alakai said. A lot of people stopped going to see their regular doctors during the pandemic, and things that could have been identified two or three years ago through check-ups like mammograms were missed. 

This, coupled with the shortage of health care providers who were already preoccupied with Covid care, may have discouraged people from receiving preventative care, he said. 

By the end of the year, Litt plans to begin supporting pregnant patients through her program. She just purchased an ultrasound machine through grant funds and hopes to provide first-trimester care for the community.

“This may be helpful, so that people aren’t going without care in the first trimester,” Litt said. “They can notice the pregnancy, find out how far along they are and see if they are high-risk, sooner rather than later.” 

C ivil Beat’s coverage of Maui County is supported in part by a grant from the Nuestro Futuro Foundation.

Civil Beat’s community health coverage is supported by the Atherton Family Foundation , Swayne Family Fund of Hawaii Community Foundation, the Cooke Foundation and Papa Ola Lokahi .

--> Sign up for our FREE morning newsletter and face each day more informed. --> Sign up for our FREE morning newsletter and face each day more informed.

Do you feel more informed.

As a nonprofit newsroom, we rely on the generosity of readers like you to keep all of our stories and resources free during election season—and every day.

Make a gift today to help us keep our news free and accessible for everyone . And if you’re able, please consider a monthly gift to support our work all year-round.

About the Author

Maui’s Mayor Has Struggled To Lead An Island Reeling From Tragedy. But Some Say He’s Getting Better

Oahu Condo Owners Are Debating Best Way To Limit Fire Safety Costs 

How A Group That Started As Libertarian Found Influence In Blue State Hawaii

Professional Development Can Be Lucrative For Hawaii Teachers — And Hard To Come By

The Sunshine Blog: Party Politics Can Be Messy

Candidate Q&A: State House District 50 — Timothy Connelly

Candidate Q&A: US Senate — Paul Dolan

Get in-depth reporting on hawaii’s biggest issues, sign up for our free morning newsletter.

You're officially signed up for our daily newsletter, the Morning Beat. A confirmation email will arrive shortly.

In the meantime, we have other newsletters that you might enjoy. Check the boxes for emails you'd like to receive.

• Breaking News Alerts What's this? Be the first to hear about important news stories with these occasional emails.
• Special Projects & Investigations What's this? You'll hear from us whenever Civil Beat publishes a major project or investigation.
• Environment What's this? Get our latest environmental news on a monthly basis, including updates on Nathan Eagle's 'Hawaii 2040' series.
• Ideas What's this? Get occasional emails highlighting essays, analysis and opinion from IDEAS, Civil Beat's commentary section.

Inbox overcrowded? Don't worry, you can unsubscribe or update your preferences at any time.

Olympic boxer at center of gender eligibility controversy wins bizarre first bout

PARIS – Algeria's Imane Khelif, one of two female Olympic boxers disqualified from the 2023 world championships after failing gender eligibility tests, entered the ring Thursday at the Paris Games .

Her bout ended in abrupt and bizarre fashion.

Khelif prevailed when Italy’s Angela Carini stopped fighting after 46 seconds.

Carini was punched in the nose and shortly afterward said she didn't want to fight anymore, according to Italian coach Emanuele Renzini

"After one punch she feel big pain,'' Renzini told reporters,.

Carini wept when speaking with reporters after the fight and spoke only in Italian. Translation of her comments was not immediately available.

But Renzini said Carini had been told not to take the fight and it had been weighing on her as the bout approached.

During the first round, Carini consulted with her coach twice before the fight was halted. Officially, Khelif won by ABD (abandoned).

Opinion: Olympic female boxers are being attacked. Let's just slow down and look at the facts

The crowd at North Paris Arena greeted Khelif with cheers before the abbreviated fight at the Summer Olympics and several Algeria flags were seen among the crowd. The fight in the welterweight division at 66 kg (146 pounds) was scheduled for three three-minute rounds.

The issue of gender eligibility criteria surfaced at the 2023 world championships when Khelif and Lin Yu-Ting of Taiwan both won medals in the women’s competition before tournament officials announced the boxers had failed gender eligibility tests. They were stripped of their medals.

This week the International Olympic Committee (IOC) said the two boxers met criteria to compete in Paris, sparking discussion about gender eligibility tests .

Get Olympics updates in your texts!  Join USA TODAY Sports' WhatsApp Channel

The world championships are overseen by the International Boxing Association (IBA), long plagued with scandal and controversy.

Last year the IOC banished the IBA and developed an ad-hoc unit that ran the Olympic boxing tournament at the Tokyo Games in 2021 and is doing the same here.

The IOC did not detail the criteria met by Khelif and Yu-Ting to compete here and in Tokyo, but did say the boxers’ passports state they are women.

Yu-Ting, 28, is scheduled to begin competition Friday against Sitora Turdibekova of Uzbekistan in the featherweight division at 57 kg (126 pounds).

Are you as obsessed with following Team USA as we are? Thought so. Subscribe to our Olympics newsletter Chasing Gold here. 

How Can Robert Downey, Jr. Be Doctor Doom? The Shared History Between Doom and Iron Man Explained

Doctor doom is iron man now it makes more sense than you might think..

This year’s Marvel Studios panel at San Diego Comic-Con may not have been overflowing with new reveals and announcements, but there was one huge shocker to cap off the evening. We learned that Avengers 5 has now become Avengers: Doomsday , and none other than Robert Downey, Jr. has been cast as iconic Marvel villain Doctor Doom.

Marvel fans are still trying to wrap their heads around that announcement . It’s a big deal that arguably Marvel’s biggest and most important villain is finally going to make his MCU debut. But why is he being played by Downey of all people? Is Doom an evil variant of Tony Stark?

We have a lot more questions than answers at this point. But it’s important to remember one thing - Iron Man and Doctor Doom have a long history together in Marvel’s comic book universe. We can only assume this casting will play on that history one way or another. As we grapple with this surprise announcement, let’s break down the relationship between Doom and Iron Man in the comics and how that might play into the MCU’s unusual take on Doctor Doom.

Was Robert Downey Jr being cast as Doctor Doom the right move for the MCU?

Iron Man and Doctor Doom’s Shared History

Doctor Doom will always be defined by his feud with Mister Fantastic. As the traditional origin story goes, Reed Richards and Victor von Doom were college roommates and intellectual rivals from pretty much the very beginning. Victor was obsessed with building a machine that would allow him to communicate with his dead mother. Reed warned his frenemy that the machine was dangerous, but the arrogant Victor didn’t listen. That stubbornness wound up blowing up in his face - literally - when the machine exploded and scarred Victor’s handsome mug. One soul-searching journey around the world later, Victor von Doom was reborn as Doctor Doom.

Mister Fantastic has certainly remained Doom’s arch-enemy over the years, but the Latverian monarch has also tussled with Iron Man a fair few times. Their rivalry really took shape in a 1981 storyline called Doomquest, where both Tony Stark and Victor von Doom are dragged back in time to the court of King Arthur. Doom attempts to forge an alliance with Morgan le Fay, but they’re no match for the combined might of Iron Man and King Arthur’s knights.

Doom and Iron Man had another major faceoff in 2007’s Mighty Avengers, which is set in the aftermath of the Civil War crossover and Tony Stark’s promotion to Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. After Doom is implicated in an attack on New York City, Iron Man leads the Avengers and S.H.I.E.L.D. in an all-out invasion of Doom’s kingdom of Latveria. Though Doom wasn’t actually responsible for the attack, he winds up in S.H.I.E.L.D. custody.

Basically, as one of the only people on the planet smart enough to rival Victor von Doom himself, Tony was always going to wind up on Doom’s s*** list. It’s the same reason Doom and T’Challa have always had such a love/hate relationship. It doesn’t help that Tony is purely a man of science, whereas Doom is all too happy to tap into the power of the supernatural in his never-ending quest for more power. That conflict between technology and magic is what has also made The Mandarin such an enduring Iron Man foe.

But their relationship isn’t always purely antagonistic. Following the events of 2015’s Secret Wars (which ends with Doom being redeemed and getting his old face back), Doom turns over a new leaf. He becomes a supporting character in 2015’s Invincible Iron Man, insisting on lending a helping hand despite Tony refusing to believe that the former Doctor Doom is on the level.

Doom even becomes the new Iron Man for a time after Tony is left in a comatose state due to the events of 2016’s Civil War II. That’s the premise of a series called Infamous Iron Man , as Doom forges his own suit of Iron Man armor and attempts to carry on Tony’s heroic legacy. Doom even defends Stark Industries from an attack by The Hood and his minions, but at the cost of his recently healed face.

It’s also worth pointing out that there are versions of Doctor Doom in the Marvel multiverse who actually are Tony Stark. One of these is Iron Maniac, a version of Tony Stark introduced in 2004's Marvel Team-Up #3. Another is featured in 2010’s What If? Iron Man: Demon in an Armor #1. In this world, Victor von Doom swapped bodies with Tony Stark in college. Trapped in his rival’s body Tony swears revenge and begins a yearslong quest to destroy Doom’s Stark Universal company.

How Can Robert Downey, Jr. Be Playing Doctor Doom?

At this point, we’ve established that Doctor Doom and Iron Man have a long shared history together in the comics. But that still doesn’t answer the basic question - why is Downey of all people playing Doctor Doom? Why cast the actor who made Iron Man a household name as a completely different Marvel character now?

One possibility is that Downey is simply playing a new MCU role, independent of any connection to Tony Stark. Don’t forget that Doom is well-known for never taking off his mask. Whether because he can't or simply won't is part of his mystique. Depending on how over-the-top Downey’s performance is (and there’s plenty of room to go big with a character like Doom), the movies may simply be able to ignore the fact that the guy underneath Doom’s armor looks and sounds an awful lot like Tony Stark. If Downey proved anything with his performances in 1992’s Chaplin and Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes movies, it’s that he can really transform himself with the right accent.

And it’s not as if Downey would be the first MCU actor to return in a completely different role. Michelle Yeoh played Aleta Olgord in the Guardians of the Galaxy movies and Ying Nan in Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. David Dastmalchian played Kurt Goreshter in the first two Ant-Man movies and pivoted to playing Veb in Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. Gemma Chan played Minn-Erva in Captain Marvel and Sersi in Eternals. There is a precedent for this kind of double-casting.

That said, it seems hard to imagine that Marvel just decided to cast Downey again without intending to reference his history as Tony Stark. Another option is that Doom has been reimagined as a variant of Tony Stark. We know that the newly retitled The Fantastic Four: First Steps is set in an alternate-universe, retro-futuristic version of New York City. Perhaps in this universe, Tony Stark is the one who rooms with Reed Richards in college and develops an unhealthy obsession with besting his rival.

This Tony may undergo some twisted inversion of the origin story seen in 2008’s Iron Man, leaving him disfigured and retreating inside a powerful suit of armor to plot vengeance against the Richards family. Doom may not be the primary antagonist in The Fantastic Four: First Steps (that would be Ralph Ineson’s Galactus ), but we have to imagine he’ll appear in the movie in some capacity. Ideally, the FF movie will provide Downey’s new character with an origin story prior to him taking center stage in Avengers: Doomsday.

We also know that the FF are eventually making the jump to the MCU, as they’re now confirmed to be appearing in both Avengers: Doomsday and Avengers: Secret Wars. It’s probably safe to assume that Doom will make the journey with them. Making Doom a refugee from another world would also help explain why the character has yet to appear in any previous MCU project. Like with the FF, the MCU has no Doctor Doom of its own. The Fantastic Four: First Steps can change that.

Whether Downey’s Doom is Victor von Doom or Tony Stark, it may not matter much in the end. This is a villain who’s egomaniacal to an extreme. He hides from the world inside a suit of armor. He combines the most advanced technology his mind can conjure and the darkest spells the supernatural realm has to offer to make himself a god among men. He’s a twisted inversion of everything Iron Man stands for. Where Iron Man was the savior of the MCU, Doom is its greatest nightmare.

That’s why you cast Robert Downey, Jr. as Doctor Doom. It’s a chance for the MCU’s most pivotal actor to play a completely different kind of character, but one who can have an equally profound effect on the future of this universe. We’ve seen Downey at his heroic best. Now it’s time to see just how evil he can be.

Deadpool & Wolverine: Easter Eggs, Cameos and References

For more on Marvel's SDCC panel, learn what we saw in the Captain America: Brave New World footage and the stunt-heavy Thunderbolts* footage .

Jesse is a mild-mannered staff writer for IGN. Allow him to lend a machete to your intellectual thicket by following @jschedeen on Twitter .

In This Article

Where to Watch

Not yet available for streaming.

IGN Recommends

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

What title do you hold after you've defended but before you graduate?

Two friends successfully defended their dissertations yesterday, and many people have congratulated them, calling them Doctor so-and-so. I explained to my wife that they actually don't have that title until the graduation ceremony, that it's similar to a President-elect, who isn't called the President until they are sworn in. So, what title does a doctoral candidate take after they've defended but before they graduate?

• 4 See this: academia.stackexchange.com/a/12447/5674 –  posdef Commented Oct 8, 2013 at 16:41
• 1 possible duplicate of When can you call yourself doctor? –  Samuel Russell Commented Oct 12, 2013 at 0:03

5 Answers 5

There isn't a formal, universally accepted title here. The general standard has been to call them "Doctor" since everything else is in principle a formality.

The only other note that I'd make is that it's not commencement that makes the student in question a doctor, but rather conferral of the degree by the university. Some universities may confer degrees multiple times per year, but only have one commencement ceremony.

So, I would not include "Ph.D." next to my name, but in the education of my CV, I'd write "Ph.D. (to be conferred Month Year )," as that is entirely accurate representation of the state of affairs.

Formally, they don't take a title before the university awards it, and the awarding is usually done by handing out a certificate stating the title (independent of whether that involves a ceremony or not).

In informal situations, it's nice to address them with the title because they are usually happy and proud of their accomplishment, and what remains to be done before they actually get the title is more or less a mere formality. But you shouldn't put any doctoral title on name tags, staff directories, or anything formal like that before they actually get the document.

• 6 I suppose this is similar to me calling myself a "dad" even though my daughter won't be born for another two months? –  Jonathan E. Landrum Commented Oct 10, 2013 at 19:00
• 4 @JonathanLandrum Yes, that's a nice comparison. Everybody will be fine with that, but you can't put it down in any official documents yet. –  silvado Commented Oct 11, 2013 at 6:32

In most countries "Dr" is an honorific (in Germany I believe it is a legal title and part of your name) that is typically used when referring to individuals that hold certain types of degrees (most doctorates but not all, for example holders of the JD degree are not typically called doctor, and some non doctorate degrees, for example a BMedSci in the UK). As it is an honorific I think it is perfectly reasonable to bestow that honor to someone during a party to celebrate a doctoral defence. Similarly when seeing someone the first time after the defence using doctor is a nice why of honoring them. In some countries one can pass the defence and still need to make substantial revisions. I would use the honorific as long as the person passed.

In non-formal situations I would avoid it, but then again I avoid using the honorific even for people with doctorates. In formal situations where honorifics are being used I would definitely avoid it. I think it would set a bad tone to go to a job talk an allow yourself to be introduced as doctor. In that situation I would deflect the honorific and say "not yet"

In the (British) English Language the correct name for someone who has qualified to graduate but has not yet done so is a graduand .

One could formally say you are a doctoral graduand, but only other academics would understand.

Also, at the ceremonies in British Universities, the point at which you hold the title is when the Chancellor (or similar awarding officer) intones the word "I award upon those students who have qualified the degrees listed in the official record.. etc". Until those words have been said, whatever handshaking and parading has happened, you do not have a degree!

In Germany, it is "Doctor Des." standing for Doktor Designiert (designated doctor)

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged defense graduation ..

• Featured on Meta
• We've made changes to our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy - July 2024
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process

Hot Network Questions

• How does Ashaya, Soul of the Wild and Realm Razor interact?
• Is leveling this ground and removing plastic by the side of my house a bad idea?
• What is this switch in the video link below that Bill Jenkins holds down before launching his drag car?
• The Puzzle Noob’s New Game
• One Page IDP issued by Govt. Of India not acceptable in Japan
• A novel where evolution from Neanderthals to us, and from us to superhumans is just by shedding facial skin to become less prognathous
• Are there official, standard, or conventional names for the screen RAM addresses on the ZX Spectrum?
• Justification for imputation with over 50% missing data
• achilles pain after bike fit
• How to play mono (or very unbalanced stereo) through both ears?
• Boundedness of sum of sin(sin(n))
• What are the specific terms for breaking up English words into roots/components
• Can any analytic function be written as the difference of two monotonically increasing analytic functions?
• 50s-60s novel likely written by a British author — ancient starship discovery unveils humanity's extraterrestrial roots
• Does Voltage of solar cell depends on Intensity of light?
• How much does having competing offers benefit a job search?
• Are dice pools public knowledge in Dogs in the Vineyard/DOGS?
• Split column into lines using awk
• What techniques are there for preventing radio-signal replay attacks?
• Why do doctors seem to overcharge for services?
• Animate Objects on vials of Holy Water
• Why does IfBlankTF give a different result than IfNoValueTF?
• Which programming language first used negative indexing to mean counting from the end?
• How much and how candid should my feedback be when leaving a team?

To revisit this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories .

• The Big Story
• Newsletters
• Steven Levy's Plaintext Column
• WIRED Classics from the Archive
• WIRED Insider
• WIRED Consulting

The Shameful Controversy Over Olympic Boxer Imane Khelif

This story was originally published in WIRED Italia and has been translated from Italian.

Algerian boxer Imane Khelif won her first match of the 2024 Paris Olympics when her opponent, Angela Carini of Italy, quit after taking several blows to the face in the opening seconds of the bout. The victory only fueled the misguided controversy around Khelif, who has been targeted by critics who have misgendered her throughout the Games.

Born in 1999 in Tiaret, Algeria, Khelif has been boxing since she was a child and has always competed in women's categories. In her career, she competed in the Women's World Boxing Championships in New Delhi in 2018 (finishing in 17th place), then competed in Russia the following year. She competed in the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games, reaching all the way to the quarterfinals, and she finished second in the 2022 Women's World Championships in Istanbul.

Everything seemed to be running smoothly until the 2023 World Cup, organized by the International Boxing Association. The Russia-led IBA, which is not recognized by the International Olympic Committee, disqualified Khelif after a gender eligibility test allegedly found she has XY chromosomes. IBA president Umar Kremlev has said that both Khelif and Taiwanese boxer Lin Yu-ting, who allegedly had a similar test result, “were trying to deceive their colleagues and pretend to be women.” Khelif has contested the allegations.

The Olympics Controversy

Both Khelif and Lin were admitted to Olympic boxing competitions. Admission rules in this case are handled by the so-called Boxing Unit, which has ensured that all athletes participating in the Games' boxing tournament comply with the rules of eligibility and registration for the competition as well as all medical regulations, which also includes the appropriate demonstration of medical certificates stamped and verified to at least three months before the start of the competitions.

“These boxers are completely eligible. They are women on their passports, they are women who have competed in the Tokyo Olympics and have been competing for many years, I think we all have a responsibility to tone it down and not turn it into a witch hunt,” said IOC spokesperson Mark Adams, at a news conference on Tuesday.

Still, prominent figures on social media decried Khelif's participation in the Games. X owner Elon Musk amplified a tweet from swimmer Riley Gaines that “men don't belong in women's sports,” while author J.K. Rowling falsely referred to Khelif as “a male who’s knows he’s protected by a misogynist sporting establishment enjoying the distress of a woman he’s just punched in the head.”

The fact is that Khelif is participating in the Games because she is allowed to by the rules, and has passed the IOC's standards. “The current aggression against these two athletes is based entirely on this arbitrary decision,” said the Boxing Unit and IOC in a statement Thursday, referring to the IBA ban. “[It] was taken without any proper procedure—especially considering that these athletes had been competing in top-level competition for many years. Such an approach is contrary to good governance.”

The controversies of the past few days took serious issues such as hyperandrogynism—the excessive production of testosterone by female bodies—and intersexuality, in which someone is born with sex characteristics that don't fit neatly into traditional definitions of male and female, and debased them. They then further poisoned an already very sensitive debate around transgender women's participation in the Olympics and sports competitions in general.

Beyond everything, however, the fact remains that Imane Khelif has always defined herself as a woman and the IOC is allowing her participate in the Olympics as such. Even in the face of assaultive public opinion, there is nothing to add.

You Might Also Like …

In your inbox: Our biggest stories , handpicked for you each day

How one bad CrowdStrike update crashed the world’s computers

The Big Story: How soon might the Atlantic Ocean break ?

Welcome to the internet's hyper-consumption era

Olympics: Follow all our coverage from Paris this summer here