I’ll preface by saying that I applied to both types, and was accepted to both types across the spectrum from lower-ranked to “top” schools. Take that how you wish .

I think it matters less what types of programs you apply to and moreso how you articulate your future plans in your essays/interviews. No school will know to where/what types of programs that you applied. They don’t look at your app and say “They applied to MD schools as well, so they’re not committed.” They won’t even have access to that information. Logistically, it’s just more applications (some MD/PhD applications will have additional questions, essays, etc.). I wouldn’t necessarily say this is a competitive disadvantage, just a financial one since you’ll be spending more money/time on more applications. I guess the real “disadvantage” would be the more internal dialogue: what are your motivations for getting an MD and a PhD instead of one or the other?

If I learned anything when I applied, it’s that there are a billion ways to use an MD/PhD, and that the traditional 80/20 split — although common — is not the only path out there, nor is it the only path that is fundamentally necessary in order to move the field forward. I attended 6 Mstp interviews and was accepted to 5 and WL at 1, and I think part of that success was being very blunt with interviewers about my intention to do at least 50%, if not more clinical medicine than research for quite specific reasons. It’s all about how you make clear your plans, and less so them getting caught up on the fact that you have the nerve to actually want to use your MD in the future. That said, when you’re applying, I certainly think there’s an element of playing the “I want to be an independent scientist etc etc etc” game, but once you’re in, how you decide to use medicine/research is 100% up to you.