As we reviewed this debate over the past few weeks, we at RSG Health Services thought we’d chime in. A controversy has been making the rounds within our profession (yet again), one that speaks directly to those of us in laboratory medicine. The debate centers around Yllana Marie Aduana, a laboratory professional and Miss Universe Philippines 2025 contestant, who sparked debate by correctly referring to herself as a “scientist.” This simple statement sparked backlash from individuals outside our field who questioned whether Medical Laboratory Scientists are actual scientists. At RSG Health Services, we work with laboratory professionals daily, and, as a Medical Laboratory Scientist myself, I personally know what it takes to work in laboratory medicine.
For those who work, or have worked, in laboratory medicine, this is nothing new. The struggle for professional recognition has been ongoing for decades. While we know the essential role they play in healthcare, the general public, and sometimes even those within allied health, often fail to understand our contributions.
The Evolution of Titles, a Fight for Recognition: A Short History
Medical laboratory professionals have long undergone title changes, reflecting our expanding expertise and responsibilities.
Early 1900s: Laboratory Assistants
- In the early days, they were simply laboratory aides or clinical assistants, supporting physicians with basic tests.
1920s-1950s: The Rise of Medical Technologists
- As laboratory work became more specialized, the title Medical Technologist (MT) was introduced, with the American Society for Clinical Pathologists (ASCP) leading certification efforts.
1960s-1990s: Expanding Roles and New Titles
- As diagnostic testing advanced, professionals became Registered Medical Technologists (RMT), Clinical Laboratory Technologists (CLT), or Clinical Laboratory Scientists (CLS), depending on the certification body.
- The National Credentialing Agency for Laboratory Personnel (NCA) introduced Clinical Laboratory Scientist (CLS) as an alternative to MT, further diversifying our titles.
2000s-Present: Standardizing the Medical Laboratory Scientist (MLS)
- In an effort to unify the profession, ASCP and American Medical Technologists (AMT) adopted Medical Laboratory Scientist (MLS) as the preferred title, officially replacing MT.
- In 2022, both ASCP and AMT fully transitioned to using only Medical Laboratory Scientist (MLS) and discontinued the use of Medical Technologist (MT), solidifying the shift toward a standardized global title for the profession.
- Today, MLS is the standard designation for certified laboratory professionals, reflecting our analytical and diagnostic expertise.
The Laboratory’s Impact in Healthcare
For those working in the field, the title debate is not just about semantics—it’s about recognition. Laboratory analysis is responsible for 70% of medical decisions that influence patient care. Their clinical work includes:
- Clinical Chemistry – Identifying metabolic disorders and organ dysfunction.
- Hematology and Blood Banking – Diagnosing blood disorders and ensuring safe transfusions.
- Microbiology and Infectious Disease Testing – Detecting and identifying bacterial, viral, and fungal infections.
- Molecular Diagnostics – Conducting genetic and PCR-based testing, including for cancer and infectious diseases.
- Toxicology and Drug Testing – Screening for toxic substances and monitoring medication efficacy.
Despite these critical functions, laboratory professionals often remain unseen and unrecognized.
The “Scientist” Debate: Why It Matters
Calling them “scientists” is not about inflating titles—it is about accurately describing their work. Laboratory professionals conduct rigorous testing, analyze complex biological data, and ensure the accuracy of medical diagnoses. In many parts of the world, Medical Laboratory Scientist is the standard title, reinforcing the reality that our work is deeply rooted in science.
PAMET and other organizations defending Aduana have reinforced this point. To RSG Health Services, the profession is grounded in evidence-based practices, research, and technological expertise. They are not simply techs carrying out routine tests; medical laboratory professionals are problem-solvers, innovators, and scientists who play a critical role in patient care.
The Bigger Picture: A Call to Our Profession
At RSG Health Services, we believe the controversy highlights a long-standing issue that laboratory professionals must continue to address. The lack of recognition for contributions is not just a problem in public perception—it affects advocacy, funding, staffing, and even wages within the field. If we don’t advocate for ourselves, who will?
Laboratory professionals work behind the scenes, but the impact is undeniable. It’s not about just processing samples; we ensure accurate and reliable test results that guide patient care and save lives. The role of Medical Laboratory Scientist is vital, and by continuing to share the importance of clinical laboratory work, we can foster greater understanding and appreciation to those around us.
The next time someone questions whether a Medical Laboratory Scientist is truly a scientist, the answer should be clear. They are. And always have been.
7 comments
Len Salvador
I have worked in the field of laboratory science for 30 years. During this time I have worked both the bench and administrative side in laboratory and radiology. Yes, I have seen and experienced the lack of credibility of the laboratory contributions to comprehensive healthcare. But let me propose a notion as to why lab professionals are not taken seriously: IT IS OUR OWN FAULT THAT WE ARE IN THIS BOAT. Other than the departments of blood bank, and microbiology the other departments really do not need to have a CLS validating results. Other support disciplines such as pharmacy, radiology, respiratory therapy, and physical therapy for example are held in high regard by primary physicians because they provide direct patient care along side the physician. More importantly, they promote themselves through various mechanisms on a daily basis. For example: pharmacy provides ongoing education to physicians regarding new drugs, contraindicated protocols regarding medications depending on the prescription regimen established by primary care. Respiratory therapy, physical therapy and to a lesser extent radiology technicians do the same thing when it comes to the interactions of their respective disciplines and primary care physicians. But, here is the salient point: Laboratory services does not. We do not provide ongoing education and recommendations as to how this service can better augment and be a significant contribution to primary care.
For example: as alluded to earlier, the departments of chemistry, hematology, urinalysis, serology does not need a CLS to validate results. Auto verification can provide faster results reliably and so much faster when autoreleased. Faster release of these results would serve primary care much better if the turn times are significantly diminished. To that end consider the following change: have dedicated phlebomists in the ER, change chemistry process to accommodate lithium heparin analysis; have the phlebotomist centrifuge chemistry on statspin centrifuges and make it their responsibility to load chemistry, hematology, and coagulation equipment with autorelease capabilities. This suggested process will easily get physicians results within fifteen minutes consistently. Then have appropriate lab liaison meet with primary care physicians on a monthly basis to communicate with primary care physicians on continuing education and support with emphasis on the needs of the physician. It would also greatly add to labs credibility if a physician champion can be appointed that would help grow this relationship. The end agenda here is to become more of a daily presence with providing patient care reminiscent of the other departments previously mentioned. These are the lessons gleaned from seeing how other departments perceived importance in the hierarchy of department importance in providing health care support to primary care physicians.
Pegah Brown
I have been a proud Medical Laboratory ‘Scientist’ since 2011. I remember when ASCP made that transition and I remember not taking this lightly. The amount of critical thinking this profession allows in the clinical field is crucial. We earned that Title and for those ignorant enough to dispute it, there is no help for them and I refuse to stoop down into their ignorance.
Kelechi
This is awesome. Uniformity of the title is long over due. I think Scientist is the better title; Medical Laboratory Scientist is too long a title and too long to write. Physiotherapist, Nurse, Pharmacist- all sounds direct.
Medical Laboratory Scientist- seems we’re already explaining a lot 😄
Marcela D Pinilla
The lack of knowledge of what we do, amongst other health professionals, and the little even some pathologists know about our training, is the cause of the shortage of applicants to our programs nationwide. Also, the lack of recognition for our hard work, and the load of work we have to handle due to shortages, is the culprit of work burnout.
Until our profession gets the recognition it deserves, and the lab representatives in the hospitals learn to advocate for our work, the shortages will continue, and our profession as a four year BS in Medical Technology will be just a memory in the history books.
Lowering the standards in order to get licensed, instead of increasing the salaries and promoting the profession is the way to go. Sadly, the clinical pathologists have not advocated for us. In other countries where the medical technologists manage the labs, the shortage is not even near that of the USA.
Kevin Marcantel
This speaks volumes!! I’m a proud Medical Laboratory Scientist and it’s great to see others recognize us for what we truly are…SCIENTISTS!! 👨🏼🔬🔬🧫
Angela Tomei Robinson MS MLS ASCP cm
Excellent article for historical timeline and validation of the importance of Medical Laboratory Professionals
LuAnn
Bravo to the author for putting this info in words that “laypeople” can understand! I started identifying with the MLS label about 20 years ago and the general public (& many health care workers) still need to be educated. I’ve used Medical Lab Weeks to inform anyone who would listen. Keep it up! Thanks for all staff working behind the scenes.