Coldery

Anatomical Pathology: Queen's CMG (Jan 10), Queen’s IMG (Jan12), Ottawa CMG (Jan 13), MUN CMG (Jan 16), UofC CMG (Jan 17), McMaster CMG (Jan 17), Dal CMG (Jan 17), Western CMG (Jan 18), McMaster IMG (Jan 18), UBC CMG (Jan 18), Manitoba CMG (Jan 20), Laval (Jan 24), McGill CMG (Jan 24), UdeMontréal CMG (Jan 25), Sherbrooke CMG (Jan 25), Anesthesiology: MUN CMG (Jan 19), NOSM CMG (Jan 20), UBC CMG (Jan 20), McMaster CMG & IMG (Jan 24), Sask CMG (Jan 24), UofC CMG (Jan 24), Dalhousie CMG (Jan 25), Queen's CMG (Jan 26) Cardiac Surgery: UofT CMG(Jan 18th), Ottawa IMG (Jan 23), UofM (Jan 23) Dermatology: Sherbrooke (Jan 23), Ottawa CMG(Jan 24), McGill Regular (Jan 25), Calgary (Jan 25), UBC CMG (Jan 25) Diagnostic Radiology: McGill regular (Jan 23), Dalhousie (Jan 24), Queens (Jan 24), Sherbrooke (Jan 24), Western (Jan25), McMaster CMG/IMG (Jan 25), Laval (Jan 25), Calgary (Jan 25), Manitoba (Jan 25), UdeM (Jan 25), UBC (Jan 26), MUN (Jan 26) Emergency Medicine: UManitoba (Jan 25), Queen's (Jan 25), UBC (Jan 25), Calgary (Jan 26) Family Medicine: ULaval CMG (Jan 12), UdeSherbrooke CMG (Jan 12), UdeMontréal CMG (Jan 12), Ontario IMG Joint panel (Jan15), NOSM IMG (Jan 23), McMaster IMG (Jan 23), McGill - Gatineau (Jan 24), McMaster CMG (Jan 24), UOttawa- Montfort CMG (Jan 24), Alberta Edmonton CMG (Jan 24), McGill - Val d'Or (Jan 24), uOttawa CMG (Jan 24) UofT CMG (Jan 24) MUN IMG (Jan 25), McGill - Châteauguay (Jan 25), UBC IMG and CMG (Jan 25), UdeM IMG (Jan26), ULaval IMG (Jan26), USherbrooke IMG (Jan26), MUN CMG (Jan 26), UBC Coastal (Jan 26) General Pathology: McMasterIMG(Jan 19), Dalhousie (Jan 24) General Surgery: MUN CMG (Jan 18) NOSM CMG (Jan 23), McGill (Jan 24), UofT (Jan 24), ULaval (Jan 24), McMaster Niagara (Jan 24), Western (Jan 25), U of Alberta (Jan 25), Sherbrooke (Jan 24), UdeM (Jan 25), Dalhousie (Jan 26), USask (Jan 26), Queen's (Jan 26) Hematological Pathology: Internal Medicine: UdeM (Jan 25), USasK IMG (Jan26), UofS Saskatoon CMG (Jan 26), UBC IMG (Jan 26), McGill Regular (Jan 26) Medical Genetics and Genomics: UofC CMG (Jan 12), UBC CMG (Jan 13), UofT CMG (Jan 20), Ottawa CMG (Jan 23), McGill (Jan 23). Medical Microbiology: UofC CMG (Jan 10),UofM CMG (Jan 11), UBC CMG (Jan 13), McMaster CMG (Jan 16), UofO CMG (Jan17), U of T IMG (Jan 23) Neurology: UofM (Jan 16), Dal (Jan 19), UofC(Jan 19), Queens (Jan 23), McGill (Jan 24), Ottawa (Jan 24), MUN (Jan 26) Neurology - Paediatric: McGill (Jan 25), UBC (Jan 20), UofAlberta (Jan 12) Neuropathology: Neurosurgery: Saskatchewan (Jan 16), Western (Jan 20), Ottawa (Jan 23), Alberta (Jan 24), UBC (Jan 24), Dalhousie (Jan 26), Toronto CMG (Jan 26), Calgary (Jan 26) Nuclear Medicine: Western (Jan 23) Obstetrics and Gynaecology: UdeMontréal (Jan 23), Calgary (Jan 24), Manitoba (Jan 25), Ottawa (Jan 25), Western (Jan 26), UofT (Jan 26), MUN (Jan 26), Edmonton (J25), Dalhousie (J25), Manitoba (J26), McMaster IMG (Jan 26) Ophthalmology: McGill (Jan 24), Laval (Jan 24), Edmonton (Jan 25), Dalhousie (Jan 25), Manitoba (Jan 26) Orthopaedic Surgery: Dalhousie (Jan 20), McGill (Jan 23) UBC CMG (Jan 23), UdeM CMG (Jan24), MUN (Jan24) uOttawa (Jan 24) USherbrooke CMG (Jan 25) Western (Jan 25), NOSM (Jan 25), Sask (Jan 25) ULAVAL CMG (Jan 26) McMASTER CMG (Jan 26),Calgary (Jan 26) Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery: UoT CMG (Jan 18), McGill CMG (Jan 20), McMaster CMG (Jan 24), uOttawa IMG (Jan25), Ottawa CMG+IMG (Jan 25) Pediatrics: MUN CMG (Jan 24), UofA CMG (Jan 25), UdeM (Jan 25), McMaster - Waterloo (Jan 26), Sherbrooke (Jan 26), McMaster - Hamilton (Jan 26), Ottawa (Jan 26), UBC - Vancouver (Jan 26), UBC - Fraser (Jan 26), McGill (Jan 26), Queen's (Jan 26), Manitoba (Jan 26), UBC Victoria (Jan 26) Plastic Surgery: uManitoba (Jan 23) ULaval (Jan 23), UofT (Jan 24), USherbrooke CMG (Jan 25), UdeM (Jan 26), McMaster (Jan 26), UAlberta (Jan 26), UOttawa (Jan 26) PM&R: Western University CMG, UofM CMG Psychiatry: Manitoba (Jan 13), McMasterHamilton CMG (Jan 19) McMaster University IMG (Jan 19), UofT CMG/IMG (Jan20), McMaster Waterloo CMG(Jan 20), Calgary CMG (Jan 20), McGill regular (Jan 20), Sherbrooke CMG (Jan 20), UBC Vancouver, Fraser, Vancouver Island, Interior, PrinceGeorge CMG (Jan 23), Saskatchewan IMG (Jan23), Saskatchewan CMG (Jan 23), MUN (Jan 24), Ottawa CMG & IMG (Jan 25), Western CMG & IMG (Jan 25), Dal CMG (Jan 25), Queen's CMG (Jan 25), NOSM (Jan 26), Queens IMG (Jan26) Public Health and Preventive Medicine: Sherbrooke (Jan 19), McGill (Jan 25) Radiation Oncology: Dalhousie (Jan 19), UBC (Jan 20), UOttawa (Jan 23), UdeM (Jan23), uManitoba (Jan 24), Alberta (Jan 24), Toronto CMG (Jan 25), McMaster CMG (Jan 25) Urology: Ottawa CMG (Jan 20), UBC (Jan 21), McMaster (Jan22), uManitoba(Jan 23), Laval (Jan 24), Dal (Jan 25), McGill (Jan 25), Alberta (Jan 25) Vascular Surgery: Western CMG(Jan20), UBC (Jan 24), Calgary (Jan 25)

When I searched through all the FM program descriptions, most of the one's that broke down their applicant criteria mentioned how it would only constitute 5% of the overall file score. In other word, peanuts. So you shouldn't be worried and neither am I (as someone who got 2nd quartile). The test also didn't seem "well-baked". Probably to be expected given that it's currently in its first year of operation. There wasn't enough guidance on what we should consider slightly desirable vs very desirable so I ended up inadvertently putting upwards of 3/4s of my "desirable" answers in the "very desirable" box.

Do programs generally tend to release interview invites and regrets at the same time? Applying to IM so if there is any IM-specific info, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

Yes. From what I've heard, it's gonna open in the next few years but graduates will only be able to match to FM. How long a system like that will last is the big question...

Hey! I am a 3rd year UBC MD student who is pretty interested in applying to UBC IM. Is there anyone here who has experience with the program whom I could talk to? Thanks!

-

In theory, none. I think they're likely asking people for purely data collection purposes.

Yes. Your first set of calculations about the ~50% getting accepted is essentially correct. I remember reading off similar stats when I was in your position 2 years ago. I am not sure about the 2nd set of calculations concerning the 98% interview rate though. From what I currently read of it, you may be making some incorrect assumptions. Technically, the interview rate could range from almost 100% with all the IP 90%+ refused applicants coming from post-interview rejections to 50%, with the refused 90%+ BC applicants all stemming from pre-interview rejections. Of course, if UBC elaborated more on the stats of the interviewees themselves, we wouldn't have to make these assumptions but that's where we are right now.

There are obvious similarities but to what will you attribute it? 150 years does not change developmental advantages due to geography. Northeastern states were most closely positioned to the UK and France. They were (and still are) several steps ahead of the rest of the flyover states. Union: Capital-intensive, Confederate: Labour-intensive. The Big Apple and large skyscrapers serve as a testament. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan were all Union states and went Republican in 2016 (with large margins). I do not know anyone who would believe that a vote margin of 5,000 votes is enough to define whether the legacy of racism still exists in those states. If Alaska, ND, SD, and Idaho voted Republican, would it imply a continued legacy of slavery in those state? If you read about it, it will turn out that there was little to no slavery in those states. For Alaska, you'll have to check for Gulags first. They weren't a part of America for at least another century after slavery was abolished. Yes but what is your point. There is little point in mentioning the truism of Bush Jr being the last republican president to win the popular vote as he was the republican directly preceding Trump. The statement has a strong implication of Republicans never being able to win the popular vote, only being able to win with the electoral college. With Trump, evidently so. However, with Republicans at large? You are going to have to use more than a single Trump election to prove that. All of this to say that it was just a poor statement. It would've made much more sense if you had said of the last 3 elections they won, Republicans won the popular vote in only 1 of them.

You have to read more closely. "The "swing vote" on the SC". Supreme Court =/= a Supreme Court ruling. "by about the same margin as Clinton vs Trump". Margin (n): an amount by which a thing is won or falls short. A matter of degree. I should not have bolded Georgia as it precluded your need to speak on Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, and Kansas, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan which you conveniently decided not to... ------------------------------ Just noticed that you also said "the last Republican that actually won the popular vote was Bush Jr against Kerry". Either you don't know too much about US presidential politics or you're deliberately ignoring the fact that GWB's 2004 election vs John Kerry was the last Republican presidential win until Trump's in 2016. It would've been another thing if "the last Republican that actually won the popular vote was Reagan vs Mondale in 1984" (hypothetical). That would've meant ~4 election wins since they won both the electoral college and popular vote (or ~8 elections in total) but what you said is just a single election where they won electoral but not popular (or 3 if you count all elections in total). This has happened before to both Dems and Repubs. Check the Reagan + HW Bush 3 popular vote victory run. 2000: GWB Republican 2004: GWB Republican (won popular vote) 2008: Obama Democrat 2012: Obama Democrat 2016: Trump Republican (lost popular vote) 2020: Biden Democrat -> Right now It was just one electoral election win since the Republicans won the pop + electoral vote. It would've made much more sense if you had said of the last 3 elections they won, Republicans won the popular vote in only 1 of them. If I was American, I wouldn't have voted Trump as his rhetoric alone should've disqualified his run to lead a country like America but this sort of (willful?) prevarication is what is wrong with modern North American political discourse. Polarization in America goes both ways and it's only getting worse.

I think I could put money down on the idea that they likely aren't going to overturn R v W. The "swing vote" on the SC, John Roberts, is pretty in the lane of maintaining the legitimacy of the SC so he is very likely to vote against anything like that, even before considering the other more conservative justices. He has many conservatives pretty pissed off because of his "maintain the SC's legitimacy" stance. The senate was created for that purpose. Universal healthcare exists in several states. California singlehandedly has essentially all of North America's products labelled with P65 warnings for teratogenic and toxic substances on consumer products. It's a certain type of federalist system that they understand generates gridlock and gives extra influence to small states. It's what they want. To compensate, states are given much leeway in how they want to govern their own states. I'm personally pretty doubtful of a system like their senate (and supreme court) but it's not a Canadian system. It's an American one and I'm not American. Bush v Gore yielded a margin of about ~0.5%. Trump v Clinton yielded a margin of 2.1%. Biden won Georgia. Trump won Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, and Kansas. Last election, Trump won Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. We live in globalized world and America is a globalized country. People can move much more quickly than ~200 years ago. General patterns still exist but things are not more or less the same.

Not everyone. First examples were made to illustrate disparities between the province in question and every other province. Wrong question. Right question is: "Because people are paid less in a different system could we be paid less too?" Never was an advocate of taking everyone's down. All was done to speak of the relative viability of dropping the highest paid doctors pay while retaining their (slightly) tenuous desire to live a top 1% lifestyle. Just check Ontario's latest government statistics. Healthcare takes up approximately 40% of total government expenditures. Of all healthcare expenditures, physician billings takes up 25% of that. So, of all taxpayer dollars at the Ontario provincial level, 10% of the $ in their public coffers are going to physicians alone. Alberta relative to Ontario (Table 2) Of course not, extracting likely action from one's spoken word is a strawman. I may be saying this now but I would actually double our billing schedules given the chance. /s Also, that isn't a strawman. A strawman involves: 1. You arguing in favour of proposition X. 2. Me falsely claiming your position is proposition Y. Example: 1. You want to maintain physician take home profits at current levels. 2. I argue about why you want to double physician take home profits. What I did was not falsely restate your position. I extracted likely action from your given position. Is it rock hard evidence? No, nothing concrete has happened yet. However, if we can't extract likely action from one's stated viewpoint, then everyone everywhere is committing a logical fallacy when they make assumptions about family, friends, politicians, the bear they found in the woods, etc. From your very strict viewpoint: Will politician A legislate voter suppression laws? No, he never said he would. Will you necessarily walk off the job? No, of course not, but considering your viewpoint, it would make it more likely if all provincial governments suddenly slashed all fees by a factor of 4-5x. Canada has had its fair share of physician strikes (not just one or two physicians)...

What about doctors in UK, France, Germany, Taiwan, Sweden, etc. Almost no doctor in any of those countries bill any more than $200k. Most of the other developed nations have training that is equal in length, if not longer than ours. In the UK, it takes 5 years of post-MD training to become a GP, approx. 8 years post-MD training to become a specialist. If they all had your POV, they would've walked off the job a long time ago. The NHS is not very forgiving when it comes to cash. In Taiwan, they aren't earning much more than $100k/year at the most senior positions. North America is the anomaly (ps: also worse health outcomes, mainly due to lifestyle factors but still). lol Australia is one of the only other developed countries that offers anything close to what NA offers in terms of cash. Likely one or two others but Canada and America are the top 2, eyes closed.

$150k is bare minimum with approximately $200k billing at 25% overhead. Overhead is pretty middle of the road for a GP with minimal procedures whereas $200k is very low relative to regular GP physicians, let alone specialists. In BC, $150k books $100k post-tax, assuming every dollar is taken home as income instead of the other tax schemes available (incorporation, dividends, etc.). Depending on how you allocate that, you can get that debt done quick. To put it in perspective, there are teachers in their mid-40s still paying off their student debt with $50k/year salary pretax. If you are doing $300k/year (still below average for GPs and specialists), the numbers go up. Once you get to $400k/year, $500k/year, etc. you'll eventually get to a point where student debt becomes a joke. For a debt that normal BSc grads will take about 10 years to pay off, MDs will pay off in <5 easily, 2x over. A university president is a very big job and relatively influential people take such positions. Eisenhower was a university president just before he was elected as the 34th president of America. Not the best example. We could make an equivalent comparison with the PM of Canada. He's got the biggest job in the country. He books $357k/year.

$200k to get through school is misleading. We're Canadian, not American. Tuition is $20k per year for four years: $80k. Presumably you're taking living expenses into account to fill the $120k gap. If so, the same can be done for a BFA, BSc, or whatever other degree you'd like to consider. I'm also assuming medical students don't have a sudden urge to spend when they matriculate. MD (4 years): 4 years x $20k/year + 4 years x $30k/year = $80k + $120k = $200k Any Bachelor degree: 4 years x $6.5k/year + 4 years x $30k/year = $26k + $120k = $146k If you are any run-of-the-mill physician (not working in a saturated area), you'll net at least $150k/year: pre-tax, after overhead. Theoretically, you can pay off your student loans within 2 years assuming you hadn't already done so before finishing residency. Run the same calculations for someone coming out of a bachelor program, average starting wage $50k-$60k. We are privileged members of society. The (not really) massive MD tuition fee argument would actually be an argument in favour of your opposition. Better arguments could be made.