Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

gogogo

Members
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from zxcccxz in Learning Nothing in Clerkship   
    I agree with you, medmedmed132. It's a patronizing waste of time how some staff/rotations treat you. I've sat in the OR watching 1-4 hour surgeries with zero acknowledgment by the staff. I can't ask questions because he's/she's busy teaching the resident/fellow, and besides, I don't care for surgery so I don't have many questions to ask. Some will respond that you need to "show initiative," but that's the typical mindset that the system is always right and we are always wrong. Showing initiative doesn't work when you have staff that don't care to teach you and either give you a few words when answering your questions or just tell you that you should read about it when you bring up a question. I have spent 10-hour shifts just following staff around and they never acknowledged me. Like skyuppercutt said, it's even worse when you consider that you're paying for this.
    Learning about bread and butter clinical presentations does happen in any rotation, I agree, but it's extremely inefficient to learn it through service-based rotations like surgery. There is no need to watch hours long surgeries to "understand" a case better. I could learn much more efficiently at home or in services that are actually relevant to my career goals. Same goes for the practical skills of learning to write notes or prescriptions. After a few dictations in ortho, I realized that all I'm doing is dictating 25% of the staff's appointments for the day and not learning anything myself (because I was seeing the same presentations all day).
    So anyway, I sympathize with you. I just keep reminding myself that if I put up with this, it'll be another few years and I'll be making 200k+ in a job that's meaningful and impactful. I've also stopped being 200% polite/respectful/deferential to staff when I realize that they're not going to be adding value to my learning (because they don't care to teach). I'll still be professional, but I don't follow them around and when there's downtime, I just ask them if I can study on my phone and they're fine with it. I also sometimes say no to requests if they say that it's my choice (e.g., I've said I don't want to scrub in for a c-section because I've already seen it a few times). This hasn't affected my evaluations. Part of clerkship, I think, is learning how to act like an adult in a workplace, and if you do that correctly, I think you're unassailable for making time for your own learning.
  2. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from whatdoido in Learning Nothing in Clerkship   
    I agree with you, medmedmed132. It's a patronizing waste of time how some staff/rotations treat you. I've sat in the OR watching 1-4 hour surgeries with zero acknowledgment by the staff. I can't ask questions because he's/she's busy teaching the resident/fellow, and besides, I don't care for surgery so I don't have many questions to ask. Some will respond that you need to "show initiative," but that's the typical mindset that the system is always right and we are always wrong. Showing initiative doesn't work when you have staff that don't care to teach you and either give you a few words when answering your questions or just tell you that you should read about it when you bring up a question. I have spent 10-hour shifts just following staff around and they never acknowledged me. Like skyuppercutt said, it's even worse when you consider that you're paying for this.
    Learning about bread and butter clinical presentations does happen in any rotation, I agree, but it's extremely inefficient to learn it through service-based rotations like surgery. There is no need to watch hours long surgeries to "understand" a case better. I could learn much more efficiently at home or in services that are actually relevant to my career goals. Same goes for the practical skills of learning to write notes or prescriptions. After a few dictations in ortho, I realized that all I'm doing is dictating 25% of the staff's appointments for the day and not learning anything myself (because I was seeing the same presentations all day).
    So anyway, I sympathize with you. I just keep reminding myself that if I put up with this, it'll be another few years and I'll be making 200k+ in a job that's meaningful and impactful. I've also stopped being 200% polite/respectful/deferential to staff when I realize that they're not going to be adding value to my learning (because they don't care to teach). I'll still be professional, but I don't follow them around and when there's downtime, I just ask them if I can study on my phone and they're fine with it. I also sometimes say no to requests if they say that it's my choice (e.g., I've said I don't want to scrub in for a c-section because I've already seen it a few times). This hasn't affected my evaluations. Part of clerkship, I think, is learning how to act like an adult in a workplace, and if you do that correctly, I think you're unassailable for making time for your own learning.
  3. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from medmedmed132 in Learning Nothing in Clerkship   
    I agree with you, medmedmed132. It's a patronizing waste of time how some staff/rotations treat you. I've sat in the OR watching 1-4 hour surgeries with zero acknowledgment by the staff. I can't ask questions because he's/she's busy teaching the resident/fellow, and besides, I don't care for surgery so I don't have many questions to ask. Some will respond that you need to "show initiative," but that's the typical mindset that the system is always right and we are always wrong. Showing initiative doesn't work when you have staff that don't care to teach you and either give you a few words when answering your questions or just tell you that you should read about it when you bring up a question. I have spent 10-hour shifts just following staff around and they never acknowledged me. Like skyuppercutt said, it's even worse when you consider that you're paying for this.
    Learning about bread and butter clinical presentations does happen in any rotation, I agree, but it's extremely inefficient to learn it through service-based rotations like surgery. There is no need to watch hours long surgeries to "understand" a case better. I could learn much more efficiently at home or in services that are actually relevant to my career goals. Same goes for the practical skills of learning to write notes or prescriptions. After a few dictations in ortho, I realized that all I'm doing is dictating 25% of the staff's appointments for the day and not learning anything myself (because I was seeing the same presentations all day).
    So anyway, I sympathize with you. I just keep reminding myself that if I put up with this, it'll be another few years and I'll be making 200k+ in a job that's meaningful and impactful. I've also stopped being 200% polite/respectful/deferential to staff when I realize that they're not going to be adding value to my learning (because they don't care to teach). I'll still be professional, but I don't follow them around and when there's downtime, I just ask them if I can study on my phone and they're fine with it. I also sometimes say no to requests if they say that it's my choice (e.g., I've said I don't want to scrub in for a c-section because I've already seen it a few times). This hasn't affected my evaluations. Part of clerkship, I think, is learning how to act like an adult in a workplace, and if you do that correctly, I think you're unassailable for making time for your own learning.
  4. Like
    gogogo reacted to medmedmed132 in Learning Nothing in Clerkship   
    I just did a rotation in a core specialty (surgical), and felt like I was just there to do the work of the team, and get the job done. I learned literally nothing, and worked easily 50-60 hours a week. To top it all off, my school has shelf exams, and I failed by one mark. I'm pretty angry - not only were we not taught the things relevant on the exam during the rotation, we grinded out 50-60 hours (some weeks were night shifts) and still learned nothing.

    Is med school just unpaid labour?
  5. Like
    gogogo reacted to MDinCanada in Family Medicine Salary   
    Quebec! Yes no overhead, he works in a "GMF", so the overhead is payed by the government and they have great supporting staff (social worker, nurses, psychotherapists, etc.). Planning clinic is like sexual health (IUDs, abortions, etc.)
     
  6. Like
    gogogo reacted to JohnGrisham in Ask questions about emergency medicine here   
    It's usually just a bit of a step up from a walk-in-clinic. Not exactly the type of medicine most people who go into emerg want to do. Financially its not bad at all, just in general not everyones interest. But maybe a happy middle ground between FM and hospital based EM.
  7. Like
    gogogo reacted to MDinCanada in Going into FM without liking the core aspects of the program?   
    I'm from Quebec too and I'd like to eventually practice in Montreal for factors that you mentioned above (quality of life, culture, cost of living, etc.)
    A big factor motivating me to do family medicine is the shorter training, career flexibility (you can sort of change careers as you age depending on your interests), lifestyle flexibility (being able to reduce hours when I'll have a family), etc. Does it scare you that the government may want to impose a large amount of patients on each family doctor? Possibly turning it into something that is very not lifestyle? Instead of threatening family doctors, they could make going into family medicine more attractive to students...
    The political and administrative bs in medicine bothers me the most... If all goes to shit, I would have no problem changing provinces/going private or doing non-clinical work.
  8. Like
    gogogo reacted to offmychestplease in Going into FM without liking the core aspects of the program?   
    there is not need to make FM more attractive to students as it is already very popular...already 50-60% of graduates from the medical schools in QC go into FM for the reasons you mentioned above and more.
  9. Like
    gogogo reacted to offmychestplease in Going into FM without liking the core aspects of the program?   
    I think we see eye to eye on many things, and I fully agree about the niches. 
  10. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from heydere in Going into FM without liking the core aspects of the program?   
    I agree, the opinions on this board are going to be biased because of the limited sample. But I'm starting to take them seriously because they align with what I'm hearing from FM grads that I've met/spoken to outside of the forum. All are from one of the bigger cities in Ontario.
    I completely agree with the financial analysis. In fact, I made the same argument in another thread comparing FM to PA or FM to FRCPC; when you consider the years of lost income, the higher earning option (i.e., FM > PA or FRCPC > FM) typically doesn't equal the lower earning option until 40s or 50s, and by that point, I don't think the extra money is worth it vs. having had more freedom in your 30s and early 40s.
    But from a quality of career standpoint, it's becoming increasingly suspicious to me that 9/10 of FM grads I've spoken to are not practicing in the field they trained. Some are doing just derm, some palliative, some ER, some hospitalist, some only walk-ins, some cosmetics, some surgical assist, etc. But only one wants to do comprehensive office-based family med. And these are people from the bigger cities in Ontario (London, Hamilton, Toronto). That tells me there's likely something undesirable about family med that drives people away. I even know an older FM who used to have a practice and he quit and now only does walk-ins. He told me he'd never open a full practice again because of how demanding it is. The nice thing about FM is the flexibility to just turn away from the full scope of the field, but it doesn't look good and suggests to me that the path isn't as linear as we're promised as med students.
  11. Like
    gogogo reacted to JohnGrisham in Is Uworld step 2 a good resource for clerkship?   
    Doesn't mean they can't be one in the same - Uworld will cover most common topics that you should know as a clerk, and then some. If all you did was UWORLD, you would be in a strong footing for knowledge base- and then apply it to the real world on a day to day basis by learning the "flow" and guidelines for your respective rotation.
  12. Like
    gogogo reacted to shikimate in Is Uworld step 2 a good resource for clerkship?   
    UWorld is more test oriented so not the best for "learning" in general per se, but if you combine UWorld+First Aid you will get a lot more out of it. You can even tackle First Aid for step 3 if you want to up a notch.
    Doing UWorld does keep you motivated to study if you set a schedule and do a fixed number of questions per day/week etc. Unless of course you study better by just reading books. Some people like studying by doing questions rather than reading books.
  13. Like
    gogogo reacted to Butterfly_ in Is Uworld step 2 a good resource for clerkship?   
    I think Toronto notes is pretty helpful, onlinemeded, uptodate, reading around cases you see.
     
    but you gotta do both: learn medicine and study for test taking. If you don’t study for the purpose of test tasking then you may fail some rotations even if you have good clinical evals.
  14. Like
    gogogo reacted to blah1234 in Not Backing Up Am I Making the Wrong Choice?   
    Some aren't able to continue in medicine. Some find a path forward (e.g. business, law, research, etc.) others aren't as fortunate or I've lost contact with them. Luckily you don't always need a residency to be successful in other endeavours but it's not like the career escalator that you see in medicine with residency. However, it's also not 100% rosy if you do residency either as you just have to look at the number of specialists that are stuck in perpetual clinical associateships or fellowships or graduate degrees.
    People can feel bitter with their second choice because they often feel like they got the short end of the stick but it really is the lesser evil compared to not finishing your training.
  15. Like
    gogogo reacted to JohnGrisham in Not Backing Up Am I Making the Wrong Choice?   
    Your guess is as good as mine - often find some research coordinator job. The opportunities for those with only an MD are not as glamorous as people often make it seem. The average medical student often doesn't have much real world translatable experience in the business world/consulting world etc.  Sure many do, but those that often do, aren't the ones going unmatched - because they realize how powerful any residency is from making an income stream and then slowly building up lateral interests. 

    I.e. a colleague of mine left a surgical residency after 2 years, and went into FM. Now has his license, works part-time while building up a side business(and painfully learning the ropes, and trials/errors). Much easier to do that when you have a gauranteed source of income from the clinic job that is servicing your debt, keeping you afloat and funding your side business. 
  16. Like
    gogogo reacted to bearded frog in Current CaRMS Competitiveness - Schools and Specialties   
    I took some time and scraped the last 20 years of 1st choice and quota data going back to 2000 to see if there were any interesting trends in competitiveness over time. It turns out things have been relatively stable over the last two decades. I again combined pathology and dropped the 1 applicant a year research tracks, and combined community medicine and public health as the name transitioned. Vascular surgery only became a thing in 2012.
    The values are ratios of first choice applicants to spots, ie number of applicants per spot. Numbers above 1 mean more applicants than spots and blow 1 are more spots than applicants. To account for outliers I used a 3 year rolling average to smooth the data somewhat. The data is presented below in 4 separate graphs for ease of visualization. Also note the scales for each graph are not the same!
    Stable
    The following specialties have been generally stable in competitiveness in the last 20 years:

    Otolaryngology and Urology had a bump in ~2002 and ~2018 but otherwise reverted to mean. Pediatrics had a small valley with a nadir at 2010. Otherwise these ones have been pretty solid at their respective competitiveness levels.
    Declined then Recovered
    The following specialties had a significant decline from 2000 with a nadir around 2010 and recovered to current levels:

    ER had a bump around 2005 but otherwise slumped somewhat before peaking again in 2017. Nuclear medicine had a little peak in the middle of their nadir for some reason. Generally if we only looked back 10 years we would consider these specialties on the rise.
    Increasing
    The following specialties have generally increased in competitiveness over the last 20 years:

    The caveat here is radiation oncology which peaked in 2004 then had a big slump before a meteoric rise in the last 3 years. PM&R, while still increased form 2000, is also down from its peak in 2015. Anesthesiology had a small nadir in 2005. Interesting to see how much neurosurgery has grown, even with its terrible reputation.
    Decreasing
    The following specialties have been *relatively* decreasing in competitiveness in the last 20 years:

    This basically goes to show that while still the most compeditive, plastics and derm are not as crazy competitive as they once were, now with only ~2 applicants for every spot as opposed to 3-4 in 2000. Vascular started off strong in 2012 and then has come down. Rads has seen a steady decline.
  17. Like
    gogogo reacted to bearded frog in Current CaRMS Competitiveness - Schools and Specialties   
    There is a stickied post in this forum from 2014 discussing the competitiveness of various specialties. Things have changed a little since then (but not much!) so I thought I would discuss the current field using data from the 2020 match available at https://www.carms.ca/data-reports/r1-data-reports/. I also tried to approach the competitiveness of specific schools as well, as someone just asked about where average applicants end up.
    Competitiveness of Specialties
    There are two main ways to approach this. The first way, the way that was done in the above mentioned post, is to consider the first choice specialty of applicants, and then consider the number of available spots. A specialty is considered more compeditive if there are less spots per first-choice applicant, and less compeditive if there are more spots per applicant. Traditionally, optho, plastics, and derm have vied for the top spot in being most competitive, trading year by year. In general the pathology specialties usually have more spots than applicants and are seen as least compeditive. The data for 2020 is below, with the caveat that I combined the program variants, ie there was a research anesthesiology track with one applicant and one spot which I combined with anesthesiology, and I combined the pathology subspecialties together. Doing this did not change the order of competitiveness.

    To understand this graph, the number is the ratio of spots to applicants. There were 1.68 spots for every pathology applicant, and there were two applicants for every ophthalmology spot. There was just over 1 spot for every internal medicine applicant.
    As you can see, the traditionally compeditive specialties are still compeditive, but has been joined by emergency medicine as one of the most compeditive disciplines, with 126 applicants for 73 spots and a ratio of 0.58 spots per applicant. Interestingly, radiology has a fairly compeditive reputation, however it is less competitive using this method than psychiatry and pediatrics, typically seen as low compeditive specialties. Interestingly ortho as seen as relatively noncompetitive using this method as well. Ortho, pathology, family medicine, physical medicine & rehab, and IM are the only specialties with more spots than applicants.
    Now I feel that this is the best way to approach the question with the data available, but there are obviously caveats and problems using this method, as applicants potentially apply to multiple fields without a "first" choice, or prioritize location over specialty, etc. Another way to look at this question is to see where applicants actually end up after the first round, or more specifically where they don't end up.
    In theory, more compeditive specialties will have less unfilled spots at the end of the first round of the match, and less compeditive specialties will have more. This doesn't really work as it will skew towards specialties with larger quotas. Family and IM are likely to have left over spots just because the number of available spots are so much higher. So to account for this we can rank disciplines by the ratio of unfilled spots to total offered spots. Less compeditive disciplines, in theory, will have a higher proportion of their total quota go unfilled.

    This graph shows the ratio of unmatched spots to total offered quota for specialties that had unmatched spots. The total number of unmatched spots are listed next to the bar. For example, over a third of the pathology spots were not filled, and 10% of the vascular surgery spots were still available. Those not shown had no unmatched spots after the first round. You can see that it somewhat correlates with the previous method, with pathology, family, ortho, and PM&R still at the top. However, as you can see with the labels, we are talking about very low numbers for everything other than pathology, IM, ortho, and IM, so it's difficulty to extrapolate using this method, as that one spot in gyne might be due to a program making only limited selection of applicants, for whatever reason, hoping to do better in the second round? We cannot say.
    The reason why I bring up this method though, is that based on the data supplied by CaRMS, a similar method is the only way to look at school competitiveness, as while school quotas are published, we do not know the numbers of first-choice applicants for each school.
    Competitiveness of Schools
    We have the number of spots offered by each school, and we have the number of unmatched spots after the first round so we can get a ratio.

    This is a graph of ratio of total unfilled spots to total quota with the number of unfilled spots next to the bar. A third of NOSM's spots went unfilled. Note that the vast majority of these are family medicine spots. The graph with only royal college disciplines (ie. no family med) is below.

    As you can see the overall numbers are much lower, but the general order of schools is the same. Without judgment, the trend generally correlates with "desirability" to live in that city, especially in the non-family data. (Calgary certainly is an outlier there)
    Summary
    These data are not perfect, and there's caveats to every method, but I hope this gives a general idea about where things stand, at least for CMG's in the first round of CaRMS. There might be some interesting trends over time if we compare how this ranking changes going back previous years, which I may do in the future, but for now I'll leave it at this.
  18. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from MissingPrereqs in From Finance to Medicine - can I do it?   
    I agree with everyone that you have a really great shot at getting into med school.
    But I'll be honest: Why do you want to do this? If you think when you're 65 you'll end up regretting not being a doctor, then sure, do it (though I'll point out that research on people's regrets at the end of life show that career regrets are few and far between, with most people actually regretting that they didn't spend more time with their loved ones). From a financial perspective, this is likely not going to help you that much (see my post history). From a wellbeing perspective, you'll find that much of your life will go on hold and you'll lose your autonomy for at least the duration of med school and residency (i.e., 5 years minimum, assuming Calgary MD + FM 2-year residency; much longer for any other specialty). The training to be a doctor is necessarily very demanding, so you may end up missing your regular hours and life outside of work.
    I think whether what you're looking for from medicine will be somewhat contingent upon which specialty you choose. Most non-trads and older students go for FM, and in there, you'll be doing just as much "selling" and negotiating as any other career. Patients will demand things of you that you don't think are appropriate (e.g., expensive MRI imaging for run-of-the-mill low back pain), they'll refuse things that you think are appropriate (e.g., vaccinating their kids), and they'll request things that seem borderline unethical (e.g., notes to get time off work for reasons they may be lying about or exaggerating). In any hospital-based specialty, you may deal with demanding and stressed-out family members (who can even be antagonistic), and you'll be dealing with toxic hospital politics. Coming from a different field before medicine, I've come to recognize that there is no occupation that is immune to the biases and downfalls of human nature. Whatever you dislike about human social interactions in finance, I'm pretty sure you'll run into the same, just in a different form, in medicine. It's just human nature.
    Note, I'm not saying that FM (or medicine in general) doesn't have meaningful outcomes, it obviously does, but I'm not sure whether the outcomes are any more meaningful or impactful than helping people with their finances. A lot of medicine, whether FM or not, also involves algorithmic thinking and following pre-established guidelines, so it becomes pretty repetitive rather than engaging your critical thinking for problem solving. Problem solving and critical thinking does happen, but from what I see, much of it is doing the same thing day in, day out, without much creativity required.
    The nice thing about medicine is that there are many specialties that can suit many different types of people. So if you do decide on medicine, it would be a good idea to do detailed research on the different specialties (including talking to people in those fields) to understand whether what you want from medicine will actually be what you get. I don't mean to discourage you, because medicine is a pretty good career, but I think you're already in a good place and should think very hard about this decision.
  19. Like
    gogogo reacted to unmatch in Advice on IM vs FM   
    I'm in the boat of having applied and matched to FM as a back-up from a different specialty (not IM). I haven't really enjoyed my program, just find the work in FM to be unfulfilling. There are a lot of conditions which are very prominent but have no good treatments and patients are very upset (bad backs, bad knees, etc), it often times feels like you're being more of a counsellor than a doctor, and there's so much paperwork that specialists don't have to deal with (refills, consultant notes, etc). I feel like a baby sitter for a lot of my complex patients who have multiple specialists - trying to coordinate complex conditions without having the training or skills to do so.  Specialists have the ability to choose their patients and discharge them when the medical question is answered, whereas in family it doesn't feel like there's a medical question at all a lot of the time. If you find it rewarding to develop relationships with patients, know them over several years, and don't necessarily want to always be practicing from strict evidence based medicine (a lot of your judgement is based off of gestalt and intuition), then you'll probably enjoy family medicine. If you want to be a doctor in the strictest sense then IM is probably better for you. 
    They also get paid a lot more for ultimately doing less work (assuming you work similar hours as you would in rheum/endo/etc). The residency is harder in IM but I think the trade off is worth it for a lifetime of a potentially more fulfilling career. 
    My thoughts are echoed by a lot of my friends who only wanted family medicine and found that the career wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. Medical students are often shielded from the reality of family medicine because a large amount of your time will be unpaid scutwork, and not true medicine. 
  20. Like
    gogogo reacted to rice in emergency medicine moonlighting + working with family (vs ccfp-em, frcpc)   
    I've seen it in the Durham region- Whitby, Ajax, Oshawa, Bowmanville, etc.
    I'm sure it's the same in other places
    I think most just did standard CCFP, I don't know about anything specific to EM. I know one did a POCUS course after residency but that's not necessary by any means.
  21. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from Symphonie in Feeling exhausted... How do I decide on a specialty?   
    I feel the same as you. I'm pretty set on FM because I am content with it (I don't mind the "negatives") and have chosen to focus more on other aspects of my life that make me happy. I think it depends on your personality. Personally, I used to be much more ambitious when I was younger. But I saw what pursuing success at all costs leads to and I realized it wasn't worth it to me. I like the rest of my life too much. Case in point: As intellectually satisfying and enjoyable it can be to understand something, I find that whatever pleasure I get from an intellectual pursuit is the same pleasure I get from simpler things, like having free time, being around family, and pursuing my hobbies. If you cannot live life without feeling as if you've reached your maximum career potential, then that's the only reason I'd say you should consider a specialty; but understand that pursuing your maximum career potential means sacrificing other areas of your life. There's much more balance with FM that I think is appealing and only becomes more appealing the older you get. But maybe clear your headspace first to make sure that you're not choosing FM just because it's an escape.
  22. Like
    gogogo got a reaction from DaWiz in Is being a doctor worth it?   
    I didn't say non-physicians need a PhD to earn a lot. I was talking specifically about tech and brought up the example of data science, which is one of the hottest jobs in tech right now. Many of the people in data science have a PhD, meaning they have almost just as much training as a family doctor, but are earning half of what the average family doctor does. And that's just family medicine, which is one of the lower paid specialties (on average). The cardiologists, ophthalmologists, etc. making 500k+ are making a salary that you won't touch in tech/corporate unless you're the very best of the best and have decades of experience (or are in Silicon Valley, which again, is rare, can come with long hours too, and is usually a short-term option for Canadian tech grads who eventually move back to Canada and take a huge paycut).
    Here are the notable jobs in our society that make 250k+ (I'm not including insanely rare jobs, like professional athlete, artist, etc.):
    1. Partner at a professional firm (e.g., law, accounting)
    2. Corporate executive 
    3. High up at a consulting firm/investment banking
    4. Independent business owner/founder
    All of the jobs above usually require just as many hours as medicine, if not more. Consultants, for example, are in a different city *every week* from Monday to Thursday. One consultant I spoke to was married and had to take a project in Sweden, meaning he wouldn't see his wife for 6 months. People in IB are basically working nonstop everyday (100 hours a week is typical). The same for law firm partners. And being an independent business founder/owner is so rare that it's probably not worth discussing. Also remember that these jobs are not guaranteed like in medicine. There's no guarantee you'll become partner at a law firm, for example. In medicine, once you're in, you have the job for life.
    If you choose a lifestyle specialty (e.g., family medicine, endocrinology), you will make a salary that the people in the above jobs are working a minimum of 60 hours a week to achieve. Except they also have the risk of being fired any time, losing their job during a recession, have to travel for corporate events, etc. For instance, a friend who was making 150k in investment banking 2 years after undergrad seemed to have it all. The bank was even paying for her taxis to drive her home at night. But then I realized that she was working every day from 7am to 1am. And that's for 150k, a salary you could easily double as a family doctor working on your own terms. The level of autonomy, stability, and salary for the hours worked in medicine is not easily replicated in other industries.
    If you are working resident hours as staff,  you are doing it because you chose a specialty with those hours, and you are being compensated nicely for it. For instance, the cardiologists working insane hours are making 500-600k. That would take beating a lot of competition in corporate after 1-2 decades just to get there. It's not any easier. 
    As for debt, unless you're bad with money, you can pay off medical school debt within 5 years of practice. There are also scholarships during med school that can offset costs, as well as the tuition tax breaks I mentioned above. Finally, again, it's not like people in other industries don't have debt. MBA and law school costs ~100k.
  23. Like
    gogogo reacted to James Nystead in Students who bought luxury cars during clerkship, how do you feel about them now?   
    Spend money on assets not liabilities; Invest it in VGRO in a TFSA instead
  24. Like
    gogogo reacted to blah1234 in Why is plastic surgery, opthalmology and dermatology competitive?   
    Apologies, out of consideration for their privacy I wouldn't feel comfortable sharing even ballpark numbers. I will say they do well but not 7 figure well if that is at all helpful. There should be no worries about them starving or struggling if they are responsible with their money. Unfortunately, more MDs than I would like to see do live irresponsibly (sometimes paycheque to paycheque).
    Numbers are also only part of the picture. There are considerations like practice location and mix that also play into professional satisfaction.
  25. Like
    gogogo reacted to Jennifer_Dickens in PBL - what is it REALLY like?   
    This post is coming 13 years after the original, but it's never too late.
    The biggest problem with McMaster is the discrepancy between what they preach and what they practice. They claim to stand out because they accept more mature and unconventional students with non-science backgrounds. But if you take a look at their admissions trends over the last 5 - 7 years, you'll notice that they've fallen back into the baseline habit of being like every other medical school: Accept science students straight out of undergraduate programs. The advantage of that is having more uniform and monolithic classes with energetic, idealistic and motivated students. The administration also faces less resistance and novel ideas, i.e. the student body is easier to control and manipulate. The disadvantage comes in the fact that medicine remains stagnant and deprived of true innovation.
    Re: PBL, itself, I noticed two major problems while working my way through McMaster's program:
    1.) The school claims to be open to discussion and differing ideas, but in practice it's quite intolerant of original thinking. Tuesday mornings are dedicated to "Professional Competencies", which is essentially comprised of lectures dealing with the soft side of medicine: Ethics, law, spirituality, culture, etc. Over time, I noticed that the lectures and resources that were made available to us were extremely biased, one-sided and poor. We had an ER doc give us a lecture on ethics and tell us that there basically was no definition of ethics; a very ignorant statement that ignores at least 2,000 years of philosophy and political science. Our lectures on abortion stressed its absolute necessity but did not touch upon the possible complications that could come as a result. We had a lecture on Indigenous culture that resulted in a student being publically berated in the auditorium after he asked a question that was in line with our learning objectives; people were deadpan and pale as snow when that was happening. It was terrifying. Our Dean publically apologized to everyone EXCEPT for that student. 
    And because McMaster's become so biased and intolerant of original thinking, that's why they're moving away from more mature and unconventional students; they want younger people who more or less all think the same and will agree unanimously with a one-sided opinion.
    2.) One comment in this thread mentioned that the tutors for the medical PBL tutorials are experienced clinicians or PhDs, which leads one to logically assume that groups will always receive the best possible teaching. That's grossly inaccurate. I saw countless instances in which the tutor was a family physician and discouraged learners from getting caught up in the nitty gritty details. Meanwhile, these were students who were future medical geneticists, internists, and pathologists who wanted to better understand the biochemistry behind clinical presentations. This also contributes to the fact that a lot of these tutors aren't properly trained in education and sometimes make poor/lazy teachers. Quite a few students who asked for guidance were invited to "go and read around it", rather than being recommended specific sources and chapters that would be good starting points. I had quite a few intelligent classmates who agreed that the PBL process should have been more gradual: Make it more didactically heavy in the beginning, teach people HOW to teach themselves, and then gradually ease up.  
×
×
  • Create New...