class size :(

[sv3]

Economics. The price of oil is way lower than what it was. If you owned a car in the past couple of years, you probably remembered the price of gas being in the $1.30 range (because the price of oil was well over $100/barrel). Now that the economy is lagging and oil is lagging because of lower demand (around the $70-80 range), the AB gov't isn't racking up as huge tax money from the oil as they used to. Doesn't it seem a little odd that the AB gov't is actually running a deficit despite having all the liquid gold? Oil boom = stagnant. Ontario on the other hand depends on manufacturing (which could rebound ), yet they will spend and expect higher equalization payments. Ontario isn't the most responsible province (e-Health anyone). I don't think AB should be compared to ONT because those are two huge different balls of wax.

 

That is huge. The big problem here is perception too. The class went up by 30 last year, b/c of surpluses. So if you use 150 as a base, this cut may not seem as drastic. Obviously I (being a desperate as hell premed) still see it as a huge cut from 180 but i think this is the government's view. What they really screwed up on was implementing extra corporate taxes 2 years ago and then removing them once the economy went down. They were depending on revenues from this particular tax and now thats gone (their own doing), they are finding ways to cut. I could be completely wrong but something along the same lines could still explain whats going on.

 

And ya....i would be shocked if UA didn't go through the same thing. blows.

 

oh and about the Ontario thing.......Ontario didnt do this "put in a new tax, let's depend on it, ok ok let's take it out now" dance. not exactly focused on the long term is Alberta

[keith_015]

oh and about the Ontario thing.......Ontario didnt do this "put in a new tax, let's depend on it, ok ok let's take it out now" dance. not exactly focused on the long term is Alberta

 

Ontario would rather be like Quebec and spend themselves so far into debt, that they are damn near broke. AB is still staying civil in their spending. Will be better long term for civilians, med students, nurses and med students alike in the province, even at the expense of short term med school enrollment decline.

[sv3]

Ontario would rather be like Quebec and spend themselves so far into debt, that they are damn near broke. AB is still staying civil in their spending. Will be better long term for civilians, med students, nurses and med students alike in the province, even at the expense of short term med school enrollment decline.

 

so much changes between now and the long term - so i have a bias towards favouring the short term. It's something you get now, today, appreciate it, and hope for the best in the long term. Not sure about other people but any 5 year plan I've ever tried coming up with changes in about 6 months. So I'm never sold on anyone or any governing body promising things 5+ years later (especially considering the whole election thing you know......). but as far as ontario and alberta - i dont know enough to comment on who's better.

 

sv

[sfinch]

I was doing a observorship with a surgeon in london recently. The consensus with many of his colleagues is that for political capital, Ontario has increased the number of medical spots by WAY too much. There just are not enough specialist jobs for the new graduates from specialty programs - and it is only going to get worse. Especially with new US medical schools and training programs tightening up access to the USA. People are just avoiding family medicine, even though gp work pays really well now - GP medicine and some small town specialty work is the only area where there are shortages.

 

For cities > 100K: No jobs for eye doctors. No jobs for heart surgeons. No jobs for brain surgeons. Few jobs for urologists. Few to no jobs for ENTs. Much fewer jobs for radiologists (especially fellowship trained ones).

 

At the same time, newspapers like the Toronto Star keep pushing for more international grads to work here (read yesterdays newspaper) - and it has an effect on the liberal party that wants to win more immigrant votes and stay in power. Their numbers are also increasing and will continue to increase.

 

In the meanwhile, getting a job in the GTA, Ottawa, London, Hamilton, Kitchenar or even Kingston as a specialist is getting harder, and even starting as a successful gp in the GTA is starting to get harder.

 

I suspect big cuts coming to Ontario soon - just not this year. But one just never knows.

[yeeha]

I was doing a observorship with a surgeon in london recently. The consensus with many of his colleagues is that for political capital, Ontario has increased the number of medical spots by WAY too much. There just are not enough specialist jobs for the new graduates from specialty programs - and it is only going to get worse. Especially with new US medical schools and training programs tightening up access to the USA. People are just avoiding family medicine, even though gp work pays really well now - GP medicine and some small town specialty work is the only area where there are shortages.

 

Maybe this is a way to get doctors to go into FM or rural medicine. Although I dream of being a surgeon, I would rather be in family medicine than no medicine at all.

 

It's interesting. Many premeds are reacting because of the potential seat cuts to get into medicine, while many medical students are reacting because they might not get into the specialty that they want. More interesting is that the medical students feel entitled to tell the premeds want they should want. I would rather deal with competition on the other side because I will still be satisfied with the bottom line (FM, in my opinion. Note: I completely respect family doctors but it is the last on my list). The bottom line on the premed side is complete rejection

 

I'm still hoping for a large class size

[sfinch]

yeeha...it would not effect anyone in my class if Canadian schools quadrupled in size this year - we still get to match earlier and try for staff jobs earlier. The issue is whether it is good for the country or province to overproduce physicians. And that is very questionable.

 

Doctors COST alot of money to produce. And having too many doctors in the system, with their high pay, can be inefficient and actually also take away from the public purse. Most Canadians don't fully understand how much doctors make - the make ALOT! They really do, and anyone saying otherwise is flat out lying. Their average incomes destroy the average in any other macroprofession (there are very few investment bankers in the grand scheme of things, and they can only work in a few cities in the world).

 

Anyways, the government always overreacts. Spots were overcut when they did not need to be (officials miscalulated the effect of increasing numbers of female graduates in the 1990s), and now spots are being overincreased withour really assessing the need for the Canadian public. One should also note that there is increasing use of non MDs for previous MD jurisdiction activities. And an increased use by the public into non-traditional practioners (chiropractic, naturopathic, trad chinese, aryuvedic, homeopathic, etc).

 

I hope they don't cut spots for the sake of this years applicants. But advocating huge classes when they might be problematic is very short sighted.

[yeeha]

yeeha...it would not effect anyone in my class if Canadian schools quadrupled in size this year - we still get to match earlier and try for staff jobs earlier. The issue is whether it is good for the country or province to overproduce physicians. And that is very questionable.

 

Doctors COST alot of money to produce. And having too many doctors in the system, with their high pay, can be inefficient and actually also take away from the public purse. Most Canadians don't fully understand how much doctors make - the make ALOT! They really do, and anyone saying otherwise is flat out lying. Their average incomes destroy the average in any other macroprofession (there are very few investment bankers in the grand scheme of things, and they can only work in a few cities in the world).

 

Anyways, the government always overreacts. Spots were overcut when they did not need to be (officials miscalulated the effect of increasing numbers of female graduates in the 1990s), and now spots are being overincreased withour really assessing the need for the Canadian public. One should also note that there is increasing use of non MDs for previous MD jurisdiction activities. And an increased use by the public into non-traditional practioners (chiropractic, naturopathic, trad chinese, aryuvedic, homeopathic, etc).

 

I hope they don't cut spots for the sake of this years applicants. But advocating huge classes when they might be problematic is very short sighted.

 

Bold part - Me too

 

Maybe this will be a solution to cut down on the overinflated pay for doctors as you had pointed out. If there are so many doctors, there will be doctors willing to work for less. Like me I don't need an average income that will destroy the average in any other macroprofession. I just want a career that I am passionate about.

[osmosis]

By the way, an excellent way to encourage students to go into family medicine is to increase and promote post-FM fellowships. For example, you can do an emergency medicine or anesthesiology fellowship after a FM residency. This way, people who are attracted to the flexibility of FM, but still want the opportunity for a bit of excitement and specialization in their career (especially when they are young) can be satisfied.

 

For example, I really want to be an oncologist. Not for the pay, not for the status, not because I want to be a specialist for the sake of being a specialist, but because I really, really want to treat people with cancer. I find cancer absolutely fascinating, it's what drives me to be a doctor. I could do the Int Med + oncology fellowship route. But that's six years and it's a difficult, time-consuming path. On the other hand, I could do FM and then do a fellowship in oncology to become a GP-oncologist. It's shorter, and the hours are much more flexible, allowing me to start a family and then later tailor my schedule so that I have enough time to spend with my kids. I'm sure there are many students (especially women who know they want children) who might give FM more consideration if there more doors open for specialization after a FM residency.

 

you my friend, are an inspiration.

 

i on the other hand would love to be a GP. i have shadowed two different GP's and think it's the greatest job in the world. i also have exposure to emergency medicine, nephrology, and radiology. while i respect the role of all physicians and surgeons, the flexibility and breadth of FM is just truly awesome.

 

i'd sign a contract right now saying i promise to be a GP if they'd let me in.

[bloh]

I waited 6 months to see a urogolist a few years back. Don't tell me that there are no jobs for specialists because I do not believe it.

[sfinch]

bloh...the issue is OR time and hospital privileges. The docs almost fight each other for open OR days. Unless they can fill OR spots, many don't bother filling up their clinics. Hospitals are also loathe to take on new docs because of the financial impact a new one makes.

 

The difficulty in finding spots for specialists IS REAL. Not all specialties of course, but many.

[bloh]

bloh...the issue is OR time and hospital privileges. The docs almost fight each other for open OR days. Unless they can fill OR spots, many don't bother filling up their clinics. Hospitals are also loathe to take on new docs because of the financial impact a new one makes.

 

The difficulty in finding spots for specialists IS REAL. Not all specialties of course, but many.

 

I know that deep down you realize that isn't the entire issue. Why did I need to wait 3 months to see my dermatologist in his downtown office? I realize that constraints on OR time are real; that is why my doc only does operations on Tuesdays. However, it does not explain why the wait time for consultation took 6 months.

 

Service constraints are one thing and should be fixed. But the medical schools have a mandate to train and prepare doctors to meet the demand of our country. What happens after the medical graduates throw their graduating hats into the air is not their concern.

[sfinch]

If you honestly think there are jobs waiting around for tons of specialists, you are delusional. Enter medical school and talk to actual consultants or young residents. Medical school spots have literally doubled in most of Canada. Was Canada that bad off 10-15 yrs ago? It was not - and you know it.

 

PS - Dermatology positions are not great for new grads either. Some it is probably self serving - derms don't want competition to lower their own incomes. But it is really hard setting up a successful practice in an urban center for ToNS of specialties right now - and the problem is getting worse, not better.

 

Waits WILL occur in any publicly funded system - where it's not just doctors that are paid, but nurses, equipment, secretaries, etc. You want immediate for your non life threatening skin condition? Pay for it and go to the States.

[kandy4]

UofA Med 2013 student here...

 

1. To address rumours that med students already know about cuts, we do not. I just asked friends in both years 2013 and 2012, and this is news to most of us.

 

2. I would be surprised if the government actually followed through with such a drastic cut in seats. I want to remind all of you that UofA did massive renovations to all our facilities to accommodate an increase in students, and these renos are still on-going. We've also completely re-worked most of clinical, small-group, etc sessions. And our rotations have been re-done. So are they going to make all these changes for one year and then revert back? I highly doubt it.

 

3. I also have not heard any rumours from the 2012 year about lower calibre interviewees. I was a set leader and was impressed with both my groups. You guys did great as far as I'm concerned. The interviewers I know of did not say that you were a bad group.

 

4. I remember what it was like to be a premed and genuinely freaked out over any little twitter about med schools. But honestly, for your own health and sanity, you should probably A) Get off this forum and relax, and Accept the fact that it is now post-interview time, and there is absolutely nothing more you can do.

[kandy4]

And one more thing...

 

In my opinion, having an extra "30 people" in family medicine graduating from our class is a good thing.

 

We need more family docs than we need dermatologists. Sorry, but that's the truth.

[sv3]

If you honestly think there are jobs waiting around for tons of specialists, you are delusional. Enter medical school and talk to actual consultants or young residents. Medical school spots have literally doubled in most of Canada. Was Canada that bad off 10-15 yrs ago? It was not - and you know it.

PS - Dermatology positions are not great for new grads either. Some it is probably self serving - derms don't want competition to lower their own incomes. But it is really hard setting up a successful practice in an urban center for ToNS of specialties right now - and the problem is getting worse, not better.

 

Waits WILL occur in any publicly funded system - where it's not just doctors that are paid, but nurses, equipment, secretaries, etc. You want immediate for your non life threatening skin condition? Pay for it and go to the States.

 

The first bolded comment is a matter of opinion. Not sure what facts would back up your statement (or the one I'm about to make - just opinions). I personally do think Canada was that bad off 15 years ago, and is now much worse. Wait times are worse, and complaints are on the rise. Population growth is exceeding the growth of available healthcare services/practioners and this is why the shortage is getting worse. I just can't think of facts that would back up the opposite arguement - that we are getting better.

 

As for the second bolded statement, this is, in my opinion, exactly why the health system is in terrible (yes, terrible) shape. If this is how you measure the system - if people who are dying or who are only in immediate danger - get healthcare, then I think your goals or standards for this country are horribly low. We should have a system where you get timely access and don't need a knife in your head to get it. Seriously, as a future doctor, is this the bar you want to measure the system by?

 

Also, people pay through taxes for timely care - not just emergency care. So if you want people to pay for healthcare services in the US, then taxes should be lowered. You're statement requires people to pay extra for what I beleive (i recognize this is an opinion based arguement) should be covered through the system that is funded by their taxes.

 

anyway, not sure this thread is the perfect place for this but thought i'd throw in my two cents.

[sv3]

UofA Med 2013 student here...

 

1. To address rumours that med students already know about cuts, we do not. I just asked friends in both years 2013 and 2012, and this is news to most of us.

 

2. I would be surprised if the government actually followed through with such a drastic cut in seats. I want to remind all of you that UofA did massive renovations to all our facilities to accommodate an increase in students, and these renos are still on-going. We've also completely re-worked most of clinical, small-group, etc sessions. And our rotations have been re-done. So are they going to make all these changes for one year and then revert back? I highly doubt it.

 

3. I also have not heard any rumours from the 2012 year about lower calibre interviewees. I was a set leader and was impressed with both my groups. You guys did great as far as I'm concerned. The interviewers I know of did not say that you were a bad group.

 

4. I remember what it was like to be a premed and genuinely freaked out over any little twitter about med schools. But honestly, for your own health and sanity, you should probably A) Get off this forum and relax, and Accept the fact that it is now post-interview time, and there is absolutely nothing more you can do.

 

Hey Kandy,

 

Thanks for your post. It seems the UC students have heard about cuts but your post is full of great insights for those of us interested in UA.

 

....about #2 - it seems that the effects of a huge cut would be so far reaching - way beyond effecting just pre-meds, and the suddeness would cause such bad downstream effects. Wouldn't people be forced to work less hours or be laid off? I've gotto think of all the planning that goes into every single year, and the ripple effect on the entire school and people invovled with such a cut. I don't think it would be a good situation for anyone really. Hopefully things work out but either way, thanks for the info

[future_doc]

Kandy, you are a wonderful breath of fresh air in these troubled times!

[kandy4]

Well remember the government can do anything it bloody well pleases when it comes to medicine. So always expect the unexpected from them... they would have no qualms about laying off lots of people down the line.

 

My main concern is that they hyped up the fact that they were going to produce more doctors. A cut back after only one year of expansion sounds like a really great way to push some more MLAs over to the Wild Rose Alliance...

 

 

Like I said everyone....just relax. Please please relax. Stress causes health problems in every bodily system possible

[future_doc]

Stress causes health problems in every bodily system possible

 

The only upside to tension or stress is the release that follows!

[LookingForInfo]

UofA Med 2013 student here...

 

3. I also have not heard any rumours from the 2012 year about lower calibre interviewees. I was a set leader and was impressed with both my groups. You guys did great as far as I'm concerned. The interviewers I know of did not say that you were a bad group.

 

 

I agree with FD. You are amazing...and probably one of the reasons you were a set leader -- I loved my set leaders! Plus, I didn't think the interviewees this year could have been THAT bad .

 

Also, people pay through taxes for timely care - not just emergency care. So if you want people to pay for healthcare services in the US, then taxes should be lowered. You're statement requires people to pay extra for what I beleive (i recognize this is an opinion based arguement) should be covered through the system that is funded by their taxes.

 

To preface my next point, I'm a premed and obviously want to get in just as badly as anyone else this year. However, I think it's important to understand that, proportionally, the increase of taxes isn't nearly at the same level as the rise in healthcare costs (MRIs, procedural tests, laboratory tests, training medical students, etc.) or the physician/nurse salaries. Governments are very reluctant to increase taxes as it would obviously produce a number of very grumpy citizens (and subsequently potential voters). One of the ways that the government can control these skyrocketing health care costs (i.e. physician billing) is to have those wait times in place...and limit the resources available to physicians, including OR time, MRIs, etc. As a universal healthcare system, this shortage of doctors, limited resources, and long wait times is an inherent problem that will probably never be solved. Training more physicians without the resources they need to practice and without paying them just isn't going to help with the problems in the healthcare problem now. The real problem is (as someone said before) MONEY. We don't have it, so we can't spend it.

 

Either way, I understand everyone's frustrations regarding the cuts as I interviewed at both UC and UA too...but no matter how much we complain, the school/government is still going to go through with whatever decision they arrive at. Nothing we can do about it except try to understand it from the other point of view too (I mean, that was one of the strategies for the interviews, no? ).

 

So, GOOD LUCK everyone! I definitely hope to see some of you in my class next year! Everyone I met there was GREAT!

[future_doc]

Great post ^ LookingForInfo!

[bloh]

If you honestly think there are jobs waiting around for tons of specialists, you are delusional. Enter medical school and talk to actual consultants or young residents. Medical school spots have literally doubled in most of Canada. Was Canada that bad off 10-15 yrs ago? It was not - and you know it.

 

PS - Dermatology positions are not great for new grads either. Some it is probably self serving - derms don't want competition to lower their own incomes. But it is really hard setting up a successful practice in an urban center for ToNS of specialties right now - and the problem is getting worse, not better.

 

Waits WILL occur in any publicly funded system - where it's not just doctors that are paid, but nurses, equipment, secretaries, etc. You want immediate for your non life threatening skin condition? Pay for it and go to the States.

 

I suppose I must have taken more business classes than you. If all the patients have to wait 3+ months to see a specialist, then the most logical conclusion is that adding an extra specialist will lower that time provided everything is equal. The obvious implication is that there is a shortage of specialists.

 

Your argument is incongruous with the above fact.

[sv3]

I agree with FD. You are amazing...and probably one of the reasons you were a set leader -- I loved my set leaders! Plus, I didn't think the interviewees this year could have been THAT bad .

 

 

 

To preface my next point, I'm a premed and obviously want to get in just as badly as anyone else this year. However, I think it's important to understand that, proportionally, the increase of taxes isn't nearly at the same level as the rise in healthcare costs (MRIs, procedural tests, laboratory tests, training medical students, etc.) or the physician/nurse salaries. Governments are very reluctant to increase taxes as it would obviously produce a number of very grumpy citizens (and subsequently potential voters). One of the ways that the government can control these skyrocketing health care costs (i.e. physician billing) is to have those wait times in place...and limit the resources available to physicians, including OR time, MRIs, etc. As a universal healthcare system, this shortage of doctors, limited resources, and long wait times is an inherent problem that will probably never be solved. Training more physicians without the resources they need to practice and without paying them just isn't going to help with the problems in the healthcare problem now. The real problem is (as someone said before) MONEY. We don't have it, so we can't spend it.

 

Either way, I understand everyone's frustrations regarding the cuts as I interviewed at both UC and UA too...but no matter how much we complain, the school/government is still going to go through with whatever decision they arrive at. Nothing we can do about it except try to understand it from the other point of view too (I mean, that was one of the strategies for the interviews, no? ).

 

So, GOOD LUCK everyone! I definitely hope to see some of you in my class next year! Everyone I met there was GREAT!

 

Good thinking but not exactly accurate. Of course taxes are not going to rise in step with healthcare costs - do you really think personal/corporate taxes would do that? You realize what kind of increases in taxation (>15%)would need to occur for that to happen?

 

Sure more money helps, but that isnt the problem. Go look at comparative tables on health outcomes with other OECD countries and look at how much Canada spends per capita compared to them. Then ask yourself how this can be? Canada spends pretty much the same per capita but lags in most measures of health care system performance. If we're spending the same....the problem is not money is it?

 

And yes, the situation about cuts blows. and yes, we're powerless more or less to do anything about it.

 

sv

[MedIn2010]

I suppose I must have taken more business classes than you. If all the patients have to wait 3+ months to see a specialist, then the most logical conclusion is that adding an extra specialist will lower that time provided everything is equal. The obvious implication is that there is a shortage of specialists.

 

Your argument is incongruous with the above fact.

 

Well of course more specialists would reduce the wait. I think the problem is that the number of doctors available isn't straight up supply/demand like most economic problems. The number of specialist positions available depends directly on how many specialists the hospital is willing to employ, which is in turn decided by how much the government is willing to spend.

 

I think sfinch is probably right about this, there are likely many locations (eg. Toronto) where wait times are long, but where many specialists would love to work. In these plases there is no doctor shortage, but a shortage of open positions.

[LookingForInfo]

Good thinking but not exactly accurate. Of course taxes are not going to rise in step with healthcare costs - do you really think personal/corporate taxes would do that? You realize what kind of increases in taxation (>15%)would need to occur for that to happen?

 

Sure more money helps, but that isnt the problem. Go look at comparative tables on health outcomes with other OECD countries and look at how much Canada spends per capita compared to them. Then ask yourself how this can be? Canada spends pretty much the same per capita but lags in most measures of health care system performance. If we're spending the same....the problem is not money is it?

 

And yes, the situation about cuts blows. and yes, we're powerless more or less to do anything about it.

 

sv

 

Yes, Canada may spend more per capita, but it's not necessarily going in exactly where it's needed. North American physicians get paid significantly more than in other countries with universal health care. Is this right? Is it wrong? Who's really to say.

 

Looking at a straight per capita comparison isn't the best method to analyzing healthcare problems. Of course the Canadian system is going to have inefficiencies, but I'm sure they make it up somewhere else which doesn't necessarily show up in paper. I'm not saying one can solve the Canadian healthcare problems with JUST money, but it IS a major factor governing the direction of healthcare (that I think is undeniable). The problems with the Canadian healthcare problem are much more complex than what's being discussed on the forum (we're really just scratching the surface)...otherwise, I'm sure someone would have already come up with a solution by now. Personally, I absolutely love the Canadian healthcare system - despite the inherent flaws. And believe me, I've been on the receiving end of long wait times/shortages (ex. snowboarding accident, soccer injuries, family members hospitalized, etc.).

 

Anyway, thanks for the heads up on healthcare in other countries. I've looked into other countries healthcare systems briefly before my interviews -- particularly France which has the highest rated healthcare system. I didn't look into the particulars regarding per capita spending and such though...it'll definitely be something for me to keep in mind if I'm one of the unlucky applicants who are affected by the cuts this year (or...was simply inadequate as an interviewee this year lol )