International Medical Graudates Trying to Return

[Mashmetoo]

The news articles have tried to paint the picture that IMGs are so hard done by and that Canadian medical students are "the lucky ones". This was offensive to a lot of hard working Canadian medical students who worked their butts off to get in, some applying 6 or 7 times!

 

This same news story went on to claim that all IMGs want is a chance to compete.

 

The reality is that every Canadian has a chance to compete to become a doctor, that competition is called the medical school application process. If at first you don't succeed try try try again! That is the beautiful thing about the process, you can try again.

 

A lot of kids want to grow up to be astronauts, very few of them actually make it, and if they don't they deal with it and find other careers. Why is medicine so different? Why do some people feel like they are entitled to become doctors in Canada? It just isn't a reality. If you can make it into a Canadian Medical school then you can become a Canadian doctor. For some LUCKY IMGs we have a few extra spots because we have doctor shortages in SOME communities in SOME specialties. These are the lucky ones.

 

Regardless leviathan, I respect your fight, you have been a one man army out there on the blogs today!

 

lol.. I'm going to ignore the logical fallacy you made AGAIN called the fallacy of Affirming the consequent

 

Example:

If you can make it into a Canadian Medical school then you can become a Canadian doctor.

 

Because medicine is not the same as wanting to be an astronaut. There are international options for med schools, but no international options for astronaut school. Because in most other countries in this world, getting into a damned med school isn't as hard as it is in Canada. What gives Canada the right to deny the dreams of thousands of Canadians who WANT to be doctors, and could have gotten in if they were citizens of other countries? Most people will not accept that they got "screwed" simply due to geography.

 

Ask any Ontario resident that were forced to go international because ontario has no IP preference - do you think that these ambitious people will simply forget their dreams because of some damned provincial politics?

[anon1234]

I am glad you don't work in my hospital and that I will never have to try and teach you anything. Your ER example is an excellent one, but if you were to sarcastically make a comment like that to your senior attending regardless of what he said and or meant you would and should be shut down. Have a little respect. Perhaps that attending was meaning to draw your attention to the most likely or important issue, but by taking his every word literally you will miss out on all of the other potential diagnoses.

 

My whole point is don't be a prick even if you are smart. Make arguments that refute the facts not the sentence structure.

 

If I were a betting man, I would say that you have a sparkling GPA and test scores, as for your personality and whether or not you are the kind of person I would want to have as my colleague at 3am....

 

++ nicely said.

[Mashmetoo]

Haha you are hilarious, where do you get this from? Although totally ridiculous, and completely off topic, you do write some entertaining stuff.

 

lol, thanks. I took an introductory philosophy class in logic, logical reasoning in undergrad. One of the best choices I made.

 

Also, I'm incredibly bored right now.. and I have a mini quiz tomrw morning.. procrastinating.. ahhhhh.. back to studying

[RickRick]

Rick, sometimes people are going to disagree with you. If you only want to deal with people in your life who are like your lapdogs then you'll never learn anything. Addressing someone's comment which said "either you're in a Canadian med school or you're dumb/incompetent/lazy" and explaining why this is illogical IS refuting it with facts. I didn't tell him he spelled a word wrong, or ended his sentence with a preposition. I'm curious though, how would you respond to him then?

 

I will not respond to your insulting comments about my personality. I'm a pretty easy going person, and I have the utmost respect for my colleagues. For me, if someone disagrees with me, I don't have a problem working with them at 3am. But if someone is disrespectful, I won't let that slide and I will address that issue.

 

Thank you for that response, it comes off as rational and logical. I apologize for lashing out about your personality, I think I was getting a little worked up about the issue.

 

It is totally okay to disagree and challenge senior colleagues, as long as it is done respectfully.

 

I would have responded by giving examples of students who went to international schools for reasons x,y,z.

 

I agree with some of your arguments, I just don't agree with the way that you made many of them.

 

I think that it is important that IMGs recognize that when they lost out in the battle for admittance into Canadian medical schools they also lost the right to compete with Canadian medical students. It isn't fair for Canadian students to have IMGs breathing down their necks fighting for residency spots when they have already put a tremendous amount of time and energy into winning the competition that was four years ago.

 

In terms of IMGs having a fair process to compete for spots amongst themselves, I totally agree with you, this needs to be done! It is a very complex issue however and one that is almost impossible to make ideal for every candidate from every University. Constructive feedback on how to do this I think would be welcomed by the entire Canadian medical community. What people don't want to hear is complaining about not being allowed to compete with the Canadians. They also don't appreciate the recent slandering and attack of the current system that has gotten to the media.

[leviathan]

Thank you for that response, it comes off as rational and logical. I apologize for lashing out about your personality, I think I was getting a little worked up about the issue.

 

It is totally okay to disagree and challenge senior colleagues, as long as it is done respectfully.

 

I would have responded by giving examples of students who went to international schools for reasons x,y,z.

Fair enough. The thing is, I did respond with reasons x,y,z (if you read further back in this endlessly long thread). I guess I got fed up with giving reasons and instead resorted to using logic to explain myself, since he didn't seem to understand facts.

 

I think that it is important that IMGs recognize that when they lost out in the battle for admittance into Canadian medical schools they also lost the right to compete with Canadian medical students. It isn't fair for Canadian students to have IMGs breathing down their necks fighting for residency spots when they have already put a tremendous amount of time and energy into winning the competition that was four years ago.

I agree with you for the most part, but I do feel there are spots that the best IMGs should be getting over the worst CMGs. I mean, most Canadian med students are very hard working and motivated, but there ARE those that really take advantage of being on 'easy street'...you know what I mean? A little healthy competition might get them back in gear.

 

In terms of IMGs having a fair process to compete for spots amongst themselves, I totally agree with you, this needs to be done! It is a very complex issue however and one that is almost impossible to make ideal for every candidate from every University. Constructive feedback on how to do this I think would be welcomed by the entire Canadian medical community. What people don't want to hear is complaining about not being allowed to compete with the Canadians. They also don't appreciate the recent slandering and attack of the current system that has gotten to the media.

While I agree with a lot of their message, I do admit it's a little embarrassing seeing these news pieces on TV which aren't 100% truthful. One thing that is universal for every candidate from every university is that we're all applying for CaRMS in the Fall, so an OSCE that is required to compete for spots in BC should not be opened up in April after CaRMS is long finished. Anyway, off to watch a movie, I'll see what happens in this nightmare of a thread tomorrow.

[Mashmetoo]

Oh good lord.

 

Agreed, the Lord is good.

[OttawaURookie]

Leviathan,

 

Let's go at this another way.

 

Most people agree that if you want to become a doctor you have to make sacrifices and investments. Maybe that means less time with friends, family, less sleep, less of a social life. Many others spend money to take trips to volunteer overseas, on second degrees, more courses to improve GPA, all for for a chance to become an md. Others decide that they are gunning for just one speciality despite it being very competitive and almost impossible to get.O thers like you decide to go the overseas route despite the knowledge that it will be difficult to come back to Canada.

 

We make all these sacrifices, investments, with clear knowledge of the difficulty and no gurantees.

 

So whichever argument you want to make, it comes back to you.

 

I hate the comparisons though especially among Canadian and American schools.

 

I'd consider American schools but at the end of the day I wouldn't complain if I couldn't come back to Canada.

[concernedmedstudent]

Because medicine is not the same as wanting to be an astronaut. There are international options for med schools, but no international options for astronaut school. Because in most other countries in this world, getting into a damned med school isn't as hard as it is in Canada. What gives Canada the right to deny the dreams of thousands of Canadians who WANT to be doctors, and could have gotten in if they were citizens of other countries? Most people will not accept that they got "screwed" simply due to geography.

 

Ask any Ontario resident that were forced to go international because ontario has no IP preference - do you think that these ambitious people will simply forget their dreams because of some damned provincial politics?

 

Are you suggesting that we lower our standards to appease dreamers who were not capable of achieving the standards currently in place?

 

Canada should be proud of maintaining some of the highest standards in the world when it comes to educating our future physicians. We are lucky that we have so many exceptional candidates.

 

Canadian institutions do have a right to set the bar wherever they want. If you can't get into medical school in Canada perhaps try the Caribbean, if not there maybe Afghanistan, heck, why not start your own non-accredited medical school wherever you please and teach yourself? But if you chose to do that, don't complain when you aren't allowed to come back to Canada to practice medicine as a licensed physician. High standards are a good thing!

 

There are a lot of other great careers in the healthcare field that don't require you to get an MD. Premeds should have back up plans in Nursing, Osteopathic medicine, Physical Therapy etc etc. These are very rewarding fields that would love to take the smart, and passionate candidates that don't quite make the cut for Canadian MD programs. Sometimes students have an unrealistic sense of entitlement and their overzealous pride can wind up hurting them in the long run.

[Robin Hood]

Are you suggesting that we lower our standards to appease dreamers who were not capable of achieving the standards currently in place?

 

Canada should be proud of maintaining some of the highest standards in the world when it comes to educating our future physicians. We are lucky that we have so many exceptional candidates.

 

Canadian institutions do have a right to set the bar wherever they want. If you can't get into medical school in Canada perhaps try the Caribbean, if not there maybe Afghanistan, heck, why not start your own non-accredited medical school wherever you please and teach yourself? But if you chose to do that, don't complain when you aren't allowed to come back to Canada to practice medicine as a licensed physician. High standards are a good thing!

 

There are a lot of other great careers in the healthcare field that don't require you to get an MD. Premeds should have back up plans in Nursing, Osteopathic medicine, Physical Therapy etc etc. These are very rewarding fields that would love to take the smart, and passionate candidates that don't quite make the cut for Canadian MD programs. Sometimes students have an unrealistic sense of entitlement and their overzealous pride can wind up hurting them in the long run.

 

1. US MD schools have lower standards than Canadian MD schools, does that make American medical education inferior?

2. DO (USDO) = MD.

[rswim]

1. US MD schools have lower standards than Canadian MD schools, does that make American medical education inferior?

2. DO (USDO) = MD.

 

You are correct the overall medical education in the US is inferior that in Canada. That is not to say that all is medical schools are inferior but some are. Once again there is far more variability in the US than there is in Canada. Some schools are excellent and others are not.

 

There is a difference between osteopathic medicine and allopathic medicine. They are not equivalent despite what some DOs would like to tell you. I'm not saying that osteopathic medicine isn't a great supplement in the US but to insist it is the same is just flat out incorrect. It would be like saying that chiropractors and physical therapists are the same. Yea there is a lot of overlap but they are not the same thing. MD=MD DO=DO. You are however correct that in Canada we recognize USDOs and they are licensed by the college.

[Robin Hood]

You are correct the overall medical education in the US is inferior that in Canada. That is not to say that all is medical schools are inferior but some are. Once again there is far more variability in the US than there is in Canada. Some schools are excellent and others are not.

 

There is a difference between osteopathic medicine and allopathic medicine. They are not equivalent despite what some DOs would like to tell you. I'm not saying that osteopathic medicine isn't a great supplement in the US but to insist it is the same is just flat out incorrect. It would be like saying that chiropractors and physical therapists are the same. Yea there is a lot of overlap but they are not the same thing. MD=MD DO=DO. You are however correct that in Canada we recognize USDOs and they are licensed by the college.

 

USDOs can do the same tasks as MDs.

[RickRick]

1. US MD schools have lower standards than Canadian MD schools, does that make American medical education inferior?

2. DO (USDO) = MD.

 

The top US medical schools actually have higher standards than most Canadian Schools. Canada has 17 medical schools, all of which would rank somewhere in the top 50 of US schools. If you compare average GPA and MCAT of Canadian medical students with those in top 50 US Medical schools I think you will see that they are similarly competitive.

 

The same holds true for undergraduate education. Some US schools (Ivy League + UC's, UW, UVA, Hopkins, Duke, MIT etc.) are excellent, but other schools, not to mention any names, are garbage (when compared to an average Canadian University). The US is a bigger country and it is bound to have more variability. I think we should be proud of how high our education standards are in Canada and instead of finding ways to lower the bar we should find ways to maintain these standards! Otherwise we risk devaluing the degree.

 

Another great example of the hug disparity in the US is law schools. In Canada it is very competitive to get into law school, but if you get in you are expected to pass the bar with flying colors and become a pretty good lawyer. In the US there are competitive law schools (again, Harvard, Yale etc) and there are garbage law schools (Night law schools and colleges). The end result is you have excellent lawyers and the kind of lawyers you see on bus stop advertisements. In Canada, while we still have some bottom feeder lawyers, most are relatively competent or at least decently well educated.

[concernedmedstudent]

Keep in mind that there once was a time when an undergraduate degree carried significant value in society. If you had an undergrad you were considered educated and would likely find a pretty good job. Then everyone wanted to get an undergraduate degree, standards dropped, new for profit colleges/universities opened up, and what was the result? Undergraduate degrees from all but the most prestigious universities have lost a significant amount of value. If we just let any person with any old MD or MBBS or DO or whatever they call their medical degree, fight for a spot in Canadian Residency programs then we are undermining the value of a Canadian medical degree and we are prolonging the rat race.

 

Is it cost effective? absolutely. Is it safe for our population and will it increase the quality of care? Not a chance. If it is just about being fair and saving money then by all means open up the competition to everyone. I'll bet there is a whole bunch of MDs from developing nations that would LOVE to come work in Canada for a small fraction of what we pay Canadian MDs.

 

Fortunately, most physicians will continue to fight hard to keep tight regulations on who has access to becoming a doctor in this country. These are the same physicians that are fighting for patient safety and quality of care, instead of fighting to make sure their sweet little Bobby and Suzy who want to grow up to be a doc just like mommy and daddy, are able to get a spot back in Canada.

[Illuminant]

The top US medical schools actually have higher standards than most Canadian Schools. Canada has 17 medical schools, all of which would rank somewhere in the top 50 of US schools. If you compare average GPA and MCAT of Canadian medical students with those in top 50 US Medical schools I think you will see that they are similarly competitive.

 

The same holds true for undergraduate education. Some US schools (Ivy League + UC's, UW, UVA, Hopkins, Duke, MIT etc.) are excellent, but other schools, not to mention any names, are garbage (when compared to an average Canadian University). The US is a bigger country and it is bound to have more variability. I think we should be proud of how high our education standards are in Canada and instead of finding ways to lower the bar we should find ways to maintain these standards! Otherwise we risk devaluing the degree.

 

Another great example of the hug disparity in the US is law schools. In Canada it is very competitive to get into law school, but if you get in you are expected to pass the bar with flying colors and become a pretty good lawyer. In the US there are competitive law schools (again, Harvard, Yale etc) and there are garbage law schools (Night law schools and colleges). The end result is you have excellent lawyers and the kind of lawyers you see on bus stop advertisements. In Canada, while we still have some bottom feeder lawyers, most are relatively competent or at least decently well educated.

 

Keep in mind that there once was a time when an undergraduate degree carried significant value in society. If you had an undergrad you were considered educated and would likely find a pretty good job. Then everyone wanted to get an undergraduate degree, standards dropped, new for profit colleges/universities opened up, and what was the result? Undergraduate degrees from all but the most prestigious universities have lost a significant amount of value. If we just let any person with any old MD or MBBS or DO or whatever they call their medical degree, fight for a spot in Canadian Residency programs then we are undermining the value of a Canadian medical degree and we are prolonging the rat race.

 

Is it cost effective? absolutely. Is it safe for our population and will it increase the quality of care? Not a chance. If it is just about being fair and saving money then by all means open up the competition to everyone. I'll bet there is a whole bunch of MDs from developing nations that would LOVE to come work in Canada for a small fraction of what we pay Canadian MDs.

 

Fortunately, most physicians will continue to fight hard to keep tight regulations on who has access to becoming a doctor in this country. These are the same physicians that are fighting for patient safety and quality of care, instead of fighting to make sure their sweet little Bobby and Suzy who want to grow up to be a doc just like mommy and daddy, are able to get a spot back in Canada.

 

You both think that somehow having high standards for canadian med schools = better doctors .. which is really not the case .. the whole point of having high standards is to filter the number of applicants applying b/c there are limited seats for large number of applicants .. you could have an applicant with gpa of 3.5 who would be better as a doctor than someone with 4.0 .. Add to it the fact that having only one B and all As in an academic year will end you with a 3.7, which is not competitive currently for med schools .. people might go through struggles trying to adapt to the uni atmosphere .. or other struggles in their lives that might cause to have that one B that made their gpa a 3.7 .. taking MCAT .. some people might be nervous in taking such tests, which will definitly impact how they will cognitively perform .. You see now that the high standards having nothing to do with your ability of being an excellent physician .. it takes empathy, intellect, critical thinking, and good problem-solving skills that make you a great physician .. people who did meet the high standards do not necessarily possess those characterisitics .. that's why see a large number of them do not pass the interview stage ..

 

Also, when you apply for a residency position, the program directors look at your board exams and letter of references from the docs you did your clinical years with, so do you both now see how having high standards for entry into med school is irrelavent to how good you be as a future doctor

[concernedmedstudent]

You both think that somehow having high standards for canadian med schools = better doctors .. which is really not the case .. the whole point of having high standards is to filter the number of applicants applying b/c there are limited seats for large number of applicants .. you could have an applicant with gpa of 3.5 who would be better as a doctor than someone with 4.0 .. Add to it the fact that having only one B and all As in an academic year will end you with a 3.7, which is not competitive currently for med schools .. people might go through struggles trying to adapt to the uni atmosphere .. or other struggles in their lives that might cause to have that one B that made their gpa a 3.7 .. taking MCAT .. some people might be nervous in taking such tests, which will definitly impact how they will cognitively perform .. You see now that the high standards having nothing to do with your ability of being an excellent physician .. it takes empathy, intellect, critical thinking, and good problem-solving skills that make you a great physician .. people who did meet the high standards do not necessarily possess those characterisitics .. that's why see a large number of them do not pass the interview stage ..

 

Also, when you apply for a residency position, the program directors look at your board exams and letter of references from the docs you did your clinical years with, so do you both now see how having high standards for entry into med school is irrelavent to how good you be as a future doctor

 

Illuminate - By high standards I meant overall standards, not just grades and GPA. There are plenty of excellent medical students at UBC that had a GPA of ~3.4 and MCATs less than 32. These people had great back stories, fantastic extra-curriculars and have great people skills. In fact, I would say that these are some of the best medical students. It is for this reason precisely that we need to fill our residency spots with Canadian medical school graduates because on paper their exams scores might not be the best, but they have had ample evaluation by Canadian Physicians practicing in the Canadian culture of care who can comment on how they performed in Canadian hospitals. Who better to evaluate the competency of future residents than those who will be their future attendings in those residency programs?

 

I am strongly opposed to introducing more standardized tests into Canadian medical education. It is for this reason, why we need to rely on qualitative assessments from reputable attendings who are well known in the Canadian healthcare system. We can't just assume that all doctors in other countries will write letters of recommendations using the same standards and guidelines as our docs here. Additionally, it would be nearly impossible to compare 3500 IMGs with Canadian grads without standardized tests, which I think we both agree aren't correlated very well with future success.

 

There are a lot of very good reasons that the process currently in place is the way that it is. Radically revamping things to suit the selfish needs of a few powerful parents is not the solution. Patient care should be the most important thing when considering change to our system. Perhaps opening up more seats and more Canadian medical schools is a good idea, but this times time, money and energy. Patience is a virtue.

[leviathan]

You are correct the overall medical education in the US is inferior that in Canada. That is not to say that all is medical schools are inferior but some are. Once again there is far more variability in the US than there is in Canada. Some schools are excellent and others are not.

Which schools are lower in quality in the US? Why does being Harvard University mean they have the best medical school? Reputation =/= Quality, especially when it's reputation for the school globally and the research they do, not for the medical school or the quality of education they deliver. UBC (my alma mater) has a fantastic global reputation, that doesn't mean I thought their teaching was excellent or that I learned more than if I was at SFU or some other university. In fact I thought the quality of education in many of the areas at UBC was terrible. The research opportunities were great, but not the teaching.

 

There is a difference between osteopathic medicine and allopathic medicine.

Comparing physical therapists and chiropractors to DO and MD shows you don't really understand the program very well. What are the differences between DO and MD besides the addition of some osteopathic manipulative medicine that is in their curriculum?

[rswim]

Agreed. Overall standards when assessing the candidates academic and non academic application. The better people (not students) we get into medical

School the better doctors we will produce. Part of being a better person for the job however is academic but this is merely one aspect.

[gongshow]

Which schools are lower in quality in the US? Why does being Harvard University mean they have the best medical school? Reputation =/= Quality, especially when it's reputation for the school globally and the research they do, not for the medical school or the quality of education they deliver. UBC (my alma mater) has a fantastic global reputation, that doesn't mean I thought their teaching was excellent or that I learned more than if I was at SFU or some other university. In fact I thought the quality of education in many of the areas at UBC was terrible. The research opportunities were great, but not the teaching.

 

 

Comparing physical therapists and chiropractors to DO and MD shows you don't really understand the program very well. What are the differences between DO and MD besides the addition of some osteopathic manipulative medicine that is in their curriculum?

 

Reputation is correlated to quality although not necessarily cause/effect. I agree however that reputation is generally based on research prowess.

 

A big part about the top 50 compared to the bottom 50 (were talkin US here) is the QUALITY of applicants. The top schools are able to select the very best of the best (again I am talking overall, academic and non academic), these students have proven through a variety of measures to have the greatest potential as physicians (ie have the qualities that the profession considers to be important). Generally speaking high quality in = high quality out. Medical schools can't turn straw into gold regardless of how good they are.

 

Lets use University of Queensland as an example. They have been providing medical education for 76 years and have produced thousands of incredibly talented doctors and will continue to do so. Australian students work incredibly hard to be accepted into UQ med and face the same crazy high standards and low acceptance rates that Canadian students face in Canada. Since these standards are high, UQ has an intake of brilliant young Aussies who are well rounded, sociable, all around great people who will go on to be great doctors. In fact, Australia is so confident that they will be great docs that they virtually guarantee them post graduate medical education in their country. Recently, UQ has started accepting over a 100 international students into their program. For these students the standards are pathetic. There is no interview, no essay, just a few very low academic standards. Some of the internationals that they get are fantastic (much like the Aussies that are there) and some of them are pathetic. I would be willing to bet that the fantastic ones will be great docs and the pathetic ones won't be, despite going to a reputable University. The Australian Gov't obviously agrees and thus isn't willing to provide post graduate positions to all of these international students despite having the same kind of doctor shortage that Canada has.

 

I'm a newbie to this blog thing - not sure if the quote thing is kosher.

[leviathan]

Reputation is correlated to quality although not necessarily cause/effect. I agree however that reputation is generally based on research prowess.

 

A big part about the top 50 compared to the bottom 50 (were talkin US here) is the QUALITY of applicants. The top schools are able to select the very best of the best (again I am talking overall, academic and non academic), these students have proven through a variety of measures to have the greatest potential as physicians (ie have the qualities that the profession considers to be important). Generally speaking high quality in = high quality out. Medical schools can't turn straw into gold regardless of how good they are.

 

Lets use University of Queensland as an example. They have been providing medical education for 76 years and have produced thousands of incredibly talented doctors and will continue to do so. Australian students work incredibly hard to be accepted into UQ med and face the same crazy high standards and low acceptance rates that Canadian students face in Canada. Since these standards are high, UQ has an intake of brilliant young Aussies who are well rounded, sociable, all around great people who will go on to be great doctors. In fact, Australia is so confident that they will be great docs that they virtually guarantee them post graduate medical education in their country. Recently, UQ has started accepting over a 100 international students into their program. For these students the standards are pathetic. There is no interview, no essay, just a few very low academic standards. Some of the internationals that they get are fantastic (much like the Aussies that are there) and some of them are pathetic. I would be willing to bet that the fantastic ones will be great docs and the pathetic ones won't be, despite going to a reputable University. The Australian Gov't obviously agrees and thus isn't willing to provide post graduate positions to all of these international students despite having the same kind of doctor shortage that Canada has.

 

I think you and I are on the exact same page with this. The 'quality' of a medical school is mostly a function of the quality of the students AT that school. Most of med school is self-taught, so the biggest variable is the students, not the school. Students from Harvard Med are going to score higher on their exams simply because the population they selected were stronger students.

 

I would argue the only part of med school that is really quality dependent would be the clerkship phase. The more independence and responsibility you are given, and the more you have attendings/residents who are involved with teaching, the better your education will be.

[Mashmetoo]

Are you suggesting that we lower our standards to appease dreamers who were not capable of achieving the standards currently in place?

 

Canada should be proud of maintaining some of the highest standards in the world when it comes to educating our future physicians. We are lucky that we have so many exceptional candidates.

 

Canadian institutions do have a right to set the bar wherever they want. If you can't get into medical school in Canada perhaps try the Caribbean, if not there maybe Afghanistan, heck, why not start your own non-accredited medical school wherever you please and teach yourself? But if you chose to do that, don't complain when you aren't allowed to come back to Canada to practice medicine as a licensed physician. High standards are a good thing!

 

There are a lot of other great careers in the healthcare field that don't require you to get an MD. Premeds should have back up plans in Nursing, Osteopathic medicine, Physical Therapy etc etc. These are very rewarding fields that would love to take the smart, and passionate candidates that don't quite make the cut for Canadian MD programs. Sometimes students have an unrealistic sense of entitlement and their overzealous pride can wind up hurting them in the long run.

 

Hey don't get me wrong, I agree with you. Canada, or any country, has the right to set the bar as high or as low as they want.

 

What we have in Canada is a system where the "requirements" for the provinces vary greatly. You have provinces where there are in - province preference, so people with 3.5 - 3.6 avg cGPA, and 25-30 MCAT can get into their provincial med school, simply by virtue of dumb luck - i.e., for being born into that province, or having lived in that province for a set amount of time.. You know what this sounds like? - It sounds like feudalism.

Then there's things like affirmative action for people of aboriginal ancestry, where you need a 3.40 cgpa to get an interview, while applicants of other races don't get any of these gimmicks. Is this fair? I don't know, you tell me.

 

The moment an applicant from another province tries to apply to the first province, since he is an OOP (out of province) applicant, the requirement immediately jumps to 3.9, and 35+ MCAT just for the opportunity for an interview.

 

So, across the country, you can have situations where people from anywhere between 3.4cgpa, ~25-30 mcat, to 3.9+ 35+ MCAT, can get into med school as the entrance requirements. It is hardly uniform, and is largely based on geography.

 

The point is, what you call "highest standard" for Canadian med school is very arbitrary, and vary greatly across the country. It looks more like a monopoly to protect the residents of certain provinces from fierce competition from neighbouring provinces (i.e., mostly Ontario), more than anything else. Also, applicants from provinces with these IP preference have an "easier" time getting accepted into med schools even if their hard stats were not nearly on level as applicants from Ontario with no IP. I see this happening over and over again from the people I know. - i.e., either through family connections or what have you, can't get into Ontario with their average stats, but gets into UofManitoba, even a McGill simply by virtue of applying as an in province applicant. While applicants from Ontario, with no family ties to other provinces, are forced to apply year after year, or explore international options, or switch careers, etc etc. It's really disgusting, and absolutely contrary to what you call "the highest standard". From the front lines of what I've seen, it has a lot to do with luck, and who you know, not what you know.

 

What a lot of people on this forum fail to grasp, is the resilience of the human spirit. Regardless of what government sets as the bar for entrance, a lot of people with even remotely decent stats, that would have had a shot, and would have made good doctors if they got accepted, will not simply accept the fact that they got screwed out of going to a Canadian med school, simply for being a resident of Ontario, or whatever province that doesn't have IP preference that worked against them. I highly recommend the film GATTACA - it's what the film is all about

 

It's called the human spirit, and wanting to get somewhere that is greater than whatever they have presently, and doing everything in their power, no matter what risk, to achieve those dreams.

 

I see it everyday here in the US, with illegal immigrants, who traversed drug controlled territory, crossing jungles, deserts, US immigration agents, to have a chance to live/work in the US.

 

I suspect the same thing is going on with Canadians who become IMGs to become doctors

 

1 last clarification - Osteopathic medicine is to medicine, what Canadian medicine is to medicine It is hardly an alternative career.

[moo]

First of all, as someone who has been in the US and Canada, I can tell you that people really don't care what degree you have (MBBS v DO v MD). Many of the ones who teach at UBC have foreign medical degrees. Even at a top 20 school in the US, many of my attendings were from overseas or DOs. Nobody stops you in the hall when you're an attending to look at your tag to see whether it's an MBBS v DO v MD. Really. Second, as someone who is going to be involved in undergraduate and graduate medical education in a few months time, and as someone who has taught at the undergraduate medical level for the past 6 years, I can tell you that the caliber of students at the two Canadian schools I've been at really varies. I've had 3rd year students who didn't even know that ibuprofen is an anti-pyretic, didn't know how to even write a tylenol order, etc. Others have been great. However, I can tell you one thing that almost all students lack compared to when I was in the US is skills in EBM and epidemiology, which I think is the underpinning of almost every medical specialty. This is ironic because EBM and epidemiology is known to be quite strong in Canada--apparently not at the two Canadian medical schools I've taught at. Of course, this is only my observation, but I feel that the curriculum in the two schools I've been at is very weak in this regard. This is reflected in the Royal College comments for the last few Public Health exams--there was lots of concern about lack of epi skills among our grads, even though all of the Public Health grads have completed a Masters.

 

My point is, all North American schools have to meet basic minimum standards. Some schools are naturally better than others, but all should be considered more or less equivalent. It's the individual that determines whether they are competent or not to practice medicine.

 

As for Caribbean, Aus, Irish schools, I think they are more or less equivalent. yes, there is some jealousy among NA grads that IMGs are able to come back to compete for positions but in the end, those who went abroad sacraficed a lot too--away from home/families, financially, living in a foreign country, etc. As Canadian students you guys need to be careful about criticizing other countries' med schools, because you never know if your next attending will be an IMG.

[dy727]

Let's get down to the facts and exclude assumptions.

 

Government puts in a lot of money to educate physicians --> reason why our tuition fees are so cheap.

 

Government also funds most of the residency spots across the country --> who do you think pays you when ur a resident?

 

Government wants bang for its buck --> this is why generally CMGs will have some precedence over IMGs and no CMG will be left without a spot (unless it's voluntary).

 

Now, the government didn't invest any money into educating IMGs -- which is good. So no doubt if IMGs are competent and are good enough to be an average doctor, the government has an incentive to hire them. This is the reason why there are IMG spots across Canada. Every year, these residency spots are assigned based on perceived need in that area of specialty.

 

The reason why there needs to be a limited number of IMG spots in Canada is because the government is funding the canadian medical education system + health care, and the government has an incentive to receive returns on its investments.

 

It's a whole different story in the states because their health care system is for the majority, privately funded. There is a mix of private+public medical education + largely private hospitals + private health insurance system. This is why it makes sense that IMGs do better in the states because as long as they're competent, there is nothing hindering the hospitals from hiring them.

 

The IMGs in the news article have absolutely no case against this issue based on how the whole health care system in Canada works.

 

I have nothing against really smart and qualified IMGs from working in Canada and they probably will do because they'll outcompete all the other incompetent IMGs for the IMG spots.

 

As a CMG, we're already passed the hurdle and gotten into med school. We should feel confident that as long as we work hard and do the things that are necessary, we'll land a spot that we want for our residency. We still have to earn that and prove that we are going to be competent in what we do, and we will. A lot of medical education is really what you make out of it. I think there is nothing for us CMGs to worry about, as long as we do the studying and get the right amount of practice and exposure. We got into med school not because we deserve it because the ad coms thought we had the potential to be a good doctor and its our turn to prove that true.

[moo]

Let's get down to the facts and exclude assumptions.

 

Government puts in a lot of money to educate physicians --> reason why our tuition fees are so cheap.

 

Government also funds most of the residency spots across the country --> who do you think pays you when ur a resident?

 

Government wants bang for its buck --> this is why generally CMGs will have some precedence over IMGs and no CMG will be left without a spot (unless it's voluntary).

 

Now, the government didn't invest any money into educating IMGs -- which is good. So no doubt if IMGs are competent and are good enough to be an average doctor, the government has an incentive to hire them. This is the reason why there are IMG spots across Canada. Every year, these residency spots are assigned based on perceived need in that area of specialty.

 

The reason why there needs to be a limited number of IMG spots in Canada is because the government is funding the canadian medical education system + health care, and the government has an incentive to receive returns on its investments.

 

It's a whole different story in the states because their health care system is for the majority, privately funded. There is a mix of private+public medical education + largely private hospitals + private health insurance system. This is why it makes sense that IMGs do better in the states because as long as they're competent, there is nothing hindering the hospitals from hiring them.

 

The IMGs in the news article have absolutely no case against this issue based on how the whole health care system in Canada works.

 

I have nothing against really smart and qualified IMGs from working in Canada and they probably will do because they'll outcompete all the other incompetent IMGs for the IMG spots.

 

As a CMG, we're already passed the hurdle and gotten into med school. We should feel confident that as long as we work hard and do the things that are necessary, we'll land a spot that we want for our residency. We still have to earn that and prove that we are going to be competent in what we do, and we will. A lot of medical education is really what you make out of it. I think there is nothing for us CMGs to worry about, as long as we do the studying and get the right amount of practice and exposure. We got into med school not because we deserve it because the ad coms thought we had the potential to be a good doctor and its our turn to prove that true.

 

So you think you're pretty entitled just because you've passed the hurdle? Typical arrogance.

[dy727]

So you think you're pretty entitled just because you've passed the hurdle? Typical arrogance.

 

you read me wrong bro.

 

I never said i'm entitled. I'm glad i passed this hurdle and got in, but i know i still have to work hard to become a competent doctor because i know i can't as of right now.

 

why u judgin

[rswim]

Moo I don't think that anyone in Canada is questioning that there are great doctors trained elsewhere. I think the issue is how to discriminate between the good and the bad. Canadian schools

Have gone to a lot of effort to reform

Their admissions processes in order to select those who they think have the beat overall attributes that will lead them to

Be successful docs. That doesn't mean that nobody else will

Be great but this is where the selection process occurs. After this a lot o time money and energy is put into these students to prepare them for residency. It doesn't make sense to jeopardize their chances at successfully matching 4 years after deciding that this is the group that we want to be the future doctors of Canada. I think that most Canadian students are in favor of allowing some IMGs into Canada regardless of where they are originally from. We just want to make sure there is a process in place that makes sure we only get the very best And we don't want that process to affect the group that has already been chosen to be the future of the profession in this country.