Allopathic Medical School Expansion

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Originally Posted by vegangirl

what happens though after the boomers, when their was a drop in births between 1958-1968 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Busters_) What will we do with the surplus supply of physicians??? Im not saying that growth is bad, it just should be done in a controlled/regulated manner

supply and demand. ... some will leave, others will get paid less.

Originally Posted by OSUdoc08

Would you rather have a physician shortage?

Have you ever heard of baby boomers?

good call my friend. health care in this country has already took the turn to go down the tubes. we are in dire need of competent, NORMAL, non-egotistical freaks to run our health care system.

Everyone has extremely valid points and I completely agree with all of you, but let me propose one question to all of you...

Have you ever heard ANYONE (yourselves included) say that the reason they like a certain doctor is because they scored high on their MCAT's or got A's all through college or medical school?

When did the quality of a physician or the education they received become solely judged by how well they do on those stupid standardized tests? Now I agree with the fact that there should be a cutoff point (i.e. a 2.80 gpa and a 15 MCAT just won't cut it!), but I guarantee you there are plenty of horrible physicians out there who scored 40s on their mcats and 270s on their boards. Research has shown (I dont remember the name of the article so dont ask) that the majority of malpractice lawsuits have come from a lack of patient trust with their doc. So if a physician has an awful bedside manner, but he or she is a genius, does that make them a good doc?

One thing I forgot to mention - If a DO student takes the USMLE and does better than half of the MD students that take it, what does that say about the quality of education or admission standards of allopathic and osteopathic schools?

Originally Posted by FutureNavyDOc

The number of residencies doesn't necessarily correlate to the amount of physicians needed. For the DO Class of 2004, only 68% of budgeted Osteopathic Internships were filled, yet due to the AOA's continued stubbornness, these spots went un-filled while MD and FMG students may have taken them.

The real solution to the 32% that remained empty is a combined match. Many many DO students each year (48% in 2004) only do the ACGME match, one of the main reasons for this is because of the automatic withdraw rule. This rule says if you enter the AOA and ACGME matches that if you match to ANY AOA program on your list, you must go there and withdraw from the ACGME match.

Getting back to your point, just because spots exist doesn't necessarily mean there is a need for their graduates, just means there is funding for those spots.
As it stands right now, there can be NO MORE residency programs started with federal funding. So the AOA's stubbornness again is preventing new AMA and AOA residencies from opening up while 32% of AOA residencies (many FP) sit unused.

Not sure if I replied to your post at all, I'm just a little peeved at the AOA good old boys club in general right now. I guess I should be thankful I'm military and don't have to deal with the AOA after I graduate in 2008!

Do you mean a combined match where all physicians, MD and DO, participate? That could be the solution to preventing waste of resources, that is residency programs (and ensure that MD's have equal access to federal money).
Or perhaps (you all know much more about this than me), OMM training can be offered to MD's as part of AOA recognized residencies. Just my 0.0005 cents. (I know I'm a pre-dent, but healthcare concerns are shared by all healthcare personnel/students and for that matter, by all citizens.)

Originally Posted by FutureNavyDOc

I agree that the latter choice is the better option as well, but are we doing anyone a service when people are accepted because of lowered standards due to the increasing number of schools?

Especially when such people are undoubtedly less likely to pass all of their courses and boards.

Who benefits when someone has to drop out of med school after 2/3 years with $100,000 in loans because they can't pass Step I?

Is it really fair to bring that person in, get their hopes up only to part ways 2 years later the school $80,000 richer and the student $100,000 in debt when maintaining high standards would have prevented all of this?

I realize that people with low MCATs and GPAs have done very well in med school in the past, however I would imagine that number is small in comparison to similar applicants who have struggled.

I wholly agree. Surely, students with marginal numbers are understandable, having a low GPA decent MCAT or likewise. Nonetheless, when I mean low, I don't mean a 2.5 with a 15 MCAT. Some students go to difficult universities and elect to tackle much tougher undergraduate curricula than your average pre-med. Kids majoring in biomedical or chemical engineering get the friggen pass by me as their undergraduate IS WAAAAAAAAY more difficult than your typical pre-med bio major. I feel like these kids will be putting themselves in danger as the chance they won't be able to handle the rigors of a medical education are soundly found in their performance. Any med student can agree that undergrad is nothing compared to med school, so why let someone in that barely got by getting their BA or BS? If a student does that poorly, they should go to graduate school and prove they can handle classes like histology and embryology. Oh yeah, MCATs are huge....not a bright idea letting someone in with a very low MCAT b/c boards are an inevitable reality. Schools should select students they believe will do well on their boards. Just my two cents.

I think the whole - let's compare apples to apples debate is a good one. I have seen many many premed- non typical majors have a very difficult time getting in because their GPA wasn't up to par. My bachelor's is in Math. But my ridiculously hard math classes got lumped in with my easy bio classes in my GPA on the MD applications. On the DO applications, it was separate. And on my DO interviews? They were impressed. On my MD interviews? They told me my GPA wasn't high enough and asked me who paid for my education my "generous parents or a sugar daddy". Yes, I LITERALLY got asked that.

I digress...

I have had no problem doing well in med school (easily passed all classes), COMLEX I and II (but not PE - sorry, had to repeat that one, my bad), NOR my inservice exams in my MD peds residency program. IN fact, I've done fairly well on my inservice exams.

I read a study MANY years ago (in the 90's)
that said the ony thing that differentiates those who get into med school (I think it was only MDs) and those who don't is PERSISTENCE. There was NO STATISTICAL difference between MCATS, GPAs, or extracurriculars. ONLY that those who applied more were more likely to get in.

And have there been some insinuations on this thread that IMGs are subpar? We have many in our program and they are SMOKIN' in terms of academics. MAN oh man.

That's great news.There are so many students to get the ticket and study and if they have the brains to sail through it why not?Let them expand and make place for more doctors...we need them all.

Originally Posted by exmike

You are an exception to the rule, and you know that. In fact, as the DO slots have increased in recent years, the stats for DO students have remained stagnant or fallen, while the #of MD slots has remained about the same and the averages have gone up.

This is completely untrue..in fact, the exact opposite is true. Stats have been shooting up at most DO schools as the years have progressed.

I don't even think this is an issue of DO vs MD. Even if all U.S. med schools were MD schools, if you increase the number of applicants accepted, then the lower end of those accepted students ~will~ have lower scores. There are only a finite number of students in undergrad that are capable of becoming doctors(whether or not MCAT scores and GPA reflect that capability is another topic). It's a cynical fact but a fact nonetheless.

Originally Posted by SmokD

I don't even think this is an issue of DO vs MD. Even if all U.S. med schools were MD schools, if you increase the number of applicants accepted, then the lower end of those accepted students ~will~ have lower scores. There are only a finite number of students in undergrad that are capable of becoming doctors(whether or not MCAT scores and GPA reflect that capability is another topic). It's a cynical fact but a fact nonetheless.

True..however it is AMAZING how many very very qualified candidates get rejected from medical school each cycle. I don't think stats would fall all that much to be honest. There is still a pretty big pool to fish from if you're a medical school, with plenty of ones that got away in previous cycles or would have otherwise been barely overlooked.

Edit: Nevermind this thread is ancient!

Does anyone know if there are any plans by the aoa to combine the comlex or combine the aoa/agcme matches in the near future? this thread started back in 06 so it might be nice to kno if any of these ideas have gone anywhere.

I read somewhere on here (SDN) that there was talk of just one test to take for boards instead of USMLE and COMLEX but even if it were to happen it would go in effect for possibly classes of 2017 or something like that. Though I still think this doesn't address the OMM issue not each test belongs to a different side and I don't see either side compromising to eventually combine their tests.

I don't know about other schools, but I saw a piece about the University of Utah School of Medicine reducing its class size from 102 to 82 students. See:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=6922287

My school seems to be pretty stagnant though, with no increases or decreases.

Despite the push for expansion, the economy may throw a wrench into things.

Originally Posted by USArmyDoc

Interesting. We really do need more physicians. However, I think what a lot of people on these boards are arguing is that we do not want the standards to Osteopathic schools to drop much more.

Are they producing shoddy doctors?

Originally Posted by Concubine

I don't know about other schools, but I saw a piece about the University of Utah School of Medicine reducing its class size from 102 to 82 students. See:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=6922287

My school seems to be pretty stagnant though, with no increases or decreases.

Despite the push for expansion, the economy may throw a wrench into things.

It was bound to happen with some schools, due to lack of funding and staff reductions.

I can't believe no one has stated the obvious:

It didn't used to be this difficult to get into med school. The population of the country has increased much faster than the number of med school seats. Thus, average stats have crept up and qualified people can't get in.

Proportionally increasing enrollment won't produce incompetent doctors anymore than the last generation did. Besides, all the schools must be accredited by the AOA or LCME, and every graduating student has to pass the COMLEX/USMLE.

There's a reason why good students end up in the Caribbean. With increased enrollment, we won't have to send them into exile or drain doctors from second-world countries.

Bump

This is not meant to be a slight to DOs but in todays world, what is the real difference in practice between and MD and a DO.

I have seen a number of them practice in the fields of OB, surgery, internal medicine (plus associate specialties) FP, neuro and psychiatry. There is no difference. Why are there parallel systems?

Originally Posted by MacGyver

Great lets just build 5000 new medical schools, one for every medium sized city.

After all, we wouldnt want a student to have to travel 20 miles to attend med school!

We are already dipping into the lower half of the med school applicant pool. Once all these schools come about (about 25 recently built or planned schools), 75% of applicants will get accepted. Thats LAW SCHOOL NUMBERS, folks

We have enough schools we just don't have a lot of schools with really high acceptance rates.

There is a shortage in the residency program. As a result, a lot of medical students, mostly indians from india, are coming over here and making up for that. So we are not graduating more doctors than we need we are actually not graduating enough and getting enough American students accepted into medical school.

You may think the Doctors don't run the show, but you are wrong. In the end the Doctors bring the patients, especially to the OR's, and in the end what the Doctor wants (especially the surgeon) he will get.

I don't think it's true at all that he's an exception to the rule. I'm a student at a DO school that's considered one of the most prestigious (it is linked to 2 allopathic schools, it falls under the same umbrella) Our stats are very close to the allopathic schools, and we have plenty of students with mid 30 MCATs and high GPAs who wanted to be DOs and could have gone to MD schools. I know of at least one student with a 40+ MCAT, who could have gone to allopathic schools but chose our school. It bothers me that so many students still look down on osteopathic schools and osteopathic students, assuming we just couldn't get in to allopathic schools.


I also want to say, just as there's a difference between first and 3rd tier allopathic schools, there's a different between some osteopathic schools. I don't know why people lump all schools in together - if one has lower standards, it means they are all bad. It's not true. And I also am bothered that osteopathic is always lumped with foreign medical graduates. Some osteopathic schools are better regarded than local allopathic schools. I don't know why people always want to lump things together...there are good allopathic schools and bad allopathic schools, there are good osteopathic and bad osteopathic schools. Maybe osteopathic schools used to accept students with lower scores, but at our school, our GPA and MCAT for matriculated students was pretty similar to the allopathic schools we're affiliated with.

Originally Posted by exmike

You are an exception to the rule, and you know that. In fact, as the DO slots have increased in recent years, the stats for DO students have remained stagnant or fallen, while the #of MD slots has remained about the same and the averages have gone up. There is no denying that expansion of medical school slots will lower averages for ALL schools of medicine. What impact this has on medical care remains to be seen.

If allopathic schools expand enrollment by 30% as encouraged by the AAMC, they'll essentially swallow up the entire DO school population. (4,500 additional slots). A great porportion of DO enrollees would probably choose to enroll in the MD schools. Who would fill those DO slots vacated by due to the new MD slots? I really do think that there comes a point when the quality of students will start to suffer. Noone wants a US medical school with 40-50% attrition rates like the Caribbean scohols.

Originally Posted by Beth_W737

I don't think it's true at all that he's an exception to the rule. I'm a student at a DO school that's considered one of the most prestigious (it is linked to 2 allopathic schools, it falls under the same umbrella) Our stats are very close to the allopathic schools, and we have plenty of students with mid 30 MCATs and high GPAs who wanted to be DOs and could have gone to MD schools. I know of at least one student with a 40+ MCAT, who could have gone to allopathic schools but chose our school. It bothers me that so many students still look down on osteopathic schools and osteopathic students, assuming we just couldn't get in to allopathic schools.


I also want to say, just as there's a difference between first and 3rd tier allopathic schools, there's a different between some osteopathic schools. I don't know why people lump all schools in together - if one has lower standards, it means they are all bad. It's not true. And I also am bothered that osteopathic is always lumped with foreign medical graduates. Some osteopathic schools are better regarded than local allopathic schools. I don't know why people always want to lump things together...there are good allopathic schools and bad allopathic schools, there are good osteopathic and bad osteopathic schools. Maybe osteopathic schools used to accept students with lower scores, but at our school, our GPA and MCAT for matriculated students was pretty similar to the allopathic schools we're affiliated with.

I agree with most of this. However, DO students are treated as "guests" in the MD match because of the AOA, not the LCME. The AOA chooses to keep itself separate and refuses to even consider MD students for DO residencies.

i have read enough osteo threads to weave a sweater and i thing MD is written more often than DO. We would be hard pressed to see DO written in "their" blogs. we are all MD wannabees......but thats ok b/c its better than living at home with mom and smoking reefer like most of our college buds.

but seriously, why compare so much....they dont think about us one bit.

If both programs take the same federal standardized exams, criticisms regarding growth are pretty much moot. Just because they are growing programs doesn't mean that they are "cheaper" in any way.

Originally Posted by eldoctoraz

One thing I forgot to mention - If a DO student takes the USMLE and does better than half of the MD students that take it, what does that say about the quality of education or admission standards of allopathic and osteopathic schools?

It means that the admission standards are bull crap....

There is a consistent joke that I see a lot of my 40-60 physician mentors/friends throw around.

"You know, NONE of us would have gotten into medical school these days *somber laughter*"

Originally Posted by FutureDoctorrrr

It means that the admission standards are bull crap....

it is bull. what's the point of verbal reasoning? writing? plus each undergraduate institution has its own GPA standard...