when you are talking to people not in medicine and you tell them you are a pathologist and they say "what kind of doc is that", how do you describe to them what you do?
explaining your job to non-med peeps
- Thread starter eyeball01
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
If they are non-medical people, I tell them I look at biopsies and surgery specimens under a microscope to look for cancer and other diseases.
If they are medical people, I tell them I work in a lab and just do autopsies all day.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 1,822
- Reaction score
- 821
Haha Joe Girardi as a Chicago Cubs catcher.
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2004
- Messages
- 875
- Reaction score
- 1
My Approach is...
"You like football?...well, the Quarter back is the Brain Surgeon. The linebacker is the Heart Surgeon. The running backs are the Medical people..."
[pause]
"Pathologists are like the referees of the game.... We enjoy the game close up without bothering about the trivial, tedious and nasty details....and also the injuries!"
" We pass unnoticed till we make a wrong call...then the whole world (viewers, patients, quarterbacks, neurosurgeons) chews our ass up"
Hope it helps...I never fail to get a enlightened smile after I put out this analogy.
"You like football?...well, the Quarter back is the Brain Surgeon. The linebacker is the Heart Surgeon. The running backs are the Medical people..."
[pause]
"Pathologists are like the referees of the game.... We enjoy the game close up without bothering about the trivial, tedious and nasty details....and also the injuries!"
" We pass unnoticed till we make a wrong call...then the whole world (viewers, patients, quarterbacks, neurosurgeons) chews our ass up"
Hope it helps...I never fail to get a enlightened smile after I put out this analogy.
technically the refs are the ones who bother about all the trivial stuff aka rules. Just look at some of the calls they make.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 58
- Reaction score
- 1
brushing off topic in joking manner:
"I see dead people."
or to irritating person i would like to avoid in social setting:
"I cut up dead folk in a basement with scalpels, electric saws, and large knives."
or to non-******ed person i would like to continue conversation with:
"I help guide clinical tx by microscopic examination of tissue."
"I see dead people."
or to irritating person i would like to avoid in social setting:
"I cut up dead folk in a basement with scalpels, electric saws, and large knives."
or to non-******ed person i would like to continue conversation with:
"I help guide clinical tx by microscopic examination of tissue."
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2008
- Messages
- 616
- Reaction score
- 2
Well, when I tell people that I want to go into pathology, I say that pathologists diagnose every case of cancer along with a number of other diseases. The association with cancer tends to make an impression on people... and of course, they're always surprised that oncologists aren't the ones that do it.
Then I tell them that oncologists also rely on data from the pathologist to determine how to treat the cancer as well (thinking of Her2/neu and the like). I know it creates an inflated view of the role of pathology in treatment in general, but I'm trying to paint a broad picture.
Then I tell them that oncologists also rely on data from the pathologist to determine how to treat the cancer as well (thinking of Her2/neu and the like). I know it creates an inflated view of the role of pathology in treatment in general, but I'm trying to paint a broad picture.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,369
- Reaction score
- 23
I tell them the truth. I am Quincy, only younger and cooler. And it's hard to out-cool Quincy.
I also usually try to explain that mine is one of the least common roles in pathology, but generally they're too caught up in either avoiding me or asking about the grossest/craziest/most notorious case I've had.
(During fellowship we had a photo-wall of all the ME's who had worked there, and hidden in the middle was a photo of Quincy.)
I also usually try to explain that mine is one of the least common roles in pathology, but generally they're too caught up in either avoiding me or asking about the grossest/craziest/most notorious case I've had.
(During fellowship we had a photo-wall of all the ME's who had worked there, and hidden in the middle was a photo of Quincy.)
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
- Reaction score
- 15,947
I still haven't figured out how to explain it. Most people can't get past the word "necropsy" (I have stopped using it and say autopsy itself, which isn't technically correct, because its a word they recognize) and think all I do is cut up dead stuff. I don't even get to talking biopsy, onco, etc..
The best I have come up with is "Well, we are kind of the "disease experts" when it comes to the microscopic stuff that the regular doctors can't see. We look at samples of tissues on the microscope to see if there's cancer or disease, both from animals [in my case] that are alive, called a biopsy, and from animals that we have done autopsies on, everything from cows to dogs to camels to birds."
People actually seem to have a pretty good reaction to that. And you're right Enkidu, cancer always rings a bell that they appreciate.
The best I have come up with is "Well, we are kind of the "disease experts" when it comes to the microscopic stuff that the regular doctors can't see. We look at samples of tissues on the microscope to see if there's cancer or disease, both from animals [in my case] that are alive, called a biopsy, and from animals that we have done autopsies on, everything from cows to dogs to camels to birds."
People actually seem to have a pretty good reaction to that. And you're right Enkidu, cancer always rings a bell that they appreciate.
Very simple.
"I am the super diagnostician of the hospital. When other doctors fail to find out what is wrong with the patient, they turn to me. I not only tell them the definitive diagnosis, but also how the disease will behave and what possible therapies may be effective"
I start, where other doctors fail.
"I am the super diagnostician of the hospital. When other doctors fail to find out what is wrong with the patient, they turn to me. I not only tell them the definitive diagnosis, but also how the disease will behave and what possible therapies may be effective"
I start, where other doctors fail.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 1,822
- Reaction score
- 821
Please tell me if im wrong but I dont know of any pathologist thus far in my short career who discussed treatment options with clinicians. At tumor boards, we show pics of histology or gross specimen and I've never heard of any pathologist talking about treatment. That's what oncologists are for.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2000
- Messages
- 857
- Reaction score
- 421
FYI
In dermpath it is common practice for the dermatopathologist to give treatment recommendations on melanocytic lesions (whether to take it out or not, margins of excision, followup, etc).
But when it comes to medical oncology, I don't think it's common practice to give treatment rec's (type of chemo, etc) other than results of molecular tests (mutation present or not, karyotype, etc).
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
Talk about bitter and arrogant. We are mere humble servants to the surgeons and oncologists.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 440
- Reaction score
- 8
Sarcasm or not, there's a fair bit of truth in what Raider said. In all reality, surgeons/oncologists/clinicians are just as dependent on the pathologist as the pathologist is upon them. After all, it's the pathologist that determines what is actually going on in many cases.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 28,059
- Reaction score
- 441
I think I asked this question like 5 years ago!
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=106163
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=106163
Talk about bitter and arrogant. We are mere humble servants to the surgeons and oncologists.
We?
Talk about yourself.
Surgeons and oncologists depend on me and are extremely grateful when I return their calls to discuss prognosis and the best next step. They have asked me to help them understand the implication of rare diagnoses that I have rendered.
They specifically ask for me to read their difficult frozen sections and are always very grateful.
During tumor board, they always solicit my opinion regarding molecular diagnostics and diagnostic terms they are not clear about.
I am sorry to hear some of you are treated as "servants". If someone treated me like that he/she would be on my "ignore" list till they rectified their behavior. I would neither sign out their cases nor respond to them during tumor board and would give them the "evil eye" if they ever dared cross my path.
I am not arrogant, I just have a lot of pride in what I do. I have an unshakable belief that pathology is the best field of medicine and a stellar pathologist is the very best of all physicians. That is who I try to be on a daily basis.
The problem is pathology is over run by mediocre and reject-loser types who have contaminated the field and its image by their mere presence. The only way to overcome this is by slashing residency positions or weeding out these pathetic people by denying them certification.
Only the "best of the best" should be given the most important responsibility in medicine viz. making the correct definitive diagnosis, without which everything else in medicine crumbles like a house without a foundation.
We?
Talk about yourself.
Surgeons and oncologists depend on me and are extremely grateful when I return their calls to discuss prognosis and the best next step. They have asked me to help them understand the implication of rare diagnoses that I have rendered.
They specifically ask for me to read their difficult frozen sections and are always very grateful.
During tumor board, they always solicit my opinion regarding molecular diagnostics and diagnostic terms they are not clear about.
I am sorry to hear some of you are treated as "servants". If someone treated me like that he/she would be on my "ignore" list till they rectified their behavior. I would neither sign out their cases nor respond to them during tumor board and would give them the "evil eye" if they ever dared cross my path.
I am not arrogant, I just have a lot of pride in what I do. I have an unshakable belief that pathology is the best field of medicine and a stellar pathologist is the very best of all physicians. That is who I try to be on a daily basis.
The problem is pathology is over run by mediocre and reject-loser types who have contaminated the field and its image by their mere presence. The only way to overcome this is by slashing residency positions or weeding out these pathetic people by denying them certification.
Only the "best of the best" should be given the most important responsibility in medicine viz. making the correct definitive diagnosis, without which everything else in medicine crumbles like a house without a foundation.
Last edited:
Well said! Finally a pathologist with a spine on SDN. Why must we as a specialty view ourselves as being inferior to surgeons and oncologists? We offer both clinicians and patients an essential service. We they need us at least as much as we need them and the sooner we as a group realize that the sooner we can stand up to urologists (for instance) and get our prostate biopsies and professional billing components back!
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2005
- Messages
- 160
- Reaction score
- 4
I cannot think of a single pathologist at my institution who thinks of him or herself as inferior to anyone else in the hospital. It seems incredibly silly to me that the problems in our field would actually arise from pathologists actively thinking that they are inferior, rather than from pathologists merely accepting limitations imposed on them from external sources. Then again, this is a silly world...
I cannot speak for eunuchs who are "servants" to others.
As far as I am concerned, I always feel superior and gifted compared to other specialities because of my immense knowledge base of medicine (compared to other fields) and also the impact of what I do far outweighs that of other specialities in terms of consequences for the patient.
As far as I am concerned, I always feel superior and gifted compared to other specialities because of my immense knowledge base of medicine (compared to other fields) and also the impact of what I do far outweighs that of other specialities in terms of consequences for the patient.
D
deleted314957
I tell folks " I am the guy who tells YOUR doctor what you have"
Or, the doctor who tells the surgeons and oncologists what to do.
You could also use a military model such as the pathologists are intel/command, with the surgeons as shock troops and the oncologists as mop-up.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2005
- Messages
- 476
- Reaction score
- 10
I tell them I work in a laboratory and read specimens that are taken from people who have surgery. Those surgeries can be small biopsy specimens such as skin biopsies or even major surgery such as cancer or gallbladders or appendix removals(most people are familiar with appendectomies)...I also tell them we are the quality control for surgeons...
and we also review the CBC's /peipehral smears if they are atypical and thier doc may consult us if they need inforamtion about abnormal results on the lab chemical results such s urinalysis or cholesterol studies...
If they want more information I let them know we are the doctor's doctor and provide consultation services for a very wide number of reasons...
There is a distinction between having a spine and having respect for others. What is this, fox news? You don't have to be either "inferior" or "superior." You can have a spine and be a respectful and respected colleague.
All of medicine is a collaborative effort. We have to make the calls and tell the clinicians what the patient has in many cases, but the clinicians have to decide how to treat and when to treat and how to work up a problem. If you start trying to argue that certain fields are more important you are beginining to justify your own marginalization.
I do agree to some extent with raider's point that there are too many sycophants and intellectually and socially weak individuals in pathology. Many of these get taken advantage of(sometimes even willingly). Others just give the field a bad name and permit that to happen. This is why I always encourage bright young med students to consider pathology. And, this is going to come as a major shock to some of you, many of these poor pathologists have trouble landing jobs which people on these forums then inappropriately generalize to the entire graduating class.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 3
I have known several pathologists who not only made treatment recommendations, but were actually consulted about what to do by surgeons and others. In soft tissue pathology, we often make recommendations to clinicians, as the diagnoses we are rendering are often quite uncommon and few people aside from pathologists have even heard of some of these tumors, much less knowing about how to manage them. Of course, the goal is to be truly helpful to clinician and patient, rather than being insulting or condescending.
I personally work closely with the surgeons and onc and med onc docs at weekly tumor board and I ask questions about how and why they manage certain tumors the way they do so that I can learn about it. I won't be an oncologist or rad onc ever, but maybe one day I can have a discussion with a clinician that proves useful to him and to the patient. I might not get paid for it, but I like to think it will add some value to what I can offer the medical team. Cliche and naive maybe, but that is what I think.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 3
I agree. My experience has been very similar to that described by raider in the VAST majority of encounters I have had with various docs, both during residency and in fellowship (and at several other institutions that I rotated through during training). No one has made me feel like a slave or inferior.
But to answer the OP's question, my one line answer (which I borrowed from a senior pathologist): "I diagnose cancer."
And then you can explain the details. But if I make it clear that the majority of pathologists spend the majority of their time diagnosing cancer, and that essentially ONLY pathologists can do this, then I feel that I have explained the essence of our profession (at least AP) pretty well.
For CP, I say "We run the laboratory and the blood bank. We figure out what kind of blood to give people and make sure it is safe."
Last edited:
