Eye Surgery Training

[smiegal]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I, personally, don't understand the attitude that Ophthalmologists should have to produce evidence against creating a new, shortened non-MD surgical training pathway. The burden of proof is not ours. I'm still waiting to hear a good reason to, essentially, subject the American public to a giant clinical trial of MD vs. OD surgery when there are no concerns re: the surgical competence of U.S. Ophthalmologists.

Who would honestly benefit in legislating that another organization (OD's) may start to train their own surgeons? It would certainly make it more difficult to intelligently manage the number of surgeons. We can likely agree that either a surplus or deficit of eye surgeons would harm patient care. It is difficult to be an excellent surgeon if you are low-volume or overworked. While there exist regional variations in surgeon to patient ratios (including areas of inadequate coverage), there is no reason to think that OD's would distribute themselves much differently. Ophthalmology is a desirable field and there is no forseeable difficulty in filling training spots. The current Ophthalmologic surgical training setup simply ain't broke.

That being said, what do I care if another eye surgeon was initially trained as an OD? I don't...as long as they have been appropriately trained to perform surgery. I'm sure that most medical school application committees would look favorably on an applicant who has completed (or even partially-completed) Optometry school.

So you say you're not getting any credit for you're OD professional school training & you shouldn't have to complete the entire 4 yrs + 1 yr +3 yrs to be a surgeon. Fine, make some proposals that involve shortening the med school portion a year or two. I'm sure there are some OD's who could compete head-to-head with the MD applicants for Ophthalmology training spots. Don't make me brainstorm for the best way to get you credit for your previous educational pursuits. So far the only halfway complete proposal I've seen was offered by an MD (Dr. Doan). There have to be some good, reasonable ideas out there.

 

[EYESURG]

I, personally, don't understand the attitude that Ophthalmologists should have to produce evidence against creating a new, shortened non-MD surgical training pathway. The burden of proof is not ours. I'm still waiting to hear a good reason to, essentially, subject the American public to a giant clinical trial of MD vs. OD surgery when there are no concerns re: the surgical competence of U.S. Ophthalmologists.

Who would honestly benefit in legislating that another organization (OD's) may start to train their own surgeons? It would certainly make it more difficult to intelligently manage the number of surgeons. We can likely agree that either a surplus or deficit of eye surgeons would harm patient care. It is difficult to be an excellent surgeon if you are low-volume or overworked. While there exist regional variations in surgeon to patient ratios (including areas of inadequate coverage), there is no reason to think that OD's would distribute themselves much differently. Ophthalmology is a desirable field and there is no forseeable difficulty in filling training spots. The current Ophthalmologic surgical training setup simply ain't broke.

That being said, what do I care if another eye surgeon was initially trained as an OD? I don't...as long as they have been appropriately trained to perform surgery. I'm sure that most medical school application committees would look favorably on an applicant who has completed (or even partially-completed) Optometry school.

So you say you're not getting any credit for you're OD professional school training & you shouldn't have to complete the entire 4 yrs + 1 yr +3 yrs to be a surgeon. Fine, make some proposals that involve shortening the med school portion a year or two. I'm sure there are some OD's who could compete head-to-head with the MD applicants for Ophthalmology training spots. Don't make me brainstorm for the best way to get you credit for your previous educational pursuits. So far the only halfway complete proposal I've seen was offered by an MD (Dr. Doan). There have to be some good, reasonable ideas out there.

So, again trying to get a shortcut (1-2 yrs). My questions: if they are so eager to become eye surgeons and are willing to sacrfice a lot then why they just can't apply to a medical school & "compete head-to-head with MD applicant", which is according to your argument is 1-2 yrs extra? I will answer this question for you. BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY CAN'T COMPETE HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH AN MD APPLICANT. THEY DON'T WON'T THE IDEA OF A MEDICAL SCHOOL TRINING BECAUSE THEY WON'T GET ACCEPTED AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE GRADES FOR IT. THEY BASICALLY WANT TO CIRCUMVENT THE SYSTEM AND HAVE SHORTCUTS. Your argument is so silly. If it only take an extra 1-2 yrs and they are SO WANT BE AN OPHTHALMOLOGIST OR AN EYE SURGEON THEY WHY THE HELL FOR THEM NOT DO THESE TWO EXTRA YEARS????? MEDICAL SCHOOL IS THE ANSWER FOR YOU.

 

[vanelo]

So, again trying to get a shortcut (1-2 yrs). My questions: if they are so eager to become eye surgeons and are willing to sacrfice a lot then why they just can't apply to a medical school & "compete head-to-head with MD applicant", which is according to your argument is 1-2 yrs extra? I will answer this question for you. BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY CAN'T COMPETE HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH AN MD APPLICANT. THEY DON'T WON'T THE IDEA OF A MEDICAL SCHOOL TRINING BECAUSE THEY WON'T GET ACCEPTED AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE GRADES FOR IT. THEY BASICALLY WANT TO CIRCUMVENT THE SYSTEM AND HAVE SHORTCUTS. Your argument is so silly. If it only take an extra 1-2 yrs and they are SO WANT BE AN OPHTHALMOLOGIST OR AN EYE SURGEON THEY WHY THE HELL FOR THEM NOT DO THESE TWO EXTRA YEARS????? MEDICAL SCHOOL IS THE ANSWER FOR YOU.

The best evidence that supports your point that "THEY OBVIOUSLY CAN'T COMPETE HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH AN MD APPLICANT" comes from the fact that even though your solution has been suggested many many times, they still continue with the crappy shortcut route.

An MD student would have certainly understood that already. 😛

 

[JennyW]

So, again trying to get a shortcut (1-2 yrs). My questions: if they are so eager to become eye surgeons and are willing to sacrfice a lot then why they just can't apply to a medical school & "compete head-to-head with MD applicant", which is according to your argument is 1-2 yrs extra? I will answer this question for you. BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY CAN'T COMPETE HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH AN MD APPLICANT. THEY DON'T WON'T THE IDEA OF A MEDICAL SCHOOL TRINING BECAUSE THEY WON'T GET ACCEPTED AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE GRADES FOR IT. THEY BASICALLY WANT TO CIRCUMVENT THE SYSTEM AND HAVE SHORTCUTS. Your argument is so silly. If it only take an extra 1-2 yrs and they are SO WANT BE AN OPHTHALMOLOGIST OR AN EYE SURGEON THEY WHY THE HELL FOR THEM NOT DO THESE TWO EXTRA YEARS????? MEDICAL SCHOOL IS THE ANSWER FOR YOU.

A tired argument that has been repeated again and again, yet has no basis in fact.

I sat on the admissions committee of an east coast optometry school for 4 years. I can assure you that while there might have been 5 or 6 bottom feeders in each class, the rest of them could have easily competed for admission to the vast majority of medical schools in the country and the ones at the top of the admitted class could have competed for a spot at even the most competitive of medical schools.

I myself graduated Magna from Dartmouth with a degree in chemistry so I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there.

Jenny

 

[futuredoctorOD]

A tired argument that has been repeated again and again, yet has no basis in fact.

I sat on the admissions committee of an east coast optometry school for 4 years. I can assure you that while there might have been 5 or 6 bottom feeders in each class, the rest of them could have easily competed for admission to the vast majority of medical schools in the country and the ones at the top of the admitted class could have competed for a spot at even the most competitive of medical schools.

I myself graduated Magna from Dartmouth with a degree in chemistry so I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there.

Jenny

👍 I went to UMSLCO for a visit a few months ago and saw thier demographics and what you are saying is sooo true....

 

[EYESURG]

I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there.

Jenny

Then WHY WON'T THEY JUST SPEND AN EXTRA 2 YRS BY ATTENDING A MEDICAL SCHOOL?

 

[EYESURG]

👍 I went to UMSLCO for a visit a few months ago and saw thier demographics and what you are saying is sooo true....

you are THE LAST person I would believe in this forum. AGAIN, you are asking for SHORTCUTS, SHORTCUTS AND MORE SHORTCUTS!

 

[eyeful]

if you are talking about UNECO, the average GPA for incoming students is 3.17 according to http://www.opted.org/info_profile2.cfm

I dont see how most of the students there wouldve been competitive at the majority of medical schools.

 

[JR]

Hey Jenny,

I can assure you that while there might have been 5 or 6 bottom feeders in each class, the rest of them could have easily competed for admission to the vast majority of medical schools in the country and the ones at the top of the admitted class could have competed for a spot at even the most competitive of medical schools.

I am a little confused. How's sitting on the admissions committee for an optometry school makes you qualified to assess who would be competative enough for medical school admission?

I myself graduated Magna from Dartmouth with a degree in chemistry so I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there.

That's pretty impressive 👍 👍 👍

 

[EYESURG]

I myself graduated Magna from Dartmouth with a degree in chemistry so I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there.
Jenny

FYI, only a small percentage of people who get a chemistry or biology degree get into medical school.

 

[rubensan]

Dear jenny,

I am a little confused. How's sitting on the admissions committee for an optometry school makes you qualified to assess who would be competative enough for medical school admission?

I am still waiting to hear a reply from you on this issue!

the rest of them could have easily competed for admission to the vast majority of medical schools in the country and the ones at the top of the admitted class could have competed for a spot at even the most competitive of medical schools.

I myself graduated Magna from Dartmouth with a degree in chemistry so I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there

Because academic merit and a degree in chemistry automatically translate into excellent clinical skills? As someone who sits on the admissions committee at my medical school, I can assure you that there is much more to being admitted to an allopathic medical school than being magna cum anything from an ivy league. I usually think your posts are pretty "right on" Jenny and I do think Deek is generalizing optometry students on the basis of their academic potential. But I don't think you should lecture him on making an argument that has "no basis in fact" when your counterpoint isn't even based in fact.

Ruben

 

[odieoh]

Hey Jenny,

I am a little confused. How's sitting on the admissions committee for an optometry school makes you qualified to assess who would be competative enough for medical school admission?

Give me a break. I'm sure the admissions process is very similar for med school and optometry schools. It doesn't take a genius to tell who would be competitive for med school, all you really need to know is grades and MCAT.

 

[rubensan]

Give me a break. I'm sure the admissions process is very similar for med school and optometry schools. It doesn't take a genius to tell who would be competitive for med school, all you really need to know is grades and MCAT.

I can't speek for OD school admissions and I am not arrogant enough to say that just because I got into medical school that I would be a shoe in for OD school. Like I said before, it's more than grades and MCAT.

Ruben

 

[odieoh]

I can't speek for OD school admissions and I am not arrogant enough to say that just because I got into medical school that I would be a shoe in for OD school. Like I said before, it's more than grades and MCAT.

Ruben

My post had nothing to do with anyone saying they were a shoe-in to anything, it was about if Jenny can determine whether or not someone is competitive for med school. I'm sure she can. Yes, grades and MCAT arent everything, but I'm sure the intangible qualities that med school admissions committees look for are pretty much the same intangible qualities that Optom school committees look for. So all around, I'd say she could give a pretty educated assessment of whether or not her optom school applicants would be competitive for med school.

 

[odieoh]

FYI, only a small percentage of people who get a chemistry or biology degree get into medical school.

FYI, only a small percentage of people who get a chemistry or biology degree apply to medical school in the first place. Nice stat though.

 

[rubensan]

I'm sure she can.

And my answer to you is "she probably shouldn't." I am not trying to be argumentative with you in the whee hours of the morning when I really should be studying for my boards, but do you speak from experience on this issue? how does an optometrist speak with authority on a Graduate Medical Forums[ MD / DO ] re: medical school admissions when they have never applied? i have always attested on this forum that i am naive to OD education and its admissions admissions process. thus, i would never say publically (or better yet on an OD forum) that just because I graduated cum laude from undergrad and work with admissions at my medical school, that i am capable of judging whether an applicant is going to get into OD school, but also that they could excell once they got there. One of the most common questions that is asked during a medical school interview is why do you want to become a [medical] doctor? Many times the response is "because I want to help people." A sophisticated interviewer will then ask, "well nurses help people, dentists help people, optometrists help people, psychologists help people, why do you want to be a medical doctor?"

my point? there has to be something that drives you to be a medical doctor rather than these other professions. Just like there has to be something that drives you to become an OD rather than these other professions. One is no lesser of a degree than the other; they're different. So let's stop generalizing about each other's education and admissions standards.

Don't get me wrong, I am glad Jenny posts on this forum and I agree with her on many things, but not on this.

One last thing, at many medical schools, once an applicant gets an interview,
they are deemed academically qualified for that medical school. Not everyone who interviews is accepted.

Good night,
Ruben

 

[JennyW]

Dear jenny,



I am still waiting to hear a reply from you on this issue!



Because academic merit and a degree in chemistry automatically translate into excellent clinical skills? As someone who sits on the admissions committee at my medical school, I can assure you that there is much more to being admitted to an allopathic medical school than being magna cum anything from an ivy league. I usually think your posts are pretty "right on" Jenny and I do think Deek is generalizing optometry students on the basis of their academic potential. But I don't think you should lecture him on making an argument that has "no basis in fact" when your counterpoint isn't even based in fact.

Ruben

Sorry for the delay. The demands of running a practice and raising a 9 month old sometimes cut into my posting time on SDN. 😉

Pt 1: Having sat on the admissions committee for an optometry doesn't make me qualified to say who should or should not admitted into medical schools. The reason for my post was that Mr. Deek made the point that optometry students "dont have the grades" for admission into medical school. Having seen the applicant pool at my school, more than half of them had above a 3.60 and more than 85% of them had a above a 3.4. While that may not get most of them into Harvard, looking at published GPA admissions stats for medical schools leads me to believe that they would be competitive for most medical schools out there.

Pt 2: Obviously there is more to admissions than just GPA. When I sat on the committee about a third of those with GPAs above 3.8 were rejected. I'm sure the same happens in medical schools. BUt I'm not sure what argument you think that I'VE made that has no basis in fact.

 

[JennyW]

FYI, only a small percentage of people who get a chemistry or biology degree get into medical school.

Be that as it may, your generalizations about ODs students "not having the grades" is wrong.

 

[EYESURG]

Then WHY WON'T THEY JUST SPEND AN EXTRA 2 YRS (according to Smiegal) BY ATTENDING A MEDICAL SCHOOL?

How come none of you even tried to answer my question, especially Jenny? I guess they still want shortcuts!

 

[odieoh]

And my answer to you is "she probably shouldn't." I am not trying to be argumentative with you in the whee hours of the morning when I really should be studying for my boards, but do you speak from experience on this issue?

Hey Ruben-

Sorry, I went to bed before your last post. As far as "she probably shouldn't" well, she isn't. I mean this whole discussion is completely theoretical--did you think that she was telling Optom applicants to her school "Hey, you would be competitive for med school, why are you applying here?" No, but by reviewing their applications she has enough info to, in general, see if someone would be competitive for med school. People on this board are making it sound like it takes a PhD to determine if someone would be competitive to get into med school, and its just not that hard.

I'm not trying to be argumentative either, its just that people are getting pretty arrogant in some of the posts and anything the OD people post is subject to criticism for the most miniscule things. Thats dumb.

 

[Mirror Form]

Be that as it may, your generalizations about ODs students "not having the grades" is wrong.

While there are many exceptions, there's no denying that the average medical school matriculant has significantly higher scores then the average optometry school matriculant. And often times the reason the scores are as low as they are for medical school is b/c people who have applied 2 or 3 times finally get in after doing lots of research, volunteering, etc.

Also, getting into medical school is just the first step. You have to be a well above average medical student to have a good shot at getting into ophthalmology, and even then many don't match.

So the idea that most optometrists could have been ophthalmologists if they wanted to is just not true. Yes there are plenty out there that could have, but they're not the majority.

 

[JennyW]

How come none of you even tried to answer my question, especially Jenny? I guess they still want shortcuts!

I've said this dozens of times.

That's what they should do. I have never been a proponent of optometric surgery, nor am I a proponent of setting up programs similar to OMFS and if you read any of the optometric journals you will find that they are filled with letters to the editor also denouncing the push for "surgery" in the few states that are pushing for this.

To be sure, there are some letters advocating, but I would say the nays outweigh the yays by at least 3:1.

I just don't consider the removal of a foreign body surgery, nor do I consider the closure of the lacrimal punctum surgery, so if I'm fighting for those procedures, then I guess that makes me for optometric surgery.

And please spare me the line about "if you are not actively fighting against it then you are passively for it." I could just as easily make the argument that if OMDs are OK with ODs doing epilations and removal of foreign bodies then they would be actively campaiging their legislatures to continue to allow them and not advocating for the kind of crapola that we deal with here in New York on a yearly basis. And no one can make the arguemnt that ODs in New York are pushing for "surgery" because we certainly are not. New York has one of the MOST restrictive optometric scopes of practice in the union.

Jenny

 

[smiegal]

So, again trying to get a shortcut (1-2 yrs). My questions: if they are so eager to become eye surgeons and are willing to sacrfice a lot then why they just can't apply to a medical school & "compete head-to-head with MD applicant", which is according to your argument is 1-2 yrs extra? I will answer this question for you. BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY CAN'T COMPETE HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH AN MD APPLICANT. THEY DON'T WON'T THE IDEA OF A MEDICAL SCHOOL TRINING BECAUSE THEY WON'T GET ACCEPTED AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE GRADES FOR IT. THEY BASICALLY WANT TO CIRCUMVENT THE SYSTEM AND HAVE SHORTCUTS. Your argument is so silly. If it only take an extra 1-2 yrs and they are SO WANT BE AN OPHTHALMOLOGIST OR AN EYE SURGEON THEY WHY THE HELL FOR THEM NOT DO THESE TWO EXTRA YEARS????? MEDICAL SCHOOL IS THE ANSWER FOR YOU.

Intoxication? Non-native English speaker? Co-morbid Axis I to go with your Cluster B? Perhaps FutureDoctorOD's excuse of poor "typing" skills? 😱

Still trying to decipher this post.....

 

[futuredoctorOD]

Intoxication? Non-native English speaker? Co-morbid Axis I to go with your Cluster B? Perhaps FutureDoctorOD's excuse of poor "typing" skills? 😱

Still trying to decipher this post.....

You seem pretty sharp huh? 😉
How about this equation (I have 3 minutes to type a response--I am busy maybe you have more time than me?) + (I type 25 words a minute) + (I really don't care about a couple spelling errors here or there) = You being unprofessional and abrasive----wow is that your MO? 🙄


PS (Just so you know I am US born and got A's in all of my English courses)----I just wanted to inform you... 😀

 

[smiegal]

You seem pretty sharp huh? 😉
How about this equation (I have 3 minutes to type a response--I am busy maybe you have more time than me?) + (I type 25 words a minute) + (I really don't care about a couple spelling errors here or there) = You being unprofessional and abrasive----wow is that your MO? 🙄


PS (Just so you know I am US born and got A's in all of my ESL courses)----I just wanted to inform you... 😀

There goes the short fuse. I wasn't even talking about your post. You and Deek got something on the back burner? 😉
Yeah, I made a reference to you, but, c'mon - you spell Ophthalmology wrong in every freaking post (on the Ophthalmology forum). Those types of repeated errors are clearly not due to typing. But, you're right, I probably shouldn't have included that part, sorry (seriously). I see why that upset you.

You avoided a couple of questions on my recent posts. Overall, I'm truly open to your arguments & feel that if someone can make a good argument for why society would benefit - it is legit. I have yet to see such an argument re: OD surgery. 2 out of 2 dentists agree (p value <0.05) Turf influences everybody (including you), but I am actually quite good at playing devil's advocate against that which might conceivably benefit me. Do you really stand by your survival of the fittest argument? The Anthropology major in me would love to get into the finer points of that debate. I'll stay open-minded on the surgery issue, but your profession hasn't come close to convincing me thus far.

BTW, Jenny W, if I were in charge, you could do all the punctal plugs and FB removals your heart desires.

 

[EYESURG]

I've said this dozens of times.

That's what they should do. I have never been a proponent of optometric surgery, nor am I a proponent of setting up programs similar to OMFS and if you read any of the optometric journals you will find that they are filled with letters to the editor also denouncing the push for "surgery" in the few states that are pushing for this.

Jenny

I respect that and I respect you for it.

 

[EYESURG]

Still trying to decipher this post.....

May be your just too slow. 😴

 

[futuredoctorOD]

There goes the short fuse. I wasn't even talking about your post. You and Deek got something on the back burner? 😉
Yeah, I made a reference to you, but, c'mon - you spell Ophthalmology wrong in every freaking post (on the Ophthalmology forum). Those types of repeated errors are clearly not due to typing. But, you're right, I probably shouldn't have included that part, sorry (seriously). I see why that upset you.

You avoided a couple of questions on my recent posts. Overall, I'm truly open to your arguments & feel that if someone can make a good argument for why society would benefit - it is legit. I have yet to see such an argument re: OD surgery. 2 out of 2 dentists agree (p value <0.05) Turf influences everybody (including you), but I am actually quite good at playing devil's advocate against that which might conceivably benefit me. Do you really stand by your survival of the fittest argument? The Anthropology major in me would love to get into the finer points of that debate. I'll stay open-minded on the surgery issue, but your profession hasn't come close to convincing me thus far.

BTW, Jenny W, if I were in charge, you could do all the punctal plugs and FB removals your heart desires.

Your point is well taken and it's refreshing that we can talk about this controversial issue in an amiable manner 😉 I admit that I am a very passionate and fiery person (it's the athlete in me and maybe too much spicy food..lol) The funny thing is I took grad-level ethology-ecology and I love the whole ultimate and proximate causation topics! Anyway, what are you planning on doing in practice? Private, hospital setting, group....etc..?


PS I will capitulate and spell it as Ophthalmology---instead of being stubborn about it! 🙂

 

[Visioncam]

There is not such a great national need that people with less training are put into service.

10-15 years ago, there were 6 and even 5 year combined college and medical school programs. I am not certain which ones still exists. Jefferson and Northwestern were among them. Dartmouth was a 3 year medical school (originally a 2 year then one would transfer but later a full M.D. granting 3 year program). Why not try that?

I am in favor of having general surgery required of all ophthalmologists. It would weed out some lazy people, which is a problem in ophthalmology. It would also give valuable training. Internal Medicine is not good internship training. I have seen a number of ophthalmology residents that can't tie surgical knots even as well as a beginning surgery intern. Actually, expanding the internship year to 2 years and including 4 months of Neurology, Pathology, and maybe either Derm or Internal Medicine in addition to a 12 month general surgery year would be helpful. On top of that, adding 6 months to weaker ophthalmology programs making it a 5-5.5 year residency wouldn't hurt. This idea is completely opposite of the proposed "ophthalmology lite" idea mentioned in earlier posts.

 

[Buck Strong]

It would weed out some lazy people, which is a problem in ophthalmology.

Look, I can admit that there are some valid points in your post, even though I'm not sure that the combined college/md programs are all that great. I think it's a shame to rush through college...the best years of your life. But I honestly do not know any lazy people in ophthalmology. An above average lifestyle after residency does not equate to laziness...by your argument, most optometrists, dentists, and basically anyone working less than 100 hours a week is lazy. I mean, the average accepted applicant is in the top of his/her med school class, and has a 229 (the average matching score this past year) on step one. You don't get accepted into ophtho by being lazy or taking shortcuts. Plus...a surgery intern year is not spent in the OR cutting...most of the time, you're managing patients, rounding and doing various scut on the floor (admits and discharges, checking labs, etc).

 

[smiegal]

Anyway, what are you planning on doing in practice? Private, hospital setting, group....etc..?

I still have to decide on a subspecialty.

 

[scott McGregor]

A tired argument that has been repeated again and again, yet has no basis in fact.

I sat on the admissions committee of an east coast optometry school for 4 years. I can assure you that while there might have been 5 or 6 bottom feeders in each class, the rest of them could have easily competed for admission to the vast majority of medical schools in the country and the ones at the top of the admitted class could have competed for a spot at even the most competitive of medical schools.

I myself graduated Magna from Dartmouth with a degree in chemistry so I feel pretty confident that I could have competed "head to head" with the vast majority of med school applicants out there.

Jenny

Agreed Jenny! The inferior OD student is so outrageous. I too had a Magna degree in Biology out of William and Mary College in Virginia. I also had a Magna degree in Optics (AS) before undergrad. I was also accepted to a medical school in Va the same year and chose Optometry. It gets old being referred to as an inferior student due to my choice.

 

[scott McGregor]

While there are many exceptions, there's no denying that the average medical school matriculant has significantly higher scores then the average optometry school matriculant.
So the idea that most optometrists could have been ophthalmologists if they wanted to is just not true. Yes there are plenty out there that could have, but they're not the majority.

Sledge
I don't really want to argue this, but please tell us where (data and stats and source) you get such information. You are reasonable and you must see how badly this reads. Now, to make it simple flip over to the Optometry Forum on SDN and there is a 15 page thread citing the GPA and OAT scores of hundreds of new students accepted into the class of 2005 (Optometry) across the nation. There are only one or two that were below 3.4 GPA. OAT scores showed 340-380 for virtually every one (out of 400). Do you truly think that a vast percent of these students could not compete to attend medical school had they chosen to go?? Now to compete for an ophthalmology residency after med school is a whole other topic. Optometry is not comprised of second best or med-school denials. Perhaps you should thank those students for NOT competing against many who CHOSE medical school instead of Optometry. All these students attended major universities and attained these competative GPAs Take a look, perhaps it will enlighten you, and Optometry is not all 4.0 P-Chem majors either, much goes into acceptance besides raw scores.

 

[CircleTheDrain]

Originally Posted by Sledge2005
While there are many exceptions, there's no denying that the average medical school matriculant has significantly higher scores then the average optometry school matriculant.
So the idea that most optometrists could have been ophthalmologists if they wanted to is just not true. Yes there are plenty out there that could have, but they're not the majority.

Sledge
I don't really want to argue this, but please tell us where (data and stats and source) you get such information. You are reasonable and you must see how badly this reads. Now, to make it simple flip over to the Optometry Forum on SDN and there is a 15 page thread citing the GPA and OAT scores of hundreds of new students accepted into the class of 2005 (Optometry) across the nation. There are only one or two that were below 3.4 GPA. OAT scores showed 340-380 for virtually every one (out of 400). Do you truly think that a vast percent of these students could not compete to attend medical school had they chosen to go?? Now to compete for an ophthalmology residency after med school is a whole other topic. Optometry is not comprised of second best or med-school denials. Perhaps you should thank those students for NOT competing against many who CHOSE medical school instead of Optometry. All these students attended major universities and attained these competative GPAs Take a look, perhaps it will enlighten you, and Optometry is not all 4.0 P-Chem majors either, much goes into acceptance besides raw scores.

I believe that he was pointing out that Opthamology is a difficult to get into specialty of Medicine and few would be able to get into both medical school and Opthamology. 🙂

 

[rubensan]

oh scott, you're reviving this messy thread again?

Sledge
I don't really want to argue this, but please tell us where (data and stats and source) you get such information. You are reasonable and you must see how badly this reads. Now, to make it simple flip over to the Optometry Forum on SDN and there is a 15 page thread citing the GPA and OAT scores of hundreds of new students accepted into the class of 2005 (Optometry) across the nation. There are only one or two that were below 3.4 GPA. OAT scores showed 340-380 for virtually every one (out of 400). Do you truly think that a vast percent of these students could not compete to attend medical school had they chosen to go?? Now to compete for an ophthalmology residency after med school is a whole other topic. Optometry is not comprised of second best or med-school denials. Perhaps you should thank those students for NOT competing against many who CHOSE medical school instead of Optometry. All these students attended major universities and attained these competative GPAs Take a look, perhaps it will enlighten you, and Optometry is not all 4.0 P-Chem majors either, much goes into acceptance besides raw scores.

 

[scott McGregor]

oh scott, you're reviving this messy thread again?

Ruben, you are so right, I regret letting it get under my skin. Whats worse, my "Crystal Ball" is in the "shop". So determining who and what GPA and what program OMD vs OD, will get accepted.. blah blah blah....is a waste of time.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

A good friend of mine went to medical school in Israel (b/c he could not get in the US) and he got into an ophthalmology residency with average grades /board scores, he said it was not as hard as it used to be to get a residency. I asked him why and he said b/c you don't make as much money as you used to.

 

[rubensan]

A good friend of mine went to medical school in Israel (b/c he could not get in the US) and he got into an ophthalmology residency with average grades /board scores, he said it was not as hard as it used to be to get a residency. I asked him why and he said b/c you don't make as much money as you used to.

hollywood,
perhaps, but i believe that nobody in medicine is making as much money as they used to. however, i give props to your friend. i have met many FMGs who seem quite capable and still have not matched into an ophthalmology residency even after 2-3 match cycles.