I don't know if I buy it, but here you go
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/23/new...ly_medicine/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=Sbin
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/23/new...ly_medicine/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=Sbin
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
Family Practice gaining popularity?
Started by NurWollen
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
So, is that picture an accurate depiction of lectures? Are students always dressed in shirt, tie, and white coat and does each desk get their own desktop?
If any specialty was gaining in popularity, we would expect to see the overall percentage of matriculants to that specialty increase and a drop-off somewhere else. The CNN article mainly focuses their conclusions on 133 more residents entering FM, which is great for primary care. But 133 more people could easily have come from new med schools opening and existing schools increasing their enrollments. Those studenys have to match somewhere.
I think the focus should be on the 94% fill rate rather than the extra 133. They increased the spots by 100 and still broke the record for the amount of spots that were filled. That is kind of a big deal I think.
It could also be that there are now more FP positions.
Cant say whether FM is a more popular option or the last match was more competitive. Overall I wouldn't want to be matching into a field which is basically PA run and under constant attack from DNPs.
The (slowly dying) optimist in me says, "Great!" but the (gaining strength) cynic says, "They matched FM because their first-choice specialty became too competitive with the flood of applicants as graduates increase and residencies stagnate!"
Lol, I like how the article/AAFP guy assumed it was because of 'healthcare reform.' I don't think he's taking into consideration, or wants to take into consideration, some of the issues surrounding increasing numbers of students, self-selecting (or being rejected) from more competitive spots, etc.
I'm 100% for beefing up FM and getting physicians back into primary care, but I don't think you can really chalk it up to the PPA/ACA when, to my knowledge, any perk extended to DO/MDs in primary care would also be extended to the DNPs et. al.
Let's hope the trend continues and some tiger blood is pumped back into FM though!
I'm 100% for beefing up FM and getting physicians back into primary care, but I don't think you can really chalk it up to the PPA/ACA when, to my knowledge, any perk extended to DO/MDs in primary care would also be extended to the DNPs et. al.
Let's hope the trend continues and some tiger blood is pumped back into FM though!
I was thinking the same thing. It made me curious, and I actually went onto heathcare.gov to see exactly what these benefits were. I always had a vague idea, but never knew anything truly concrete. Low and behold I found this page and really didn't see anything all that good specifically for physicians (Aside from more FP residences, which was still pretty vague). They seem to just throw a ton a money around but don't explain exactly where the money is going. 5 million to states to "encourage" planning to address healthcare professional workforce needs? 15 million to open 10 NP led clinics? If anyone knew some legitimate perks that FP's will be receiving and would like to enlighten me I would appreciate it. It seems like if you go into FP and don't practice in an underserved area you're pretty much out of luck for any of these benefits.
Also, 40 Billion to Pell Grants? That is definitely a good thing, but that only applies to undergraduates, and there are MANY affordable options for undergrad institutions where you wouldn't need an increase in Pell funding. We have virtually nothing to help us with medical school loans. Why not increase the subsidized loan caps, and lower the unsubsidized to balance it out? How about lowing the atrocious Graduate Plus loan 4% origination fee and 7.9% interest. Giving 40 Billion to Pell isn't exactly helping medical school students out all that much. I think it's great, but to put it under the healthcare act doesn't seem right to me.
Last edited:
You realize that they are getting rid of subsidized stafford loans for graduate students (including med school) altogether, right?
The student aid reform was only added to the bill so that it would make the overall bill lower the deficit in the CBO's eyes, this enabled them to ram the bill down our throats without having to follow the rules in the senate.
When are they doing that?
Yes, but:
1) How many more US students were applying this year? Both allo and osteopathic schools have been bumping up their enrollments in recent years.
2) How many FMGs/IMGs claimed those spots? FP is arguably the easiest thing to match as an IMG, and large numbers of IMGs are always interested in matching anything in the US. You could probably add thousands of FP slots and still fill them almost entirely by matching tons of IMGs; however it still wouldn't mean dork about the "desirability" of those spots to your average US MD/DO student.
I saw this article earlier today and I thought it (like most stuff CNNMoney puts out) was rubbish. There is zero hard evidence presented about why anyone should think US med students are suddenly finding FP desirable; instead, there is a lot of half-baked hypothesizing and conjecture built around a few quotes from people who are biased nine ways to Sunday (like that AAFP guy). As far as I can tell, primary care still is a rotten specialty in terms of compensation and lifestyle and neither Obamacare nor anything else has been more than a token effort at fixing that.
Heh??? Source please.
I don't want to get into the political aspect of it, but Obama has made some pretty anti-physician comments ('cutting off a limb to make 20k) and has been quite supportive of individuals like DNPs helping to fill this primary care goal. Unless perks are given directly to physicians and not to anyone else who wants to tout themselves as a 'primary care provider,' I really see no reason to jump for joy over 'primary care incentives.'
It's the same reason I fear tort/malpractice reform won't be specific enough. If you cap all malpractice issues at something like 250k without specifically stating that this is for physician providers, you break down a very crucial barrier that's keeping a lot of non-physician providers from officially practicing primary care.
Then again, the elimination of defensive medicine is supposed to save 39 billion over the decade after it's 'stopped,' so I suppose it's all an issue of macro versus microcosm, big picture, etc.
I saw that too. Made me wonder!
And do med students really smile like that, as they cram every day for half a decade?
Even as a pre-med, knowing next to nothing about actual medicine, I can see an obvious difference in the approach/ medical understanding I see in a NP vs a DO/MD. I NP recently told my wife, who was having leg cramps after jogging, the women shouldn't jog because of the wear and tear on their hips and on their uterus.
It was refreshing to see a physician later who could quote actual studies to back up the advice he gave me.
And now you know...either the kitchen or the bedroom...
I keed, I keed, somebody's gotta do the grocery shopping 😀
What do you think?
http://dailynewspulse.com/obamas-bu...s-for-student-loans-with-less-options/228500/
Look at the last part. It's part of his budget, and a compromise to save Pell grants for undergrads.
edited out. gut reaction, but couldn't remember IIRC. will check at home. can't check certain websites here.
Last edited:
wellllll.......
sort of.
I went to a lobbyist for the AOA with this (okay he came to me. but I did ask him!). He said that while it is a possibility, that stuff similar to this gets put into federal budgets every year and never gets enforced. The budget needs to be approved first with that in there. Then after that each and every pay change needs to be voted on when actual allocation of funds happens in the House of Representatives. He said that while it about 50-50 that clause remains in the budget, it's another 50-50 that when it comes time to fund/defund this individual clause that someone will go 'thats ridiculous' and just scrap the entire defunding.
So .5x.5 = 25% chance of that actually happening. That was his take on it at least. He told me not to be concerned because budget cut stuff are more often newspaper fodder rather than actual legislative reality.
On the slight silver lining. I did the math for a $200,000 debt and that change would only increase your total debt, after 4 years of loans, to an additional 6 or 7 thousand (I forgot what my final figure was. my bad). In the grand scheme of things thats not much at all.
On another note..... when was this picture taken? 1996? Who the hell has 1) rollerball mice 2) with wires?
Ah, the ole "women shouldn't jog because of the wear-and-tear on the uterus theory." Of course. I think we're learning about this in Physiology soon.
Keep in mind that these individuals are convinced that the only difference between their knowledge base/skill set and that of a physician's is that 'they get paid less and care more about patients.'
Additionally, they have a vicious, junkyard dog of a lobbying group that is doing its best to make sure all DNPs get to prance around privates practices in white coats, introducing themselves as doctors and making the killer, House-esque 'jogging uterus' diagnoses that we all desperately need to fill that 'crucial gap in primary care.'
