Is radiology going down?

[nima123]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I read on this forum several times that radiology salaries are going down in the future. Why is that?

[Considering the new techniques (e.g. interventional radiology) and the developing technology, I thought radiology would only get better compensated in the future...]

 

[OHMAN0125]

I read on this forum several times that radiology salaries are going down in the future. Why is that?

[Considering the new techniques (e.g. interventional radiology) and the developing technology, I thought radiology would only get better compensated in the future...]

Salaries of ALL physicians are going down. DRA 2005? Radiologists are in better shape than other groups though because of increased volume of imaging to make up for the reimbursement cuts.

 

[pdz]

Salaries of ALL physicians are going down. DRA 2005? Radiologists are in better shape than other groups though because of increased volume of imaging to make up for the reimbursement cuts.

Second that. The trend for the coming years is that they will continue going down even more. I don't think it's anything particular of radiology, it's just physicians in general.

 

[peduncle]

"Radiologists are in better shape than other groups though because of increased volume of imaging to make up for the reimbursement cuts."

But this means that the day-to-day life of a radiologist will get pretty crazy hectic to keep up with the reimbursement cuts. It'd be interesting to see the trend for the popularity of Radiology if the daily life of a Rads Doc becomes super busy and stressful.

 

[CaptKirk]

Having been out on the trail, talking to residents, program directors, etc., I would say that no one seems the slightest bit worried at all. The only recurring theme I have noticed is that because volumes are so high, it's getting harder to entice people into research or academics. Pro - those in academics want to be there, have an interest in teaching; Con - hard to increase the size of programs when it's tough to recruit faculty. Building on that, without increasing the number of radiologists trained, there is... well, I would not call it concern per se, but there is an awareness that as the workload increases and number of radiologists trained does not, there will be TONS of work - i.e. lots and lots of opportunities for graduates. In other words, from my young, limited, inexperienced perspective, this is a great time to enter radiology because at least for the foreseeable future, there will be plenty of work and opportunities.

 

[Big Steve]

It truly amazes me how naive and uninformed you med studs are. No offense -- most MS's are. I wasn't but that's b/c I am a compulsive data and facts gatherer.

Radiology is and will continue to be the PREMIER gig in all of medicine and surgery. I am in my last year of training and am getting inundated with offers from all over the country. I can work from home via telerad, I can work in a metropolis, I can do PP or academics, I can work out in BFE. I can work as much or as little as I want. I can do procedures and have patient contact if I want (personally I'd rather bang my head against a brick wall). If I want to work a little harder than most and am o.k. with living in the boonies for a year or two, I can make 1 mill+/year. These are the facts.

No other field in medicine or surgery affords this degree of geographic and temoporal flexibility. I would venture to say that 80% of physicians in other fields who are 5 or more years out of residency, if you could really get inside their heads to know the truth, would give their left arms to go back and do radiology instead.

Future? The sky is definitely not falling. Technology constantly moves forward -- and the specialty of radiology moves in lock-step with it. Imaging volume and demand is continuously increasing. Pretty soon triple rule-out CT scans will be ordered like CXRs in every ER in the country. Gone are the days of the physical exam. You can fiddle around sticking your fingers where the sun don't shine and rubbing the patient's belly for 30 minutes, or we can scan the sucker in 1 minute and in another 2 I can tell you exactly what's wrong with him.

These are the facts friends. You can either be yet another mediocre doctor, or you can be a bada$$ radiologist. Good luck to you.

A million? Surely you jest.

 

[nima123]

It truly amazes me how naive and uninformed you med studs are. No offense -- most MS's are. I wasn't but that's b/c I am a compulsive data and facts gatherer.

Radiology is and will continue to be the PREMIER gig in all of medicine and surgery. I am in my last year of training and am getting inundated with offers from all over the country. I can work from home via telerad, I can work in a metropolis, I can do PP or academics, I can work out in BFE. I can work as much or as little as I want. I can do procedures and have patient contact if I want (personally I'd rather bang my head against a brick wall). If I want to work a little harder than most and am o.k. with living in the boonies for a year or two, I can make 1 mill+/year. These are the facts.

No other field in medicine or surgery affords this degree of geographic and temoporal flexibility. I would venture to say that 80% of physicians in other fields who are 5 or more years out of residency, if you could really get inside their heads to know the truth, would give their left arms to go back and do radiology instead.

Future? The sky is definitely not falling. Technology constantly moves forward -- and the specialty of radiology moves in lock-step with it. Imaging volume and demand is continuously increasing. Pretty soon triple rule-out CT scans will be ordered like CXRs in every ER in the country. Gone are the days of the physical exam. You can fiddle around sticking your fingers where the sun don't shine and rubbing the patient's belly for 30 minutes, or we can scan the sucker in 1 minute and in another 2 I can tell you exactly what's wrong with him.

These are the facts friends. You can either be yet another mediocre doctor, or you can be a bada$$ radiologist. Good luck to you.

Cheers, man! This is what I wanted to hear. FACTS always win.

 

[Taurus]

This may be heretical to say but I kinda look at radiology as replacing the H&P. You can go through 10 pages of H&P, 20 things on the differential, and one CT scan which shows appendicitis. Diagnosis is made.

 

[osli]

Not heretical, just expensive. The question is always going to be what is the most efficient way to diagnose? Is it cheaper for a family practitioner to spend half an hour with the patient, or to run him through an MRI? And keep in mind all of the incidental witch hunts that start through unnecessary imaging studies. One might think that sometimes a very high sensitivity might be a bad thing...

 

[Docxter]

Imaging is not a replacement for an H&P in most cases, though there are instances that it is. You can give countless examples for each argument, but in reality they complement each other. Sadly, it seems that imaging has become a way of replacing H&P by some lazy, incompetent, or just genuinely overworked doctors.

 

[MacGyver]

Not heretical, just expensive. The question is always going to be what is the most efficient way to diagnose? Is it cheaper for a family practitioner to spend half an hour with the patient, or to run him through an MRI? And keep in mind all of the incidental witch hunts that start through unnecessary imaging studies. One might think that sometimes a very high sensitivity might be a bad thing...

Considering that MRIs cost about $1500 and a FP gets about $30 for a 30 minute visit, I'd say the FP is more cost effective. The real question is this: if the FP is going to do the MRI REGARDLESS of history and physical, then why not send the pt to get scanned before they ever see the doc?

 

[nima123]

Imaging is not a replacement for an H&P in most cases, though there are instances that it is. You can give countless examples for each argument, but in reality they complement each other. Sadly, it seems that imaging has become a way of replacing H&P by some lazy, incompetent, or just genuinely overworked doctors.

....Or maybe the ones who think working smarter beats working harder!

 

[Bahamian Doc]

Radiology has always been my #1 choice. Dream Job.....the Doctor's Doctor. 🙂

 

[peduncle]

Pathologists are considered the "doctor's doctor".... they're hella smart!!!

 

[H_Caulfield]

You can either be yet another mediocre doctor, or you can be a bada$$ radiologist. Good luck to you.

A bada$$ radiologist, huh? Show me where these guys are, cause the radiologists at my hospital are the high-pants chess-club freaks and geeks. Though the decision speaks for itself, regardless of what you all look like: a guy who chooses to analyze pictures rather than perform surgeries and/or procedures must be the bada$$.

I understand that you probably have a great salary and lifestyle and don't have to ever get your hands dirty, but some of us aren't in it just to take the easiest route. Congrats on your life, but don't call the rest of us "mediocre" and act like you're super cool. Whether for good reason or not, radiologists are consistently stereotyped as dorks...

 

[jpro]

Imaging is not a replacement for an H&P in most cases, though there are instances that it is. You can give countless examples for each argument, but in reality they complement each other. Sadly, it seems that imaging has become a way of replacing H&P by some lazy, incompetent, or just genuinely overworked doctors.

Lets say that your H&P correctly diagnoses or rules out appendicitis, SBO, or a renal stone. You still get a CT scan because it can change the management. I don't care how much time you spend with the patient or how good you are at diagnosing, that CT scan is still ordered.

 

[Bahamian Doc]

A bada$$ radiologist, huh? Show me where these guys are, cause the radiologists at my hospital are the high-pants chess-club freaks and geeks. Though the decision speaks for itself, regardless of what you all look like: a guy who chooses to analyze pictures rather than perform surgeries and/or procedures must be the bada$$.

I understand that you probably have a great salary and lifestyle and don't have to ever get your hands dirty, but some of us aren't in it just to take the easiest route. Congrats on your life, but don't call the rest of us "mediocre" and act like you're super cool. Whether for good reason or not, radiologists are consistently stereotyped as dorks...

Correct me if i'm wrong, but interventional radiologists DO perform surgery (although minimally invasive).

 

[nima123]

Interventional radiology and angioplasty is as badass as you can get in medicine.

Besides, what's more badass than looking at an image for a few seconds and come up with a diagnosis that takes other doctors a good half hour.

Dorks?... Come on!

 

[fun8stuff]

Interventional radiology and angioplasty is as badass as you can get in medicine.

Besides, what's more badass than looking at an image for a few seconds and come up with a diagnosis that takes other doctors a good half hour.

Dorks?... Come on!

haha... so now we are down to medical students/residents arguing about who's the head dork of the dork club?

 

[peduncle]

at least from my experience... final diagnoses aren't always made by the radiologist. "correlate with clinical findings" comes to mind....

but I agree that they do get to reveal a bit more about a patient's condition. Many docs I've worked with have become pretty proficient with radiological studies however and could read films themselves pretty well (ie. orthopedic surgeons with MSK films). This is variable, of course....

 

[nima123]

Many docs I've worked with have become pretty proficient with radiological studies however and could read films themselves pretty well (ie. orthopedic surgeons with MSK films). This is variable, of course....

As of now, these doctors may be commiting "medicolegal" suicide, but what worries me is that perhaps, with the evolving technology, images will be so clear and easy to read that any doctor would be able to read them. Any thoughts?

 

[H_Caulfield]

As of now, these doctors may be commiting "medicolegal" suicide, but what worries me is that perhaps, with the evolving technology, images will be so clear and easy to read that any doctor would be able to read them. Any thoughts?

When the imaging gets clearer, any surgeon or internist will be able to identify things that could only previously have been read by a radiologist... that seems inarguable. However, I think evolving technology will come with higher expectations from any given diagnosis. A radiologist will then be expected to answer not only "what?" but "what kind?"...and will be expected to pinpoint the locations, grade, etc. of findings to a greater degree. In this way I expect that radiologists will always be better at interpreting images than other doctors, no matter how good those images get. Just a largely uneducated guess, though...

 

[OHMAN0125]

As of now, these doctors may be commiting "medicolegal" suicide, but what worries me is that perhaps, with the evolving technology, images will be so clear and easy to read that any doctor would be able to read them. Any thoughts?

You can be sure that the ACR won't let radiologists lose their jobs dont worry. Lol.

 

[-Goose-]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but interventional radiologists DO perform surgery (although minimally invasive).

That was a good one... "surgery"

 

[Amxcvbcv]

Calling the H&P dead is short-sighted and downright arrogant. As a future radiologist, I realize that there is an bonafide need and place for imaging, but the fact is there are still a vast majority things that doctors do for there patients that don't have anything to do with radiology.

If what you describe were truly the case, why don't we just close down all the family medicine clinics and just have imaging centers.

You need to take a step outside of your hospital for a day or two realize that although radiology is the best specialty it is by no means the only one.

Would you really want to look at all your studies without any kind of background?

 

[MrBurns10]

That was a good one... "surgery"

Vascular surgeons do many of the same procedures IR does, so I don't think it was hysterical the poster referred to it as surgery...

 

[nima123]

That was a good one... "surgery"

Just look at the range of procedures they do right now. You may laugh now, but that's how surgeries will be done in the near future. You'll be a sorry ass.

 

[-Goose-]

Just look at the range of procedures they do right now. You may laugh now, but that's how surgeries will be done in the near future. You'll be a sorry ass.

IR procedures have their place (and are doing great things for the medical field), but they are just that. Procedures.


What is hysterical is these jokercat radiologists walking around the hospital calling themselves "surgeons."

Is an EP who places chest tubes suddenly a emergency thoracic 'surgeon'? What about the GI doc scopin' for dollars? A GI surgeon?

Truth be told, IR can't handle its own complications that are inherently associated with the procedures they do on a daily basis.

"If you're gonna go bear hunting, you'd better know what to do when you find a bear."

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=466243

 

[MrBurns10]

IR procedures have their place (and are doing great things for the medical field), but they are just that. Procedures.
What is hysterical is these jokercat radiologists walking around the hospital calling themselves "surgeons."

For one thing, that poster referred to some IR procedures as "surgery", not as IR docs as "surgeons." Those are two very different statements. A AAA repair is a surgical procedure, regardless if it's a vascular surgeon or an IR doc who does it. I certainly don't believe for something to be considered a "surgery" it must involve making an incision larger than those necessary to insert a catheter. But just to make sure we're clear, I don't consider IR docs surgeons because that implies training in a surgical residency.

You sound like an MS2 who wants to go into surgery, read that thread, was inspired, and decided you would set straight whoever on the rads boards would dare refer to what they do as surgery. Any procedure, in any field, has its risks...to argue that only surgeons should be doing procedures because only they can fix all the complications (including the ones necessitating actual surgery) is arrogant and short-sighted. But we can certainly agree to disagree on that point.

Surgeons always make it seem like only they can be proud of what they do and that you're less of a doctor if you desire a field that allows you to be home at a decent hour. I'm not saying you personally do, Goose, but that's the nature of surgery and it gets old after a while. And I say this after only experiencing 8 weeks of it!

 

[fun8stuff]

Would you really want to look at all your studies without any kind of background?

well, most the time the background is either not present, not specific, or it was made up (by the doc or patient).

 

[kamehame]

Remember whether you think it's a ball or a strike is irrelevant, it is what the umpire calls it. Period. The RADIOLOGIST is the umpire, like it or not.

I'm with you, bro. Not only can rads read films, but we do clinical correlation and understand the disease processes just like pathologists and can show people everything going on in the body. Plus, we can do procedures that are on par with a lot of what vascular surgeons can do and better than medicine docs. That makes us the ultimate physician in my book.

 

[kamehame]

Pathologists are considered the "doctor's doctor".... they're hella smart!!!

A good radiologist knows just as much as any pathologist about disease processes.

 

[-Goose-]

As a refresher, here's the pecking order: rads, derm, anesthesia, rad onc, cards, GI, surgical subspecialties (neuro, ortho, uro, ENT), hem onc,... gen surg, EM, IM, peds, FP, psych.

Wow. 🙄

Thanks buddy. I needed that refresher.

 

[vascsurg]

As a general surgery chief resident headed for vascular fellowship, I'd like to comment on some of the above.

First off, surgeons, spend at least five years learning how to work up a patient for surgery, we learn how to perform the procedure, we learn how to take care of the patient post-procedure and how to follow the patient in the future if indicated. We learn how to determine if patients need emergent surgery, urgent surgery, semi elective or elective surgery. We learn how to take care of the critically ill or injured patient better than anyone else in the hospital (in my opinion). I, as well as ~20% of incoming 2008 vascular surgery class, completed a year of surgical critical care.

Many IR doctors are very good at performing endovascular procedures. Their understanding of the indications for such procedures is often marginal. They are incapable of caring for a patient in the hospital and will admit their patients to a surgical service post-procedure. This is infuriating.

I don't mind taking care of a complication from an interventionalist or a cardiologist. I do mind dealing with fixing a problem that was caused after performing a procedure that was not indicated. Not every arterial stenosis needs to be ballooned or stented. Just because you can bill for it does not mean it's indicated. When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.........

Pecking order? Everyone has their role in medicine. I would never claim to be better at interpreting an imaging study than a radiologist. Does the fact that you interpet images better than anyone else put you at the top of the pecking order? Perhaps, but then again, I'm just a dumb surgeon.

 

[MrBurns10]

My pecking order is based on real world, objective criteria: salary, lifestyle, future, political power, flexibility (both temporal and geographic), long term satisfaction.

Then I don't see how psychiatry is last on your list. Really interesting pathology and patients, sweet hours, decent pay for your time (I'll gladly take $180k to work 40 hrs/week), and lots of current research. It's a cool field.

I have a lot of respect for surgeons because it's an important job and somebody has to do it...I'm just glad it's not me.

 

[vascsurg]

I agree that radiology is a GREAT choice in terms of money, hours, flexibilty, etc. Most normal human beings use those criteria to find a good job.
I often push medical students on my service in that direction (and towards anesthesia, dermatology, etc) and AWAY from surgery.

Vascular surgery is a tough lifestyle. However, it has emerged as one of the most popular choices recently because of all the endovascular work available. Half of my class is headed to a vascular fellowship (4/8). Vascular surgeons easily start at more than 300K per year, with top grads making even more. I have a very close relative that makes more than 1 million per year whom I will be joining in practise. We are consistently the highest billers in the department of surgery. There is a huge shortage across the country. There are ~ 10 open positions per vascular fellowship graduate. There are 2500 board certified vascular surgeons spread over 50 states with only ~ 2 new graduates produced per year per state.

In the real world, vascular surgeons don't worry the complex medical problems that go along with our patient population, a medical or critical care service does. I just need to make sure the patient is not coding from blood loss or a rupture AAA.

I wish surgery was easier, but it is not. I wish I could have stomached radiology or dermatology or radiation oncology, but I could not. Am I a "Napolean complex loser" ? I don't think so. I like going home at a reasonable hour and making lots of money too and I plan on doing plenty of both!

 

[vascsurg]

I agree that radiology is a GREAT choice in terms of money, hours, flexibilty, etc. Most normal human beings use those criteria to find a good job.
I often push medical students on my service in that direction (and towards anesthesia, dermatology, etc) and AWAY from surgery.

Vascular surgery is a tough lifestyle. However, it has emerged as one of the most popular choices recently because of all the endovascular work available. Half of my class is headed to a vascular fellowship (4/8). Vascular surgeons easily start at more than 300K per year, with top grads making even more. I have a very close relative that makes more than 1 million per year whom I will be joining in practise. We are consistently the highest billers in the department of surgery. There is a huge shortage across the country. There are ~ 10 open positions per vascular fellowship graduate. There are 2500 board certified vascular surgeons spread over 50 states with only ~ 2 new graduates produced per year per state.

In the real world, vascular surgeons don't worry the complex medical problems that go along with our patient population, a medical or critical care service does. I just need to make sure the patient is not coding from post-op blood loss or a rupture AAA.

I wish surgery was easier, but it is not. I wish I could have stomached radiology or dermatology or radiation oncology, but I could not. Am I a "Napolean complex loser" ? I don't think so. I like going home at a reasonable hour and making lots of money too and I plan on doing plenty of both!

 

[f_w]

Many IR doctors are very good at performing endovascular procedures. Their understanding of the indications for such procedures is often marginal. They are incapable of caring for a patient in the hospital and will admit their patients to a surgical service post-procedure. This is infuriating.

You must have worked in a hospital with a poorly run IR service.

When I did my IR fellowship, we admitted all of the patients that needed admission to our own service (unless they had a primary service that wanted to keep them such as onc or VS).

I don't mind taking care of a complication from an interventionalist or a cardiologist.

I never minded fixing a complication from a surgeon either.

Not every arterial stenosis needs to be ballooned or stented. Just because you can bill for it does not mean it's indicated. When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.........

Greed is universal. Vascular surgeons outside of academic centers are just as guilty of 'proceduralism' as cards or IR. In order to make a mil in VS, your relative has certainly put more than one fem-far bypass into an extremity that was beyond repair or 'up rated' a carotid stenosis or neurologic symptoms to justify a CEA (the same people will operate 20/20 cataracts in ophthalmology because 'you know, it improves his golf game').

Pecking order? Everyone has their role in medicine.

Don't mind the indian. He is just a bit too enthusiastic about his choice of specialty. The thought that other people make other choices and are happy with them is just remote to him.

I'm just a dumb surgeon.

There are no dumb surgeons, the dumb ones go into ortho....

 

[OHMAN0125]

My mistake, you're absolutely right about psych -- much better field than the PC gigs and surgery/surgical specialties.

I find it laughable whenever somebody brings up low income or bad lifestyle or whatever, you'll have someone retort with how they have an uncle/friend's dad/neighbor/whatever who they know makes over a mill and have a great lifestyle and a hot blonde wife and blah blah blah. Sure outliers exist in every field... I'm sure there are surgeons who are indeed leading the life you described, just like I'm sure there are some radiologists making 150K busting their chops. But these are EXCEPTIONS people. These are not the norm or the average. There are too many variables involved to pigeonhole each specialty into one precise lifestyle/income/etc. But if we think like scientists (that's what we are supposed to be right?), we understand numbers... averages, SDs, modes, etc.

Remember when n=1 there is NO statistical significance.

I stand by my statement. Vascular surgery is at the bottom of the barrel. If you insist on going into surg, laproscopy or plastics are your only ways out of hell.

I dont think he was arguing with you that radiologists make more money on average. Everyone knows that. He was just saying that vascular surgery isn't as bad as you made it sound, with a good salary and potential as well.

 

[Docxter]

Apacheindian is too hotheaded now and beyond reasoning, so people should save their breath. My guess is he'll descend back to the level of the rest of us once he's out in practice for couple of years, and the realities of life in real medical practice and working with other doctors kicks in. I was a little over my head when I was finishing my radiology residency too, but not near his levels. Buy hey, good for him for his (?over)enthusiasm for radiology.

 

[vascsurg]

Laparoscopy? Are you joking? That's the same s..t general surgery existence and call you have without doing a fellowship. If you've gone to a good program, you need not do another year of general surgery to make yourself marketable. Yes, Plastics has always been good but most big cities are saturated.

I stand by my numbers. The average graduate from vascular fellowships are all making 300K to start, top fellowships even more and can work anywhere in the country. The 90th percentile is ~ 550K for all vascular surgeons out there. Those are real numbers. This may get worse as medicare and insurance companies wise up to the excellent reimbursement for endovascular procedures.

I'm sorry you feel that surgery is so unpleasant. I guess you got smacked around a bit on that 3rd year rotation but kissed enough ass to honor it to land a radiology spot. Good work!

I have never heard of an interventional radiology service. I guess one year of internship qualifies you to take care of patients.

I am not accusing IR/cardiology of being greedy or unethical. I am accusing them of performing peripheral vascular procedures that are not indicated becuase they do not know any better. CT surgery, starving for work, is often guilty of the same poor clinical judgement when it comes to peripheral vascular work.

 

[nima123]

Apacheindian is too hotheaded now and beyond reasoning, so people should save their breath. My guess is he'll descend back to the level of the rest of us once he's out in practice for couple of years, and the realities of life in real medical practice and working with other doctors kicks in. I was a little over my head when I was finishing my radiology residency too, but not near his levels. Buy hey, good for him for his (?over)enthusiasm for radiology.

Sounds like you dislike rads more than our vac surgeon here. Why is that?
Did radiology turn out to be a mirage for you?

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

ApacheIndian - Dude, I am so glad to hear you confirm what I've suspected all along. Radiology is the wave of the future.

 

[peduncle]

why can't we all just get along... in the spirit of the holidays at least.

Hah, but seriously, this debate is pretty sickening. I hate what medicine has become. Yknow in most other countries, Internal Med or Surgery is still the number one choice amongst grads.. why is that? Has money made us greedy? I agree that everyone who can has the right to a good life and stable income (and riches in some cases), but I feel the medicine has no honor anymore when I read the things that are posted.

Radiologists do have great lifestyles/salaries which arguably make it the most popular career choice. Face it, if Radiologists were making 120 thousand a year, a lot of you wouldn't go into it no matter how hard you convince yourself otherwise. I'm not saying a lot of you are going into it for the wrong reasons however, because Lifestyle and Salary are very very important things.

Though I would never go into surgery, I feel that Surgeons are the most capable doctors out there. They know most of what the IM docs know plus surgical procedures and an impressive scope of imaging. If I had to choose one type of doctor to take care of me, it would be a surgeon.... face it.. they're smart and most clinically capable. This is variable obviously, but every surgeon I've worked with (especially vascular) has impressed me with there clinical command. (and it is definitely possible for them to make a lot of money and lead good lifestyles if they balance their practice correctly).

 

[H_Caulfield]

Is it obvious to anyone else that, deep down, this guy has a reason or two for wishing he'd chosen surgery?...and that he's now shoving his justifications down our throats in order to fight back that feeling? He can relax; his rationalizations are realistic: radiologists, at least at present, have a great income and a nice lifestyle. The lifestyle, though, is much closer to a surgical lifestyle than most people realize; statistics for post-residency rads guys is about 60 hours per week, according to some pretty reliable data, and I've had plenty of radiology buddies b*tch like the world were ending over how often they were called during dinner-time.

Still, radiology has its perks...for people who aren't interested in being doctors. Before getting infuriated, ask yourself whether anyone even thinks radiologists are physicians? When I was considering the field I asked half a dozen people about it: all but one thought it was either a technician, a nurse, an engineer, or some other button-pushing title with which they were unfamiliar. Did anyone, when considering going to medical school, think of NOT TREATING PATIENTS?

My point is that radiology is a good job, JUST LIKE being a patent lawyer, or an investment banker, or the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Does it really have anything to do with being a doctor in the traditional sense? Not really. I went to medical school to be a doctor, and radiology feels about as relevant to that decision as does going off to become an architect.

 

[MrBurns10]

I agree that everyone who can has the right to a good life and stable income (and riches in some cases), but I feel the medicine has no honor anymore when I read the things that are posted.

Why is your impression that the current state of honor in medicine is so poor? I mean, if you equate honor with working 100 hours a week while saving lives then I guess I could see how you could say that. But I just don't understand this belief that medicine is the one profession out there where you have to sacrifice everything to do it, that you have to be totally selfless to be able to do it with honor. It's a job. It's a really important job, and doctors have tremendous responsibilities and privileges that no other professionals have...but it's still a job.

For me personally, it's not about the money so much as it is the hours. I realized on my surgery rotation that I want to raise my family, spend time with my husband (if/when I get married), and be able to explore my interests outside medicine. Some people are really gung ho about medicine and living in the hospital and that's great...but it's not for everyone, and I don't think anyone is less of a doctor for seeing medicine as their job rather than as their life.

 

[MrBurns10]

Did anyone, when considering going to medical school, think of NOT TREATING PATIENTS?

I take it you don't think too highly of pathologists either, huh?

One of the things I like about rads is that you do get patient contact, but not to the point where it makes you want to shake the next hypertensive, diabetic, obese patient that walks in the door with an HgbA1c of 12 or the kid who just got shot for the 3rd time by a rival gang. I don't even know if I'm going into rads...for all I know I could hate my elective. But I don't see radiologists as being inferior doctors or helping people any less just because they get less patient contact, if that's what you're getting at.

 

[f_w]

ask yourself whether anyone even thinks radiologists are physicians? When I was considering the field I asked half a dozen people about it: all but one thought it was either a technician, a nurse, an engineer, or some other button-pushing title with which they were unfamiliar.

Who did you ask that you got those answers ? Your barber ?

If you made a decision NOT to go into rads based on extraneous factors such as popular opinion, you potentially made a mistake. (The public also thinks that pathologists only deal with dead people and go out to hunt criminals).

My point is that radiology is a good job, JUST LIKE being a patent lawyer, or an investment banker, or the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Does it really have anything to do with being a doctor in the traditional sense?

Is a pathologist a 'real doctor' ? Or an anesthesiologist ?

I play my role in patient care, and each of the other professionals involved plays theirs. Petty competitions about who is the 'real doctor' in the house don't get us anywhere. Funny enough, these kind of discussions only happen on the planet 'academic medicine' or on SDN. In the community, those pi##ing matches are unknown. And yes, in our small town even the locals know who I am and what I do: 'oh, so you are the one reading the mammograms' is what I tend to get as my job description if conversation ever covers work.

 

[kamehame]

Apacheindian is too hotheaded now and beyond reasoning, so people should save their breath. My guess is he'll descend back to the level of the rest of us once he's out in practice for couple of years, and the realities of life in real medical practice and working with other doctors kicks in. I was a little over my head when I was finishing my radiology residency too, but not near his levels. Buy hey, good for him for his (?over)enthusiasm for radiology.

Why not be enthusiastic? Radiologists are the men among boys in the hospital. We make as much and work fewer hours than Anesthesia. We can do procedures like Surgery. We can correlate disease processes with physical manifestations like Pathology. We deal with most diseases like IM. And we can do it all from anywhere we want, thanks to technology!

 

[peduncle]

I love Radiology... but of all the things to describe radiologists as, "Men among boys" isn't one of them. Stop kidding yourself.