Med to dent

[KOM]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I went and chatted with an air force recruiter today and he said that he's been swarmed with people that had an orginal interest in medicine, but have decided to pursue dentistry because of the high costs of insurance. He said another big factor for the switch was not having to do residency.

It seems like whereas before dental students were competing with some of the pre-medical school students who switched over simply because they didn't have competitive stats, now we're competing with many more higher qualified pre-medical students who have started to see the greater benefits in a dental career.

This seems like a pretty good explanation of why we've seen such dramatic increases in DAT scores and GPA's over the past 5 years.

 

[Taurus]

I believe it. Average dentist income also exceeds average primary care physician's too. In hindsight, I would have given dentistry more consideration.

 

[fightingspirit]

I went and chatted with an air force recruiter today and he said that he's been swarmed with people that had an orginal interest in medicine, but have decided to pursue dentistry because of the high costs of insurance. He said another big factor for the switch was not having to do residency.

It seems like whereas before dental students were competing with some of the pre-medical school students who switched over simply because they didn't have competitive stats, now we're competing with many more higher qualified pre-medical students who have started to see the greater benefits in a dental career.

This seems like a pretty good explanation of why we've seen such dramatic increases in DAT scores and GPA's over the past 5 years.

maybe it's a minor factor. ....med-schools are certainly not dying for qualified applicants.

what is more likely happening is that more people in general are interested in healthcare (more people apply), as it offers relative financial security. i dont think that the rise in dental applicant pool is coinciding with a drop in med-school applicant pool.

 

[Taurus]

I believe it. Average dentist income also exceeds average primary care physician's too. In hindsight, I would have given dentistry more consideration.

 

[pudge123]

maybe it's a minor factor. ....med-schools are certainly not dying for qualified applicants.

what is more likely happening is that more people in general are interested in healthcare (more people apply), as it offers relative financial security. i dont think that the rise in dental applicant pool is coinciding with a drop in med-school applicant pool.

Agreed. I think the rise in dental applicants has more has to do with a boom of interest in healthcare then premed students realizing that they rather be dentists. Even off-shore medical schools are seeing a rise in applicants (from what a friend told me) because there is so many applicants to the US medschools. More applicants= more competition.

 

[blue_moon01]

I don't think the rise in applicants to Dental Schools is a direct result of the disillusionment of Medicine that lots of potential applicants harbors. While it is true that there are a percentage of pre-meds switching to pre-dents, that number is relatively small. Obviously, Medicine and Dentistry shares many similarities but they are still two very different fields of healthcare; each with its own pros and cons. There are some of us who are able to do either with the same zeal and love but most of us have the personalities for either one of those profession not both. IF there are serious pre-meds out there who have done serious exploration of medicine and loves it for what it is and decided to go with dentistry just because it doesn't require residency or because there's less interference with insurance, they are in for a rude awakening. THey will get their licence and then hate their job. they will realize that above it all they should have just gone with their dreams and their heart and go for medicine because while they might get paid a little less, they will at least truly enjoy what they do every day and that in itself is priceless.

Same goes for Dentistry, if I can't make it in this year, I will try and try again. I won't go for pharmacy because while it's also healthcare, it's completely different from what I want to do.

I resent the stigma that was imposed on Dentistry as the back-up for medicine. Why is it to hard to believe that there are brilliantly intelligent minds out there who has always wanted to go into dentistry and not just choosing it as "plan B" when they find Medicine too time-costing to pursue? Yes, we all know that doctors are smart, very smart people, but dentisty aint a walk in the park either.

Wait, what was I saying? oh yes, basically, I think the general stability ( financial) that healthcare professions offers is the thing that is piqueing ( is that a word?) public's interest thus increasing numbers of applications to dental schools.

DENTAL PRIDE!!
say AY!😎

sorry if I sounded bitter, its cause I'm bitter.

 

[L8DYV]

I resent the stigma that was imposed on Dentistry as the back-up for medicine. Why is it to hard to believe that there are brilliantly intelligent minds out there who has always wanted to go into dentistry and not just choosing it as "plan B" when they find Medicine too time-costing to pursue? ....

Amen to that! 😉

 

[54807]

Amen to that! 😉

Dentists are doctors also. Dentists aren't physicians. I hate when people say I wont be a real doctor. I will be a real doctor, I won't be a physician. I want to be a dentist. Doctor does not equal physician.

Vets are doctors and they do a much better job of diagnosis than the average physician. I go in with a belly ache and the hospital physician can't even figure it out. It takes a lab technician to run cultures or something. You take your dog in because he's acting funny and the vet comes back and says "Well, I think your dog has a stuck piece of poo in the large intestine. Most likely caused by a plant, do you have yellow leafy plants in your house?". They have NOTHING to start from, at least a physician gets some complaints.

I call my professors Dr. XXXXXXXX. Are they not REAL doctors?? They slave away for 7+ years in a subject and they're being belittled by pre-med kids who think they're not REAL doctors.

Does this make anyone else mad? When these people need a root canal they'll sure be valueing the skills of an endodontist...o well, I guess I should get used to the 2nd class treatment.

 

[54807]

........the thing that is piqueing ( is that a word?)

lol, not sure.. "..peaking the public's interest..." maybe

 

[dentstd]

please, please fellow dental applicants!!!.... please don't say things like... "vets are doctors", "peaking the public's interest"

or... to make an assertion like "While it is true that there are a percentage of pre-meds switching to pre-dents, that number is relatively small" and supporting that with the pro's and con's the two fields. How do the pro's and con's relate to the percentage of people switching?!??!? or supporting that statement with the claim that you should do what your heart says.

or make arguments about why we call certain people "doctors", confusing ideas of people with doctorates, with people who are physicians.

If you're going to criticize other professions or other groups of people in an intellectual sense, please double check your arguments to make sure you're not making academic mistakes.

 

[pine88]

please, please fellow dental applicants!!!.... please don't say things like... "vets are doctors", "peaking the public's interest"

or... to make an assertion like "While it is true that there are a percentage of pre-meds switching to pre-dents, that number is relatively small" and supporting that with the pro's and con's the two fields. How do the pro's and con's relate to the percentage of people switching?!??!? or supporting that statement with the claim that you should do what your heart says.

or make arguments about why we call certain people "doctors", confusing ideas of people with doctorates, with people who are physicians.

If you're going to criticize other professions or other groups of people in an intellectual sense, please double check your arguments to make sure you're not making academic mistakes.

Huh? I don't understand what you are saying. What academic mistakes? People with doctorates are doctors of whatever they got that doctorate in (Thus the title, Dr._____). The problem is, as Saxy was saying, that people equate doctor with physician, when a physician is only one kind of doctor.

(A vet's title is "Doctor of Veterinarian Medicine." Are you saying they aren't doctors, or am I misunderstanding you?)

 

[dentstd]

Huh? I don't understand what you are saying. What academic mistakes? People with doctorates are doctors of whatever they got that doctorate in (Thus the title, Dr._____). The problem is, as Saxy was saying, that people equate doctor with physician, when a physician is only one kind of doctor.

(A vet's title is "Doctor of Veterinarian Medicine." Are you saying they aren't doctors, or am I misunderstanding you?)

you are misunderstanding me.

the feller said, "I call my professors Dr. XXXXXXXX. Are they not REAL doctors?? They slave away for 7+ years in a subject and they're being belittled by pre-med kids who think they're not REAL doctors."

...he's interconverting between the two senses of the word "doctor". One sense being doctorate, and the other being physician.

 

[RaaMD]

Vets are doctors and they do a much better job of diagnosis than the average physician.

What are you basing this on? Is this based on your own personal experience, here-say, or do you have facts to back up this sentiment? If there's numbers out there to back up what you're saying, then I'd be interested in reading it. Please copy the link.

 

[medlife]

What are you basing this on? Is this based on your own personal experience, here-say, or do you have facts to back up this sentiment? If there's numbers out there to back up what you're saying, then I'd be interested in reading it. Please copy the link.

I wouldn't worry about it. He was emotional and resentful of something. he ended up making a stupid claim.

 

[KOM]

I agree that the boom in the healthcare field in general is probably more of a contributing factor.

After reading through some of the threads I noticed a bit of an argument going on with the title "Dr."

To stir up this controversy some more what do you think about pharmacists lobbying for the right to prescribe medication. I've also read about how many pharmacists want to be granted the title of Doctor.

Also, another thing I was reading about is how some pharmacists across the country were refusing to prescribe morning after pills or birth control pills because it violates their moral or personal beliefs. I don't want to bring up a debate necessarily about pro-life/pro-choice that will turn ugly, but I'd love to hear about whether or not you think it is pharmacists responsibility to make those products available regardless of their beliefs.

 

[blue_moon01]

I agree that the boom in the healthcare field in general is probably more of a contributing factor.
Also, another thing I was reading about is how some pharmacists across the country were refusing to prescribe morning after pills or birth control pills because it violates their moral or personal beliefs. I don't want to bring up a debate necessarily about pro-life/pro-choice that will turn ugly, but I'd love to hear about whether or not you think it is pharmacists responsibility to make those products available regardless of their beliefs.

THis is a hot topic.
I think it's fine and dandy to have beliefs and stand up for them but anytime you infringes on another's right, you're in the wrong. So pharmacists would be wrong to not dispense the afterpill drugs due to their beliefs. If you don't think it's wrong, don't do it. But here in the good ol US, we have laws and those laws should protect everyone. And sorry to say, as long as a zygote is still considered a zygote and not a human being, the law does not protect it.

So I think this whole "let the pharmacists do as his beliefs dictate is bull**** and gives alot of room for ill-behavior later on." It'll set a precedent for other ridiculous law. Pretty soon everyone can refuse to do their jobs because it's "against their beliefs". It's a stretch, but humans are limitless in imagination, they will think of many ways to twist the laws to fit their needs

 

[Lemming]

THis is a hot topic.
I think it's fine and dandy to have beliefs and stand up for them but anytime you infringes on another's right, you're in the wrong. So pharmacists would be wrong to not dispense the afterpill drugs due to their beliefs. If you don't think it's wrong, don't do it. But here in the good ol US, we have laws and those laws should protect everyone. And sorry to say, as long as a zygote is still considered a zygote and not a human being, the law does not protect it.

So I think this whole "let the pharmacists do as his beliefs dictate is bull**** and gives alot of room for ill-behavior later on." It'll set a precedent for other ridiculous law. Pretty soon everyone can refuse to do their jobs because it's "against their beliefs". It's a stretch, but humans are limitless in imagination, they will think of many ways to twist the laws to fit their needs

Regardless of what I believe...If you own your pharmacy, then sure, dispense what you want. If you work at a pharmacy owned by someone else, as crappy as it might seem, I'm sorry, but you have to go by the policy of your employer as long as it is legal. As much as it sucks, Walmart or Longs could easily fire you for not dispensing what they say they do. If you want to offer certain services only...start your own business.

 

[DHG]

Howdy, dents. Pharm here.

The "doctor" title = Doctorate debate is alive and well in the Pharmacy forums too.


I just wanted to add my opinion about the pharmacists refusing plan B.

I think a woman should absolutely have access to this if she has a valid prescription, and should not have to be harrassed by a pharmacist.

Most of the ones that have been high profile about it just turn my stomach. I really, really resent what they are doing. It's especially a problem in rural areas where there may be only one pharmacy in town.

HOWEVER, with that said, I can't argue with someone who really honestly feels that they would be taking part in something offensive to them. They really feel like they would be harming a baby. *I* personally think this is a silly way to think, but nonetheless... We don't force all doctors to preform abortions, nor to prescribe birth control, or plan B. There are many doctors who are opposed to abortion, and many would never write a script for plan B. Yet no one forces them to do so against their beleifs.

So I don't really have a solution. While I think that refusing to fill is offensive (pushing their belief on another), I would also question forcing someone to be a participant in something they find morally reprehinsible. I don't know why in this case doctors couldn't stock the drug in office,... I do think at least the chain/corporate pharmacies have a responsiblity to ensure that there is always an RpH on duty that will fill. Inerestingly, in some states (CA), pharmacists are authorized to prescribe and dispense Plan B. I belive in the state of NC, CPC's (certified Pharmacist Practitioners) can do this as well (not sure about that but I think they have the same prescribing rights as NPs)

Just my opinion.

 

[2quik]

how did "from med to dent" become about plan B-birthcontrol? lol. what the...

 

[aphistis]

While I think that refusing to fill is offensive (pushing their belief on another), I would also question forcing someone to be a participant in something they find morally reprehinsible.

That's exactly what makes this issue so ironic. Simply saying "no" to facilitating something you believe, in good faith, to be an act of murder doesn't push anything on anybody. The only people forcing their beliefs on others are legislators who want to force all pharmacists to dispense Plan B.

 

[aphistis]

Pretty soon everyone can refuse to do their jobs because it's "against their beliefs".

The military, of all organizations, has long recognized conscientious objection--a fancier term for "it's against my beliefs"--as a legitimate circumstance. If it's good enough to get you out of killing other human beings on a battlefield, I'd say that sets a pretty solid precedent.

 

[Lemming]

Howdy, dents. Pharm here.

The "doctor" title = Doctorate debate is alive and well in the Pharmacy forums too.


I just wanted to add my opinion about the pharmacists refusing plan B.

I think a woman should absolutely have access to this if she has a valid prescription, and should not have to be harrassed by a pharmacist.

Most of the ones that have been high profile about it just turn my stomach. I really, really resent what they are doing. It's especially a problem in rural areas where there may be only one pharmacy in town.

HOWEVER, with that said, I can't argue with someone who really honestly feels that they would be taking part in something offensive to them. They really feel like they would be harming a baby. *I* personally think this is a silly way to think, but nonetheless... We don't force all doctors to preform abortions, nor to prescribe birth control, or plan B. There are many doctors who are opposed to abortion, and many would never write a script for plan B. Yet no one forces them to do so against their beleifs.

So I don't really have a solution. While I think that refusing to fill is offensive (pushing their belief on another), I would also question forcing someone to be a participant in something they find morally reprehinsible. I don't know why in this case doctors couldn't stock the drug in office,... I do think at least the chain/corporate pharmacies have a responsiblity to ensure that there is always an RpH on duty that will fill. Inerestingly, in some states (CA), pharmacists are authorized to prescribe and dispense Plan B. I belive in the state of NC, CPC's (certified Pharmacist Practitioners) can do this as well (not sure about that but I think they have the same prescribing rights as NPs)

Just my opinion.

Hey DHG, Thanks for the input. It is really funny we go from "med to dent" and end up with this discussion. Even funnier that you are perusing the pre-dent forums🙂 Not so I guess...my boredom often leads to reading all sorts of posts that don't apply to me. And you actually found one that did! Anyway, just wanted to express gratitude for the postive response🙂

 

[blue_moon01]

The military, of all organizations, has long recognized conscientious objection--a fancier term for "it's against my beliefs"--as a legitimate circumstance. If it's good enough to get you out of killing other human beings on a battlefield, I'd say that sets a pretty solid precedent.

I was under the impression that the military don't care what your beliefs are when they need you. During the Vietnam war or any other wars for that matter, when the army was recruiting soldiers, people have to leave the country to avoid going to war and killing people on the battlefield. Why did they do that when they could just say " I don't believe in killing"? I got this information from 3rd source cause I'm too young to live through the Vietnam war so if I was wrong, I'm sorry and please just ignore this post.

Also why would you join the army which require you to kill others if you have to in order to protect the country when you are against killing ?

 

[blue_moon01]

how did "from med to dent" become about plan B-birthcontrol? lol. what the...

because we pre-dents are open-minded individuals who cares about a broad-range of issues, not just those that pertain to our chances of getting into a dental school. 🙂 😀

Also because I have ADD and have difficulty focusing on one subject. 😀

 

[fightingspirit]

That's exactly what makes this issue so ironic. Simply saying "no" to facilitating something you believe, in good faith, to be an act of murder doesn't push anything on anybody. The only people forcing their beliefs on others are legislators who want to force all pharmacists to dispense Plan B.

yeah...they dont push anything on anybody; they just push an unplanned pregnancy and an unwanted child on a free woman.

the only people forcing their beliefs on others are crazy religious pharmacists who want to force all plan-B-needing women to get pregnant and deliver unplanned babies.

 

[medlife]

Simple solution. The employer can put into the employment contract that the employee is to waive his Constitutional right to...such and such, and will comply with all dispensing requirements of that job description.

 

[blue_moon01]

Simple solution. The employer can put into the employment contract that the employee is to waive his Constitutional right to...such and such, and will comply with all dispensing requirements of that job description.

edited:
sorry Medlife, I misunderstood your post.

 

[sejin8642]

I went and chatted with an air force recruiter today and he said that he's been swarmed with people that had an orginal interest in medicine, but have decided to pursue dentistry because of the high costs of insurance. He said another big factor for the switch was not having to do residency.

It seems like whereas before dental students were competing with some of the pre-medical school students who switched over simply because they didn't have competitive stats, now we're competing with many more higher qualified pre-medical students who have started to see the greater benefits in a dental career.

This seems like a pretty good explanation of why we've seen such dramatic increases in DAT scores and GPA's over the past 5 years.

Not even DAT scores, but also other tests like SAT, GRE, and etc. I think the reason is that increases of people's interests in Education.

 

[toothfairy85]

Plan B no longer requries a presecription unless the woman is under the age of 18.

On another note, I don't think individuals can be denied medicine in my opinion, even if it infringes on your beliefs or morals. If a pharmacist opts not to fill a prescription for Plan B or birth control, shouldn't someone else on staff have to be willing to fill the prescription?

 

[Mackchops]

The military, of all organizations, has long recognized conscientious objection--a fancier term for "it's against my beliefs"--as a legitimate circumstance. If it's good enough to get you out of killing other human beings on a battlefield, I'd say that sets a pretty solid precedent.

The only problem with this comparison, aphistis, is that in order to be legally recognized as a "conscientious objector" an individual must claim a moral objection to war in general -- not to one particular fight or battle. A pharmacist choosing not to dispense a single medication would be more in line with desertion.

As for the original topic of this thread, the Kaplan rep I was talking to said there has been a very large increase in the numbers of DAT and PCAT (pharm test ???) students while, at the same time, MCAT student numbers have dropped slightly. This suggests to me that more students are choosing dentistry on its own merits instead of merely as a backup plan. Expect stats and applicant numbers to continue to rise for awhile!

 

[jaypea65]

I think that 90% of diagnosis comes from the physical exam then ordering the tests to prove that you were correct... or ordering them to CYA against law suits.

 

[JKH]

Why don't we just ask all women to sign a contract that states that they hereby gave up their constitutional right to ... such and such and just have unplanned babies no matter what the circumstances are as soon as they start having sex?

This response is ******ed. This person threw a fit and cried wah.

And let's leave the Constitutionality of the law up for the courts to decide, as they are the only ones who can do it. If the law was as "clearly unconstitutional" as you suggest, the courts with higher authority would interject. Unless a higher court declares it unconstitutional, it is officially Constitutional until then.

 

[blue_moon01]

This response is ******ed. This person threw a fit and cried wah.

And let's leave the Constitutionality of the law up for the courts to decide, as they are the only ones who can do it. If the law was as "clearly unconstitutional" as you suggest, the courts with higher authority would interject. Unless a higher court declares it unconstitutional, it is officially Constitutional until then.

No need for you to make it personal and attack me. This is a free forum, I'm merely expressing my opinion and you are free to express yours. if you have valid points against why my argument that the law was unconstitutional please present it.

I do know how the "constitutionality" of a law is decided, so no need for your little lesson. Unlike you, I don't sit by and let every law be executed without questioning the validity of it. The "Courts" are not infalible, they are made up of people, people who once declared it was constitutional to have slavery. If everyone just sit and let the "courts" decide the constitutionality of the laws, where would America be right now?

 

[JKH]

Why don't we just ask all women to sign a contract that states that they hereby gave up their constitutional right to ... such and such and just have unplanned babies no matter what the circumstances are as soon as they start having sex?

Then to answer your question.... because we're not asking women to give up their Constitutional right to...have unplanned babies no matter what the circumstances are as soon as they start having sex.

To go with another's suggestion, if a legitimate job description asks a person to dispense medication, then that job maybe should be allowed to further its directive. A contract that asks the pharmacist to waive his/her Constutional right (all appropriate Amendment rights) would, in effect, ask the pharmacist to relinquish those rights for the purpose of furthering the patients' rights. Since the original issue is whether the pharmacists' or the patients should dominate, an employment contract could end that dispute by adding a waiver clause.

From a purely legal standpoint, this contract idea is hard to attack in court. The issues of constitutionality would largely be removed, leaving the lawyers to only consider contractual defenses and arguments. Even if they come up with great arguments, there's still the issue of damages, because there aren't much, from a contracts law perspective. I don't know why more pharmacies havn't put this clause into their employment contract before.

 

[blue_moon01]

Then to answer your question.... because we're not asking women to give up their Constitutional right to...have unplanned babies no matter what the circumstances are as soon as they start having sex.

To go with another's suggestion, if a legitimate job description asks a person to dispense medication, then that job maybe should be allowed to further its directive. A contract that asks the pharmacist to waive his/her Constutional right (all appropriate Amendment rights) would, in effect, ask the pharmacist to relinquish those rights for the purpose of furthering the patients' rights. Since the original issue is whether the pharmacists' or the patients should dominate, an employment contract could end that dispute by adding a waiver clause.

From a purely legal standpoint, this contract idea is hard to attack in court. The issues of constitutionality would largely be removed, leaving the lawyers to only consider contractual defenses and arguments. Even if they come up with great arguments, there's still the issue of damages, because there aren't much, from a contracts law perspective. I don't know why more pharmacies havn't put this clause into their employment contract before.

I knew SDN members are capable of giving good arguments without offending people. Actually I misunderstood Medlife's post so I was arguing on the same side as Medlife.

Sorry Medlife!

 

[blue_moon01]

🙂