More on OD oversupply

[Tippytoe]

Copied from ODwire from 8-23-11

"The Future Surplus of ODs Will Be Immense

In prior posts I pointed out that both the RAND study (1995) sponsored by opthalmology and the Abt. study (2000) sponsored by AOA predicted surplus numbers of ODs. The Abt study even underestimated by assuming that in 1999 there was no OD surplus and future numbers of graduates would remain at 1,100 (vs today's rate of 1,665).

There is no question a surplus exists that will only increase more rapidly when the new schools at Worchester, MA and Grundy, VA are in place.

How large will the future surplus be?

The average OD receives their degree at age 26 and retires at age 66 which is a 40 year career.

The future total number of practicing ODs (T) will peak and then stabilize once the number graduating per year equals the number retiring each year. An average career length of 40 years means that 2% (0.02) retire each year.

Thus the future peak and then stable number of ODs (T) will exist when, each year:

Annual Losses due to retirmeent = new graduates or,

(0.02)T = 1,665

Solving for T gives T= 83,250 ODs (not including graduates of Worchester and Grundy)

Our profession has no hard facts on the current number of licensed ODs but the Abt. report estimated 26,000 in 1999 (based upon licenses) and a good guess for today is about 32,000.

This means that while the US population will only creep higher, the number of US ODs will more than double.

There is no escaping the conclusion our profession is heading towards an even greater surplus since the earlier studys assumed a graduate rate of "only" 1,100 vs today's 1,665.

The OD degree may become yet another college credential that qualifies one to earn a low paying service position.

Why? Because academics can not resist reproducing and creating career opportunities. But some of our schools are now hedging their bets by adding lesser degrees to their revenue streams as optometry education is a venture capital business with only 1.4 applicants per seat when once there were 7-9 per seat.

Medical Schools do not wag the "medical dog" the way ours do since the independent residency training programs and Federal Government (Medicare) operate and control the training of medical specialists and their numbers have been the same for years. Medicine, dentistry and podiatry have planned parenthood and we do not.

By the way, medical schools are essentially two years of didactics taught by Ph.D.s and two years of clinical rotations operated by practicing MDs based at teaching hospitals. It is the latter than control the medical profession rather than the medical schools.

If things are worrisome now with 32,000, what about 83,000?

"​

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Jason K]

Copied from ODwire from 8-23-11

"The Future Surplus of ODs Will Be Immense

In prior posts I pointed out that both the RAND study (1995) sponsored by opthalmology and the Abt. study (2000) sponsored by AOA predicted surplus numbers of ODs. The Abt study even underestimated by assuming that in 1999 there was no OD surplus and future numbers of graduates would remain at 1,100 (vs today's rate of 1,665).

There is no question a surplus exists that will only increase more rapidly when the new schools at Worchester, MA and Grundy, VA are in place.

How large will the future surplus be?

The average OD receives their degree at age 26 and retires at age 66 which is a 40 year career.

The future total number of practicing ODs (T) will peak and then stabilize once the number graduating per year equals the number retiring each year. An average career length of 40 years means that 2% (0.02) retire each year.

Thus the future peak and then stable number of ODs (T) will exist when, each year:

Annual Losses due to retirmeent = new graduates or,

(0.02)T = 1,665

Solving for T gives T= 83,250 ODs (not including graduates of Worchester and Grundy)

Our profession has no hard facts on the current number of licensed ODs but the Abt. report estimated 26,000 in 1999 (based upon licenses) and a good guess for today is about 32,000.

This means that while the US population will only creep higher, the number of US ODs will more than double.

There is no escaping the conclusion our profession is heading towards an even greater surplus since the earlier studys assumed a graduate rate of "only" 1,100 vs today's 1,665.

The OD degree may become yet another college credential that qualifies one to earn a low paying service position.

Why? Because academics can not resist reproducing and creating career opportunities. But some of our schools are now hedging their bets by adding lesser degrees to their revenue streams as optometry education is a venture capital business with only 1.4 applicants per seat when once there were 7-9 per seat.

Medical Schools do not wag the "medical dog" the way ours do since the independent residency training programs and Federal Government (Medicare) operate and control the training of medical specialists and their numbers have been the same for years. Medicine, dentistry and podiatry have planned parenthood and we do not.

By the way, medical schools are essentially two years of didactics taught by Ph.D.s and two years of clinical rotations operated by practicing MDs based at teaching hospitals. It is the latter than control the medical profession rather than the medical schools.

If things are worrisome now with 32,000, what about 83,000?

Kenneth Myers, Ph.D., O.D. "​

I think the profession will have imploded into a black hole of optometric gravitational self-destruction long before we ever get to 83,000 ODs. At some point, people will realize that what they are buying is a degree that can't easily pay for itself, at least not comfortably. I believe that what's keeping the profession going, as far as new "bright-eyed" applicants, is primarily the appearance of potential success that is seen in today's thriving OD practices. People see what their OD has and think "I can totally make that happen, no problem!" They're completely unaware of the enormous obstacles that will be waiting for them after graduation, pushing them in a direction that is opposite what many/most are hoping for. (Incidentally, I posted a thread about this very question, basically asking, "What are you hoping for from your OD degree?"......but, apparently, people aren't hoping for anything because no one has yet answered the question! ) The nail in the coffin is the "hot air" blown out the ass of the AOA along with other meaningless overly-optimistic numbers put out by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (in that they don't really apply well to new entries into the profession) and biased magazine surveys. People see the successful OD in practice today, they read that AOA garbage, they read the BLS, and that's it, they're convinced. I've read postings by too many completely naive, clueless pre-optometry students to believe otherwise. The point is, when thriving private offices become so diluted by commercial optometry that they are no longer a real "presence" in the profession, people will wake up and stop pursuing the degree.

 

[Judgment Dragon]

Copied from ODwire from 8-23-11

"The Future Surplus of ODs Will Be Immense

In prior posts I pointed out that both the RAND study (1995) sponsored by opthalmology and the Abt. study (2000) sponsored by AOA predicted surplus numbers of ODs. The Abt study even underestimated by assuming that in 1999 there was no OD surplus and future numbers of graduates would remain at 1,100 (vs today's rate of 1,665).

There is no question a surplus exists that will only increase more rapidly when the new schools at Worchester, MA and Grundy, VA are in place.

How large will the future surplus be?

The average OD receives their degree at age 26 and retires at age 66 which is a 40 year career.

The future total number of practicing ODs (T) will peak and then stabilize once the number graduating per year equals the number retiring each year. An average career length of 40 years means that 2% (0.02) retire each year.

Thus the future peak and then stable number of ODs (T) will exist when, each year:

Annual Losses due to retirmeent = new graduates or,

(0.02)T = 1,665

Solving for T gives T= 83,250 ODs (not including graduates of Worchester and Grundy)

Our profession has no hard facts on the current number of licensed ODs but the Abt. report estimated 26,000 in 1999 (based upon licenses) and a good guess for today is about 32,000.

This means that while the US population will only creep higher, the number of US ODs will more than double.

There is no escaping the conclusion our profession is heading towards an even greater surplus since the earlier studys assumed a graduate rate of "only" 1,100 vs today's 1,665.

The OD degree may become yet another college credential that qualifies one to earn a low paying service position.

Why? Because academics can not resist reproducing and creating career opportunities. But some of our schools are now hedging their bets by adding lesser degrees to their revenue streams as optometry education is a venture capital business with only 1.4 applicants per seat when once there were 7-9 per seat.

Medical Schools do not wag the "medical dog" the way ours do since the independent residency training programs and Federal Government (Medicare) operate and control the training of medical specialists and their numbers have been the same for years. Medicine, dentistry and podiatry have planned parenthood and we do not.

By the way, medical schools are essentially two years of didactics taught by Ph.D.s and two years of clinical rotations operated by practicing MDs based at teaching hospitals. It is the latter than control the medical profession rather than the medical schools.

If things are worrisome now with 32,000, what about 83,000?

Kenneth Myers, Ph.D., O.D. "​

Is there a link to this?

 

[Tippytoe]

Is there a link to this?

ODwire.org

You have to be an OD or OD student to join this site.

 

[Jason K]

ODwire.org

You have to be an OD or OD student to join this site.

It's interesting that the opinions on ODwire, being those of practicing ODs, are VAAAAAASTLY different from the general consensus on this forum.

 

[Tippytoe]

The point is, when thriving private offices become so diluted by commercial optometry that they are no longer a real "presence" in the profession, people will wake up and stop pursuing the degree.

I mostly agree with you. But I don't know if the vast oversupply will ever discourage people from pursuing an OD degree. Even when the average income is down to $40,000, many numbnuts will still say, "hey, 40 grand for flipping some dials in the air condititioning is better than 40 grand teaching snotty-nosed 8 year olds at an elementary school".

Look at all the crazies that go to a private college and spend $50,000 to get a bachelors degree in sociology or psychology or English Literature.........KNOWING they will only be able to land a $22,000 if they are lucky.

Probably the only thing that will hold the semi-intelligent people back is the ablity to do basic math to see the $200,000, which can turn into a $400,000 loan after interest will never be able to be paid back at a $40,000 refracting job at the store.

But never underestimate what people will do for a little white coat and to be able to be called 'doctor'.

 

[Tippytoe]

It's interesting that the opinions on ODwire, being those of practicing ODs, are VAAAAAASTLY different from the general consensus on this forum.

Yes. Imagine that. Silly people with optometric degrees and optometry practices actually think they know what they are talking about. Idiots!

 

[Jason K]

Yes. Imagine that. Silly people with optometric degrees and optometry practices actually think they know what they are talking about. Idiots!

I know, I can't imagine the shade of pure white that many on this forum would turn if they were to read some of the threads on ODwire. Alas, it will never happen! (Actually, it will, it just won't happen until their first 1500K loan bill comes in the mail and they're only working 3 days per week.)

 

[imemily]

You guys really need to quit trolling.

 

[Tippytoe]

You guys really need to quit trolling.

It's more "PROOF" you've been asking for.

 

[Jason K]

You guys really need to quit trolling.

You need to research what a troll is. You also need to stop reading my posts. I fear that at some point, I might get through to you and you'll decide against an OD. Actually, I think you already know I'm right, you just seem like the kind of person who loves to disagree with people just for the sake of disagreement. It shows in your posts.

I really want you to join me in this profession. I'm on here to try to save some souls from an over-priced degree that is quickly losing its value, but for you, I'd love to see you pay even more than I did for mine, and get even less in return. Come on in, the water's great!!

At the end of the day, imemily, you're a pre-optometry student who admits she knows little of the profession (do you want me to quote you again on that?) You guys rely on each other's naive optimism to create warm-fuzzies from each other. The real world will be a cold shock for you. Some day, your naivety will bite you in the ass.

......and you're kind of annoying. Guys really don't dig girls who like to bicker. Just some advice from an old married dude.

 

[imemily]

It isn't proof, it's however an opinion that I would consider. Just because its posted on ODWire it doesn't mean its fact.

I doubt you two could influence the actions of pre-optometry students, so please stop trolling. You guys are giving ODs a bad rep with the constant whining and crying. I admit, it was funny at first, but its getting pretty pathetic now.

I also don't understand why you choose to demote Optometry, as an Optometrist, when it's clear that Optometry is in fact growing for the better. This makes me question if you are infact an OD because you definitely do not sound like one.

 

[KHE]

I also don't understand why you choose to demote Optometry, as an Optometrist, when it's clear that Optometry is in fact growing for the better. This makes me question if you are infact an OD because you definitely do not sound like one.

What in God's name could you POSSIBLY be basing THAT on?

 

[Ryan_eyeball]

What in God's name could you POSSIBLY be basing THAT on?

I was scratching my head on that one too when I read it.

 

[Jason K]

I also don't understand why you choose to demote Optometry, as an Optometrist......

I have never once demoted optometry or what we are trained to do. I've said over and over that I have tremendous respect for my profession. That's precisely the reason I'm so disgusted by what's happening to it.

.....when it's clear that Optometry is in fact growing for the better.

Ok, I'll bite on this. What could you possibly be referring to? The fact that a few ODs are now zapping the trabecular meshworks of some old ladies in KY and OK? I hope that's not it. Oh ,maybe it's the aginng babyboomer population. Better yet, maybe it's Obamacare!! Yes, that's it, Obamacare will be great for all docs, including ODs, right? We'll get millions of more patients to see while getting paid less to see them, sounds like we're definitely moving in the right direction.

This makes me question if you are infact an OD because you definitely do not sound like one.

I'm not even going to respond to this. Oh wait, i just did.

 

[netmag]

The math being used to predict the demise of optometry can be applied to many fields. Most people work 40+ years. They have to. The main thing that differentiates things is the amount of demand for the skills in question. That’s why it’s difficult to compare optometry to other fields unless you know what the relative demand is.

For example, the number of schools and graduates for optometry is actually laughable compared to pharmacy. There are 123+ pharmacy schools in the United States and it is growing. However, pharmacy services has a large demand so pharmacist salaries are still maintaining a high base pay (100k+). The downside is that there is not much room for growth in salary, there is little to no opportunity for private practice, and the majority of the work environments are retail. Also, even with the higher demand, the sheer number of schools and graduates are now causing a truly serious oversupply issue.

As another example, most people want to look to dentistry as a model of a near bullet proof health care career. They do have more of a private practice focus and command high rates for their services. Still there are some challenges there as well. For example, even though they can generate a million dollar revenue practice, the overhead is extremely high. Also, if you read their forums you’ll see mentions that Walmart is launching dentist facilities. So they’re not completely immune to these things either.

I think the main thing is for people to do their own research. Asking an OD for their thoughts on optometry vs. anything means that you really haven’t done enough personal research yet. For pre-optometry people that want to compare optometry to other professions, they should consider that the kind of work that these professions perform is different. If you’re just looking for the best bet financially and don’t care about what work is actually done, then optometry probably isn’t for you. The danger of oversupply (i.e. more doctors in a field than respective demand for that field) is there for many health care related professions, so you should make sure you’re pursuing work that you like first or else you could end up spending a large amount of time constantly whining on internet forums about how you’re not getting what you feel you are entitled to.

 

[imemily]

The thread that was recently closed which was started by tippytoe ironically addresses Optometry's growth. If you want you can read through it again. Even if you don't agree with those facts, there is little that one can point to in regards to Optometry's "death" besides their own glorified anecdote or opinion.

It really seems to me that only the ODs who are unsuccessful, for whatever reason, make it a priority to demote the profession. That is more so a fault of the OD and not the profession which is deemed a bad one due to the lack of success earned by the OD.

 

[Jason K]

It really seems to me that only the ODs who are unsuccessful, for whatever reason, make it a priority to demote the profession. That is more so a fault of the OD and not the profession which is deemed a bad one due to the lack of success earned by the OD.

Spend some time on ODWire reading practitioner threads on the state of optometry and you may change your mind on that statement. (Oh wait, you can't). There is no shortage of successful ODs who are all too aware of what's happening. Just because you're naive doesn't make the problem a fabrication of a small number of ODs. That's just the way you want to see it. Like I said, come on in, the water's great!

 

[blazenmadison]

This oversupply issue is beaten to death.

Yes. We have an oversupply.

 

[Tippytoe]

This oversupply issue is beaten to death.

Yes. We have an oversupply.

Not according to some genius pre-optometry students.

 

[Jason K]

This oversupply issue is beaten to death.

Yes. We have an oversupply.

Quotes like the one below are terrifying......clearly, the oversupply issue has not reached the preoptometry folks to the extent that it's "beaten to death." Personally, I don't feel the issue can be beaten to death as it's one of the most threatening problems the profession is facing and there's nothing being done about it.

It isn't proof, it's however an opinion that I would consider. Just because its posted on ODWire it doesn't mean its fact.

.....when it's clear that Optometry is in fact growing for the better. This makes me question if you are infact an OD because you definitely do not sound like one.

 

[Judgment Dragon]

Quotes like the one below are terrifying......clearly, the oversupply issue has not reached the preoptometry folks to the extent that it's "beaten to death." Personally, I don't feel the issue can be beaten to death as it's one of the most threatening problems the profession is facing and there's nothing being done about it.

I agree with this. My friend is entering / entered IAUPR Fall 2011 with a 2.53 GPA and 300 OAT score. He has $26000 for his undergraduate UCSB loan and is about to take out $100,000 (or is the amount higher than this for IAUPR?) more!

 

[imemily]

There is no oversupply. Its only the unsuccessful docs who make a big deal out of it.

If you think I am wrong, then get some facts or data to support your opinions.

And, when is this thread being closed?

 

[Judgment Dragon]

And, when is this thread being closed?

It seems like you are running out of arguments.

 

[Jason K]

There is no oversupply. Its only the unsuccessful docs who make a big deal out of it.

Wow.

 

[Judgment Dragon]

Wow.

What would you say would be the reason why people still continue to go to optometry school despite the fact that there is a current oversupply of ODs? Is it due to the simple fact that they do not research the job market well enough?

 

[Jason K]

What would you say would be the reason why people still continue to go to optometry school despite the fact that there is a current oversupply of ODs? Is it due to the simple fact that they do not research the job market well enough?

Personally, I believe it's a combination of things, but really what it amounts to is the fact that realistic and relevant information is not readily available to those considering the profession. A person who is looking into the various health professions will be fed large quantities of BS from every direction. It's not easy to sift out the truth from the garbage. The problem is, people don't consider the source(s) from which they get their data carefully enough. The AOA is the public face of optometry, why would they present anything but realistic numbers? The schools are the trainers of the ODs of the future, why wouldn't they present reliable information? The Bureau of Labor Statistics quotes the "aging US population" and "increases in eye disease" as reasons for which the the need for optometric services will increase, it's government stuff so it has to be accurate, right? (....wait a minute, the BLS stuff sounds just like the AOA crap....hmmmm...I wonder where the BLS got its data?)

The fact is, if someone really wants to get an OD, they're going to find the information that makes them feel all warm and fuzzy inside about getting one. It doesn't matter if 25 practicing ODs tell them to do something else because of the host of problems we're facing, they're not going to listen to reason. "What the heck does a practicing OD know anyway? Maybe if I see it in print somewhere, then it might be true." Everything "looks" ok right now to someone taking a cursory glance. You can go into any city in the US and find OD offices that are doing very well. A 21 year old who shadows a 55 year old OD who's proud of his thriving practice is not going to think to themselves, "Hey, I wonder if this office was created in a time when optometry was vastly different from today?" They think to themselves, "I can do just what this guy did!" And the AOA data, the BLS data, and the nonsense they're fed from private OD programs seals the deal.

So, the bigger question is, why is it so hard for people to see the "writing on the wall?" With things the way they are, why do people even bother applying to optometry school? Knowing what I know now, I would never dream of applying to optometry school so why are there so many people still jumping in? How is it possible that, not only are schools not closing, they're actually opening new ones? Well, because optometry has no built-in self-regulation mechanism. Other professions, ophthalmology, dentistry, podiatry, etc, have faced oversupply issues in the past and they've wisely self-corrected. Optometry hides it and as a result, there's a delay between the time someone signs up for an OD and the time when they realize things are very different from what they pictured as a 1st year OD student. There's a number of reasons for doing so, but the reality is, we're not exposing the problem to those who would like to enter the profession. By the time they figure it out, they're way beyond the point of no return. Can you imagine what would happen to the application rates if the AOA issued a statement that read:

"Optometrists provide the vast majority of routine eye care to the public in the United States. Our profession is essential component of the health care system and we constantly seek to maintain the highest quality of care for those who seek the care of an optometrist. At the current time, we are graduating more optometrists than the market requires. If we do not reverse the trend, this can have serious, irreversible negative effects on the profession in the future. Since the goal of the AOA is to advance the profession of optometry, we are recommending that programs reduce the number of open seats by 20% to 50%, depending on the class size, to address the issue.

Now, I ask you, if you were considering optometry as a profession and you read that statement from the AOA or better yet, printed in the BLS, would you not think twice about applying? That's the problem, the AOA has other agendas and the last thing they're going to do is publicly address the oversupply issue. Unfortunately, it would be a huge step in the right direction as long as it were done in the right manner.

Or how about if at every open house, the dean comes out and says, "Ok everyone, welcome to our program, we know you'll love what you see! Now, the fact is that most of you will be funneling into commercial or corporate optometry after graduation. You'll probably be stringing together part-time work as independent contractors without benefits. Don't worry about not making enough money to pay your bills, all you have to do to avoid defaulting your loans is go on Income Based Repayment, and all will be well. You'll mount interest that could add as much as $1500 per month to your principal, but don't worry about that, you'll be a doctor so nothing else matters! We really want your $200K so just disregard the pesky little oversupply issue that's going on, it's really no big deal."

The sad thing is, the above quote is probably not far from what goes on inside the heads of the new deans at WesternU, AZOPT, and MCPHS, but that's not what comes out of their mouths on the 1st day of class. People are lured in and when they figure it out, it's too late to turn back. I can still hear the load of **** that was dumped on my class as 1st years. It reverberates in my head like a William Hung single - melting away my brain cells.

 

[Judgment Dragon]

I see. Interesting analysis. I never told the full story of my friend (the guy who has a 2.53 GPA and 300 OAT score) who is entering IAUPR Optometry School this Fall 2011.

He started out as an Electrical Engineering and Computer Science major. He was dismissed from UCSB for 2 quarters for getting below a 2.00 GPA. In his time off, he went to community college to build up his grades and also got an internship that was unpaid working for an optometrist.

Of course, he never told me this. I just deduced this from gathering information over the period of 2 years.

When he came back to UCSB, he had his heart set on being an optometrist. I suspect that he wanted to go to optometry school to become an optometrist due to not knowing what to do after graduation and optometry was the only career that he had a lead to. He had no other work experience and no other internships or undergraduate research experience.

 

[KHE]

There is no oversupply. Its only the unsuccessful docs who make a big deal out of it.

If you think I am wrong, then get some facts or data to support your opinions.

And, when is this thread being closed?

I would be considered "successful" by any definition out there and I'm telling you there is an oversupply of doctors.

 

[Jason K]

I think the following post is worth revisiting, let's pay particular attention to those bullets and most of all, the bolded statement at the end:

Agree with all of Ken's post, but especially this. The most recent schools didn't open to fill a need, but for profit & to increase the prestige of the school.

A small avalanche is starting & when these new schools start to graduate hundreds of extra OD's will be when we all get smothered.

For those who think more schools is a good thing since it will be easier to get in, prepare for a cascade of events that will harm our profession for a long time:

• It's already difficult for new grads to find full time employment. It will get even tougher and might be working PT at multiple locations with poor job security and chance to advance.
• Commercial employers will see the supply glut and begin to offer less and demand more with complainers getting kicked to the curb & replaced with a naive newbie.
• OD's will feel pressured charge less and accept low-ball vision plans. Low-ball plans will thrive with more providers willing to enroll & take less, allowing them to go even lower with reimbursement.
• Insurance carriers will see OD's charging $29 exams and feel comfortable lowering their reimbursement as well.
• The new schools and the mega-enrollment schools like ICO will feel more hatred from the profession for getting us in this state.
• Servicing a huge student loan on a meager PT salary will get very difficult to manage.
• The best & brightest students will see the future of optometry and choose another profession (already starting).

I still think optometry is a great profession & I love my job, but I fear it will be nearly impossible for new grads to have what I have. (bolded and underlined by secondary poster)

 

[netmag]

Any of this sound familiar?
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=849810
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=838771

It seems that no one has a monopoly on issues in their respective health care field. Oversupply is one of the most common issues noted. Not that it doesn't exist. I think it does. Although some health care professions have enough demand per doctor to overcome it as a long term issue. If you're less concerned about the details of the work or the work environment and primarily want the best bet financially then optometry probably isn't for you. In fact, health care may not be the best bet for you since apparently almost everything is plagued with the exact same kind of issues just in varying degrees of intensity.

Debt is another common complaint but the only re-course is not to get an advanced degree at all and save the money. Of course, there's no guarantees you'll be one of the ones making a decent salary with only a bachelor's either. If you're just in it for $$$, you probably need to look else where (and be sure to come back and let everyone else know what sure fire, lifetime, 90%+ secure, profession you find).

 

[Jason K]

Any of this sound familiar?
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=849810
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=838771

It seems that no one has a monopoly on issues in their respective health care field. Oversupply is one of the most common issues noted. Not that it doesn't exist. I think it does. Although some health care professions have enough demand per doctor to overcome it as a long term issue. If you're less concerned about the details of the work or the work environment and primarily want the best bet financially then optometry probably isn't for you. In fact, health care may not be the best bet for you since apparently almost everything is plagued with the exact same kind of issues just in varying degrees of intensity.

Debt is another common complaint but the only re-course is not to get an advanced degree at all and save the money. Of course, there's no guarantees you'll be one of the ones making a decent salary with only a bachelor's either. If you're just in it for $$$, you probably need to look else where (and be sure to come back and let everyone else know what sure fire, lifetime, 90%+ secure, profession you find).

Wow, netmag, your post actually seems to make some sense here. But having an interest in the "details of the work or the work environment" with respect to optometry isn't enough to justify entry into the profession for anyone but an idealistic 21 year old. You can say to yourself "I just love eyes, I want to treat people's eye problems and build lasting relationships with my patients. I don't care about making money." But when you get out of school 5 or 6 years from now and all that's available are jobs at EyeMart and leases at JCPenny, the "details of the work" might be a missed target as well. Furthermore, if you have trouble stringing together enough part time work to pay your bills, you might also consider that a missed target as well. Notice I did not mention defaulting on student loans. Anyone recent grads who default on student loans are unaware of IBR. IBR is the "get out of jail free" card for the private university education business. It allows them to claim, "Hey look, none of our grads default on their loans!" In reality, their graduates are sinking in a spiral of mounting interest, but it doesn't currently count against them because of the IBR allowance.

If one looks at optometry and seeks a job in a high-volume commercial or corporate setting making 70-85K indefinitely (if you're lucky), and you're willing to move out of your home state, then optometry probably won't give you any surprises. If you don't mind having a non-OD "manager" interrogate you as to why you dilated your -6.00D patient instead of charging them $50.00 for an Optomap (retinal photo) which can't even see what a dilated exam was intended to look for, then you probably won't have any surprises. If, however, you dream of a work environment that approximates those of a solid private practice as most OD hopefuls do, the likelihood of disappointment is very high.

In other news, you never responded to my request for justification of your statements in the "What Business Are We In?" thread. I figured as much.

 

[netmag]

Actually, I'm quite consistent in what I say. If you stated a question in another post, I probably did not see it because I don't read most of your posts at all. I usually skip over them completely. To me, I've already established that your role here is just to be one of the "anti-PickYourProfession" guys that hangs around this particular forum. Most of your responses to anyone that questions you are childish at best and not worth taking the time to read. There are entities like you infesting this entire website and not enough time in the day to bother with them really. It's unfortunate that it is allowed to such a great extent in such a small forum as this optometry forum, but that's not my call. In the busier forums, such people are usually drowned out by more useful posters and you can get a more balanced view of the positives and negatives of each profession. The fact that you don't think knowing the details of what you would be doing in a profession matters might explain why you seem to have had no idea of what you were getting into. Also, much of what you just said is incoherent (as usual).

Since I did see and respond to this one, I'll just finish with a few notes (some of which I've already mentioned before):

- Most everyone pays for their doctor degree and the prices are high. Dentists make more but they also tend to accrue a lot more debt too. Dental schools aren't giving them a free pass either. The demand for that profession is high and they charge accordingly. If someone feels the prices are too high and don't want to be bothered to have to spend the next X years paying it off then they need not apply and that's all there is to it. In this country, that's fair enough. However, if you know the pay range for an OD and the tuition for those particular schools is not a deal breaker for you then that's fine too.

- Not everyone is the same in their desires and expectations. Some may compare optometry to other fields and determine that working in an America's Best is perfectly fine in comparison to say working as a pharmacist in a busy CVS. It's all relative really. I'm not saying it's right or wrong for them to think one way or the other and I never have because I'm not here to set an agenda. I'm just saying that what is being complained about here is no different than what other people are complaining about all over these boards for every profession. If they still like optometry after knowing exactly what they do on a day to day basis and how much they are compensated for their skills then so be it.

- Trying to scare off a few pre-optometrists that happen to read here isn't really going to change much of anything or shut down any schools. It's actually kind of petty and Mickey Mouse and doesn't reflect very well on the perpetrators. Although, I suppose if anyone is indeed that silly, then perhaps they deserve to be scared off.

- People need to learn the positives and negatives of the profession they want to enter (including what you would actually be doing in that profession, cost of such an education, etc). They can compare it to other professions just by doing a similar analysis on that profession. Then make their own informed decisions. If the risks are too great for them to stomach then that's their right. If the risks still don't out weigh the positives for them then that's their right as well. Just because one person can't deal with it doesn't mean another can't. That's just common sense though. If they're silly enough to put too much stock in the rants of an obviously jaded anonymous internet poster (especially someone who plainly modifies facts stated in a publication to say something that the publication never said), then they probably are destined to have some major issues in life.

 

[Jason K]

I probably did not see it because I don't read most of your posts at all. I usually skip over them completely.

You're consistent in what you say? How then can you make the statement above, and the statement below? Which is in netmag? Do you or don't you read my posts? You can't disregard them and make a negative claim about all of them at the same time.

Most of your responses to anyone that questions you are childish at best and not worth taking the time to read.

I'm leaning towards your first claim. If you actually had read the vast majority of my responses, you'd feel like an idiot saying that.

Pressing forward.....

The fact that you don't think knowing the details of what you would be doing in a profession matters might explain why you seem to have had no idea of what you were getting into.

Seriously? What are you talking about here? Can you please point to where I said that knowing the details of your profession is unimportant? I'd love to hear this - really, I would. Maybe you'll just avoid this question just like the other one you backed out of. If you're going to make accusations, at least have the "stones" to back them up.

As for the rest of your post, you basically reiterated most of what I've been claiming all along. Thanks for the backup.

 

[Judgment Dragon]

I think a good way to convince someone to run away from an oversaturated profession would be to warn them about it before they have their heart set on it because people who set their heart out to something, they have a heart-oriented thinking mindset where they make decisions based on emotions and a person who has a mind-oriented thinking mindset will make decisions based on facts and logic such as adapting to the job market and changing career goals if it comes down to it.

 

[KHE]

- People need to learn the positives and negatives of the profession they want to enter (including what you would actually be doing in that profession, cost of such an education, etc). They can compare it to other professions just by doing a similar analysis on that profession. Then make their own informed decisions. If the risks are too great for them to stomach then that's their right. If the risks still don't out weigh the positives for them then that's their right as well. Just because one person can't deal with it doesn't mean another can't. That's just common sense though. If they're silly enough to put too much stock in the rants of an obviously jaded anonymous internet poster (especially someone who plainly modifies facts stated in a publication to say something that the publication never said), then they probably are destined to have some major issues in life.

I think the point Jason is trying to make is that while optometry has significant negatives and challenges as a profession, you won't hear any of that from any official source.

You can find lots of information on the "downside" of medicine or law or whatever from official channels. They certainly don't EMPHASIZE their problems but they at least acknowledge them.

In optometry, if you read any of the "official" stuff, you would think it's all sunshine, roses and candy.

I would tell students that when you are talking to ODs as part of your shadowing or whatever, the question to ask is not "what are the negatives of this job" but the question should be "what are the negatives of the job that YOU DID NOT EXPECT before you entered it."

 

[Jason K]

I would tell students that when you are talking to ODs as part of your shadowing or whatever, the question to ask is not "what are the negatives of this job" but the question should be "what are the negatives of the job that YOU DID NOT EXPECT before you entered it."

Agreed! (As long as the ODs being questioned are more recent grads, not guys who've been out since '85.)

 

[Jason K]

The fact that you don't think knowing the details of what you would be doing in a profession matters might explain why you seem to have had no idea of what you were getting into.

Seriously? What are you talking about here? Can you please point to where I said that knowing the details of your profession is unimportant? I'd love to hear this - really, I would. Maybe you'll just avoid this question just like the other one you backed out of. If you're going to make accusations, at least have the "stones" to back them up.

Oh, netmag??? I'm still waiting??

 

[Judgment Dragon]

Are classes in optometry school graded as pass no pass or letter graded?

 

[optsuker]

Are classes in optometry school graded as pass no pass or letter graded?

Almost never. Clinical rotations usually are P/F

PS If you're pre-pharm, why are you spending so much time here?

 

[Judgment Dragon]

Almost never. Clinical rotations usually are P/F

PS If you're pre-pharm, why are you spending so much time here?

I originally wanted to do a combined joint PhD organic chemistry / Pharm D. but now I just want to do a PhD in organic chemistry. There was no option to select PhD / Pharm D. so I just went with Pharm D. I wish there was an option for "spectator" or "lurker" because I'm just posting on SDN to learn not just about the health related job markets but also the job market overall.

I'm confused by your answer. Are you saying the courses are letter graded but the clinical rotations are P/F?

Also is the optometry job market for optometrist saturated in Canada and Puerto Rico? Because if the answer is no for PR, then going to IAUPR may not be that of a bad idea.

 

[optsuker]

I wish there was an option for "spectator" or "lurker" .

There is.
It's called just reading the posts and not posting your own.

I'm confused by your answer. Are you saying the courses are letter graded but the clinical rotations are P/F?

Yes

Also is the optometry job market for optometrist saturated in Canada and Puerto Rico? Because if the answer is no for PR, then going to IAUPR may not be that of a bad idea

Unless you speak fluent Spanish, it's a terrible idea.

 

[blazenmadison]

There is.
It's called just reading the posts and not posting your own.
Yes
Unless you speak fluent Spanish, it's a terrible idea.

There are plenty of high paying jobs near the border of Mexico (ie. El Paso). You can earn $500+/day. Of course there is a reason why there is a demand down there....

Honestly, I am thinking of taking a job down there. My student loans will be paid off pretty quick!

 

[Jason K]

There are plenty of high paying jobs near the border of Mexico (ie. El Paso). You can earn $500+/day. Of course there is a reason why there is a demand down there....

Honestly, I am thinking of taking a job down there. My student loans will be paid off pretty quick!

No disagreement on this claim. There are well-paying PP jobs in El Paso and Las Cruces since most people would hit the gas pedal with both feet when driving past those cities. I've been through both and I can say that living a stone's throw away from Juarez, MX would not be overly comforting given that people's heads and other body parts seem to be quite "removable" there. For what it's worth, though, El Paso is rated as one of the safest cities in America despite its proximity to the drug murder capital of the planet. We all know how reliable those "surveys" are, though.

I guess that could be on the school websites, "Welcome to optometry! If you want to be paid somewhat fairly for your services and have a respectable job after graduation, you'll need to move to a place where few people want to live." On the plus side, in El Paso, you'll have easy access to drug cartels, which is always a big bonus. Heck, if the optometry thing didn't work out, I hear they're always looking for a good police chief in Juarez.

 

[PharmaTope]

The math being used to predict the demise of optometry can be applied to many fields. Most people work 40+ years. They have to. The main thing that differentiates things is the amount of demand for the skills in question. That’s why it’s difficult to compare optometry to other fields unless you know what the relative demand is.

For example, the number of schools and graduates for optometry is actually laughable compared to pharmacy. There are 123+ pharmacy schools in the United States and it is growing. However, pharmacy services has a large demand so pharmacist salaries are still maintaining a high base pay (100k+). The downside is that there is not much room for growth in salary, there is little to no opportunity for private practice, and the majority of the work environments are retail. Also, even with the higher demand, the sheer number of schools and graduates are now causing a truly serious oversupply issue.

As another example, most people want to look to dentistry as a model of a near bullet proof health care career. They do have more of a private practice focus and command high rates for their services. Still there are some challenges there as well. For example, even though they can generate a million dollar revenue practice, the overhead is extremely high. Also, if you read their forums you’ll see mentions that Walmart is launching dentist facilities. So they’re not completely immune to these things either.

I think the main thing is for people to do their own research. Asking an OD for their thoughts on optometry vs. anything means that you really haven’t done enough personal research yet. For pre-optometry people that want to compare optometry to other professions, they should consider that the kind of work that these professions perform is different. If you’re just looking for the best bet financially and don’t care about what work is actually done, then optometry probably isn’t for you. The danger of oversupply (i.e. more doctors in a field than respective demand for that field) is there for many health care related professions, so you should make sure you’re pursuing work that you like first or else you could end up spending a large amount of time constantly whining on internet forums about how you’re not getting what you feel you are entitled to.

smart post above. pharmacist salaries are starting to come down. bonuses are gone, people starting at lower salaries, jobs requiring more hours for the same salary (salary isnt 40 hours a week anymore at a lot of places).

Not according to some genius pre-optometry students.

haha the pre-pharm, pre-med, pre-dent, pre-everything always have an answer. gotta love those bright eye 22 yr olds that think they have life all figured out but have ZERO idea of what they are getting into. it is refreshing to see real life appear to them....

There is no oversupply. Its only the unsuccessful docs who make a big deal out of it.

If you think I am wrong, then get some facts or data to support your opinions.

And, when is this thread being closed?

oh here we go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! data.... ya bc data isnt manipulated. get the hell out of here.

optometry is oversaturated and on top of that, it faces online markets with contacts, glasses competing against them. 15 dollar glasses online...., having to be employed by a big chain, walmart coming to town.... you got no idea kid.

 

[imemily]

Shouldn't you be trolling the pharmacy forum?

 

[thiaeyemd]

Can someone explain to me what trolling means? My impression is that when someone enters a board and is not a long time member and is a new member and says something disparaging or disagrees with the main group it is "trolling". What does it mean exactly so I know the right definition. Imemily just made that comment on Pharmatope but I would like a clarification.

 

[Jason K]

Can someone explain to me what trolling means? My impression is that when someone enters a board and is not a long time member and is a new member and says something disparaging or disagrees with the main group it is "trolling". What does it mean exactly so I know the right definition. Imemily just made that comment on Pharmatope but I would like a clarification.

I think most people's definition of a "troll" would actually fit imemily quite nicely for many of her posts; void of any thought or content, intended to provoke a response, and usually amusing if taken at face value (if only for the colossal gaps that exist in her understanding of the subject matter at hand.) That's just me though.....

 

[JAZZEYE]

What in God's name could you POSSIBLY be basing THAT on?

Maybe she read that from a thread on ODwire.

It was started by a Doc who believes "if 1% more of the population in the US would get their eyes examined Optometrists would be inundated with patients"

It was weird some of the other OD's questioned his logic and he would not respond...then the thread was abruptly closed by the moderator, who described the man as a respected OD who writes the Health Notes page in "Optometry: Journal of the Amertican Optometric Associaton"

Still don't know what that was all about...
but the whole thing really made that forum seem pretty lame.

 

[netmag]

Not too surprising but the saddest thing is that there are a couple of people trying to turn these forums into a sort of ODWire extension site and they are being allowed to flood these forums with their one minded view of things.

Maybe she read that from a thread on ODwire.

It was started by a Doc who believes "if 1% more of the population in the US would get their eyes examined Optometrists would be inundated with patients"

It was weird some of the other OD's questioned his logic and he would not respond...then the thread was abruptly closed by the moderator, who described the man as a respected OD who writes the Health Notes page in "Optometry: Journal of the Amertican Optometric Associaton"

Still don't know what that was all about...
but the whole thing really made that forum seem pretty lame.