Physician Salary data?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I

ishr

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
A not very commonly discussed topic.

I was wondering if anyone has reliable data on the salary of physicians categorized by specialty.
Members don't see this ad.
 
ishr said:
A not very commonly discussed topic.

I was wondering if anyone has reliable data on the salary of physicians categorized by specialty.
Click to expand...

If you think this is "not very commonly discussed" you need to read SDN pre-allo more and post in allo less...

Reliable? Well, the Bureau of Labor and Statistics info is linked to the Salary article on the front page of SDN, so that's an impartial take. Some say those salaries are a bit low. You can do a search, as this thread comes up repeatedly, but are likely going to get a lot of folks posting links to various headhunter firms with pie in the sky figures you will never get. Get ready to ignore them. Recruiter salary lists are fakes. If a firm has an incentive to get folks to call them, they will unrealistically float high numbers. Then when you call, you will learn that that position has already been filled, but that they have a job "just as good" at 75% of the salary but with 120% of the hours. So ignore the links to things like salary.com, etc people will surely post. They are inaccurate. Also inaccurate are lists where data is assembled based on surveys. People who aren't satisfied with their salary don't return surveys as often, so any average salary determined this way is going to be skewed high. Finally, you have to read the footnotes. If salaries are based only on folks in large practice groups, or otherwise not a fair cross section of physicians, then it isn't a good take on average. The cejka site is guilty of this, if you read the footnotes. Also any time you see a column of "maximum" salary be suspicious. This is a salary you will never ever see, and is added to lure people in, not because it's something you actually will be able to attain.
Sorry for the soapbox rant. But there's lots of bad salary data out there, and people seeking it all too often premeds applying to medicine for the wrong reasons, and will see that one mention of the maximum spinal surgeon earning $1 mill and think that's a normal salary for a physician.
 
Law2Doc said:
If you think this is "not very commonly discussed" you need to read SDN pre-allo more and post in allo less...

Reliable? Well, the Bureau of Labor and Statistics info is linked to the Salary article on the front page of SDN, so that's an impartial take. Some say those salaries are a bit low. You can do a search, as this thread comes up repeatedly, but are likely going to get a lot of folks posting links to various headhunter firms with pie in the sky figures you will never get. Get ready to ignore them. Recruiter salary lists are fakes. If a firm has an incentive to get folks to call them, they will unrealistically float high numbers. Then when you call, you will learn that that position has already been filled, but that they have a job "just as good" at 75% of the salary but with 120% of the hours. So ignore the links to things like salary.com, etc people will surely post. They are inaccurate. Also inaccurate are lists where data is assembled based on surveys. People who aren't satisfied with their salary don't return surveys as often, so any average salary determined this way is going to be skewed high. Finally, you have to read the footnotes. If salaries are based only on folks in large practice groups, or otherwise not a fair cross section of physicians, then it isn't a good take on average. The cejka site is guilty of this, if you read the footnotes. Also any time you see a column of "maximum" salary be suspicious. This is a salary you will never ever see, and is added to lure people in, not because it's something you actually will be able to attain.
Sorry for the soapbox rant. But there's lots of bad salary data out there, and people seeking it all too often premeds applying to medicine for the wrong reasons, and will see that one mention of the maximum spinal surgeon earning $1 mill and think that's a normal salary for a physician.
Click to expand...


Not only is all of the above true, but consider that current salaries mean absolutely nothing, nothing, for somebody who has yet to start medical school. At the earliest, OP, you'd be receiving said salary in anywhere from 7 years to 11 years.

Case in point - 10 years ago cardiothoracic surgeons were making something like 1.2 million dollars, and now I see job offers for 200k. And that's to say nothing of what the nationalization of medicine under Obama will do to us. Get ready to make what a VA internal medicine doc makes, no matter what your specialty.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
again, lol (for the third time in this thread) it's important to stress that any information you look at currently is completely invalid because we have no idea what the market will be like in 7-10 years. My advice if you go into medicine is to put the salary and financial dreams as far back in your mind as possible so you don't get depressed, and if after you're done with residency you don't make enough to repay your loans (which is possible) be comforted with the fact that 20-40 thousand other physicians will be in your same position and you'll have strength in numbers to DO something about it. At the very least I want to live the same lifestyle that my friends who graduated with an A.S. in nursing have already be living for 4 years...
 
Gallix23 said:
There are a ton of different views on this, and these threads never really get definite answers. However, I found this website a while back, but I'm not sure how accurate it is:

http://www.allied-physicians.com/salary_surveys/physician-salaries.htm
Click to expand...

See my comments on headhunters, survey data, and listing maximum salaries (eg for spinal surgeons) above. This site is guilty of all three. So I'd delete the url from your consciousness. You won't find useful data here. :laugh:
 
Law2Doc said:
See my comments on headhunters, survey data, and listing maximum salaries (eg for spinal surgeons) above. This site is guilty of all three. So I'd delete the url from your consciousness. You won't find useful data here. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Hahah ahh I see, thanks for the heads-up. So basically the only way to see what a physician accurately makes is to muster up the courage to ask one ;)
 
BLS survey may not give a complete picture either since the data may not indicate how much those working for themselves make. I've heard it's hard to gauge the salaries of small business owners because they pay themselves salaries, it's not a standard pay package you'd see in companies.
 
The sites mentioned are probably better than this one, but I'll post it anyways. http://mdsalaries.blogspot.com/
This doesn't really have a list of salaries like the cejka one, but it does have some pretty nifty links, and you can search by specialty.
 
Law2Doc said:
If you think this is "not very commonly discussed" you need to read SDN pre-allo more and post in allo less...

Reliable? Well, the Bureau of Labor and Statistics info is linked to the Salary article on the front page of SDN, so that's an impartial take. Some say those salaries are a bit low. You can do a search, as this thread comes up repeatedly, but are likely going to get a lot of folks posting links to various headhunter firms with pie in the sky figures you will never get. Get ready to ignore them. Recruiter salary lists are fakes. If a firm has an incentive to get folks to call them, they will unrealistically float high numbers. Then when you call, you will learn that that position has already been filled, but that they have a job "just as good" at 75% of the salary but with 120% of the hours. So ignore the links to things like salary.com, etc people will surely post. They are inaccurate. Also inaccurate are lists where data is assembled based on surveys. People who aren't satisfied with their salary don't return surveys as often, so any average salary determined this way is going to be skewed high. Finally, you have to read the footnotes. If salaries are based only on folks in large practice groups, or otherwise not a fair cross section of physicians, then it isn't a good take on average. The cejka site is guilty of this, if you read the footnotes. Also any time you see a column of "maximum" salary be suspicious. This is a salary you will never ever see, and is added to lure people in, not because it's something you actually will be able to attain.
Sorry for the soapbox rant. But there's lots of bad salary data out there, and people seeking it all too often premeds applying to medicine for the wrong reasons, and will see that one mention of the maximum spinal surgeon earning $1 mill and think that's a normal salary for a physician.
Click to expand...


It says right under the earnings section of the bls site:

"(NOTE) Source: Medical Group Management Association, Physician Compensation and Production Report, 2005."

You can't say bls is right and surveys are wrong... The bls bases their info off a survey (which is 4 years old).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
H_Caulfield said:
Not only is all of the above true, but consider that current salaries mean absolutely nothing, nothing, for somebody who has yet to start medical school. At the earliest, OP, you'd be receiving said salary in anywhere from 7 years to 11 years.

Case in point - 10 years ago cardiothoracic surgeons were making something like 1.2 million dollars, and now I see job offers for 200k. And that's to say nothing of what the nationalization of medicine under Obama will do to us. Get ready to make what a VA internal medicine doc makes, no matter what your specialty.
Click to expand...

come on man..thats just not true. If things get bad enough, doctors will just refuse to accept insurance and rebel.

its too much hard work for pay to ever go down THAT much!
 
shindotp said:
It says right under the earnings section of the bls site:

"(NOTE) Source: Medical Group Management Association, Physician Compensation and Production Report, 2005."

You can't say bls is right and surveys are wrong... The bls bases their info off a survey (which is 4 years old).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think I said this one was accurate, just unbiased. There isn't a great source of salary data out there, but there are some that are much worse than others. Most of the ones cited in this thread are bad ones. Ignore the allied, cejka, salary.com type figures, they are bogus and self serving. If it's a recruiter they have an incentive to lie. If there are footnotes, you MUST read them, they will often explain that the data isn't showing what it purports to.

BLS probably isn't ideally accurate, and probably not up to date, but at least they aren't biased. As for survey data, I think you always have to discount it, because people unhappy with their salary are less likely to respond. Given that the BLS is old and based on survey data, if you discount it X percent because it's a survey, and add Y percent because its dated, you perhaps end up somewhere in the same ballpark. This might be as close as you are going to get.
 
Law2Doc said:
As for survey data, I think you always have to discount it, because people unhappy with their salary are less likely to respond.
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence for this?

I have always suspected the opposite. The people not making as much love to complain about their salary while those doing well try to hide the fact and rarely discuss their income with anyone. If you are making 500k+, it is best to keep this from the public so that there is less fuel for the government and insurance decreasing reimbursment.
 
Here is a list of physician salaries from different countries. Our eventual salaries will probably trend lower, although probably not as low as many countries because our school is so dang expensive, our docs probably work more hours, and other factors that I won't go into here. 2004 data here, in US dollars.

USA: $266,733
Australia: $203,132
Netherlands: $175,155
Britain: $127,285
France: $116,077
Italy: $81,414
Denmark: $ 73,236
Spain: $67,785
Germany: $56,455

http://mdsalaries.blogspot.com/2008/01/american-versus-australian-european.html
 
number said:
Do you have any evidence for this?

I have always suspected the opposite. The people not making as much love to complain about their salary while those doing well try to hide the fact and rarely discuss their income with anyone. If you are making 500k+, it is best to keep this from the public so that there is less fuel for the government and insurance decreasing reimbursment.
Click to expand...

L2D doesn't need evidence to support that claim. There has long been an understood bias with salary data that those getting paid more are much more likely to report their salaries than those getting paid less.

The thing is with surveys, they send them out to say 2,000 physicians, they aren't getting 2,000 responses back. They are getting back only the surveys of the people who WANT to fill out a salary survey. This is not a random sample or even close to it. There will be a lot of bias in who fills it out, not to mention those that fill out the surveys probably can put down whatever number they want. "I make 135,000 a year but that is pretty close to 150 grand, so I'll put that down to make it a nicer number"
 
number said:
Do you have any evidence for this?

I have always suspected the opposite. The people not making as much love to complain about their salary while those doing well try to hide the fact and rarely discuss their income with anyone. If you are making 500k+, it is best to keep this from the public so that there is less fuel for the government and insurance decreasing reimbursment.
Click to expand...

Well, from my prior career there was much discussion and evaluation of salaries and survey data in the various journals and the determination was that surveys always skewed high. Data from a number of prominent national publications was questioned by others in the legal media. This was illuminated further when salary discussion boards became en vogue in law and law firm associates were able to actually learn what other firms were paying (which, not surprisingly, didn't jibe well with what the National Law Journal and other places were publishing).

I would disagree that folks who do well are concerned about the government using their info to decrease reimbursements as much as they see this as an opportunity to pat themselves on the back. Human nature is to brag. The folks embarrassed that they aren't pulling average, by contrast, don't rub salt into their wounds by dutifully reporting their salary. So no, the folks who complain about their salary aren't really reflected in the salary surveys as much as the people in their brackets who don't respond, and are further dwarfed by the folks who earn so much they need to brag about it. Most of the people unhappy about their salary simply don't want to pony up the info. (at least they didn't in law, and equally likely wouldn't in medicine). Hence the skew.

I also agree with DocPardi that rounding up to a nice round number is common. The dude pulling in $190k will always report that he is making $200k. Because in his mind (even if he has to factor in other intangibles not requested in the survey) he does. Folks also sometimes extrapolate in bonuses they haven't received yet, etc.
 
Where else in the world could you find people willing to take >150K in loans without knowing how they plan to pay it back. The average medical student is a high risk financial mess.
 
number said:
Do you have any evidence for this?

I have always suspected the opposite. The people not making as much love to complain about their salary while those doing well try to hide the fact and rarely discuss their income with anyone. If you are making 500k+, it is best to keep this from the public so that there is less fuel for the government and insurance decreasing reimbursment.
Click to expand...

This is a question that I've also had. In other fields like Finance or Law, making more money is basically a proxy for how "good" you are perceived to be at your job. In Medicine, other than a few outlier cases, you get paid more for pushing more patients through your office, building a good payor mix, and not working at an academic center, not for being a better physician. Hence I feel like people would report their lower incomes precisely because they think that they are being unfairly compensated and dislike the public perception that they make more money than they really do. Granted, this is just a theory and I would gladly accept evidence to the contrary should it be provided.
 
sirus_virus said:
Where else in the world could you find people willing to take >150K in loans without knowing how they plan to pay it back. The average medical student is a high risk financial mess.
Click to expand...

I'm banking on hyperinflation 2/2 to our government response to the financial crisis and artificial propping up of home prices for my debt, but that's a post for another forum.

Seriously though, we'll all be able to pay our loans back. It will just become increasingly painful to do so.
 
Law2Doc said:
The dude pulling in $190k will always report that he is making $200k. Because in his mind (even if he has to factor in other intangibles not requested in the survey) he does. Folks also sometimes extrapolate in bonuses they haven't received yet, etc.
Click to expand...
So the surveys may be off by 15k, but they should still be in the ball park. If you don't have a better source of data, then we gotta look to these surveys. I highly doubt that any of us are going to walk around asking different physicians what they really make as their salary.
 
The docs I know who make less than 200k discuss the fact openly. They also discuss how much the radiologists are making for working less in a less stressful environment. They are not ashamed of it. We keep saying that it is not about the money anyway... They also have an incentive to respond to the survey. They are not rubbing salt on the wound. They are (anonymously) displaying the wound to the entity which inflicted it, which can only help.


None of the doctors who are doing well talk about it. Successful doctors do not behave like successful rappers. Our generation is flashier than our parents', but doctors are still fairly modest. And who gets a thrill from bragging to an anonymous survey? Not me. You brag to real people, or perhaps online people, but not to an anonymous piece of paper.

I am interested in pathology. The path forum is filled with people complaining about the job market. The satisfied people are nowhere to be found, even though they exist in probably greater numbers. Look around the other forums. I have observed ONE member (in the rads forum) who likes to brag about his success. Everyone else complains, and many of the complaints are clearly unusual circumstances. The whiners defiantly appear louder and overrepresented. Why wouldnt surveys reflect a similar effect?

Anyway, neither of us have convincing evidence for our argument, so I feel that it should not be presented as fact.

The one bias free way to study the problem is to conduct the survey yourself. I checked out the non-profit report from my hometown's hospital, and the doctors are doing substantially better there than the maximum value on any of the surveys posted in this thread. The non-profit report only includes the top 5 earners, but this includes every urologist, radiologist, and ENT in town. And this is the value relevant to me, as I plan on returning to my hometown. By the way, none of these top 5 will talk about their income, but the doctors making less than a fourth of the urologist talk about it. Also worth noting is that these top 5 positions are not difficult to acquire (if you can get into a residency). This hospital has to actively recruit whenever anyone retires.
 
Last edited:
megamega said:
So the surveys may be off by 15k, but they should still be in the ball park. If you don't have a better source of data, then we gotta look to these surveys. ...
Click to expand...

Um no, you only read part of my post. The dude who reports that he earned $200k might only have earned $190 (so for him it's still in the ballpark), but the dude that earned $150k might not report at all. So it can potentially be skewed by a HUGE amount.

While surveys might be a necessary evil, I think you have to (1) take them with a big grain of salt, and (2) only look to those which are compiled by unbiased groups, such as government agencies (not search firms), and (3) read the footnotes, if provided.

At any rate, a premed asking for salary info is potentially going to use it for the absolute worst of reasons -- to extrapolate that he will be earning whatever the highest figure he can find suggests. So lets not throw out the biased and questionable allied table, with the $1 mill maximum salary figure for spinal surgeons, as a realistic goal. It is disinformation of the worst kind.
 
Law2Doc said:
While surveys might be a necessary evil, I think you have to (1) take them with a big grain of salt, and (2) only look to those which are compiled by unbiased groups, such as government agencies (not search firms), and (3) read the footnotes, if provided.
Click to expand...

Again, this is not perfectly convincing to me.

I see more incentive for a search firm to skew the national data toward a lower number. They want you to accept their positions. You are more likely to accept if the position is higher or at least comparable to the national average.

The search firm has no incentive to make the field as a whole appear more attractive. Their incentive is to make the positions which they are representing appear attractive compared to other positions within the field, and this would best be accomplished by skewing the national data toward lower numbers.

If they said the average for ortho was 500k but only had positions paying 250k, job seekers would look elsewhere for the 500k jobs. If they said the average was 200k and had a position paying 250k, job seekers might be fooled and take the job.

And long term it is better for recruiters for there to be no oversupply of labor, otherwise the recruiters would find that they were no longer needed.
 
Last edited:
number said:
Again, this is not perfectly convincing to me.

I see more incentive for a search firm to skew the national data toward a lower number. They want you to accept their positions. You are more likely to accept if the position is higher or at least comparable to the national average.

The search firm has no incentive to make the field as a whole appear more attractive. Their incentive is to make the positions which they are representing appear attractive compared to other positions within the field, and this would best be accomplished by skewing the national data toward lower numbers.

If they said the average for ortho was 500k but only had positions paying 250k, job seekers would look elsewhere for the 500k jobs. If they said the average was 200k and had a position paying 250k, job seekers might be fooled and take the job.
Click to expand...

I doubt that one. I'm sure that by the time you finish residency you'll have a rough idea of the range. They're not tricking you into taking the job, just to make that initial call, which they entice you to do by displaying high averages.

However, the reason I don't trust those sites is that they are disproportionally going to have jobs that are undesirable for other reasons (location, hours, covering multiple hospitals) and then might happen to pay more than average to compensate for that suckiness.
 
number said:
Again, this is not perfectly convincing to me.

I see more incentive for a search firm to skew the national data toward a lower number. They want you to accept their positions. ...
Click to expand...

No way. As the prior poster indicated their whole goal is to get you to call them. Once they have you on the line, they can try and sell you one of the positions they can actually get for you. Until that point, it is presumed that in your job search you will look for the site that promises the most, not the one that lowballs. Sorry, but this is the unethical way of the business world. It's called "bait and switch". A place that makes money off folks from goods or services puts up adds suggesting something too good to be true. You call, and it turns out it is. That's the bait. So then they try to sell you something different, that they can actually deliver -- that's the switch. It sometimes borders on false advertising, but so long as they are relying on some form of collected data, however skewed, or one such crazy paying position, however unique, they stay out of jail. Job Search firms are notorious for this. But you also see it regarding apartment rentals, used cars etc. The amazing deal you come across is no longer still available when you call. But they have one "almost as good" (but not really). That's why you don't buy into these numbers.
 
Thank GOD there isn't a mob here lynching the OP for asking such a normal and natural question!

What a damn relief!


I feel "safe" :)rolleyes:) here, so here's my quesion:

Does one start earning a paycheck as soon as one enters into residency?


Thanks in advance for all the mature, grown-up responses.
 
Law2Doc said:
It's called "bait and switch" .
Click to expand...

Ok, I understand the bait and switch concept. My objection is that when I see these surveys results they are not titled "average salary of positions available here" but rather "average national survey". They want you to think that their positions are better than average... It is not bait and switch if the survey chart calls it national averages.

http://www.allied-physicians.com/salary_surveys/physician-salaries.htm

http://www.cejkasearch.com/compensation/amga_physician_compensation_survey.htm
 
Well, on further thought I suppose your argument makes some sense. I was thinking of recruiting fresh graduates, but perhaps they are more interested in creating dissatisfaction in those already employed.
 
Here's an interesting question: since MD salary surveys seems a point of contention for a number of reasons, what about other profession's salary surveys? I know top law firms set their salaries and everyone else follows, are there any accurate law salary surveys? What about other health care professions: PA/pharmacy/dentistry/podiatry/etc?

Are MDs particularly hard to survey salaries on? It would seem the factors which makes MD salaries difficult to calculate would make any profession difficult to calculate (save for professions where most ppl are paid in salaries that can be researched via tax forms). Does that mean those salary surveys can only be used as a comparison to each other to see how each earns relatively to another profession, even though we have no idea of exact numbers? Hmmmm....
 
Law2Doc, physicians are more likely to underreport their income than overreport. Remember this is the profession of "we are loosing money". I have a friend make way in excess of what is being reported as the pay for his specialty, and I scratch my head everyday trying to figure out if he is doing something illegal.
 
Law2Doc said:
Um no, you only read part of my post. The dude who reports that he earned $200k might only have earned $190 (so for him it's still in the ballpark), but the dude that earned $150k might not report at all. So it can potentially be skewed by a HUGE amount.

While surveys might be a necessary evil, I think you have to (1) take them with a big grain of salt, and (2) only look to those which are compiled by unbiased groups, such as government agencies (not search firms), and (3) read the footnotes, if provided.

At any rate, a premed asking for salary info is potentially going to use it for the absolute worst of reasons -- to extrapolate that he will be earning whatever the highest figure he can find suggests. So lets not throw out the biased and questionable allied table, with the $1 mill maximum salary figure for spinal surgeons, as a realistic goal. It is disinformation of the worst kind.
Click to expand...
Well, then look at the starting salary in the cejka survey, that's gotta be on the lower end of what you'll make. Those are still good figures.
 
Kind of off topic with the money situation, but what exactly does ORS mean on that allied-physicians site?
 
sirus_virus said:
Law2Doc, physicians are more likely to underreport their income than overreport. Remember this is the profession of "we are loosing money". I have a friend make way in excess of what is being reported as the pay for his specialty, and I scratch my head everyday trying to figure out if he is doing something illegal.
Click to expand...

You would have to tell us what specialty he is in, what part of the country, how long he has practiced, what type of practice etc.

There are jobs that pay amazingly well in what some might call undesirable places. Undesirable for cardiologists for example might actually be your hometown you love.
 
No survey of such a huge population will ever be extremely accurate.

I would look at Careers in Medicine and allied-physicians. They seem to be most accurate to what physicians tell me they make anyway....

Again....there is no ultimate authority in this matter. I'd look at a few different ones and just get a relative range.
 
DoctorPardi said:
L2D doesn't need evidence to support that claim. There has long been an understood bias with salary data that those getting paid more are much more likely to report their salaries than those getting paid less.
Click to expand...

Nobody needs evidence to support the claim that the Earth is flat. There has long been an understanding about the shape of the Earth being flat.




^^^^ is what you just said.
 
Law2Doc said:
At any rate, a premed asking for salary info is potentially going to use it for the absolute worst of reasons
Click to expand...

Now that I'm three years in and 150k in debt, am *I* allowed to ask about finances as I decide what specialty to attempt to match into? Or should I also keep waiting so as not to give the appearance of 'picking a field for the wrong reasons?'

Geez, I make fun of English majors for NOT having thought about their future income potential before taking the time to earn that degree. Apparently pre-meds should feel shame for thinking about it before making a life-consuming (not altering, CONSUMING) decision.


I do agree with the premise that these surveys are likely inaccurate though :)
 
Knicks said:
Thank GOD there isn't a mob here lynching the OP for asking such a normal and natural question!
Click to expand...
Welcome to SDN.
Does one start earning a paycheck as soon as one enters into residency?


Thanks in advance for all the mature, grown-up responses.
Click to expand...

yes, interns earn a salary. I haven't looked at nationwide data in a while but it's typically 38-44k, with an increase of 1k-ish per PGY year
 
MattD said:
Now that I'm three years in and 150k in debt, am *I* allowed to ask about finances as I decide what specialty to attempt to match into? Or should I also keep waiting so as not to give the appearance of 'picking a field for the wrong reasons?'...
Click to expand...

I think that once you are actually in the thick of rotations you have been exposed enough to know that you won't be simply picking the most lucrative path, and will be looking for specialties you actually like and can see yourself working in. So sure, once you are 3 years in, it's "allowed". Before that, it's simply focusing on factors that should be secondary. You also will have a better sense of how long a road ahead of you you might have in the various rotations, and won't start getting excited about the $1 million spinal surgery position that some recruiter wants you to think is waiting for you. position. But it also should be noted that you are still 4+ years away from a post-residency, so things easilly can change, particularly in this volatile economy with so much health care reform buzz.
 
sirus_virus said:
Law2Doc, physicians are more likely to underreport their income than overreport. Remember this is the profession of "we are loosing money". I have a friend make way in excess of what is being reported as the pay for his specialty, and I scratch my head everyday trying to figure out if he is doing something illegal.
Click to expand...

I don't buy that for a second. (And know it didn't work this way in law, which is why I'm so adamant that human nature prevails, equally amongst doctors as with lawyers). In fact, because so many people feel this is a profession of losing money thanks to declining reimbursements, people LOVE to brag when they are beating the norm. But the dude who isn't making it is not going to rub salt into his wounds by dutifully completing a survey saying he's a (financial) loser.
 
MattD said:
Nobody needs evidence to support the claim that the Earth is flat. There has long been an understanding about the shape of the Earth being flat.




^^^^ is what you just said.
Click to expand...

First of all, the best one can do is know the evidence of the day and support that. There was absolutely nothing illogical or idiotic about believing the world was flat 600 years ago. The average person had no reason to believe otherwise.

Second of all it is pretty well accepted that people over estimate their income and those making less generally report less often than those making more. Leading to salary surveys being inflated. Could I find that evidence if I wanted too? Almost certainly, in fact in a critical reasoning class I took a statistician wrote a whole chapter on this phenomenon in a book we read. I however did not feel it was necessary to prove this argument.

Third, no one should be claiming pre-meds and medical students ought to be going into the field with a financial blind fold on. The point is just that 1) The financial data available may have almost nothing to do with what actual doctors are making 2) Even if the data were correct a pre-med or 1st year is 7-10 years from being an attending and things could change dramatically by then 3) Making decisions on shady data that have nothing to do with what YOU will make one day could lead to bad career decision making.

I think the best you can do is try to know if you like medicine or not (as well as a premed could) and assume you'll probably make 100-200 grand a year. If that's enough for you then go for it. You might be pleasantly surprised with how much money you make or maybe you wont, but either way hopefully you'll like your job.
 
Law2Doc said:
I think that once you are actually in the thick of rotations you have been exposed enough to know that you won't be simply picking the most lucrative path, and will be looking for specialties you actually like and can see yourself working in. So sure, once you are 3 years in, it's "allowed".
Click to expand...

Thank you. I was concerned.
 
DoctorPardi said:
...The point is just that 1) The financial data available may have almost nothing to do with what actual doctors are making 2) Even if the data were correct a pre-med or 1st year is 7-10 years from being an attending and things could change dramatically by then 3) Making decisions on shady data that have nothing to do with what YOU will make one day could lead to bad career decision making. ...
Click to expand...

Exactly. :thumbup:
 
DoctorPardi said:
First of all, the best one can do is know the evidence of the day and support that. There was absolutely nothing illogical or idiotic about believing the world was flat 600 years ago. The average person had no reason to believe otherwise.
Click to expand...
My POINT was that your contention that L2D didn't need no stinkin' evidence to make his claim was flawed. Of course you need evidence to draw a conclusion. 600 years ago the only data they had pointed to the flawed conclusion that the Earth was flat, but at least they were using data....

I agree with L2D, actually, that the survey data available online is flawed. However, if it's all the data you gots, it's all the data you gots. Telling people not to use it without giving them alternatives is dumb and stupid (and ignorant). Sure, warn them about the inadequacies of the data, but if you don't have something else to show them, you're in no position to tell them to just not look at ANY data.

Second of all it is pretty well accepted that people over estimate their income and those making less generally report less often than those making more. Leading to salary surveys being inflated. Could I find that evidence if I wanted too? Almost certainly, in fact in a critical reasoning class I took a statistician wrote a whole chapter on this phenomenon in a book we read. I however did not feel it was necessary to prove this argument.[/quote

Lots of things are well accepted. My whole POINT was that without evidence this means nothing. Consensus opinion with no data is worthless. This is why I don't pull up "central line" on wikipedia on a rolling laptop while I perform the procedure at the bedside. (Bad analogy, I know, I know) (although I hear from a current resident that they caught someone doing this at our institution once.. it was for a chest tube though I think :)

Maybe the surveys are inflated, maybe they aren't. You have no data to prove either way. You only have opinion.

BTW, the 'evidence' you're claiming exists, this statistician's claim that the wealthy over report and the less wealth underreport, even if backed up by studies to be a genuine phenomenon, isn't evidence for the claim you two are making. True evidence for the claim you're making would require you to compare the survey data to some form of 'actual' data on incomes you collected, perhaps from the IRS, and find a discrepancy. Anything else is simply making an inductive leap from a general phenomenon to a specific situation.

Third, no one should be claiming pre-meds and medical students ought to be going into the field with a financial blind fold on. The point is just that 1) The financial data available may have almost nothing to do with what actual doctors are making 2) Even if the data were correct a pre-med or 1st year is 7-10 years from being an attending and things could change dramatically by then 3) Making decisions on shady data that have nothing to do with what YOU will make one day could lead to bad career decision making.
Click to expand...
I hope L2D appreciates you gettin' his back. If you worked for Death Row Records 13 years ago we might still have the poetic rhymes of Mr. Shakur today!

I think the best you can do is try to know if you like medicine or not (as well as a premed could) and assume you'll probably make 100-200 grand a year. If that's enough for you then go for it. You might be pleasantly surprised with how much money you make or maybe you wont, but either way hopefully you'll like your job.
Click to expand...

I agree.
Click to expand...
 
MattD said:
...

I agree with L2D, actually, that the survey data available online is flawed. However, if it's all the data you gots, it's all the data you gots. Telling people not to use it without giving them alternatives is dumb and stupid (and ignorant). ...
Click to expand...

I believe I said the Bureau of Labor and Statistics data was probably the one to look at because although it is flawed, it is not biased (which I consider the bigger hurdle to useful data, when you look at the recruiter pages). I said ignore any data which (1) lists maximums (such as allied does), or (2) contains footnotes which indicate that their averages are not really based on a cross section of the specialty (as the cejka cite does). I do think there must be better resources out there aside from recruiter pages (each specialty specific journal generally has a "salary" article/analysis every couple of years), but I doubt you'll find everything nice and neat and in one place. As a result the data won't be premed friendly, but might be after you have picked a specialty.
 
MattD said:
...
I hope L2D appreciates you gettin' his back. If you worked for Death Row Records 13 years ago we might still have the poetic rhymes of Mr. Shakur today!
...
Click to expand...

People are free to have whatever opinions they have. That two people agree on a thread isn't exactly grounds for criticism. Particularly if those opinions conflict with yours. Just means more than one person isn't buying what you are selling, Tupak. East Siders/Biggie fans unite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

EdgeTrimmer
Washington Post article on Physician Salaries
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
Emed MD
E
M
Salary vs. Experience
Replies
26
Views
4K
SurfingDoctor
SurfingDoctor
B
Physician Pharma Compensation Data
Replies
2
Views
854
calivianya
calivianya
E
Salary as an MD vs. PhD
Replies
3
Views
2K
mistafab
mistafab
F
NRMP Match Data Question
Replies
2
Views
558
Future_Bone_Docta
F
Top