Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
I don't know but I was at a meeting once and heard a colleague tell him "Ralph, I've got two bad pieces of info to share with you. First, you've got Alzheimer's. Second, that grant approval for the oligomet study you've been working on is going not to go through this year."
After a long pause Ralph said "Well thank god I don't have Alzheimer's."
you’ll hear some of the best stuff at these meetings if you just keep your ears perked up and open.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I'm friends with Mo Khan and he's an honest, decent guy. We all have differences of opinion, and we all get excited about what we're doing and have detractors that want to knock us back down. I've never seen him bully or gaslight like so much of Twitter.
I stay off Twitter because of crap like this. It's probably better not to be too public about ideas for studies because these detractors can seriously derail your ideas.
At least on forums we can have a reasoned discussion with facts, links, and ideas, and not just little mostly worthless self-promotional snippets.
I stay off Twitter because of crap like this. It's probably better not to be too public about ideas for studies because these detractors can seriously derail your ideas.
At least on forums we can have a reasoned discussion with facts, links, and ideas, and not just little mostly worthless self-promotional snippets.
🤣
this is the funniest ish I've ever seen here, and I've read plenty of carbonionangle posts.
Got damn man, you gotta warn us when you drink in the morning.
SDN is a lot of things, but a place for reasoned discussion is not it.
i agree same reason why i stay away as well. It seems to attract a lot of bullies and self-aggrandizing virtue signalers. I hope your friend presses on.
Only drinking coffee so far this morning. I don't think there's anything else in it.
We have plenty of serious and reasoned discussions on here. If some people want to have more lighthearted discussions that's fine. We try to cut the unprofessional stuff, and my apologies for when it sneaks through.
Quit trolling. Anonymity on SDN has its perks exactly for that reason
ahhhhh, yes. the famous duo of anonymity on the internet and reasoned discussion. tale as old as time. tell me more lmao.
Please forgive the vulgarity, but this is something that continues to hold true across time and space.
www.penny-arcade.com
Green Blackboards (And Other Anomalies) - Penny Arcade
Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.
Honestly, that dude has dementia.
Please forgive the vulgarity, but this is something that continues to hold true across time and space.
Green Blackboards (And Other Anomalies) - Penny Arcade
Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.
Yep.
In all fairness to Ralph W., there were multiple other MDs piling on Mo K's tweet with criticism.
I know him well and agree completely. Doesn't seem like Twitter is the best place for these kinds of discussions.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
ClinicalTrials.gov
clinicaltrials.gov
this trial has 4x more secondary endpoints than planned accrual of patients
D
deleted774703
ClinicalTrials.gov
this trial has 4x more secondary endpoints than planned accrual of patients
Lmao each portion of the CMP and CBC is individually listed as an outcome
I feel bad for khan but this is kind of silly
Great trial name though!
It's like folks are clutching pearls and retiring to the fainting couch over half a gray or so XRT to the lungs. I still say you didn't need a "trial" for this mess. Should have just started doing it with some simpatico internists and pulm guys and report as case series. E.g., where's the "trial" that you need to intubate COVID patients or that intubation improves survival? Where's the trial for azithromycin? Many guidelines I saw weeks ago *were* recommending hydroxychloroquine and golly people's hair wasn't on fire because there was no HydroxyQ trial. People thought it was risky maybe but HQ was waaaayyy more risky than a few beam-seconds to the lungs. I say again: XRT to the lungs *is* a standard of care for pneumonia, by definition. That radiation-trained folks are just finding that out now and getting their feelings hurt about it is on them. There has been extant data for almost a century that it's reasonable and there's been no (can argue that somewhat) refutational data that it's unreasonable. So there!
And 100% agree.
It occurred to me today: I wonder how many of the authors of the green journal article have pending grants for studying radiation in animal models of pneumonia? A human trial skips over the animal models that keeps so many labs going...
Pandemic changed the calculus?
Grants become very fundable when you're writing about a hot topic. The government sets aside grants for studying whatever topic is hot at that time. So people rush in to adapt their research to the hot topic. In this case it's COVID-19. Next year it will probably be something else.
Point is that if someone beats you to the punch with a human trial and people start to think animal studies are unnecessary, you might lose your grant.
Or maybe it's just conspiracy theories on my end.
I think there’s ethical issues putting an unproven conclusion as the title of a trial. Otherwise I’m in favor of more innovative uses for RT and support this.
yea I’m uncomfortable with patients being offered the “RESCUE” trial as it seems like false advertising and could be coercive to desperate patients
Or coercive to their families as these poor patients may not be in position to consent
I'm currently writing a trial:
Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy: Can Urologists Refer Earlier Somehow?
Shortened for CTEP to Disease Site: Prostate Cancer; Trial Name: XRT CURES
Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy: Can Urologists Refer Earlier Somehow?
Shortened for CTEP to Disease Site: Prostate Cancer; Trial Name: XRT CURES
Can I open that trial here immediately? I would add “All” to the end of the title.
D
deleted774703
I don’t know if I should be annoyed or not by this
Erin gillsespie one of the biggest twitter gaslighters in past few years
Oh well. Whatever it takes To wake them up
I’m just surprised they haven’t blamed SDN yet
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
"Interest in radiation oncology continues to decline: The absolute number of U.S. senior medical students applying to radiation oncology fell to 128, which is 35 (21%) lower than in 2019. This number is 61 U.S. senior applicants fewer than the number of residency spots in the match and represents 0.40% of all graduating U.S. senior medical students, the lowest proportion in the documented time period (down from 0.52% in 2019 and 0.62% in 2018)."
The smart medical students are on to other things..
1) There was a lot of blaming SDN behind the scenes during this talk, rest assured.
2) ARRO and Shauna Campbell really seem to be swinging for the fences in terms of advocating for the health of the specialty. I'm so impressed with what they're willing to do, non-anonymously. I sit here and complain behind a silly internet forum moniker and this crew is out there trying to make changes for the better.
ARRO - you have my sincere gratitude.
Agreed - I just hope the takeaway from this is not "oh well we need to get more interest into the field!!11 virtual rotation for everybody!!"
I'd say 125ish x 4 years after keeping RO completely out of the match next year
One day Paul is persecuting and stoning Christians and the next he's converted and spreading the word wherever he could.
Better to convert than burn?
She even #TimesUp'd 'em?!?! Look out. She's gonna cast thieves out of the temple. I hope.
Don't forget about the programs that avoided SOAP and interviewed and ranked every warm body who simply applied and showed up to interview day, and thus filled. Radonc residency google sheets lists them all (Dartmouth, Case, Baylor, Cornell, Jeff , Kentucky are listed on the sheets).
Look on the bright side, maybe next year we can hit 30%. We’re already in the lead but at that point would be blowing away the competition. Top of the pack baby.
D
deleted774703
YES!!! This is why even counting for the SOAP doesn't tell the full story
There were ppl with 190s who matched this year. We couldn't even sniff an interview without a 240 back in the day
Suddenly, antitrust is no more a worry than supervision.
D
deleted774703
Matt Katz constantly gaslighting LOL
This is must read thread haha
This is must read thread haha
Last edited by a moderator:
Probably the best most feasible idea I’ve seen? Eliminate 1 spot from each program. Can we get a gofundme for this or something
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Bloodbath in Red Journal
Anyone catch the beat down this kid at Wash U took in the most recent Red Journal? When your department is expanding it's residency, probably best not to call out the process in the specialty's primary journal. Especially if you graduated last year.
forums.studentdoctor.net
At least Smith is on board....though it was his article (https://ascopubs.org/doi/full/10.1200/JCO.2010.31.2520) that was propped up as the reason it was OK to add more residents.
The same article that in 2010 COMPLETELY IGNORED hypofrac/SBRT for the three biggest cancers we see - breast, prostate, and lung - when making their calculations. Also ignored automation/improvements in speed in plan development.
Either a methodology mistake or they weren't interested in a calculus that said we didn't need this many rad oncs. Either way, it was a major error. Only a hand waving mention of hypofrac in their discussion section.
No truer words. And so the next generation of gaslighters begins, for a whole next generation to come...
I enjoyed this reminder that someone does actually monitor the ABR Twitter account:
