Rad Onc Twitter

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Radonc90 said:
Just went to ROHub...

It has been 8 days and zero replies from #WomenWhoCurie, any radonc (let alone female radonc), or any ASTRO members...
So much for ASTRO to silence Simul...
This alone tells everyone the status of this field, nobody stands up for what is right.
Pretty much like the FDA commissioner fiasco, the only person that was vocal about the FDA commissioner fiasco is....surprise surprise surprise...Ralph!
Click to expand...

Maybe all the dissenting opinions were deleted?
Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
scarbrtj said:
I'd like to know how to better read this. Neuronix said there's ~600 MDPhDs a year. At first blush, all these integers don't seem to add up that high? Second, am I seeing that not a single MDPhD who tried to get into rad onc was jilted? Third, does child neuro seem to jilt >2/3 of all MDPhD applicants? Likely I am seeing all this incorrectly. But good graph; I guess that's in that match data booklet somewhere.
Click to expand...

The graphs show percent not absolute number. So 25% of rad onc residents matched that year had PhDs. None with a PhD did not match, but that means they still could have failed to match into radonc but matched into a prelim year, or medicine, for example and still would have 'matched.' In a great year, maybe there's 5-10 physician scientist positions available for those 40 PhDs (some of whom never wanted to run labs anyways), but that's another topic.

Not expert on child neuro , but likely different applicant pool in those matched vs. unmatched groups, such as people with foreign MD/PhD who did a few years in american postdoc and then try to match, plus some poorly advised students without backup plans (versus rad onc where if you don't get a position you likely still received a prelim spot, so technically matched).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
thecarbonionangle said:
Putting aside the discussion of how nice Dr. Randall is, his contributions to GYN RO, the controversy of whether KY programs are worth a damn, if the job he was offering was predatory, 2:1 vs 1:1 match, though I believe all of these are apropos and admissible in this discussion, my biggest issue with Dr Randall is his refusal to lead. It is deepy disappointing he chose to selectively ignore information and demand “data”, really a cruel euphemism for many people being underemployed and unemployed. What is the tragedy of our field IMHO is that we have an overall dearth of leadership. And you just cant dig yourself out of a hole if you cannot even admit there is an issue.

there are too many entrenched people in our field with opinions and views which are counterproductive and directly antagonistic to the solutions that may be found out of this hole.
Click to expand...

This is the hearest of says, so everyone should take it with a grain of salt, but having talked in the past to the friend of a colleague they painted a much less rosy picture of U Kentucky, including the leadership attempting to sabotage one of their own residents jobs nearly leading to a lawsuit against the university. Any in any case, it doesn't change the fact that Dr. Randall is publicly failing to acknowledge the reality that many residents are experiencing despite a significant amount of anecdotal and legitimate data (see scarbrtj post).

If the U Kentucky chair can so easily turn a blind eye to evidence with an obvious conclusion, anyone want to take bets on what he and other chairs think about coronavirus?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
Members don't see this ad :)
radOresident said:
This is the hearest of says, so everyone should take it with a grain of salt, but having talked in the past to the friend of a colleague they painted a much less rosy picture of U Kentucky, including the leadership attempting to sabotage one of their own residents jobs nearly leading to a lawsuit against the university. Any in any case, it doesn't change the fact that Dr. Randall is publicly failing to acknowledge the reality that many residents are experiencing despite a significant amount of anecdotal and legitimate data (see scarbrtj post).

If the U Kentucky chair can so easily turn a blind eye to evidence with an obvious conclusion, anyone want to take bets on what he and other chairs think about coronavirus?
Click to expand...

I'm enjoying the amount of ire Randall's post churned up about him and Kentucky. What's that saying - where there's smoke there's fire?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
ASTRO continues its open stupidity

Idk why we put any hope into them making any changes

ASCO and AACR were free and also had to convert to online meeting smh

 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
radoncdoc16 said:
ASTRO continues its open stupidity

Idk why we put any hope into them making any changes

ASCO and AACR were free and also had to convert to online meeting smh

Click to expand...


ABR and ASTRO are in an arms race to see who can collect more money by way of dues and fees while hurling professionalism accusations or "woe is me" Virtue Signaling at anyone who questions their methods and decisions.
 
The two organizations seem unusually tied at the hip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I blocked out time last year to attend ASTRO in Miami this year. Understandably they cannot have a live meeting, that is totally acceptable. But they are charging the exact same rate as a live meeting when the remote one has zero ability to network in any conventional manner. Also, what the hell constitutes an "amazing exhibit hall?" You can't talk to vendors, you can't preview products in a hands-on manner, and you certainly can't haggle on the spot (the latter is only tangentially relevant as most groups have frozen capital purchases during COVID).

Screw you ASTRO, I'm not paying a penny.

ASCO is ten times your size and with hundred times the scientific content for minimal cost.

I also enjoyed the following:

In an effort to produce an immersive and interactive virtual meeting, ASTRO then invested in an online platform that is being customized for our community’s unique needs, including networking and interview opportunities and an expansive exhibit hall. I promise you this will not be a hyped up Zoom call! This virtual meeting will be immersive and unlike anything you have ever experienced before. This transition to a virtual platform required us to negotiate and secure new contracts with a range of vendors including an online platform provider, videographers and audio technicians, digital designers to create online materials, support to produce trainings and onboarding for all presenters and exhibitors, and so much more. Everything we have done to produce this Annual Meeting was done to create a world-class, unforgettable learning experience for you.
Click to expand...

ASTRO can do this in three months but ABR can't. Why not? Oh, right, because ABR already has your money.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: 9 users
Gfunk6 said:
what the hell constitutes an "amazing exhibit hall?"
This virtual meeting will be immersive and unlike anything you have ever experienced before
... world-class, unforgettable learning experience
Click to expand...
I have a natural aversion to phraseology like this and 100% of time find myself running in opposite direction of anyone talking like that. How much better would it have been had ASTRO spoken and advertised honestly versus almost comically hyperbolically. It's like Trump is their copy writer here. Very thirsty!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
OTN said:
I've been wondering this the whole time. What's the point of a contract if they can just break it at will? It's not like they don't have the money: All that incredibly expensive art, atria, hallways, etc, throughout all these large hospitals and academic medical centers would pay for a lot of salaries.
Click to expand...
"art and atria" got to love it man!!!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
scarbrtj said:
EBRT has a profit margin probably unsurpassed in medicine. It’s why there was “peak rad onc,” diminishment of private practice and growth in academic jobs over time, why there’s been residency oversupply, why radiation therapy used to literally be traded on the stock market, and a whole host of other things. That profit margin has had a hammer taken to it by multiple forces though. Ten years ago in a pandemic MDACC wouldn’t have missed a beat and honored every contract. Now the economics are a lot more fragile to perturbations. Our wiggle room is gone.
Click to expand...
Ironically, I liked rad onc by accident after a certain rotation fell through and I filled the gap with a home rad onc rotation (was considering entirely other specialty options) . Then did a couple of outside ones... loved it... decided to apply and only then did my hair stand on end because I finally realized it was "competitive" blah blah (my other specialty wasn't).
I still love rad onc the same. I just want to do good by our patients. Satisfy my own curiosity. Tweak a volume here and angle the beam there. Argue against RT (my personal fave). I have not regretted my choice of specialty ever... (well except might have gone into surgery but I am just too lazy and sleepy).
It is interesting how just a few weeks ago on Twitter they were (is that weird or what?) all oohing and aahing about how amazing our newest "low-score" residents will be, etc. etc. etc. KO was of course front and center. And hey yes, maybe it is true - fewer publications/more love for the patient? --- but why then did the field admit so many of us "undesirables" who did spare no effort to check every box on that CV (publication? oral? community outreach? helping stray dogs?). What was the attraction?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
waaaait a minute, if ASTRO can create an amazing exhibit hall experience with an "immersive and unlike anything you have ever experience before" why the $%^# can't ABR create a virtual exam that can also be taken this year, ya know with about the same turn around time. o_O
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
The “leaders” in this field are often wrong but never in doubt. That my friends is a recipe for putrid stagnancy and decline. Would you want to buy this fund? Don’t think so folks!
 
scarbrtj said:
I have a natural aversion to phraseology like this and 100% of time find myself running in opposite direction of anyone talking like that. How much better would it have been had ASTRO spoken and advertised honestly versus almost comically hyperbolically. It's like Trump is their copy writer here. Very thirsty!
Click to expand...

its gonna be the most beautiful amazing YUGE ASTRO you have ever seen. Believe me!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
thecarbonionangle said:
The “leaders” in this field are often wrong but never in doubt. That my friends is a recipe for putrid stagnancy and decline. Would you want to buy this fund? Don’t think so folks!
Click to expand...
Reminded of that old saying "What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know... it’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so" (often ascribed to Twain). Our leaders exude a confidence that only comes from being garbed in correctness. Embarrassingly, they're nekkid.

I recently rewatched 'Roger & Me.' Our leaders are Roger Smith and the GM board of directors. Incoming residents are the lucky recipients of jobs being shifted (south of the border). SDN is Michael Moore. Radiation oncology (now) is Flint of the late 1980s. Woe betide us if we're headed toward becoming the Flint of today.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users
scarbrtj said:
Reminded of that old saying "What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know... it’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so" (often ascribed to Twain). Our leaders exude a confidence that only comes from being garbed in correctness. Embarrassingly, they're nekkid.

I recently rewatched 'Roger & Me.' Our leaders are Roger Smith and the GM board of directors. Incoming residents are the lucky recipients of jobs being shifted (south of the border). SDN is Michael Moore. Radiation oncology (now) is Flint of the late 1980s. Woe betide us if we're headed toward becoming the Flint of today.
Click to expand...
I love Twain but I gotta give this one to Josh Billings (less well known than Twain but funny nonetheless). Pseudonym for Henry Wheeler Shaw.

"It ain't ignorance causes so much trouble; it's folks knowing so much that ain't so."

en.wikipedia.org

Josh Billings - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org


Reagan recycled it into "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Chartreuse Wombat said:
I love Twain but I gotta give this one to Josh Billings (less well known than Twain but funny nonetheless). Pseudonym for Henry Wheeler Shaw.

"It ain't ignorance causes so much trouble; it's folks knowing so much that ain't so."

en.wikipedia.org

Josh Billings - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org


Reagan recycled it into "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”
Click to expand...

its morning in america my friends. The sun is out, it just ain’t hitting rad onc.
 
bachiraki said:
There are several inaccurate posts here..

People will lose allies by making personal comments (financial earnings) and using derogatory language. It is very reasonable to ask for data. Scarbtj posted a nice mathematical analysis on SDN about how many new consults each Rad Onc needs annually to have a rewarding/financially stable career. I thing that analysis should be submitted to Journals for publication. Then people will find more allies for their cause..
Click to expand...

Can you send a link to this math analysis?
 
A chair requests “evidence”. The absence of evidence is not evidence for absence. The “evidence” is there for him to see.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 4 users
sallyhasanidea said:
Can you send a link to this math analysis?
Click to expand...
Read all these references, and then do some cipherin' in your head. That's the analysis.


1. Supply and Demand for Radiation Oncology in the United States: Updated Projections for 2015 to 2025. "In comparison with prior projections, the new projected demand for radiation therapy in 2020 dropped by 24,000 cases (a 4% relative decline). This decrease is attributable to an overall reduction in the use of radiation to treat cancer, from 28% of all newly diagnosed cancers in the prior projections down to 26% for the new projections."
2. AAMC Physician Specialty Data Report.
3. Projected Supply of and Demand for Oncologists and Radiation Oncologists Through 2025: An Aging, Better-Insured Population Will Result in Shortage. "We found that approximately 16,347 oncologists and radiation oncologists were clinically active and filing medical claims for patients with cancer diagnoses in 2012. Among these, there were 13,070 oncologists and 3,277 radiation oncologists. We found that 16% of oncologists and 5% of radiation oncologists provided clinical care on a part-time basis. These oncologists and radiation oncologists engaged in part-time clinical care delivered 48% of the patient care visits that their peers in full-time patient care provided. This finding is consistent with those of prior surveys showing academic oncologists, on average, spent 48.3% of their time on clinical activities.18 As a result of lower clinical productivity, we estimated by experience and sex the number of oncologists and radiation oncologists providing FTE patient care in the beginning of 2012 to be 15,190, including 12,000 oncologists and 3,190 radiation oncologists."
4. Decreasing radiation therapy utilization in adult patients with glioblastoma multiforme: a population-based analysis.
5. Trends in Radiation Therapy among Cancer Survivors in the United States, 2000–2030. "In 2016, there were an estimated 10.5 million 5-year cancer survivors, of whom 3.05 million received radiation therapy... The fraction of all cancer survivors who received radiation increased from 24% in 2000 to a projected maximum of 29% in 2020. After 2020, the fraction of radiation-treated survivors is projected to slightly decline to 28% by 2030."
6. Declining Use of Radiotherapy for Adverse Features After Radical Prostatectomy: Results From the National Cancer Data Base.
7. The Future of Radiation Oncology in the United States From 2010 to 2020: Will Supply Keep Pace With Demand?
* "Between 2010 and 2020, the total number of patients receiving radiation therapy during their initial treatment course is expected to increase by 22%, from 470,000 per year to 575,000 per year. In contrast, assuming that the current graduation rate of 140 residents per year remains constant, the number of full-time equivalent radiation oncologists is expected to increase by only 2%, from 3,943 to 4,022. The size of residency training classes for the years 2014 to 2019 would have to double to 280 residents per year in order for growth in supply of radiation oncologists to equal expected growth in demand."
* "We conducted a sensitivity analysis to determine how changes in the utilization of radiation therapy and in the incidence of cancer would impact the relative increase in demand for radiation therapy between 2010 and 2020. To estimate appropriate parameters for the sensitivity analysis of radiation therapy utilization, we conducted a historical analysis using SEER data spanning 1990 to 2006 and found that, compared with the years 2003 to 2005, radiotherapy utilization rates generally varied no more than approximately ± 10% during this time period (Fig 1).4 With regard to the cancer incidence sensitivity analysis, previously published historical data indicated that cancer incidence has both increased and decreased in a statistically significant manner between 1975 and 2006; recently however, cancer incidence has been slowly decreasing at a rate of 0.4% per year from 1997 to 2006, and this rate increases to 0.7% per year if only the years 2002 to 2006 are considered.
8. NRMP Report Archives.
9. United States Cancer Statistics: Data Visualizations.
10. American Cancer Society Facts & Figures.
11. Radiotherapy Utilization and Fractionation Patterns During the First Course of Cancer Treatment in the United States From 2004 to 2014. "We found a steady decrease in the percent of patients receiving radiotherapy in their first course of treatment, and a global decline in the mean number of fractions delivered per patient receiving EBRT, compared with an increase in systemic therapy and stable surgery utilization. "
12. Temporal Trends of Resident Experience in External Beam Radiation Therapy Cases: Analysis of ACGME Case Logs from 2007-2018. "From 2007 to 2018, the mean number of total EBRT cases per [resident] decreased, as did the proportion of definitive cases."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
projects.propublica.org

American Society For Radiation Oncology - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica

Since 2013, the IRS has released data culled from millions of nonprofit tax filings. Use this database to find organizations and see details like their executive compensation, revenue and expenses, as well as download tax filings going back as far as 2001.
projects.propublica.org
I was surprised by the breakdown of where money comes from and goes to but it helps explain the rationale for registration costs of the annual meeting.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 users
lhl said:
projects.propublica.org

American Society For Radiation Oncology - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica

Since 2013, the IRS has released data culled from millions of nonprofit tax filings. Use this database to find organizations and see details like their executive compensation, revenue and expenses, as well as download tax filings going back as far as 2001.
projects.propublica.org
I was surprised by the breakdown of where money comes from and goes to but it helps explain the rationale for registration costs of the annual meeting.
Click to expand...
At a quick glance revenues are very dependent on meetings and events. 2020 revenues likely to be much lower.

1594336544396.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I cannot get over how sh***y this field is

Are you kidding me?

Students stay away!

 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Haha
Reactions: 5 users
radoncdoc16 said:
I cannot get over how sh***y this field is

Are you kidding me?

Students stay away!

Click to expand...

On the positive, the less busy we get in radiation oncology due to labor dilution the more time we will all have to align with how Dr. Siker says we should be thinking
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
The young woke socialist rad onc twttier bully-mob occupying the junior faculty academic positions in the oversaturated urban hellscapes has never made me more happy to be practicing in middle of nowhere (an underserved area even! Remember when that was important?). Lack of biryanis is a small price to pay to be as far removed from this noxious cloud of doxx-proof smugness and virtue-signalling as possible.

These people are so "brave." Writing about racial justice in rad onc in relation to a killing of an unarmed black man committing petty crime by a known terrible cop, a very rare event by statistics, and certainly something that has absolutely nothing to do with rad onc. Regardless, it's obviously our most important issue and it's shameful than anyone would try to discuss any other issues. We're an evidence based field after all. Evidence suggests we have a massive problem of racism and violence against minorities in radiation oncology. Well done. So brave! What exactly was it you were fearing would happen to you by speaking out on the obviously-and-universally-agreed-on-by-literally-everyone reprehensible George Floyd killing and supporting the BLM political movement? Your evil white racist overlords in academia would have fired you (the only people in America who thought the killing was justified apparently)? So brave. Really, well done.

Just when you think they can't take the virtue signalling to any higher of a vomit-inducing level...

Can't wait to get through boards and never attend an ASTRO meeting ever again.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 8 users
metallica81788 said:
Oh snap we still have boards?!?!?!

By the time we take these oral boards it will be nearly two years since finishing residency.
Click to expand...

I care little anymore as I have no desire to live anywhere near an urban metro area. If the future of our field is fighting over locums scraps in the Dakotas does it even matter if we're board certified by the ABRacket? The past, and apparently still on-going recruiting efforts and residency selection to this field have resulted in creating a workforce where 80-90% wouldn't consider taking a rural job for any amount of money. It's why the Wisconsin jobs are literally posted for years and years and people will take $70k fellowships in big cities over them.

But nope, biggest issue in rad onc is the handful of racist white cops (out of 700k cops) who kill unarmed black petty criminals. And being confused about using the proper pronouns for people who wish to change their gender. These are the most crucial issues facing our field as we strive to figure out the best ways to cure cancer with radiation. Read it on Twitter, so must be true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
metallica81788 said:
Oh snap we still have boards?!?!?!

By the time we take these oral boards it will be nearly two years since finishing residency.
Click to expand...
Because each graduating class is a good chunk of the workforce, almost one out of ten practicing rad oncs are now non board certified. With any further significant BC delays, will be >1/10.
 
scarbrtj said:
Because each graduating class is a good chunk of the workforce, almost one out of ten practicing rad oncs are now non board certified. With any further significant BC delays, will be >1/10.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard about a massive increase in morbidity or mortality despite this...it's almost like jumping the hoops through 4 different board exams isn't about patient safety or public trust any longer...
 
  • Haha
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Dr. Siker states, "'I'm not saying [board exams and gender issues] aren't important, but the timing of this discussion in the midst of a pivotal racial justice movement is odd." She goes on to suggest that we are choosing not to focus on areas of systemic anti-Black racism because other areas were in the spotlight.

But it's not odd at all. There were months of angst and uncertainty amongst her junior professional colleagues whose lives have been upended by the ABR. As a result of their lack of communication from ABR, additional information came out about gender inequity (via Twitter) including lack of access to appropriate breast feeding facilities for female RO candidates taking ABR exams.

Perhaps she wasn't paying attention because board exams aren't an issue for her, but these are important topics. The conversation evolved from early March (first message about postponed exams) to April (new dates announced) to ongoing coronavirus pandemic during which there was scant communication. Letters were written and comments made through May regarding the ABR. ASTRO sent a letter to ABR on June 26th. For reference, George Floyd was killed by the Minneapolis police on June 25th.

So, no, the timing of concern and outreach and statements regarding the ABR and virtual exams and gender equality is not 'odd.' The majority of these messages were occurring before the national conversation started by Mr. Floyd's death. It's not fair to characterize concerns about board exams and gender equity as somehow not addressing or ignoring the ongoing national dialogue about systemic racism.

We can walk and chew gum. We can care about our trainees and their frustrations with testing and gendered inequity, AND care about racism. Suggesting there are "limited resources" so that we can't address both is disingenuous.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 9 users
GapCalc said:
Dr. Siker states, "'I'm not saying [board exams and gender issues] aren't important, but the timing of this discussion in the midst of a pivotal racial justice movement is odd." She goes on to suggest that we are choosing not to focus on areas of systemic anti-Black racism because other areas were in the spotlight.

But it's not odd at all. There were months of angst and uncertainty amongst her junior professional colleagues whose lives have been upended by the ABR. As a result of their lack of communication from ABR, additional information came out about gender inequity (via Twitter) including lack of access to appropriate breast feeding facilities for female RO candidates taking ABR exams.

Perhaps she wasn't paying attention because board exams aren't an issue for her, but these are important topics. The conversation evolved from early March (first message about postponed exams) to April (new dates announced) to ongoing coronavirus pandemic during which there was scant communication. Letters were written and comments made through May regarding the ABR. ASTRO sent a letter to ABR on June 26th. For reference, George Floyd was killed by the Minneapolis police on June 25th.

So, no, the timing of concern and outreach and statements regarding the ABR and virtual exams and gender equality is not 'odd.' The majority of these messages were occurring before the national conversation started by Mr. Floyd's death. It's not fair to characterize concerns about board exams and gender equity as somehow not addressing or ignoring the ongoing national dialogue about systemic racism.

We can walk and chew gum. We can care about our trainees and their frustrations with testing and gendered inequity, AND care about racism. Suggesting there are "limited resources" so that we can't address both is disingenuous.
Click to expand...

What's crazy is that some Rad Oncs are trying to fix societies problems, when they can barely fix oral boards --> virtual boards and make some reasonable accommodations for nursing mothers. Let's not even mention their "effort" on fixing the expansion of residency spots. How are the people who can't figure out these very simple things make a dent in our bigger societal problems? I'm afraid to say it, lest they write a pub based on this idea, but you can't defeat racism with SRS.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 2 users
RadOncMegatron said:
What's crazy is that some Rad Oncs are trying to fix societies problems, when they can barely fix oral boards --> virtual boards and make some reasonable accommodations for nursing mothers. Let's not even mention their "effort" on fixing the expansion of residency spots. How are the people who can't figure out these very simple things make a dent in our bigger societal problems? I'm afraid to say it, lest they write a pub based on this idea, but you can't defeat racism with SRS.
Click to expand...

I bet I could defeat racism with an SRS-based lobotomy.

Give me 8 months for my Red Journal paper to be published.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 5 users
In my days, i have known a of rad oncs and a lot of catfish turtles. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that if we are counting on rad onc “leaders” to solve racism, the URMs are going to be waiting for a while! If there was a lightbulb that needed to be screwed in the room at ASTRO. There would be a giant comitee, old white guys deliberating, these are very serious people folks. After much talk, nothing would be done about the lightbulb. Some would say there is no evidence the lightbulb is needed. Some may be to worried about what is for lunch (our young, since you asked with a chutney mint sauce) Bottomline is, nothing is getting done! Stay tuned.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
GapCalc said:
Dr. Siker states, "'I'm not saying [board exams and gender issues] aren't important, but the timing of this discussion in the midst of a pivotal racial justice movement is odd." She goes on to suggest that we are choosing not to focus on areas of systemic anti-Black racism because other areas were in the spotlight.

But it's not odd at all. There were months of angst and uncertainty amongst her junior professional colleagues whose lives have been upended by the ABR. As a result of their lack of communication from ABR, additional information came out about gender inequity (via Twitter) including lack of access to appropriate breast feeding facilities for female RO candidates taking ABR exams.

Perhaps she wasn't paying attention because board exams aren't an issue for her, but these are important topics. The conversation evolved from early March (first message about postponed exams) to April (new dates announced) to ongoing coronavirus pandemic during which there was scant communication. Letters were written and comments made through May regarding the ABR. ASTRO sent a letter to ABR on June 26th. For reference, George Floyd was killed by the Minneapolis police on June 25th.

So, no, the timing of concern and outreach and statements regarding the ABR and virtual exams and gender equality is not 'odd.' The majority of these messages were occurring before the national conversation started by Mr. Floyd's death. It's not fair to characterize concerns about board exams and gender equity as somehow not addressing or ignoring the ongoing national dialogue about systemic racism.

We can walk and chew gum. We can care about our trainees and their frustrations with testing and gendered inequity, AND care about racism. Suggesting there are "limited resources" so that we can't address both is disingenuous.
Click to expand...

It's a non-falsifiable stance she takes.....

By anyone disagreeing with her it is further evidence of their racism. Any shift of the conversation away from this is further evidence of racism.

====

How is the low-hanging fruit on improvement of care not this?:
- All these "studies" suggest superior care at big academic cancer centers. Probably not fool proof, but these places are good - no?
- Some of these places don't accept medicaid or uninsured patients
- Call them out in hopes of them changing their acceptance of medicaid/uninsured...thus treating the URM, who likely make up a big chunk of medicaid /uninsured.

There - we just did more actual help to care for URM than any Robin DiAngelo seminar. We can intertwine what we're good at (cancer care) with where there are health outcomes discrepency (not treating medicaid/uninsured at certain places) without having to out Woke anyone on twitter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
BobbyHeenan said:
It's a non-falsifiable stance she takes.....

By anyone disagreeing with her it is further evidence of their racism. Any shift of the conversation away from this is further evidence of racism.

====

How is the low-hanging fruit on improvement of care not this?:
- All these "studies" suggest superior care at big academic cancer centers. Probably not fool proof, but these places are good - no?
- Some of these places don't accept medicaid or uninsured patients
- Call them out in hopes of them changing their acceptance of medicaid/uninsured...thus treating the URM, who likely make up a big chunk of medicaid /uninsured.

There - we just did more actual help to care for URM than any Robin DiAngelo seminar. We can intertwine what we're good at (cancer care) with where there are health outcomes discrepency (not treating medicaid/uninsured at certain places) without having to out Woke anyone on twitter.
Click to expand...

It's starting to get good... *grabs popcorn* :corny:

Twitter.PNG
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
Want to apply to rad onc? Might as well "chew gun" according to Olivier.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
BobbyHeenan said:
It's a non-falsifiable stance she takes.....

By anyone disagreeing with her it is further evidence of their racism. Any shift of the conversation away from this is further evidence of racism.

====

How is the low-hanging fruit on improvement of care not this?:
- All these "studies" suggest superior care at big academic cancer centers. Probably not fool proof, but these places are good - no?
- Some of these places don't accept medicaid or uninsured patients
- Call them out in hopes of them changing their acceptance of medicaid/uninsured...thus treating the URM, who likely make up a big chunk of medicaid /uninsured.

There - we just did more actual help to care for URM than any Robin DiAngelo seminar. We can intertwine what we're good at (cancer care) with where there are health outcomes discrepency (not treating medicaid/uninsured at certain places) without having to out Woke anyone on twitter.
Click to expand...
Some of these big centers sue poor pts and garnish their wages. Marty makary has written a lot about it.

Johns Hopkins hospital sued poor and African American patients, study shows | Maryland | The Guardian

Baltimore hospital filed 2,400 lawsuits often against poor and black patients for unpaid medical bills between 2009 and 2018
amp.theguardian.com amp.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Chartreuse Wombat said:
ANyone gonna call out KO for Mayo refusal to provide charity care/medicaid? Maybe they can pick up some of the people not cared for by MCW
Click to expand...
In my residency, it wasn't too uncommon to see patients discharged "to taxi" to take them to the ED of the county hospital down the street.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

P
Rad Onc oral boards
Replies
10
Views
712
Barcelona PSG
B
Gfunk6
Rad Onc? Burnt Out?
Replies
36
Views
2K
thecarbonionangle
thecarbonionangle
TheWallnerus
Rad onc supervision, the epilogue
Replies
10
Views
1K
elementaryschooleconomics
elementaryschooleconomics
U
Why is rad onc not more competitive?
2 3 4 5
Replies
233
Views
9K
medgator
M
D
Rad onc as a second residency?
Replies
25
Views
2K
SneakyBooger
SneakyBooger
Top