Rad Onc Twitter

  • Thread starter Thread starter deleted1002574
  • Start date Start date
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
RadOncMegatron said:
Interesting. I think people do need to consider that patients maybe watching your tweets very closely. There may be (unfortunately) prof. ramification these days to Tweets.
Click to expand...

Any supposed professional posting behind his/her own name and picture publically (Twitter, etc) is an idiot. Full stop.

Sure is easy to virtue signal when you've stacked the system in your favor such that nobody can challenge your opinions lest they risk getting fired.
 
Last edited:
KHE88 said:
...Any supposed professional posting behind his/her own name and picture publically (Twitter, etc) is an idiot. Full stop...
Click to expand...

Could you clarify this?
I see hundreds, if not thousands of MDs post on Twitter...
Maybe they are all idiots?

PS: I was hoping that this is a joke...
 
Radonc90 said:
Could you clarify this?
I see hundreds, if not thousands of MDs post on Twitter...
Maybe they are all idiots?

PS: I was hoping that this is a joke...
Click to expand...

Seriously? Why in the world would you think this is a joke?

I should clarify though since I guess it wasn't obvious. If you are posting purely professional stuff on Twitter (although I really struggle to use the words "professional" and "Twitter" in the same sentence) such as links to updates in cancer treatment, then yeah probably fine. The problem is when you start offering opinions, especially on controversial topics. Hence, the reference to social media policies above. You would think this would be common sense for MDs not to do this.

Have you noticed that "virtually all of these hundreds if not thousands of MDs" posting controversial opinions online all tend to post the same opinions? Wonder why that is? Could it be because one side controls the institutions of academia and social media? Hmm...

Yes. They are all idiots. Posting opinions attached to your name and photograph, "Radonc90, MD", online for all the world to see when you are an MD is incredibly stupid. You can do nothing but hurt yourself if you're honest, and those that do it purely to virtue signal and elevate their worthiness to their superiors probably aren't doing as much good as they think. All it takes is for one wrong re-tweet or one line taken out of context for the mob to turn on you. There little if any upside and monumental downside. Why risk it?

You're a professional. Act professional. If you ran a private practice, would it be appropriate to put a Bernie Sanders sign out front or leave pamphlets about gun violence next to the magazines in the waiting room? Put up a poster of Che Guevara in your office? Would you pin a MAGA button to your white coat lapel? Why is it ok to do this next to your online persona then?

Private facebook account only your friends can see? Sure, go nuts with whatever conspiracy theories you want. Twitter, you're an idiot.

Surprised this is controversial.
 
Neither ACS nor ASTRO have much leverage to influence individual doctors' twits. ABR and ABS can potentially mess with board certification status, which is a problem

RadOncMegatron said:
Interesting. I think people do need to consider that patients maybe watching your tweets very closely. There may be (unfortunately) prof. ramification these days to Tweets.
Click to expand...
 
KHE88 said:
Seriously? Why in the world would you think this is a joke?

I should clarify though since I guess it wasn't obvious. If you are posting purely professional stuff on Twitter (although I really struggle to use the words "professional" and "Twitter" in the same sentence) such as links to updates in cancer treatment, then yeah probably fine. The problem is when you start offering opinions, especially on controversial topics. Hence, the reference to social media policies above. You would think this would be common sense for MDs not to do this.

Have you noticed that "virtually all of these hundreds if not thousands of MDs" posting controversial opinions online all tend to post the same opinions? Wonder why that is? Could it be because one side controls the institutions of academia and social media? Hmm...

Yes. They are all idiots. Posting opinions attached to your name and photograph, "Radonc90, MD", online for all the world to see when you are an MD is incredibly stupid. You can do nothing but hurt yourself if you're honest, and those that do it purely to virtue signal and elevate their worthiness to their superiors probably aren't doing as much good as they think. All it takes is for one wrong re-tweet or one line taken out of context for the mob to turn on you. There little if any upside and monumental downside. Why risk it?

You're a professional. Act professional. If you ran a private practice, would it be appropriate to put a Bernie Sanders sign out front or leave pamphlets about gun violence next to the magazines in the waiting room? Put up a poster of Che Guevara in your office? Would you pin a MAGA button to your white coat lapel? Why is it ok to do this next to your online persona then?

Private facebook account only your friends can see? Sure, go nuts with whatever conspiracy theories you want. Twitter, you're an idiot.

Surprised this is controversial.
Click to expand...

We should put together a list of good RO to follow on Twitter

Not just “famous names” who add no value

Obvs Simul top of list
 
radoncdoc16 said:
We should put together a list of good RO to follow on Twitter

Not just “famous names” who add no value

Obvs Simul top of list
Click to expand...

I would add Matt Spraker as my #2. Rahul Tendulkar is very reasonable. Chelain Goodman and Mudit Chowdhary from the younger crowd. Matthew Katz just does his own thing so he's good to follow - he's like, OG RadOnc Twitter and does it for the love of the game. Brian Kavanagh (though probably a "big name"). I generally enjoy Fumiko's stuff because she's focused on her topic.

I personally also follow a lot of non-RadOnc #medtwitter people to keep abreast of whatever drama is brewing for the day. There's a decent crew of med student anonymous accounts which also keep me clued into that world.
 
KHE88 said:
Seriously? Why in the world would you think this is a joke?

I should clarify though since I guess it wasn't obvious. If you are posting purely professional stuff on Twitter (although I really struggle to use the words "professional" and "Twitter" in the same sentence) such as links to updates in cancer treatment, then yeah probably fine. The problem is when you start offering opinions, especially on controversial topics. Hence, the reference to social media policies above. You would think this would be common sense for MDs not to do this.

Have you noticed that "virtually all of these hundreds if not thousands of MDs" posting controversial opinions online all tend to post the same opinions? Wonder why that is? Could it be because one side controls the institutions of academia and social media? Hmm...

Yes. They are all idiots. Posting opinions attached to your name and photograph, "Radonc90, MD", online for all the world to see when you are an MD is incredibly stupid. You can do nothing but hurt yourself if you're honest, and those that do it purely to virtue signal and elevate their worthiness to their superiors probably aren't doing as much good as they think. All it takes is for one wrong re-tweet or one line taken out of context for the mob to turn on you. There little if any upside and monumental downside. Why risk it?

You're a professional. Act professional. If you ran a private practice, would it be appropriate to put a Bernie Sanders sign out front or leave pamphlets about gun violence next to the magazines in the waiting room? Put up a poster of Che Guevara in your office? Would you pin a MAGA button to your white coat lapel? Why is it ok to do this next to your online persona then?

Private facebook account only your friends can see? Sure, go nuts with whatever conspiracy theories you want. Twitter, you're an idiot.

Surprised this is controversial.
Click to expand...

While a lot of what you wrote is true, I would posit there are potential benefits, especially for individuals who were relatively early adopters. I know many faculty members who have outsized reputations compared to their academic productivity based on social media. Some attendings have had patients come to them or be referred to them based on recognition from twitter. Of course some of these same faculty have stepped over the line once or twice and been reprimanded. So it is definitely a double edged sword, and I would agree for most the risks outweigh the benefits, but the benefits can be real.
 
elementaryschooleconomics said:
I would add Matt Spraker as my #2. Rahul Tendulkar is very reasonable. Chelain Goodman and Mudit Chowdhary from the younger crowd. Matthew Katz just does his own thing so he's good to follow - he's like, OG RadOnc Twitter and does it for the love of the game. Brian Kavanagh (though probably a "big name"). I generally enjoy Fumiko's stuff because she's focused on her topic.

I personally also follow a lot of non-RadOnc #medtwitter people to keep abreast of whatever drama is brewing for the day. There's a decent crew of med student anonymous accounts which also keep me clued into that world.
Click to expand...

Oh, and because he's mentioned a lot on this forum - probably the most notable non-RadOnc but still Oncology person on Twitter is Vanay Prasad. I'll be honest - I love Plenary Session, I love his books, I love his papers - I CANNOT STAND his Twitter. The points and arguments he makes are NOT suited to the short-form Twitter formats and it comes across as contrarian and combative. But...he's in the thick of it.
 
Is this professionalism on social media, ASTRO?

C9Vj2f0.jpg
 
KHE88 said:
Seriously? Why in the world would you think this is a joke?

I should clarify though since I guess it wasn't obvious. If you are posting purely professional stuff on Twitter (although I really struggle to use the words "professional" and "Twitter" in the same sentence) such as links to updates in cancer treatment, then yeah probably fine. The problem is when you start offering opinions, especially on controversial topics. Hence, the reference to social media policies above. You would think this would be common sense for MDs not to do this.

Have you noticed that "virtually all of these hundreds if not thousands of MDs" posting controversial opinions online all tend to post the same opinions? Wonder why that is? Could it be because one side controls the institutions of academia and social media? Hmm...

Yes. They are all idiots. Posting opinions attached to your name and photograph, "Radonc90, MD", online for all the world to see when you are an MD is incredibly stupid. You can do nothing but hurt yourself if you're honest, and those that do it purely to virtue signal and elevate their worthiness to their superiors probably aren't doing as much good as they think. All it takes is for one wrong re-tweet or one line taken out of context for the mob to turn on you. There little if any upside and monumental downside. Why risk it?

You're a professional. Act professional. If you ran a private practice, would it be appropriate to put a Bernie Sanders sign out front or leave pamphlets about gun violence next to the magazines in the waiting room? Put up a poster of Che Guevara in your office? Would you pin a MAGA button to your white coat lapel? Why is it ok to do this next to your online persona then?

Private facebook account only your friends can see? Sure, go nuts with whatever conspiracy theories you want. Twitter, you're an idiot.

Surprised this is controversial.
Click to expand...

many old money grubbing boomers in rad onc, in charge. Something tells me these people don’t lean too left.
 
medgator said:
Mgh/mskcc getting rid of 401k match?

Click to expand...


this is a huge salary cut because this money grows after, agreed. Especially if you have the roth 401k option, besides the regular 401k, this is way more of a cut than some may realise
 
thecarbonionangle said:
this is a huge salary cut because this money grows after, agreed. Especially if you have the roth 401k option, besides the regular 401k, this is way more of a cut than some may realise
Click to expand...

Not to get too off topic here but Roth option only makes sense for most as a resident or first year attending when salary is half resident half attending. General rule of thumb is to contribute pretax dollars during peak earning years, Roth non-peak. Unless you expect a higher income in retirement than your current attending salary, stick with pretax/non-Roth.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN
 
frijoles said:
Not to get too off topic here but Roth option only makes sense for most as a resident or first year attending when salary is half resident half attending. General rule of thumb is to contribute pretax dollars during peak earning years, Roth non-peak. Unless you expect a higher income in retirement than your current attending salary, stick with pretax/non-Roth.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN
Click to expand...

you do you brotha!
 
frijoles said:
Not to get too off topic here but Roth option only makes sense for most as a resident or first year attending when salary is half resident half attending. General rule of thumb is to contribute pretax dollars during peak earning years, Roth non-peak. Unless you expect a higher income in retirement than your current attending salary, stick with pretax/non-Roth.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN
Click to expand...
Still can do backdoor when all is said and done once you've maxed out the pre tax venues. The big thing with Roth is it can be passed to your heirs and doesn't have required minimum distributions like traditional retirement accounts do
 
medgator said:
Still can do backdoor when all is said and done once you've maxed out the pre tax venues. The big thing with Roth is it can be passed to your heirs and doesn't have required minimum distributions like traditional retirement accounts do
Click to expand...

it grows tax free, you pay taxes up front and if you invest in it over decades it can be worth a lot.
 
thecarbonionangle said:
it grows tax free, you pay taxes up front and if you invest in it over decades it can be worth a lot.
Click to expand...

Yes, max pre tax options than remember to backdoor for you and your spouse. It’s at $6000 right now (12k for both you can put in for your spouse by making a separate account) $7000 catch up for 50 and up. OK’d by Congress so don’t have to wait one month or any trickery like that anymore. Don’t forget 529 “college” funds the growth is not taxed. After that fill up your brokerage account I recommend William Bernstein’s index approach: S&P 500 / International /Small Cap / Bonds (yes, he tilts toward value but let’s not go there right now). International has some tax advantage (foreign tax credit) and I use a muni bond for further tax sheltering.
 
elementaryschooleconomics said:
I would add Matt Spraker as my #2. Rahul Tendulkar is very reasonable. Chelain Goodman and Mudit Chowdhary from the younger crowd. Matthew Katz just does his own thing so he's good to follow - he's like, OG RadOnc Twitter and does it for the love of the game. Brian Kavanagh (though probably a "big name"). I generally enjoy Fumiko's stuff because she's focused on her topic.

I personally also follow a lot of non-RadOnc #medtwitter people to keep abreast of whatever drama is brewing for the day. There's a decent crew of med student anonymous accounts which also keep me clued into that world.
Click to expand...

I agree with this list. I tend to follow people who post about Oncology without much interjection of their personal lives. Nothing wrong with doing that... it's just not the type of content I'm interested in seeing. I would also add Dan Spratt to the list - tends to make very incisive and interesting comments about new papers and engage in substantive debates with people.
 
RadOncMegatron said:
Yes, max pre tax options than remember to backdoor for you and your spouse. It’s at $6000 right now (12k for both you can put in for your spouse by making a separate account) $7000 catch up for 50 and up. OK’d by Congress so don’t have to wait one month or any trickery like that anymore. Don’t forget 529 “college” funds the growth is not taxed. After that fill up your brokerage account I recommend William Bernstein’s index approach: S&P 500 / International /Small Cap / Bonds (yes, he tilts toward value but let’s not go there right now). International has some tax advantage (foreign tax credit) and I use a muni bond for further tax sheltering.
Click to expand...
Has Congress come out and actually passed legislation regarding this? I do the 1-2 month thing, keeping an empty traditional IRA open along with the actual Roth
 
medgator said:
Has Congress come out and actually passed legislation regarding this? I do the 1-2 month thing, keeping an empty traditional IRA open along with the actual Roth
Click to expand...

Here it is Congress Blesses Roth IRAs For Everyone, Even The Well Paid

You still need to do the whole song and dance with the traditional account then Roth (why... who knows). It’s important to keep in mind this loophole may close one day. I won’t lie as I wait one day or a little more due to paranoia.
 
medgator said:
Has Congress come out and actually passed legislation regarding this? I do the 1-2 month thing, keeping an empty traditional IRA open along with the actual Roth
Click to expand...

You can keep the traditional IRA open or just close it after you transfered the funds to Roth and open new traditional IRA in subsequent year to do the rigamarole again. What matters is that when end of the year hits, you have 0.00.balance in all other types of IRA. If you do this, you won't fall victim to "pro-rata" and this means you've done the backdoor Roth IRA contribution correctly. One cool thing about having substantial funds in Roth IRA at retirement besides just the passing on to your kid is that by withdrawing some from your 401k/403b/457 etc and some from your Roth, you can choose your effective tax rate when in retirement.
 
medgator said:
Wasn't someone saying Joe Herman was pulling in nearly $600K before bonuses at MDACC before going to LIJ? Sounds like some academics are paid quite nicely, even when they aren't chairman
Click to expand...

He was vice chair/acting chair when his salary was 800K

Steve Hahn was 1 million plus
 
thecarbonionangle said:
would you make more if you stopped being a physician scientist?
Click to expand...

TBH unclear. Things are kind of unstable where I work so volume and pay structure can change a lot from year to year. They aim me for 25th percentile anyway so if I can bonus up closer to 50th percentile, great. But bonuses are a real wild card based on a lot of metrics that change every year. Now we've got coronavirus so I lose retirement benefits and I have no idea what bonus is going to look like this year. And I'm a lot busier clinically than I should be for a "physician-scientist".

I made slightly more last year than I did when I was 100% clinical.
 
medgator said:
Wasn't someone saying Joe Herman was pulling in nearly $600K before bonuses at MDACC before going to LIJ? Sounds like some academics are paid quite nicely, even when they aren't chairman
Click to expand...

thats quite different from a physician scientist
 
radoncgrad2019 said:
thats quite different from a physician scientist
Click to expand...
Clinical informatics and clinical research integration doesn't sound that far off, but i agree it's probably easier to bring home the bacon if you're busy in the clinic more so than being busy at the bench

www.northwell.edu

Northwell Cancer Institute appoints oncology experts to lead new programs | Northwell Health

As Northwell Health moves into the post-acute phase of COVID-19, its Cancer Institute has named oncology experts to lead new cancer programs at the health system.
www.northwell.edu www.northwell.edu
 
The way the rules work, there is no way I could ever make $600k here shy of being chair.

You guys have a really odd and distorted view of the pay structure where I work. You make a lot of bizzare assumptions that don't jive with what I'm posting. I would not make significantly more if I saw more patients. There is a bonus cap even if I saw a million patients, though hitting that cap is not easy at all and it's not a big cap financially. I have interviewed at other academic places and pay is comparable if not less at full clinical effort.

I'm getting rather annoyed with it all, and am going to stop talking about how much I make or could make.

25th percentile assistant professor salary for lyfe. Unless maybe I hit 50th percentile if the bonuses are good some year (which I only have some control over). Or maybe I get promoted to associate and get 25th percentile associate in a few years, but then my targets get readjusted and I don't know if I'll make any bonus. All my expectations are in the 300s/year, it isn't based much on clinical effort, and all other offers I've gotten have been comparable regardless of clinical effort. Welcome to academics. If a few other people are doing better than me, congratulations to them.
 
Neuronix said:
The way the rules work, there is no way I could ever make $600k here shy of being chair.

You guys have a really odd and distorted view of the pay structure where I work. You make a lot of bizzare assumptions that don't jive with what I'm posting. I would not make significantly more if I saw more patients. There is a bonus cap even if I saw a million patients, though hitting that cap is not easy at all and it's not a big cap financially. I have interviewed at other academic places and pay is comparable if not less at full clinical effort.

I'm getting rather annoyed with it all, and am going to stop talking about how much I make or could make.

25th percentile assistant professor salary for lyfe. Unless maybe I hit 50th percentile if the bonuses are good some year (which I only have some control over). Or maybe I get promoted to associate and get 25th percentile associate in a few years, but then my targets get readjusted and I don't know if I'll make any bonus. All my expectations are in the 300s/year, it isn't based much on clinical effort, and all other offers I've gotten have been comparable regardless of clinical effort. Welcome to academics. If a few other people are doing better than me, congratulations to them.
Click to expand...

‘few other people’

‘25 percentile’

lmao
 
Historically, the only way you got a raise in academics was by interviewing somewhere else and brining ready to leave. Not going to happen in this job market for at least 10 years.
 
RickyScott said:
Historically, the only way you got a raise in academics was by interviewing somewhere else and brining ready to leave. Not going to happen in this job market for at least 10 years.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what hallahan at Wash U wanted when he gave the bloodbath response in the red journal
 
Neuronix said:
The way the rules work, there is no way I could ever make $600k here shy of being chair.

You guys have a really odd and distorted view of the pay structure where I work. You make a lot of bizzare assumptions that don't jive with what I'm posting. I would not make significantly more if I saw more patients. There is a bonus cap even if I saw a million patients, though hitting that cap is not easy at all and it's not a big cap financially. I have interviewed at other academic places and pay is comparable if not less at full clinical effort.

I'm getting rather annoyed with it all, and am going to stop talking about how much I make or could make.

25th percentile assistant professor salary for lyfe. Unless maybe I hit 50th percentile if the bonuses are good some year (which I only have some control over). Or maybe I get promoted to associate and get 25th percentile associate in a few years, but then my targets get readjusted and I don't know if I'll make any bonus. All my expectations are in the 300s/year, it isn't based much on clinical effort, and all other offers I've gotten have been comparable regardless of clinical effort. Welcome to academics. If a few other people are doing better than me, congratulations to them.
Click to expand...

i know people in academics, same rank, full clinical effort making more money. The jobs are out there, not saying they are easy to get at all or common, and not saying they will be available in the future, but anecdotally yes i know people who started near 400+ in your same rank and 100 clinical effort.
 
Last edited:
thecarbonionangle said:
i know people in academics, same rank, full clinical effort making more money. The jobs are out there, not saying they are easy to get at all or common, and not saying they will be available in the future, but anecdotally yes i know people who started near 400+ in your same rank and 100 clinical effort.
Click to expand...
Location dependent... Midwest/rural academic gig gonna pay better than USC, UCSF, MGH etc for the same clinical productivity
 
medgator said:
Location dependent... Midwest/rural academic gig gonna pay better than USC, UCSF, MGH etc for the same clinical productivity
Click to expand...

This is why it’s good to look at percentiles.

25th percentile means by definition you can do better and you choose not to.
 
Haybrant said:
Some people lost 401k match? That’s a major hit.
Click to expand...

Wait, you guys get a meaningful 401k match?
Ours is slowly vested over a period of 5 years and doesn't start matching until 1 year.

Eye opening to see how awful benefits are in the healthcare industry. Don't get me started on our cheapskate insurance plans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TheWallnerus
Ridiculous Moments in Rad Onc History
2
Replies
61
Views
5K
Grubbe-a-dub-dub
G
uchihastan
Rad Onc vs. Heme/Onc
Replies
16
Views
3K
medgator
M
Neuronix
Regarding the Google Docs Rad Onc Spreadsheet
Replies
2
Views
953
allseasons
allseasons
B
Rad Onc Procedures and RVUs
Replies
35
Views
5K
CurbYourExpectations
CurbYourExpectations
D
Saving Rad Onc
2
Replies
60
Views
7K
RickyScott
R
Top