Two questions for all pathologists.

[Thrombus]

Stand if you bill for the work you do.

Of those still standing, who has too much to do (remain standing)?

When those standing is greater than 50% of the pathologist workforce, we will know we need more pathologists.

Until then, we are RIPE for EXPLOITATION!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[rollwithit]

This forum has been ruined by unreasonable and sensationalist parties all over board. Nobody cares about what is said here any longer except the same 5-10 folks stating the same things over and over.

It's obvious you have strong feelings. How about you try a better way of creating change and start by gathering a handful of like-minded folks and formally petitioning CAP with some sort of well documented/supported opposition or complaint? Or better yet, find like-minded people and encourage them to volunteer their time in influencing CAP policy by getting involved. No better way to change policy than by becoming the policy-maker. Then, come back and report your progress or your hangups. Put your pent up energy to something productive instead of your counter-productive anonymous message board rants.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Here are some questions, from that study BU pathology posted, that is supposed to tell you if your speciality has an imbalance. Maybe these should be sent out to all practicing pathologists. Some of the questions need to be changed. Substitute midlevels like PAs and techs in there for NPCs and turnaround time for biopsy results rather than wait times etc


Exhibit 46. Market Indicators of an Imbalance in Physician Supply and Demand

Indicators of a Physician Surplus (Shortage)



Average earnings are lower than (exceed) expected earnings based on expected returns to training and other factors

New physicians have greater (fewer) problems obtaining employment

Downward (upward) pressure on the price of health care services

Insurers are more (less) selective in including physicians in their plan.

Patients have shorter (longer) wait times in scheduling appointments—especially new patients

Patients have shorter (longer) wait times at physicians' offices

Individual physicians see fewer (more) patients compared to historical norms

Individual physicians work fewer (more) hours in patient care

Physicians retire earlier (later)

Physicians provide more (fewer) services with marginal medical value given patients' needs

The average length of time between patient follow-up visits decreases (increases)

Physicians are more (less) likely to relocate

Physicians are more (less) likely to change specialty

Less (greater) use of NPCs

 

[thebouque]

Where did my beloved sdn pathology go? None of the threads are interesting anymore...

 

[Thrombus]

This forum has been ruined by unreasonable and sensationalist parties all over board. Nobody cares about what is said here any longer except the same 5-10 folks stating the same things over and over.

It's obvious you have strong feelings. How about you try a better way of creating change and start by gathering a handful of like-minded folks and formally petitioning CAP with some sort of well documented/supported opposition or complaint? Or better yet, find like-minded people and encourage them to volunteer their time in influencing CAP policy by getting involved. No better way to change policy than by becoming the policy-maker. Then, come back and report your progress or your hangups. Put your pent up energy to something productive instead of your counter-productive anonymous message board rants.

The CAP is controlled by academics who rely on junior pathologists and subsidized trainees to budget their departments. Notice they don't take the guy who doesn't come without funding (free government money). They have no interest in anything but perpetuating the 30 year old myth that there is a looming shortage of pathologists.

I am much better served on getting the word out to people considering this field to run away from it. I was told to do so and didn't listen, and am now paying the price as are my colleagues.

 

[rollwithit]

The CAP is controlled by academics who rely on junior pathologists and subsidized trainees to budget their departments. Notice they don't take the guy who doesn't come without funding (free government money). They have no interest in anything but perpetuating the 30 year old myth that there is a looming shortage of pathologists.

I am much better served on getting the word out to people considering this field to run away from it. I was told to do so and didn't listen, and am now paying the price as are my colleagues.

So your solution is to shy away from any respectable and realistic way of promoting change and instead play the bogeyman by attempting to scare away potential quality prospects from entering pathology knowing that a less qualified and more-likely to be abused prospect will take his/her place thereby making your life/career even more difficult and miserable?

Smart plan!

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Where did my beloved sdn pathology go? None of the threads are interesting anymore...

I dare you to come here November 2nd when those 2014 cuts become final.

People are lashing out. Things keep getting worse for everyone.

 

[Substance]

This forum has been ruined by unreasonable and sensationalist parties all over board. Nobody cares about what is said here any longer except the same 5-10 folks stating the same things over and over.

It's obvious you have strong feelings. How about you try a better way of creating change and start by gathering a handful of like-minded folks and formally petitioning CAP with some sort of well documented/supported opposition or complaint? Or better yet, find like-minded people and encourage them to volunteer their time in influencing CAP policy by getting involved. No better way to change policy than by becoming the policy-maker. Then, come back and report your progress or your hangups. Put your pent up energy to something productive instead of your counter-productive anonymous message board rants.

I agree with this. Why don't you guys do something about it?

This scaremongering won't keep people out of your field. It will just keep good people out. There are plenty of incomprehensible IMGs and barely-sentient Carib grads waiting to take any residency spot in America, and we're all aware that path is particularly bad for accepting those with egregious deficiencies.

You could bring together true market data that supports your claim and present it to the CAP, ABP and AMA and whatever politicians would love to save money on GME.

The Mitchell study put the spotlight on self-referral. The drastic technical component cuts are partially a reaction to that study. But PIMA is in the pipeline, and lots of other specialties are on board. All this is due to a study that showed evidence that all but damned pod-lab owning urologists.

With the above in mind, I suppose it wouldn't be too much for a few of these chronically complaining pathologists(many of whom have made their money) to fork over a few thou each to McKinsey or whatever to do a real-deal unbiased and properly done market study. The great thing about evidence is that its hard to refute. So go find some! It'll work!

Run for positions on the CAP and ABP too. Maybe some of you will get them. If you think you're too busy to do that, then this issue obviously isn't important enough for you.

 

[TMZ2007]

Why does Substance the presumably Canadian non-pathologist continue to post in this forum?

Why am I even bothering to comment on this at all? Sigh.🙄

 

[gbwillner]

Thrombus,
Are you actually a practicing pathologist? I only ask because you seem to be trolling this site, all day, every day. If you spent a fraction of the time you spent on this site reading slides you'd probably be a lot less grumpy.

 

[2121115]

Thrombus,
Are you actually a practicing pathologist? I only ask because you seem to be trolling this site, all day, every day. If you spent a fraction of the time you spent on this site reading slides you'd probably be a lot less grumpy.

It is because he doesn't have enough work to do. If there were fewer pathologists, and thus more work per pathologist, you wouldn't have nearly as many posts on this forum.

🙂

 

[Substance]

Why does Substance the presumably Canadian non-pathologist continue to post in this forum?

Why am I even bothering to comment on this at all? Sigh.🙄

Because i see the importance of your field and lament how it has been reduced to the level it currently resides in.

Rather than criticize my position and location, you could, you know, comment on the content of my arguments.

 

[Thrombus]

Thrombus,
Are you actually a practicing pathologist? I only ask because you seem to be trolling this site, all day, every day. If you spent a fraction of the time you spent on this site reading slides you'd probably be a lot less grumpy.

Lets see I have 400 posts in 9 years here. That is less than 1 post per week.

This site is somewhat informative for me. Hope it is for you too. You may find some different perspectives.👍👍😍😍

 

[Path or bust]

Thrombus,
Are you actually a practicing pathologist? I only ask because you seem to be trolling this site, all day, every day. If you spent a fraction of the time you spent on this site reading slides you'd probably be a lot less grumpy.

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.[2] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy,[3][4][5] more precisely an irrelevance

Ad hominem reasoning is an attempt to discredit or dismiss an argument or assertion.

 

[KluverB]

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.[2] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy,[3][4][5] more precisely an irrelevance

Ad hominem reasoning is an attempt to discredit or dismiss an argument or assertion.

Red herring (rubeum allec -- thanks Googlr traslate) is an idiom that refers to a logical fallacy that misleads or detracts from the actual issue.[1]

 

[KluverB]

Why does Substance the presumably Canadian non-pathologist continue to post in this forum?

Why am I even bothering to comment on this at all? Sigh.🙄

Maybe he/she's got a spouse in "the biz". May be they had big plans to move to the US and make bank. But now, not so much. Or he/she didn't have what it takes to match into path, and is now bitter. And since misery lover company.....

 

[KLPM]

Red herring (rubeum allec -- thanks Googlr traslate) is an idiom that refers to a logical fallacy that misleads or detracts from the actual issue.[1]

"Herring has been a staple food source since at least 3000 B.C. There are numerous ways the fish is served and many regional recipes: eaten raw, fermented, pickled, or cured by other techniques, such as being smoked as kippers."