would this be wrong to mention in an interview ??

[flip26]

---

Members do not see this ad.

for the most part i find myself agreeing more with the points that flip's been making, but to be honest you guys are no longer arguing the original point.



This. It's perfectly all right to consider income security as part of your reason to attend medical school. But I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole in the admissions game: not in an essay, not on a secondary, and for sure not in an interview. Reimbursement is the third rail in medicine right now and it would just be too easy to come off sounding the wrong way. no matter how eloquent you get. if your motivations for pursuing this career are as good as they ought to be, then you'll have plenty of other things to talk about.

Income security, or job security? Not necessarily the same thing.

Most of the pre meds on SDN do NOT look at the whole picture when it comes to evaluating the economics of attending med school and becoming a doctor. This landscape has changed dramatically in the last 10+ years. They ignore the burden of the accumulated debt and the realities of repayment of that debt, plus they seem ignorant about the declining physician compensation in our country that started about a decade ago and shows no signs of slowing down.

Physician compensation control is firmly in the tight grip of the government. Nobody in the government is going to make sure that you have 'income security' - nobody in the White House or in Congress is fighting to raise physician reimbursement - and nobody in power in DC gives a damn that med students today are graduating with more debt than med students had starting out less than a decade ago. The typical congressman who votes on shrinking your income believes like naive pre meds that docs make "bank" and can afford the pay cut.

Thus I agree that a full consideration of the money pros and cons in medicine is critical, but what I am suggesting is a far cry from the argument that money is a good motivation for med school. If your motivation can overcome the economic realities of medicine today and in the future, then proceed. But if you start this process motivated by the money, you are in for a few surprises...

 

[Kaustikos]

Eh, the school I'm matriculating to had a questionnaire that we filled out as part of the secondary. It asked us to rank (of a set of options) the top 4 reasons we were pursuing a career in medicine. I ranked income security as my 4th reason. It was never brought up in the interview and I was accepted early on.

I wouldn't suggest purposely bringing it up. But if you are asked, I don't see why you should be dishonest about it.

My family of 5 grew up on a less than 35k combined income. I don't see a problem in me saying that I would like a little bit of more income security than my parents had IN ADDITION to the other reasons that make me want to be a doctor.

It's not all about the money. Sure, I could find a job with less hours, less schooling, and more money, but what's wrong with finding a balance with what you want to do in life, how you want to live, and what you're interests are?

You shouldn't have to be. People are really confusing themselves at this point and not understanding that you have to literally throw money out of the equation find out if you'd be happy doing this just like that. Ask physicians and they'll tell you -Money shouldn't even be considered for this career. If you want money, go into pharmaceuticals, business, etc. Net a 90k salary in a biomed pharm company with your experience and never have to think again.👎

I get what the OP is saying, but just don't mention money. You came from a rough life, yes, but you're making it look like this job isn't about what's required, but as a personal achievement or proving yourself. If anything, it's about making other people happy. That shouldn't be the reason. Making other people happy is the worst reason to pursue a career in medicine.

 

[Kaustikos]

Income security, or job security? Not necessarily the same thing.

I mean, I'll still say that there are other jobs with job security. Nurses have job security and they get paid by the hour. You graduate netting a 50k income for 36 hours. Income and job security. Job done

Most of the pre meds on SDN do NOT look at the whole picture when it comes to evaluating the economics of attending med school and becoming a doctor. This landscape has changed dramatically in the last 10+ years. They ignore the burden of the accumulated debt and the realities of repayment of that debt, plus they seem ignorant about the declining physician compensation in our country that started about a decade ago and shows no signs of slowing down.

Relative to inflation, physicians aren't getting the compensation they would years ago, but it's not like other jobs are keeping with inflation. But a lot of people here will be in their late 30s, ready to start a life. How? Pay off this debt, and a mortgage and a family? You're not going to have money even AFTER residency

Thus I agree that a full consideration of the money pros and cons in medicine is critical, but what I am suggesting is a far cry from the argument that money is a good motivation for med school. If your motivation can overcome the economic realities of medicine today and in the future, then proceed. But if you start this process motivated by the money, you are in for a few surprises...

There's only so many years you can keep telling yourself the money will be waiting. By about year 2, you're going to hate yourself. By the time the check comes, you won't even care because you're at a "losing game" with the debt you have. And by the time you pay everything off, you won't give a damn about money

 

[298609]

Are there many good studies done in this area comparing "professionals" (doctors/attorneys/small businesspeople/academics/teachers/engineers/artists) to everyone else?

not trying to argue for/against your point, just curious if there is a quantifiable difference in attitude.

that would be an interesting thing to measure; i'm not sure. i didn't include a ref because i was being lazy. i learned about it when i was taking a series of courses/certification stuff around 5 yrs ago. i'll look to see if anything like that's been done. i'd also be interested in "art" classifications for professions (writers, musicians, artists, dancers, thesbians) as they often want to work but cannot find it, or work for free in order to find future opportunities.

 

[gravitywave]

People are really confusing themselves at this point and not understanding that you have to literally throw money out of the equation find out if you'd be happy doing this just like that. Ask physicians and they'll tell you -Money shouldn't even be considered for this career.

no no no. this is going too far. i agree with what flip has been saying insofar as he says that you MUST consider money, just not in the way that most people DO consider it. Entering medicine requires more of a cost/benefit analysis than ever before in its recent history. if you actually asked a physician, they'd have plenty to tell you about the money considerations.

on the other hand, i disagree with him when he suggests that medicine no longer carries the gold standard in terms of income security. sure, 20 years from now he might be pissed that he pursued medicine, as he may no longer feel it was worth the sacrifice. but he won't ever starve so long as he stays working in the field.

 

[gravitywave]

that would be an interesting thing to measure; i'm not sure. i didn't include a ref because i was being lazy. i learned about it when i was taking a series of courses/certification stuff around 5 yrs ago. i'll look to see if anything like that's been done. i'd also be interested in "art" classifications for professions (writers, musicians, artists, dancers, thesbians) as they often want to work but cannot find it, or work for free in order to find future opportunities.

cool, thanks.

 

[Kaustikos]

no no no. this is going too far. i agree with what flip has been saying insofar as he says that you MUST consider money, just not in the way that most people DO consider it. Entering medicine requires more of a cost/benefit analysis than ever before in its recent history. if you actually asked a physician, they'd have plenty to tell you about the money considerations.

Okay, so tomorrow I tell you that all physicians salaries will be declined by 50%, would you not do it? Rather, if they were to use the same income relative to the average other countries used, would you not do it (they don't make money in other countries)? Why is it that every doctor that I've talked to reiterates what I'm saying right now? Why is it that physicians who chose to do it for the money aren't happy? Why is it that we always see attendings and residents come on here to slap us with the realities? There's a point where it has to click and you realize that income/money is NOT what you should consider. Is that really hard to do?

 

[Psychiatrypd]

No. Bring up all the reasons why you want to take care of sick people, bring up your volunteer work, bring up your love of science and your desire to help people. Don't say anything that is not true. Interviewers often (but not always) have finely tuned BS detectors. You want to sound passionate and committed. Figure out what you love to do, then figure out what that has to do with medicine.

 

[armybound]

I really don't understand how so many people can't understand the difference between money being a primary motivator and money being a consideration.

Just because someone considers their future income when choosing a career doesn't mean that money is the reason they entered that career. You can take things like salary into consideration without it being THE reason you're doing it.

I mean if you're 100% equally interested in being a family practice doc and a neurosurgeon, you'd be completely happy doing either one, is it OMG so awful to consider the fact that a neurosurgeon would be paid considerably better? Does that make you such a horrible person?

 

[flip26]

no no no. this is going too far. i agree with what flip has been saying insofar as he says that you MUST consider money, just not in the way that most people DO consider it. Entering medicine requires more of a cost/benefit analysis than ever before in its recent history. if you actually asked a physician, they'd have plenty to tell you about the money considerations.

on the other hand, i disagree with him when he suggests that medicine no longer carries the gold standard in terms of income security. sure, 20 years from now he might be pissed that he pursued medicine, as he may no longer feel it was worth the sacrifice. but he won't ever starve so long as he stays working in the field.

Actually, I am not too concerned about the income situation in medicine because I will quite fortunately graduate with almost no debt and still with a big chunk of $$$ I have socked away in investments. I expect that I will be able to survive on whatever happens to physician incomes 10 to 20 years out.

I may be pissed I chose medicine at some point, but I don't think it will be because I got blindsided by the bad economic juju - I am going into this with eyes wide open, and in admittedly a very fortunate personal economic circumstance.

My greatest fear about going into medicine is the unrelenting work load, the nonstop pressure, and not having a "life" outside of the hospital even 20 years from now. I have seen the horrible home and family life of many doctors, and it frankly scares me the most, but I will not be saddled with the debt that others have, and I will be able to walk away from all of it if I so choose.

 

[45408]

I should re-phrase what I meant. I meant that kind of 5 bdrm, 2 bath place to show that you have "made it" is probably not 400k. I realize there are some places you can get such a house, but the countryside in Utah just doesn't scream I've made it big.

I had something more like this in mind: http://www.estately.com/listings/info/2396725#listings/info/2396725

7500 square feet is a lot bigger than most 4-5BR houses..

 

[catalase]

I really don't understand how so many people can't understand the difference between money being a primary motivator and money being a consideration.

Just because someone considers their future income when choosing a career doesn't mean that money is the reason they entered that career. You can take things like salary into consideration without it being THE reason you're doing it.

I mean if you're 100% equally interested in being a family practice doc and a neurosurgeon, you'd be completely happy doing either one, is it OMG so awful to consider the fact that a neurosurgeon would be paid considerably better? Does that make you such a horrible person?

armybound is smart. Well said.

 

[Kaustikos]

I really don't understand how so many people can't understand the difference between money being a primary motivator and money being a consideration.

Just because someone considers their future income when choosing a career doesn't mean that money is the reason they entered that career. You can take things like salary into consideration without it being THE reason you're doing it.

I mean if you're 100% equally interested in being a family practice doc and a neurosurgeon, you'd be completely happy doing either one, is it OMG so awful to consider the fact that a neurosurgeon would be paid considerably better? Does that make you such a horrible person?

We're talking about bringing it up at an interview. Why on earth would you do that when you have 1 hour, at most, to sell yourself as being able to practice medicine?
Yes, you're going to get a paycheck, but that's not what you should consider at this point.👎

 

[armybound]

I suppose I could say exactly what I said before, or you could go back and read it.

There ARE acceptable reasons to bring up financial security, in my opinion. I wouldn't ever simply say "I'm going into medicine, among other reasons, because it pays well." That would be monumentally stupid in an interview.

If you can't understand when it would be acceptable and even encouraged, I don't see the point in hashing out my stance yet again.

All I can really say is if I was an interviewer and I had someone tell me they had never once considered their future income, I'd think they weren't fit to come to my school. They obviously haven't considered everything they need to consider in making such a huge decision. Either that or they're just plain stupid.

 

[flip26]

I really don't understand how so many people can't understand the difference between money being a primary motivator and money being a consideration.

Just because someone considers their future income when choosing a career doesn't mean that money is the reason they entered that career. You can take things like salary into consideration without it being THE reason you're doing it.

I mean if you're 100% equally interested in being a family practice doc and a neurosurgeon, you'd be completely happy doing either one, is it OMG so awful to consider the fact that a neurosurgeon would be paid considerably better? Does that make you such a horrible person?

Like that has EVER happened...

 

[catalase]

You really don't get it.

Debt interest compounds; the longer until you pay it back, the more that piles up. I would rather start paying off $300k in dental school debt after 4 years than $300k debt of med school debt compounded to over $400k after 10+ years...

You disingenuously compared what a general dentist might make to what a medical specialist makes, and that isn't a fair comparison at all given the extra residency requirements doctors face. A general dentist makes, on average, far more than docs with the shortest and least competitivde residencies (say FM or Peds).

Furthermore, the dental student doesn't have to jump another hurdle after dental school as do med students who have to go through another nut cuttin' round of residency roulette...if money was your motivation going into med school, and you are only competitive for FM or peds, sitting on accumulated debt of $400k, guess what? You are going to be digging out of that "money pit" for the next 20 years...

Umm, no.

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291062.htm

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291021.htm

Facts should still count for something.

 

[298609]

when i see pt's all i see is $$$$$$$$$$$

 

[flip26]

Umm, no.

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291062.htm

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291021.htm

Facts should still count for something.

Dentists work fewer hours and make more money than non specialist docs:

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB110531516417121170-H9jgYNhlaF4nJynZICHaaWEm4.html

They also start earning this income 5+ years earlier than docs who entered med school the same year the dentist did.

 

[armybound]

Dentists work fewer hours and make more money than non specialist docs:

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB110531516417121170-H9jgYNhlaF4nJynZICHaaWEm4.html

They also start earning this income 5+ years earlier than docs who entered med school the same year the dentist did.

So you'd say that dentists go into dentistry for the money, not because they prefer teeth over diabetes and CHF?

 

[Kaustikos]

I suppose I could say exactly what I said before, or you could go back and read it.

There ARE acceptable reasons to bring up financial security, in my opinion. I wouldn't ever simply say "I'm going into medicine, among other reasons, because it pays well." That would be monumentally stupid in an interview.

If you can't understand when it would be acceptable and even encouraged, I don't see the point in hashing out my stance yet again.

All I can really say is if I was an interviewer and I had someone tell me they had never once considered their future income, I'd think they weren't fit to come to my school. They obviously haven't considered everything they need to consider in making such a huge decision. Either that or they're just plain stupid.

I wasn't disagreeing with what you said, I was pointing out that it's not our discussion or what the OP was getting at.

 

[Kaustikos]

So you'd say that dentists go into dentistry for the money, not because they prefer teeth over diabetes and CHF?

No, it's because they couldn't get into med school

I kid, I kid

 

[armybound]

I wasn't disagreeing with what you said, I was pointing out that it's not our discussion or what the OP was getting at.

Yes, I know. I already answered why I thought it would be acceptable to bring up in an interview. I think it's very relevant to the OP's question.

 

[catalase]

Dentists work fewer hours and make more money than non specialist docs:

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB110531516417121170-H9jgYNhlaF4nJynZICHaaWEm4.html

They also start earning this income 5+ years earlier than docs who entered med school the same year the dentist did.

Can't read your WSJ article w/o a subscription. But I'm guessing you didn't even read the BLS statistics, because if you did you'd realize it's impossible for someone to make less per hour, work less hours, yet still make more money than someone else. It just doesn't add up. Even if it did, the difference isn't appreciable enough to justify saying that " a general dentist makes, on average, far more than docs with the shortest and least competitive residencies (say FM or Peds)" (I fixed your spelling error, no d in competitive).

Also:

http://residency.wustl.edu/medadmin...3edd4e91945f8a2b86256f850071ae49?OpenDocument

You should do some reading before you put a blanket number on how long it takes to complete a residency.

 

[dextor2003]

I really don't understand how so many people can't understand the difference between money being a primary motivator and money being a consideration.

Just because someone considers their future income when choosing a career doesn't mean that money is the reason they entered that career. You can take things like salary into consideration without it being THE reason you're doing it.

I mean if you're 100% equally interested in being a family practice doc and a neurosurgeon, you'd be completely happy doing either one, is it OMG so awful to consider the fact that a neurosurgeon would be paid considerably better? Does that make you such a horrible person?

cant express how much i appreciate this post. thank you, armybound

i said it earlier, and ill say it again. money IS NOT the SOLE reason i'm going into medicine. i was actually going to post my entire decision-making process of going into medicine on here earlier, but then decided not to cuz that would just be stupid for me to spill my life story here on sdn...yes, money does play a role, but the smallest. i have other more personal, significant reasons for going into medicine which im not going to mention here. and those reasons have nothing to do with money.

 

[flip26]

Can't read your WSJ article w/o a subscription. But I'm guessing you didn't even read the BLS statistics, because if you did you'd realize it's impossible for someone to make less per hour, work less hours, yet still make more money than someone else. It just doesn't add up. Even if it did, the difference isn't appreciable enough to justify saying that " a general dentist makes, on average, far more than docs with the shortest and least competitive residencies (say FM or Peds)" (I fixed your spelling error, no d in competitive).

Also:

http://residency.wustl.edu/medadmin...3edd4e91945f8a2b86256f850071ae49?OpenDocument

You should do some reading before you put a blanket number on how long it takes to complete a residency.

Dude, you brought up comparing the income of doctors to other professions, including dentists, and you made a fallacious argument in your post. You now want to turn this into a "doctor or dentist" thread - knock yourself out, but I am not playing your game.

How in hell have I made a "blanket" statement about residency length? It varies depending on specialty. And if you don't know it, you will soon find out that many people add on fellowship years to their residency, so post MD training is actually longer for most doctors than the bare minimum suggested by residency length.

 

[flip26]

So you'd say that dentists go into dentistry for the money, not because they prefer teeth over diabetes and CHF?

Well, if someone is motivated by money, wants to be a "Dr" in the allied health field, with a shorter path to $$$, and they are indifferent to what they do to earn it, I think dentistry makes a lot more sense than medicine.

I personally would go insane if I was a dentist. Not interested. And money is not my motivation, anyway. I would think that anybody who goes into dentistry for the $$$ better make damn sure he is interested in the work.

 

[ILikeDrugs]

I should re-phrase what I meant. I meant that kind of 5 bdrm, 2 bath place to show that you have "made it" is probably not 400k. I realize there are some places you can get such a house, but the countryside in Utah just doesn't scream I've made it big.

I had something more like this in mind: http://www.estately.com/listings/info/2396725#listings/info/2396725

After looking at the monthly payment on that house, $27K per month, I'd think it would be safe to say that most physicians won't "make it". I think you may have a very exaggerated view of what it means for someone to have "made it".

I remember thinking to myself, "Wow. I finally did it.", after setting my last piece of furniture in place in my one-bedroom apartment at the age of 18 and realizing that I was finally on my own and supporting myself. Anything after that has just been a step up in quality.

Maybe we should say that someone hasn't "made it" until they've become the queen/king and ruler of their own country?

 

[brooklynblunder]

i think you and i have different interpretations of the word "support"...my primary goal is to get my parents out of a small messed up apartment and into a nice, decent place. im not expecting a 5 bedroom, 2 garage, $400K house right off the bad.. i know that will take time. i just dont want them struggling to pay bills for a place thats not even worth it

and i think i may have misphrased (like i said, im bad with words)...my family isnt really in a financial "crisis" per say. its just that both of them have never made over 40k total in their life, and theyve gone through so much to make whatever they do...countless job switiches, countless moving. and i hate it. and now theyve been unemployed for the past year. currently, my family's currently living off its savings. its this type of lifestyle that i want them to not suffer anymore. thats all i want....initially at least

and like i said. money isnt my sole reason for becoming a doctor. its my last reason. im going into medicine for my love of science. for my love of helping. for my love of kids.

sorry if it sounds like im going off...

i dont think you understand the financial situation that you will be in. definitely consult someone about it. you may be making a huge mistake if your parents have certain immediate needs.

 

[catalase]

Dude, you brought up comparing the income of doctors to other professions, including dentists, and you made a fallacious argument in your post. You now want to turn this into a "doctor or dentist" thread - knock yourself out, but I am not playing your game.

How in hell have I made a "blanket" statement about residency length? It varies depending on specialty. And if you don't know it, you will soon find out that many people add on fellowship years to their residency, so post MD training is actually longer for most doctors than the bare minimum suggested by residency length.

I'll leave your charge of my "fallacious argument" for others to decide, but in my estimation all I've done is post opinions supported with facts, and then facts to counter your opinions. It's not a game, it's a discussion relevant to the thread. I'm simply trying to counter the "woe to me" sentiment on SDN that those going into medicine can't even consider money as one of many motivations because of the realities of debt, interest, and residency. Sure those things are important to prospective physicians, but they also apply (sans residency, but there are often analog periods of low earning potential) to other fields.

I don't understand the knee-jerk reaction that you've exhibited to anyone interested in the monetary upsides to medicine. Clearly some pre-meds need to know the hurdles and time commitments, but you act as if these downsides only exist in your chosen profession.

As for residency length, your "5+" statement implies that the baseline length is 5 years. Therefore, your comment was a blanket assertion, one that is demonstrably false. As shown, many PCP's do a 3-4 year residency. One to two years' interest accruement is a big deal.

 

[flip26]

I'll leave your charge of my "fallacious argument" for others to decide, but in my estimation all I've done is post opinions supported with facts, and then facts to counter your opinions. It's not a game, it's a discussion relevant to the thread. I'm simply trying to counter the "woe to me" sentiment on SDN that those going into medicine can't even consider money as one of many motivations because of the realities of debt, interest, and residency. Sure those things are important to prospective physicians, but they also apply (sans residency, but there are often analog periods of low earning potential) to other fields.

I don't understand the knee-jerk reaction that you've exhibited to anyone interested in the monetary upsides to medicine. Clearly some pre-meds need to know the hurdles and time commitments, but you act as if these downsides only exist in your chosen profession.

As for residency length, your "5+" statement implies that the baseline length is 5 years. Therefore, your comment was a blanket assertion, one that is demonstrably false. As shown, many PCP's do a 3-4 year residency. One to two years' interest accruement is a big deal.

If you are motivated to endure the 4 years of med school and however many years of residency and fellowship for what you see as the "monetary upsides" to medicine, knock yourself out.

The problem with you and others is that you only want to discuss the "upsides" of the money, and you choose to be blissfully ignorant about the debt burden, the declining physican income trend, and the deferred gratification involved in the next 10 years of your life.

You should get off SDN and talk to actual physicians at various stages of their careers about your pre med "money" motivation in choosing this path. They will laugh at your naivete, maybe not in your face, but they will set you straight. Make sure if you talk to an older physician that you explain how much debt you will have, because most docs over the age of say 50 graduated with a low 5 figure debt if they had any debt at all, nothing like what the next generation of docs have to repay, and they luckily entered medicine in an era of rapidly rising compensation.

 

[armybound]

flip, no offense and I don't mean to be rude, but are you really the one who should be lecturing about debt load? You just said debt isn't going to be an issue for you.

I mean getting lectures on financial burdens from someone who has no burden is a bit... off-putting.

 

[catalase]

If you are motivated to endure the 4 years of med school and however many years of residency and fellowship for what you see as the "monetary upsides" to medicine, knock yourself out.

The problem with you and others is that you only want to discuss the "upsides" of the money, and you choose to be blissfully ignorant about the debt burden, the declining physican income trend, and the deferred gratification involved in the next 10 years of your life.

You should get off SDN and talk to actual physicians at various stages of their careers about your pre med "money" motivation in choosing this path. They will laugh at your naivete, maybe not in your face, but they will set you straight. Make sure if you talk to an older physician that you explain how much debt you will have, because most docs over the age of say 50 graduated with a low 5 figure debt if they had any debt at all, nothing like what the next generation of docs have to repay, and they luckily entered medicine in an era of rapidly rising compensation.

You know nothing about me. You know nothing about the physicians with whom I've spoken. I don't know much about you, but I do know that every time I introduce facts to counter your assertions you ignore them and move on to some other non-sequitur rant. This isn't constructive. I've already acknowledged the financial hurdles that come with a career in medicine. I only wanted to point out that many of these burdens exist in other fields. I don't know why you have such a problem with that.

 

[imflying]

Umm, no.

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291062.htm

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291021.htm

Facts should still count for something.

lol thanks for this - i mean actual facts to back up your opinion.

i mean, flip makes a good point about considering debt along with that 6-fig salary, but it certainly doesn't justify saying dentists make significantly more than PCPs, which appears to be demonstrably false.

also, i don't think ANYONE goes into medicine solely for the money. you think people who hate science will go into medicine for the money?

 

[flip26]

flip, no offense and I don't mean to be rude, but are you really the one who should be lecturing about debt load? You just said debt isn't going to be an issue for you.

I mean getting lectures on financial burdens from someone who has no burden is a bit... off-putting.

I am a nontrad, have been in the workforce, and have a background in finance. Most of the people on SDN are wet behind the ears, entering med school right out of college, and have no idea about any of this.

Ignorance is bliss.

 

[flip26]

You know nothing about me. You know nothing about the physicians with whom I've spoken. I don't know much about you, but I do know that every time I introduce facts to counter your assertions you ignore them and move on to some other non-sequitur rant. This isn't constructive. I've already acknowledged the financial hurdles that come with a career in medicine. I only wanted to point out that many of these burdens exist in other fields. I don't know why you have such a problem with that.

Chew on the "facts" in the WSJ article, printed in full here:

http://www.emrupdate.com/forums/t/4443.aspx

From that article:

Once the poor relations in the medical field, dentists in the past few years have started making more money than many types of physicians, including internal-medicine doctors, pediatricians, psychiatrists, and those in family practice, according to survey data from the American Dental Association and American Medical Association.

On average, general dentists in 2000, the most recent year for which comparative data are available, earned $166,460 -- compared with $164,100 for general internal-medicine doctors, $145,700 for psychiatrists, $144,700 for family-practice physicians, and $137,800 for pediatricians. All indications are that dentists have at least kept pace with physicians since then.

Those figures are a sharp contrast to 1988, when the average general dentist made $78,000, two-thirds the level of the average internal-medicine doctor, and behind every other type of physician. From 1988 to 2000, dentists' incomes more than doubled, while the average physician's income grew 42%. The rate of inflation during that same period was 46%.

Factor in hours worked -- dentists tend to put in 40-hour weeks, the ADA says, while the AMA says physicians generally work 50 to 55 hours -- and the discrepancy is even greater.

I conclude that:

1) The BLS data is BS, or at least dated.

2) Dentist compensation is on the upswing; physician compensation is on the downswing.

3) Dentists work a shorter workweek, and still make more money annually, than do most primary care doctors, and they are able to do this with a shorter education / training schedule.

Believe what you want, or whatever you need, to swallow the bitter pill.

Ignorance is bliss, and premeds are pretty ignorant about economic matters in general, and they are remarkably ignorant about the debt and pay trends in medicine and how this will impact their own economic future.

 

[Kaustikos]

flip, no offense and I don't mean to be rude, but are you really the one who should be lecturing about debt load? You just said debt isn't going to be an issue for you.

I mean getting lectures on financial burdens from someone who has no burden is a bit... off-putting.

I could say the same thing about the people on here saying it's okay to have monetary consideration while pursuing a career in medicine when 99% of the people who have posted here haven't even had a career or given considerations about the realities of what comes after becoming a physician. It's the same thinking people had 10 years ago when people in my college entering class thought they'd get a career/job in their study/field because they have a BS. How many people with BS are now working starbucks? Point is - things definitely change. Flip's argument is looking on facts and trends that counter anyones argument. I'm pretty sure I could've said the increasing amount of people with BS degrees and research experience, coupled with the inconsistent rise in jobs available for people with BS will cause a disastrous consequence for people graduating from undergrad. I'm sure people like yourselves would've made whatever opinions and arguments, but you can't argue the facts. Think as naively as you want, but don't put consideration into money with current trends.

 

[zer0crew]

Becoming a doctor is probably the single worst "get rich quick" scheme ever

 

[armybound]

I could say the same thing about the people on here saying it's okay to have monetary consideration while pursuing a career in medicine when 99% of the people who have posted here haven't even had a career or given considerations about the realities of what comes after becoming a physician. It's the same thinking people had 10 years ago when people in my college entering class thought they'd get a career/job in their study/field because they have a BS. How many people with BS are now working starbucks? Point is - things definitely change. Flip's argument is looking on facts and trends that counter anyones argument. I'm pretty sure I could've said the increasing amount of people with BS degrees and research experience, coupled with the inconsistent rise in jobs available for people with BS will cause a disastrous consequence for people graduating from undergrad. I'm sure people like yourselves would've made whatever opinions and arguments, but you can't argue the facts. Think as naively as you want, but don't put consideration into money with current trends.

who are the "people like yourselves"? who are we?

are you one of those people who think physicians are going to be making 50-60k like some European countries?

there's good money in medicine, and there always will be. people know that. it may not be as good as it once was, but that's something people have to take into consideration. either way, nobody's going to go starving. there is financial security in medicine, unless you're in a very rare situation.

I don't even understand what you're arguing anymore, or what it has to do with the OP. Are you saying there's no financial security in medicine?

 

[Kaustikos]

who are the "people like yourselves"? who are we?

are you one of those people who think physicians are going to be making 50-60k like some European countries?

there's good money in medicine, and there always will be. people know that. it may not be as good as it once was, but that's something people have to take into consideration. either way, nobody's going to go starving. there is financial security in medicine, unless you're in a very rare situation.

I don't even understand what you're arguing anymore, or what it has to do with the OP. Are you saying there's no financial security in medicine?

You guys are making assumptions just like Flip. I made my point clear - the trends we're seeing don't exactly scream "OMG, 200k salary, where's my Porsche?!". I'm saying who are you to say there is?

 

[catalase]

Chew on the "facts" in the WSJ article, printed in full here:

http://www.emrupdate.com/forums/t/4443.aspx

From that article:

Once the poor relations in the medical field, dentists in the past few years have started making more money than many types of physicians, including internal-medicine doctors, pediatricians, psychiatrists, and those in family practice, according to survey data from the American Dental Association and American Medical Association.

On average, general dentists in 2000, the most recent year for which comparative data are available, earned $166,460 -- compared with $164,100 for general internal-medicine doctors, $145,700 for psychiatrists, $144,700 for family-practice physicians, and $137,800 for pediatricians. All indications are that dentists have at least kept pace with physicians since then.

Those figures are a sharp contrast to 1988, when the average general dentist made $78,000, two-thirds the level of the average internal-medicine doctor, and behind every other type of physician. From 1988 to 2000, dentists' incomes more than doubled, while the average physician's income grew 42%. The rate of inflation during that same period was 46%.

Factor in hours worked -- dentists tend to put in 40-hour weeks, the ADA says, while the AMA says physicians generally work 50 to 55 hours -- and the discrepancy is even greater.

I conclude that:

1) The BLS data is BS, or at least dated.

2) Dentist compensation is on the upswing; physician compensation is on the downswing.

3) Dentists work a shorter workweek, and still make more money annually, than do most primary care doctors, and they are able to do this with a shorter education / training schedule.

Believe what you want, or whatever you need, to swallow the bitter pill.

Ignorance is bliss, and premeds are pretty ignorant about economic matters in general, and they are remarkably ignorant about the debt and pay trends in medicine and how this will impact their own economic future.

Dude, you're just wrong here.

Your WSJ article is from 1/10/05. The BLS data come from May 2009. Don't take my word for it, click and look for yourself. Who are you to say that a more dated article contains more accurate information than a government publication from last year? Have you been appointed the Czar of Healthcare Salary Awareness?

I don't need a background in finance to see that there is not a significant difference in earning potential between PCPs and General Dentists. Per the BLS, doctors earn slightly more. Your assertion about total earnings in point 3 is flat out wrong.

Come on now.

 

[flip26]

Dude, you're just wrong here.

Your WSJ article is from 1/10/05. The BLS data come from May 2009. Don't take my word for it, click and look for yourself. Who are you to say that a more dated article contains more accurate information than a government publication from last year? Have you been appointed the Czar of Healthcare Salary Awareness?

I don't need a background in finance to see that there is not a significant difference in earning potential between PCPs and General Dentists. Per the BLS, doctors earn slightly more. Your assertion about total earnings in point 3 is flat out wrong.

Come on now.

So you are saying the trends in the WSJ article magically reversed in Feb 2005? Umm...not quite. And in the interim, we have had Obamacare passed, and greater cuts in medicare and medicaid reimbursements...you are delusional if you think that the trends noted in the article haven't continued apace.

Come on now.

 

[catalase]

So you are saying the trends in the WSJ article magically reversed in Feb 2005? Umm...not quite. And in the interim, we have had Obamacare passed, and greater cuts in medicare and medicaid reimbursements...you are delusional if you think that the trends noted in the article haven't continued apace.

Come on now.

I cited data from last year! Last year! Don't you think that's a little more relevant?

You must really like arguing, because I can't find another logical reason why you would continue with this.

 

[flip26]

I cited data from last year! Last year! Don't you think that's a little more relevant?

You must really like arguing, because I can't find another logical reason why you would continue with this.

I just love ****ing with mental midgets!

 

[catalase]

I just love ****ing with mental midgets!

Alrighty then....

Get some fresh air flip. Go on a date or walk your dog. Do something constructive.

 

[armybound]

disagreeing is fine, but keep it civil. no personal attacks or this thread will be closed

 

[Trojan88]

Correct me if I am missing something here, but according to the BLS data, the mean salary for dentists is $75.71/hour, and that for general practitioners is $81.03/hour. Doesn't this mean that general practitioners and dentists make about the same amount of money for putting in about the same # of hours of work?

Of course, I am not taking factors such as length of schooling and upward/downward salary trends into consideration. I am just wondering about the assertion that dentists can make at least the same amount of money as general practitioners while working fewer hours.

 

[catalase]

Correct me if I am missing something here, but according to the BLS data, the mean salary for dentists is $75.71/hour, and that for general practitioners is $81.03/hour. Doesn't this mean that general practitioners and dentists make about the same amount of money for putting in about the same # of hours of work?

Of course, I am not taking factors such as length of schooling and upward/downward salary trends into consideration. I am just wondering about the assertion that dentists can make at least the same amount of money as general practitioners while working fewer hours.

You are correct. Of course these are averages, but they are representative of today's salaries in the compared fields.

 

[AllOptionsOpen]

There are far easier and shorter paths to money than med school, and much more money than one will ever make as a physician.

This isn't true.

 

[AllOptionsOpen]

The problem with you and others is that you only want to discuss the "upsides" of the money, and you choose to be blissfully ignorant about the debt burden, the declining physican income

You spoke earlier as someone who had some experience in the 'real world'. This makes me doubt that. If you were out there, you'd realize that shrinking pay, increased hours, high amounts of education debt and again, long hours are not hallmarks of medicine as a career: They're hallmarks of where we are in general.

This is affecting all fields, not just medicine. Medicine is not a unique set of circumstances in anything except residency, which frankly isn't as back breaking as people make it seem when you're earning mid 40's to low 50's pay during that period.

The difference with medicine is that the current ceiling is very high. It can fall quite a bit and still dominate the best paid profession list.

I agree that money shouldn't be the motivator. I strongly disagree that money as a motivator or consideration however is wrong. In fact, I think it's utter BS for most everyone working in medicine. Health care is a huge field. If money wasn't a factor, there would be a lot more nurses, PAs, and everything else. People would join the Peace Corps, Red Cross, or some other organization and really get out there and do some immediate good for the world. They wouldn't spend eight years in school, three years or more in residency, and then get to the 'passion' they've been striving for.

I likely won't bring up money in an admissions interview, but it has nothing to do with being ashamed of my feelings on the matter. It's because I think it's as common a motivating factor as "I would like to help people, to connect with them and help them at a point where they could really use some help from someone capable of delivering it." It's like mentioning I like Latin food because I'm hungry... isn't everyone?

 

[flip26]

This isn't true.

How so? This is a shockingly naive view about the world around us.