This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
That is very kind of you to assume, though I can't agree or disagree beyond saying that all the American doctors I personally know are scary good. Look at @Throwaway05, who I highly respect, though I think he's well above median. And I hope for the sake of my self-esteem that he is significantly older and more experienced than me, because god knows I have stiff competition as is.
(I don't know many American doctors, but they have very high quality training, even by First World standards)
I do expect to be a better doctor by the time I'm (eligible) for the USMLE, and a rather good one if I can overcome the strong competition for the positions that are bookmarked for international doctors (around 4.5k the last time I checked, and you better believe the competition is an order of magnitude larger).
I'm early in training! I've only been a psychiatry resident for 6 months and change, so God knows that you wouldn't want to leave me entirely on my own to handle truly difficult cases. I'd probably not bungle it, because I can always look up treatment guidelines, but the mark of a competent doctor these days is the ability to make good decisions when operating outside the cut and dry, where guidelines and standard practice no longer apply.
An important addendum is that you don't have to be a median or better doctor to be a net value add! This is important, and the joke about half of all doctors being below average in their class is (mostly) a joke. A 10th percentile doctor is probably the point where I'd start having strong second thoughts, and that number depends on how strong the filtering is for both med students and fully qualified doctors with MDs. This is fair, because 90% of doctors will do an adequate job of treating you.
I have no firm numbers on hand for the relative difficulty of getting into medicine in either the States, the US or the UK (I'm tipsy at a pub), but I can definitely admit without shame that the average American doctor has better training than the rest.
I would very much like to charge as much money as people would pay me, especially in the States, but on a macro level letting more foreign doctors in will both suppress local wages and also increase access to healthcare for the average American. The former is likely going to be barely perceptible, unless the AMC does something drastic like allowing all Western doctors from near-peer nations to practise in the States automatically (and they never will). The latter also depends strongly on multiple factors, but the average IMG who does get into the States will probably be forced to take a role that pays less than the median (because it's easier for us to get into the unpopular things like Family Medicine), which will make IMG doctors cheaper on average for the average Joe.
If you want to peg my capabilities, I was around 75th percentile for all doctors, both British-trained and foreign (who met the eligibility criteria to sit it) in the clinical section of the exam I gave to enter higher training. When you include both the clinical knowledge and the ethical section of the exam, I was around 65th percentile. I will say that the ethics section of the MSRA, called the SJT, is universally panned as absolute bullshit and barely better than random noise on a good day.
I meant "my analysis holds if you're as competent as the median American doctor" not that I already assume that.
This seems plausible but I'm unsure. I did realize my analysis depends on the belief that the median doctor is a net value add, which some people dispute.
You do agree or at least consider it plausible, so I guess I can only express frank confusion about those who don't. I can only hope they're a small minority (haha).
I don't know if my opinion about doctors is invalid because I'm one, but I've never felt myself having to exercise particular caution when looking for a doctor, and I'm usually happy with the treatment I receive. This is, of course, confounded by the fact I've been a doctor for a while, and a med student for about as long, and the scion of doctors for as long as I've been alive. Other doctors will treat you differently for any of the above, but I expect not to the point they wouldn't do a good job for the average person. They'll treat you regardless.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link