Should doctors in the US really be making up to a million a year??

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

Maybe your med school didn't use any of those pesky book things but I'd wager most do.

 

[JKing106]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: jacc1234
Many countries have programs like this. The Gov will pay for med school and in return the doc will have to work at a state hospital for x amount of years on the cheap.

Including the US. You get your schooling and board "paid" for in exchange for work. It's how my mom became a doctor. A poor single mother with an infant became a doctor. Talk about a great country.

No wonder you're a Neocon, you're a spoiled brat. You're a special, entitled flower, aren't you? Mommy told me so!

 

[Athena]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

I certainly don't. That doesn't mean that training as it is done now is the only way.

In many countries, medical training does not involve 4 years of general college level courses -- students go directly from secondary to medical school with courses of varying lengths. When those same students finish their training in their home countries, they can come here and get licensed. Do you think those doctors are "less" qualified than graduates of US medical schools?

 

[JKing106]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

What is your area of expertise, besides forum troll?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

What is your area of expertise, besides forum troll?

I have a degree in pharmacy, a doctorate in biology. I have the equivalent of a BS in physics and chemistry. I have 3/5 of a chemical engineering degree.

You?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

I certainly don't. That doesn't mean that training as it is done now is the only way.

In many countries, medical training does not involve 4 years of general college level courses -- students go directly from secondary to medical school with courses of varying lengths. When those same students finish their training in their home countries, they can come here and get licensed. Do you think those doctors are "less" qualified than graduates of US medical schools?

I'm responding to those who apparently think they can become effective physicians without clinical experience.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider


So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

you can't practice law that way either.

 

[JKing106]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

What is your area of expertise, besides forum troll?

I have a degree in pharmacy, a doctorate in biology. I have the equivalent of a BS in physics and chemistry. I have 3/5 of a chemical engineering degree.

You?

I've got a big schlong. I win.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider


So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

you can't practice law that way either.

I believe you, however once upon a time one could "read" the law as in sit for the board without having to go to law school. Perhaps that's not the case now.

Not to offend the legal types, but the process is inherently different between learning law and learning medicine. The latter requires clinical experience. It's not optional.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

What is your area of expertise, besides forum troll?

I have a degree in pharmacy, a doctorate in biology. I have the equivalent of a BS in physics and chemistry. I have 3/5 of a chemical engineering degree.

You?

I've got a big schlong. I win.

If you didn't want an answer why in hell did you ask? Have you professionally provided health care? If so then why don't you know the first thing about it? If not then how do you pretend to understand the process?

Hayabusa's Rule:
No one knows your job better than someone who's never done it.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.

So you think you can treat and diagnose by reading a book?

What is your area of expertise, besides forum troll?

I have a degree in pharmacy, a doctorate in biology. I have the equivalent of a BS in physics and chemistry. I have 3/5 of a chemical engineering degree.

You?

Heh. Heh. This is the Best bitch-slapping I have seen this year.

 

[ohnoes]

Originally posted by: Deeko

haha yea, all those people go to get an MBA because they want to become a middle manager. They might end up there, but not every med school student ends up being a top tier spine surgeon either.

You *HAVE* to have the degree to be a doctor. You're practically arguing against yourself in that 2nd paragraph.

Even for that remaining 99%, starting salary represents roughly what...1/40th of their career? 1/50th? I didn't go to school hoping to make my starting salary for the rest of my life. Earnings potential, even for the middle of the pack, extends far beyond starting salary.

I'm fairly certain you're just arguing with me for the sake of it, because it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, and you've yet to back anything up to that point.

God you're retarded. Starting salary matters because it defines your subsequent raises and sets the tone for your subsequent salaries. Why do you think people ask you for your current or previous salary during salary negotiations?

Anyways, Pwned? Look @ Table 7: http://findarticles.com/p/arti...pg_8/?tag=content;col1

Estimated lifetime earnings: MBA- $2.8M; Law- $3.2M; MD- $3.8M