Is PA school just as intense as med school?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have done one year of medical school and am now 2/3 of the way through didactic year in PA school. Intensity and stress levels are comparable. Subject matter is somewhat different, since in PA school we mix and match stuff from M1 and M2 into a single year. Clearly we don't have the basic science to match M1, but we have Clinical Medicine simultaneously which... is challenging.

I had a summer off in Med school to rest, not so much in PA school. We get two weeks off between semesters at my school, and it stays that way until we're done. Good news is, as they say, "you can do anything for two years." But med school is very, very long, and then follows it up with the true pain of residency.

I would agree with the 2 miles vs. 5.5 miles analogy. Both will make you long for the days of having hobbies, that's for sure. I guess during the strech in Med school they have no choice but to find a way to "make time" for that stuff. I can't imagine how, but, hey, maybe I'm just no good at that kind of time management. I truly believe I will not be able to "fly a kite," per se, until the day after I take the PANCE.

Members don't see this ad.
 
That's a little disingenuous don't you think?

A "medical student" has clearly, for many years, unambiguously, designated someone who is in medical school, not PA school or any other allied health profession. Maybe I'm just being anal today but that bothers me. Do you call an x-ray tech a radiologist? Do you say that a paralegal practices law? Does a dental hygienist practice dentistry?

BTW, for what it's worth, I am not anti-PA. Really. I work with several PAs and I value them but they're not docs and the PA students are not called "medical students."

Well, the radiologist is a medical doctor practicing medicine, the x-ray tech is not practicing medicine. They are assisting the patient in preparing for procedures, getting the films, whatever else they do, etc.

A PA is practicing medicine, not "physician assisting" so I think it is more appropriate in this case. Although, if such a designation were available (PA or NP student) I doubt any PAs or Pre-PAs would put down "medical student" or "pre-medicine." I don't think anyone is trying to steal that title or act like they are something they aren't. I thought of doing it for my own title but didn't want people to get upset like they apparently are.
 
Well, the radiologist is a medical doctor practicing medicine, the x-ray tech is not practicing medicine. They are assisting the patient in preparing for procedures, getting the films, whatever else they do, etc.

A PA is practicing medicine, not "physician assisting" so I think it is more appropriate in this case. Although, if such a designation were available (PA or NP student) I doubt any PAs or Pre-PAs would put down "medical student" or "pre-medicine." I don't think anyone is trying to steal that title or act like they are something they aren't. I thought of doing it for my own title but didn't want people to get upset like they apparently are.

a lot of degrees conferred are now MPAS - Master of Physician Assistant Studies.... wait

so what does that mean? PA school is about studying other PAs????? :D
 
Members don't see this ad :)
a lot of degrees conferred are now MPAS - Master of Physician Assistant Studies.... wait

so what does that mean? PA school is about studying other PAs????? :D

a little hx lesson-
the original name of the profession was "physician associates".
2 programs(yale and stanford) are still physician associate programs.
the name was changed due to pressure from the ama.
pa's do not practice assisting(except in the o.r.).
we practice medicine under our own licenses with the indirect involvement/sponsorship/supervision/collaboration of physicians. make no mistake, we are not independent providers and do not plan on becoming such, but we do much more than "assist" to include working solo in remote locations or settings not conducive to retaining a physician with involvement by physicians via phone/fax review of documentation for case review .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thats cool and all but... the MD is awarded after 4 years of "med-school" PRIOR to residency...

How many weeks/hours of that 4 years are spent on learning medicine...???

Is it 4 solid years (208 weeks)... or 4 traditional academic years (9 months each = 144 weeks)...????

Is the MS4 year mostly spent preparing for interviews/MATCH year...??? Because if so, then the actual weeks of medicine training become 108 weeks of medical learning (+/- say 10-15 weeks if the student needs to catch up on required rotations or electives) :confused::confused:

GENERALLY... PA students spend 104 weeks studying medicine (52 weeks x 2). The programs often give 7-10 days of off time between semesters/quarters, but they (PAs) basically attend training year-round until they are done (NO summers off!!!).

I'm thinking:

If its 144 weeks for MDs and 104 weeks for PAs thats a 40 week difference... which means that the MDs course is much more intense because they need to regurgitate much more info and demonstrate a much deeper understanding with only a 40 week difference.

The PAs need to also have a solid grasp of medicine in their short training time to practice effectively and efficiently... and NOT get themselves and their SP sued!!!

We (both MDs and PAs) have done a good job thus far...

As long as we keep a "TEAM" mentality, respect each others training, knowledge, and ability... we will be fine...;)
 
Thats cool and all but... the MD is awarded after 4 years of "med-school" PRIOR to residency...

How many weeks/hours of that 4 years are spent on learning medicine...???

Is it 4 solid years (208 weeks)... or 4 traditional academic years (9 months each = 144 weeks)...????

Is the MS4 year mostly spent preparing for interviews/MATCH year...??? Because if so, then the actual weeks of medicine training become 108 weeks of medical learning (+/- say 10-15 weeks if the student needs to catch up on required rotations or electives) :confused::confused:

GENERALLY... PA students spend 104 weeks studying medicine (52 weeks x 2). The programs often give 7-10 days of off time between semesters/quarters, but they (PAs) basically attend training year-round until they are done (NO summers off!!!).

Actually, the summer between first and second year is the main summer we get completely off at my program. Between second and third year, we had about 6 weeks or so, during which we had to take step one, then 3rd year started in early July. I suppose one could not take any time to study and take this whole time as break, but I don't know anyone who did that....at most, people took 2 weeks off. Third year was a full 52 weeks, with 2 weeks off for the winter holidays (the same time as the PA's, actually). We then had 1 week off before fourth year started. Fouth year is largely about applying for residency, taking step 2, etc, but it's not an entire year of vacation. My school allows about 10 or 12 weeks (can't remember now) of time to interview/take step 2/apply to residency. The rest of the time, we have 2 required sub-i's (very busy), neurology, and ER, leaving time for some electives. The electives can be relatively relaxed in say, derm, but they are really your only chance to prep for residency, do audition rotations at places you want to go to residency, look into possible fields for fellowship, etc.

So while you're right, that medical students don't do 4 solid years of training with no breaks, it's not really like we get 3 months completely off every year to sit around eating bon bons and watching daytime TV. :)

In response to the OP, med school and PA school are both intense. At my school, most of our classes 2nd year are done with the PA's, although they have separate classes for some things. Third year, we're all on rotations together with similar expectations from attendings/clerkship directors. The PA's take different tests than the med students and some of their rotations are shorter than ours so that they can fit everything into one year and have some elective time, but all in all, 2nd/3rd year of medical school is pretty similar to 1st/2nd year of PA school, as far as I can tell.
 
... [brevity edit]... but all in all, 2nd/3rd year of medical school is pretty similar to 1st/2nd year of PA school, as far as I can tell.

Thank you...

I really appreciate your honesty...:thumbup:;)
 
My break schedule in med school:

MS1/MS2 - no break (you had the option of taking a month off, I did some extra clinical & research stuff)

MS2/MS3 - 8wks to study for and take USMLE Step 1, if you scheduled it early you could take the rest of the time off (I ended up with a 3wk break)

During MS3 - 2wks off for Christmas, optional 2wks break time scheduled in (though if you did an extra clinical block of Radiology or Pathology, you could take that 2wks in MS4 year, which is what I did)

MS3/MS4 - no break

During MS4 - up to 10wks of "break time" to interview at residencies (8wks if you didn't do Radiology/Pathology in MS3 year); 1wk break between the end of the year and graduation, then another 6wks between graduation and the start of internship
 
Actually, the summer between first and second year is the main summer we get completely off at my program. Between second and third year, we had about 6 weeks or so, during which we had to take step one, then 3rd year started in early July. I suppose one could not take any time to study and take this whole time as break, but I don't know anyone who did that....at most, people took 2 weeks off. Third year was a full 52 weeks, with 2 weeks off for the winter holidays (the same time as the PA's, actually). We then had 1 week off before fourth year started. Fouth year is largely about applying for residency, taking step 2, etc, but it's not an entire year of vacation. My school allows about 10 or 12 weeks (can't remember now) of time to interview/take step 2/apply to residency. The rest of the time, we have 2 required sub-i's (very busy), neurology, and ER, leaving time for some electives. The electives can be relatively relaxed in say, derm, but they are really your only chance to prep for residency, do audition rotations at places you want to go to residency, look into possible fields for fellowship, etc.

So while you're right, that medical students don't do 4 solid years of training with no breaks, it's not really like we get 3 months completely off every year to sit around eating bon bons and watching daytime TV. :)

In response to the OP, med school and PA school are both intense. At my school, most of our classes 2nd year are done with the PA's, although they have separate classes for some things. Third year, we're all on rotations together with similar expectations from attendings/clerkship directors. The PA's take different tests than the med students and some of their rotations are shorter than ours so that they can fit everything into one year and have some elective time, but all in all, 2nd/3rd year of medical school is pretty similar to 1st/2nd year of PA school, as far as I can tell.
....honestly written!!!!! my fiance' is MD & she tells me same thing.
 
Please close this thread as the OP is obviously trolling...he loves nothing more than to start and fan this fire. Is there a Moderator out there?
 
Please close this thread as the OP is obviously trolling...he loves nothing more than to start and fan this fire. Is there a Moderator out there?


why close a thread ? the question was asked and answered. Shutting down free speech doesn't make you winner of an argument.
 
Please close this thread as the OP is obviously trolling...he loves nothing more than to start and fan this fire. Is there a Moderator out there?

No one had posted in the thread in over 3 weeks. It was dead on its own. There is no reason to close it. To be honest, I have never seen anyone bump a 3 week old (dead) thread and ask it to be closed.

If the thread does turn south we will close it if necessary. But oftentimes threads take care of themselves, as this one apparently was.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
why close a thread ? the question was asked and answered. Shutting down free speech doesn't make you winner of an argument.

Banned? Really?

Jeez, is SDN just trying to get rid of everyone vocal? This is like the 3rd ban of a long-time poster in the last two weeks.

Pretty soon I'm going to log in and see "SDN: An Allnurses Affilitate".
 
I'm not degrading your profession at all--I think it's a great one that I, myself might have looked more into if I didn't absolutely hate eyes. I'm just saying, judging by the attitudes on SDN, others have probably shat on you and that probably makes you bitter. But you don't have to take it out on midlevels, we know you have a doctoral degree in medicine. We have (literally or essentially) Master's degrees in medicine because that's what we chose to do. Both are hard.

Just wanted to clarify.

EDIT: So after I clarify my statements saying that the beliefs are not mine but rather the common attitude on here which would probably cause anyone in the other field of medicine to become bitter, you edit your post to make it even more insulting towards me. My comment was not directed to anyone with any of those degrees/professions, it was YOU and YOUR ATTITUDES. It has nothing to do with ODs. Its YOU being an OD and feeling the need to explain it to everyone over here. Why do you feel the need to be on the clinicians board anyways? If you were secure enough in your own degree (which, yes you should be proud of) than maybe you wouldn't come over here to remind everyone, "I HAVE A CLINICAL DOCTORATE, YOU DON'T, I'M BETTER THAN YOU." And maybe I am 5 years old? Who cares? Thanks for calling me a *****. I appreciate it.


First off, why are you indulging this tool? He does NOT have a clinical doctorate in medicine; he is studying to be an OPTOMETRIST. An optometrist is NOT a physician and never will be.

He trolls the opto forum and spouts off stuff like "ODs are gonna have surgical privileges one day" and stuff like that. He obviously resents MDs and puffs up his chosen profession to justify his decision to study a limited field, when in reality, what he really wanted to do was practice medicine. Thus, since a PA practices medicine, albeit under the supervision of a physician, and ODs do not, he is reflecting his personal frustration onto PAs.

Keep in mind, his signature says:
Future Optometric-Gynecological--Otolaryngological--Oral Maxillofacial--Onclological--Psychiatric--Geriatric--Dermatological--Podiatric--Orthopedic--Orthodontic--Endodontic--Dental--Neurological--Psychiatrist
(We get very in depth training in optometry school!)

I believe that signature says exactly what he thinks of himself, doesn't it? News flash, braintrust, once you get your OD and your license to practice, assuming you ever do, the moment you lay one finger in someone's mouth, vagina, or foot, you will end up without a license and quite possibly in jail. Your signature is neither funny, nor realistic and even the people in the optometry forum find you to be a self-inflated bag of CH4.

I'm an MD, not a PA, but the fact is, a PA program is pretty intense. Here' s a better question for the OP, other than chiropractic, what health care professional program is NOT intense? In fact, what professional program in general is not intense? Medical school sure as hell was. Law school sure as hell was. I know dental school, pharm school, vet school, pod school, and other programs are not walks in the park.

The original question is pointless, frivolous, and lame; it has no purpose other than to incite this kind of pedantic debate.

PA = intense
MD/DO = more intense

And? So?
 
Last edited:
Tired, that's a judgment on your part. You don't know me, my mind, or my life. I wrote a paper on Emergency Care of Gunshot Trauma in my first year of community college and one on Pediatric Brain Trauma in my second. That's not mentioning the rest of the work I've done following. I wrote a 20 page paper on the evidence of neurogenesis in the adult human brain before a formal book had even been published on the subject. I'll thank you not to make presumptions about my intellectual foundation and my ability to understand.

I agree with you regarding educational foundation. Obviously since I haven't yet been through PA school nor have I gone through medical school, I can't speak first-hand. However, I have done quite a bit of searching into the curriculum of both. And regardless of what words people feel comfortable with, the PA programs ready students for clinical rotations in roughly one year. That's fast, and to me, a sprint versus a marathon (longer education, none the less stringent to be sure, of medical school).

I will have to disagree with you again on your statement that I have had access to only a small part of the work of physicians and physician assistants. Perhaps that's been your experience, but it hasn't been mine. Limited, to be sure, but it would still be inaccurate to agree with your words. I was always allowed in the docs office in the last ER I was in, and they often engaged me in discussion regarding scans and situations. Shadowing a PA there for 100 hours created even more of an opportunity for me to get quite an accurate insight as to what goes on behind closed doors. I don't have to be a PA or an MD/DO to understand what it is that they do, observe how they go about doing those things, or question how and why they make their decisions. And many times, that questioning involved asking a doctor or a PA themselves. If you're walkin' by, I most likely have a question for you!:cool:

I guess I've gotten as much "reality" as I can possibly get at this point, and I certainly stand by my thought that I have a good idea of the capacities of both professions. I know I still have a long way to go, and I'm very much looking forward to the journey.



Just a few comments. How can you call yourself a medical student when you're in PA school? Uuh, sorry, but there is a HUGE difference. Second, you wrote some papers in COMMUNITY COLLEGE and that makes you an expert on what? Writing papers, at any level, whether community college or PhD, does not make one an expert on clinical matters. There is a huge dichotomy between practice and research.

I agree; no one should judge your intellectual abilities based on your age or experience (or lack thereof), but your argument here is quite weak and comes off in a pathetic manner.
 
...Tired, that's a judgment on your part. You don't know me, my mind, or my life. I wrote a paper on Emergency Care of Gunshot Trauma in my first year of community college and one on Pediatric Brain Trauma in my second. That's not mentioning the rest of the work I've done following. I wrote a 20 page paper on the evidence of neurogenesis in the adult human brain before a formal book had even been published on the subject....

Well la dee friggin' da. Dude, you're supposed to wait until after you start PA school before you develop the chip on your shoulder. Didn't you get the memo?

Hey, there's nothing to the Emergency Care of Gunshot Trauma. A few basic principles, facility with a few big procedures, familiarity with ATLS, a little bit of nerve, a trauma surgeon in the area, and you are cooking with gas. I mean, it's cool and all and I enjoy it but it's not exactly an intellectual tour de force.
 
Banned? Really?

Jeez, is SDN just trying to get rid of everyone vocal? This is like the 3rd ban of a long-time poster in the last two weeks.

Pretty soon I'm going to log in and see "SDN: An Allnurses Affilitate".

This person was not banned for anything in this thread, rather for a very long list of problems over many months.
 
Sadly, I've heard many PA students refer to themselves as "medical students" to unsuspecting residents and attendings.

I think the PA instructors are starting to buy into the coolaid and tell the PA students to start using the "med student" moniker, in the same way that the DNP programs are teaching their DNP students to refer to themselves as "doctor"
 
Just a few comments. How can you call yourself a medical student when you're in PA school? Uuh, sorry, but there is a HUGE difference. Second, you wrote some papers in COMMUNITY COLLEGE and that makes you an expert on what? Writing papers, at any level, whether community college or PhD, does not make one an expert on clinical matters. There is a huge dichotomy between practice and research.

I agree; no one should judge your intellectual abilities based on your age or experience (or lack thereof), but your argument here is quite weak and comes off in a pathetic manner.

You're purposely missing the meaning behind the context of the conversation I was having with the other poster, and in that process are coming across as self-aggrandizing. I guess educating myself on ICP and associated constitutions involving fentanyl, mannitol and opiates means nothing, or rather, is to be considered "weak". In any case, nowhere did I state that I was an expert on anything (regardless of whether I am or am not).

I wish you could have known my Animal Biology Professor, Richard Armstrong, what a brilliant man. His father was a Doctor, and his brother is a Doctor. He passed away due to kidney failure, but not before giving me some incredible guidance in the world of biological sciences (as well as an A+ on my Pediatric Brain Trauma paper). The school was Santa Barbara City College, it has the highest transfer rate in California, or at least did during my time of attendance. The paper I wrote on Neurogenesis in the Adult Human Brain was written at the University of California Santa Cruz for the Cognitive Neuroscience class taught by Professor Bruce Bridgeman. I received an A+ on that paper as well.

I could attempt to try and uncover the nature behind your hostility, but I'm studying about enteroglucagon at the moment and want to get back to my work. If you're truly a Medical Doctor, I probably wouldn't personally choose to be seen by you as a patient, mainly due to the fact that you come across as a haughty and irrational individual who for some reason feels a need to debase others.
 
Sadly, I've heard many PA students refer to themselves as "medical students" to unsuspecting residents and attendings.

I think the PA instructors are starting to buy into the coolaid and tell the PA students to start using the "med student" moniker, in the same way that the DNP programs are teaching their DNP students to refer to themselves as "doctor"

In some jurisdictions, that is illegal and constitutes the unauthorized practice of medicine. It's like paralegals saying they are law students. WRONG. If you want to be called a medical student, matriculate into an MD or DO program.

What's wrong with saying "I am studying to be a physician assistant" or "I'm a health sciences graduate student"?

And the DNPs should be saying "I'm a NP" or, at best, "I'm a Doctor of Nurse Practice), not "I'm a doctor!". Most professionals with "doctorates" (e.g., pharmacists, optos, dentists, vets, lawyers, pods, psychologists, etc.) respond "I"m a pharmacist/optometrist/dentist/veterinarian" not "I'm a doctor".
 
Hey, there's nothing to the Emergency Care of Gunshot Trauma. A few basic principles, facility with a few big procedures, familiarity with ATLS, a little bit of nerve, a trauma surgeon in the area, and you are cooking with gas. I mean, it's cool and all and I enjoy it but it's not exactly an intellectual tour de force.

I had an ER Director read my paper before I turned it in and she started laughing, saying, "what the hell is Fournier's gangrene". Anyhow, her last-all was that manually probing the wound can often be the best means of evaluation, possibly establishing the angle of trajectory, depth of the wound, as well as determining proximity or directing to vital organs.
 
You're purposely missing the meaning behind the context of the conversation I was having with the other poster, and in that process are coming across as self-aggrandizing. I guess educating myself on ICP and associated constitutions involving fentanyl, mannitol and opiates means nothing, or rather, is to be considered "weak". In any case, nowhere did I state that I was an expert on anything (regardless of whether I am or am not).

I wish you could have known my Animal Biology Professor, Richard Armstrong, what a brilliant man. His father was a Doctor, and his brother is a Doctor. He passed away due to kidney failure, but not before giving me some incredible guidance in the world of biological sciences (as well as an A+ on my Pediatric Brain Trauma paper). The school was Santa Barbara City College, it has the highest transfer rate in California, or at least did during my time of attendance. The paper I wrote on Neurogenesis in the Adult Human Brain was written at the University of California Santa Cruz for the Cognitive Neuroscience class taught by Professor Bruce Bridgeman. I received an A+ on that paper as well.

I could attempt to try and uncover the nature behind your hostility, but I'm studying about enteroglucagon at the moment and want to get back to my work. If you're truly a Medical Doctor, I probably wouldn't personally choose to be seen by you as a patient, mainly due to the fact that you come across as a haughty and irrational individual who for some reason feels a need to debase others.


I'm a psychiatrist. I try to "debase" maladaptive behaviours in my patients by showing them how their behavior is detrimental and destructive. No one is trying to demean you or undermine your achievements, but surely even you realize that writing a paper, at a community college, and getting an A+ by a community college "faculty" is not difficult even if the subject matter is at the undergrad level. Community College = inflated high school.

How well you do on a paper, kid, has no relationship to how you do in clinical practice. Arguably, how well you do on tests does, or can be predictive, but to say "I got an A+ on a paper in high school or community college" on a forum like this is laughable and esoteric; it has no relevance and is given no weight.

Furthermore, you then throw out names of people we are supposed to know or be impressed somehow. Your community college professor, who died of renal failure, gave you an A+, but the fact that this father and brother are physicians, makes his A+ more meaningful? HUH? WHO CARES what his daddy and brother do/did? How is that relevant? If your professor had a PhD and was published and recognized in a relevant biomedical field, not just "biology", then his assessment of your research may have some relevance, but to argue that because his daddy/brother are MDs, HIS assessment of your work is somehow enhanced and more credible is absurd and borders on delusional.

That's like me saying "my dad is a doctor, so I can diagnose your medical problem". It doesn't work that way, kid.

Also, you are NOT a medical student. There are categories on this forum that you can select that would not be misleading or misrepresentative of your training/career goals. While a PA may practice medicine, under the supervision of a REAL doctor, who has graduated from medical school and passed the USMLE I-III, and completed a residency, a PA is not a physician and will never be a physician. If you were in college studying to be a legal assistant or paralegal, would you also be a "law student"? No, you would not be. To say you're a medical student is rather "haughty and irrational", don't you think? I'd say it borders on fraud. In some places, you could be in serious trouble by saying you're in medical school or trying to pass yourself off as a physician.
 
What's wrong with saying "I am studying to be a physician assistant" or "I'm a health sciences graduate student"?

What's wrong with having better designating options available? I wish there was a PA Student status here to choose from!

"Other health professions" just doesn't feel right to me. I am a Physician Assistant Student, who is studying medicine. I understand it's a little unconventional, but I did the best I could with what there was.
 
Last edited:
I'm a psychiatrist. I try to "debase" maladaptive behaviours in my patients by showing them how their behavior is detrimental and destructive. No one is trying to demean you or undermine your achievements, but surely even you realize that writing a paper, at a community college, and getting an A+ by a community college "faculty" is not difficult even if the subject matter is at the undergrad level. Community College = inflated high school.

How well you do on a paper, kid, has no relationship to how you do in clinical practice. Arguably, how well you do on tests does, or can be predictive, but to say "I got an A+ on a paper in high school or community college" on a forum like this is laughable and esoteric; it has no relevance and is given no weight.

Furthermore, you then throw out names of people we are supposed to know or be impressed somehow. Your community college professor, who died of renal failure, gave you an A+, but the fact that this father and brother are physicians, makes his A+ more meaningful? HUH? WHO CARES what his daddy and brother do/did? How is that relevant? If your professor had a PhD and was published and recognized in a relevant biomedical field, not just "biology", then his assessment of your research may have some relevance, but to argue that because his daddy/brother are MDs, HIS assessment of your work is somehow enhanced and more credible is absurd and borders on delusional.

That's like me saying "my dad is a doctor, so I can diagnose your medical problem". It doesn't work that way, kid.

You've definitely got some issues. By the way, I'm almost 40. Further, I'll ignore your insulting Professor Armstrong, mainly because he's not here for me to confirm his credentials (I only know he taught anatomy at UCSB for years), but why are you ignoring the other work I mentioned? You are welcome to research Bruce Bridgeman, he's quite the knowledgeable chap in your area of specialty. Maybe that would lend some sort of credibility that would prove sufficient for you?

For the record, my point was in trying to explain my level of comprehension to someone who felt I couldn't understand, not to mention trying to explain my thirst for learning. You should try reading back through the thread a bit, before pouncing out of context. Is that how you operate with patients?

I think more than likely you have a lot on your plate right now, and are trying to work off some of your stress. I would suggest exercise, it truly works wonders for me.
 
Last edited:
Dude, your use of "medical student" along with your post content screams "wanna-be." You're making the rest of the PAs look bad and causing unnecessary resentment toward your future peers.

You really should change it. Its disingenuous.

Also, I find it very hard to believe that a residency trained EP didn't know what Fourniers was. You must have an impressive amount of knowledge.


Out of curiosity, do the PAs here realize why posts like this piss people off and result in midlevel hostility?
 
Dude, your use of "medical student" along with your post content screams "wanna-be." You're making the rest of the PAs look bad and causing unnecessary resentment toward your future peers.

You really should change it. Its disingenuous.

Also, I find it very hard to believe that a residency trained EP didn't know what Fourniers was. You must have an impressive amount of knowledge.


Out of curiosity, do the PAs here realize why posts like this piss people off and result in midlevel hostility?

schutzhund, as I've already been offered post-graduation employment by three MDs, two being Directors, your opinion means next to nothing to me. Good luck.
 
Sadly, I've heard many PA students refer to themselves as "medical students" to unsuspecting residents and attendings.

I think the PA instructors are starting to buy into the coolaid and tell the PA students to start using the "med student" moniker, in the same way that the DNP programs are teaching their DNP students to refer to themselves as "doctor"

Thats a lot of horsepoop.
 
What's wrong with saying "I am studying to be a physician assistant" or "I'm a health sciences graduate student"?


Nothing. Heck, I am proud of it. In fact, besides me introducing myself as a PA-Student, it says the same on my lab coat and name tag.....
 
I had an ER Director read my paper before I turned it in and she started laughing, saying, "what the hell is Fournier's gangrene". Anyhow, her last-all was that manually probing the wound can often be the best means of evaluation, possibly establishing the angle of trajectory, depth of the wound, as well as determining proximity or directing to vital organs.

Dude, everybody and their mother knows about Fournier's friggin' gangrene. I even had a patient die from it a few months ago. It is not a mystery diagnosis, especially not to Emergency Physicians all of whom carry in their heads a short list of "Must Not Miss Presentations" which starts with Pulmonary Embolism, includes Fournier's Gangrene, and ends with epiglotitis.

You cannot be be for real. No one who has not even started medical training (whether in PA school or medical school) could possibly be so arrogant as to think he knows more than a residency-trained, board-certified Emergency Medicine attending. She was probably laughing because acutely, gangrene of any type is not something that is of immediate concern in a trauma resuscitation. We sometimes start antibiotics in the department but a delay of fifteen minutes to take the guy to the OR is not exactly critical. It usually takes longer than that to get the antibiotics from the pharmacy, much less hang them.
 
I never said I know more than anyone. I didn't do the research or write the paper for any reason other than to educate myself. Maybe she was pulling my leg, I have no idea. I agree that antibiotics would logically come some time after initial stabilization. I'm sorry to hear of your patient.

Hey, at least this got me to pull out the paper, I hadn't read it in a while. As my gift to you, here's a bit of it (please pardon the immaturity of the referencing, it was one of my first papers):

'Extent of wounding from gunshot largely depends on the type and caliber of weapon used, as well as type of ammunition. High-powered rifles can generate energy 60 times greater than that of handguns. Distance from the weapon to the injured person mass and velocity of the ammunition, region of the body and organs injured are all determining factors in the damage incurred. Ballistics is a key factor in extent of damage. Bullets can produce direct and indirect tissue damage in three ways:

1. Crushing

2. Cavitation: causing a permanent cavity, and

3. Shock waves: representing the bullet's sound striking the surface of an object, in this case, the body's vital organs. These shock waves can compress tissue and travel ahead of the bullet (Cooper 38).

Secondary damage can also occur from fragments of a fractured bullet or from a high-energy bone impact. If the injury involves high-energy femoral fracture, abdominal injury may occur. Organs close to the bullet trajectory may be damaged by pressure waves, this second damage being frequent in high-energy injury. Bullets also have the capacity for high-speed bounce throughout the body, creating a potential path of destruction. The various 'tumbling' possibilities are yaw, precession and nutation (Ferrera 612).

According to studies done by Janzon and Seeman, there are four distinct measurements for analyzing tissue damage and destruction. They are:

1. Damage by direct contact with, and static disruption of, tissue.

2. Damage caused by high overpressures in the immediate vicinity of a projectile, penetrating at a high velocity. These pressures are caused by the flow of tissue around the projectile, cause a contusion-and-concussion-type injury.

3. Damage caused by expansion of a temporary cavity, reaching its maximum dimensions long after (milliseconds) the passage of the bullet. The injury is by tear damage, caused by stretching beyond the elastic limit of the tissues, and

4. Damage caused by the collapse of the temporary cavity. This injury could be of a contusion/concussion type caused by the pressure being brought about by the violent collapse of the cavity (implosion). It could also be of a tear/disruption type, caused by instabilities of the interior cavity surface during collapse (Cooper 39).

Senior EMS Paramedic *Blank Blank* states the first and foremost considerations for the primary caregiver are always the ABC's, airway, breathing and circulation. Then, oxygen and immediate transport. It's also important to learn the trajectory path of the bullet, which you can observe upon finding the exit wound of the bullet, if there is one. Learning of the type of gun involved and the ammunition can serve greatly in helping the doctors in surgery." ER MD *Blank Blank* states that, "All gunshot trauma cases are regarded as life-threatening injury until proven otherwise. Regardless of mechanism of injury, in any seriously penetrating gunshot wound, you must assume that the surrounding organs are in jeopardy. The work of the primary caregiver is incredibly crucial from the moment they arrive on the scene. Avoiding aspiration should be one of the strongest primary considerations."

Primary consideration would also be given to possibility of cardiovascular shock. "Therapy must proceed quickly before extensive damage to vital organs can occur" (Dambro 978). Direct pressure on the wound is extremely important in the beginning stages of blood loss. Loss of blood from the said penetrating wound, whether an exit wound is present or not, can result in "inadequate perfusion (oxygen supply) of tissues, which results in organ dysfunction, cellular and organ damage, and, if not corrected quickly, death of the patient" (Dambro 378). This type of shock can manifest itself in different contexts in relation to the type of injury sustained. For example, hypovolemic shock refers to severe reduction of cardiac output due to loss of intravascular volume, most often caused by mostly external blood loss resulting in reduced venous return to the heart. In comparison, distributive shock would be in reference to the maldistribution of blood throughout the body, perhaps from the rendering of a major artery (Dambro 978).

Tests can be given to determine which type of shock has been sustained, including Endoscopy/radioisotope bleeding scans. CAT scans, echocardiograms (which may detect and/or quantify pericardial effusions due to pericardial tamponade), lung scans and/or pulmonary arteriography for the detection of vascular injury (including massive pulmonary embolism, and pulmonary artery (Swan-Ganz) catheterization for serial measurement of cardiac output, central venous, pulmonary arterial and pulmonary arterial occlusion pressures, and vascular resistance (Dambro 978).

Debridement (laying open the wound, as well as removing all non-viable tissue) and excision of all foreign objects and contaminants, especially organic matter, is intitially necessary. Finding the distinguishing line between viable and non-viable tissue can be done using the 'four C's'. These are:

1. Color: a dark-red appearance indicating a lack of oxyhaemoglobin in the tissue, due to poor or absent circulation.

2. Contractility: healthy muscle contracts when touched or pinched.

3. Consistency: a mushy appearance indicating damaged tissue, and

4. Capillary bleeding; when cut, blood from capillaries seeps out into healthy muscle.

Also to be considered is the possibility of deep infections such as traumatic gas gangrene, a form of Clostridial infection that encompasses a possible cause of over 60 gram-positive anaerobic spore-forming rods. This condition results from gas that is produced by the bacteria becoming present in tissue, developing first and most commonly after deep, penetrating and/or crush injury that comprises the blood supply (e.g. gunshot wound). It's incubation period is less than 24 hours but ranges from 6 to 8 hours to several days. Gas present in tissue (as in crepitance) may be obvious physical examination, soft tissue radiographs, or CT. Associated signs of systemic toxicity develop rapidly, including tachycardia, fever and diaphoresis, followed by shock and multi-organ failure. Bacteremia occurs in 15% of patients and can be associated with brisk hemolysis (the liberation of hemoglobin from red blood cells, brought about by a certain substance acting in conjunction with complement of clotting factor, causing the dissolution of red blood cells and disseminated intravascular coagulation). Complication can include jaundice, hemorrhage, renal failure, hypotension and liver necrosis (Bennett 1631).

Diagnosis of Clostridial Gas Gangrene consists of recognizing pain at the site of prior injury, together with signs of systemic toxicity and gas in the tissue. Definitive diagnosis depends on discovery of large gram-positive rods at the injury site or in the blood. Surgical exploration is essential and demonstrates muscle that does not bleed or contract when stimulated, though in some cases bleeding is a good sign of circulation. Some surgeons will 'nick' the muscle to check for blood flow. Muscle tissue may be edematous and have reddish blue to black discoloration. Treatment includes the administering of penicillin, clindamycin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, metronidazole, or a number of cephalosporins that have excellent in vitro activity against Clostridia. Aggressive surgical debridement is mandatory to improve survival and prevent further complications. The use of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) has presented equivocal results when combined with antibiotics and surgical debridement (Bennett 1632).

Patients with a diagnosis of gas gangrene of an extremity have a better prognosis than those with truncal or intra-abdominal gas gangrene, largely because it is difficult to operate on such said lesions. It is to be noted that surgical closure of traumatic wounds should be avoided. Antibiotic treatment of such contaminated wounds is foremostly and extremely necessary. Gas gangrene can also occur in the heart and brain, as well as in the extremities. Other possible deep infections with muscle involvement include streptococcal myositis (muscular discomfort or pain resulting from infection or unknown cause), anaerobic myonecrosis, hemolytic streptococcal infection, acute and infectious staphylococcal anaerobic cellulitis, crepitant phelgmon, and Fournier's gangrene. Aspiration and dissemination of air into wounds by muscular activity and subcutaneous emphysema related to air-leak syndrome or trauma are of concern (Dambro 38).'
 
Last edited:
Sadly, I've heard many PA students refer to themselves as "medical students" to unsuspecting residents and attendings.

I think the PA instructors are starting to buy into the coolaid and tell the PA students to start using the "med student" moniker, in the same way that the DNP programs are teaching their DNP students to refer to themselves as "doctor"

and, you know this how?
it would be misrepresentation and is not occurring.
same applies to a med student identifying themselves as doctor.

we get it, you (and many many others, including myself) can't stand
the whole DNP thing, but really, get it together man, before bashing untruths.

unless of course you mean after obtaining the degree, then this post is moot.
 
Last edited:
Dude, your use of "medical student" along with your post content screams "wanna-be." You're making the rest of the PAs look bad and causing unnecessary resentment toward your future peers.

You really should change it. Its disingenuous.

Also, I find it very hard to believe that a residency trained EP didn't know what Fourniers was. You must have an impressive amount of knowledge.


Out of curiosity, do the PAs here realize why posts like this piss people off and result in midlevel hostility?

i can't believe that people are getting their panties in a bunch over a "label"...
"HEY, YOU'RE NOT a medical student. I am!!!!"
sorry, but this is just ridiculous,
and it makes you look even more ridiculous.
are you that insecure about such things?
if so, then there's a loooooooong road ahead for you my friend.
 
i can't believe that people are getting their panties in a bunch over a "label"...
"HEY, YOU'RE NOT a medical student. I am!!!!"
sorry, but this is just ridiculous,
and it makes you look even more ridiculous.
are you that insecure about such things?
if so, then there's a loooooooong road ahead for you my friend.

I don't think that schutzhound (or whatever the poster's name was) was getting upset at the PA student calling himself a "medical student." If you saw his credentials, you would have noticed that he/she was already a resident and thus already a physician. I believe his point was that the PA may have some insecurities to be calling himself a "medical student (which indicates that one is studying to become a physician) when in fact, he is a PA student.
 
I don't have myself listed as pre-medical (and eventually a medical student) because I am trying to lie to the world and hide the fact that I am a PA student and not a medical student.

Pre-PA / PA student isn't an option. If it was, I would choose it. However, I am studying medicine (in a different capacity than someone studying to become an MD) and pre-medical / medical student seems to be the best option of those available on this forum.
 
I never said I know more than anyone. I didn't do the research or write the paper for any reason other than to educate myself. Maybe she was pulling my leg, I have no idea. I agree that antibiotics would logically come some time after initial stabilization. I'm sorry to hear of your patient.

Hey, at least this got me to pull out the paper, I hadn't read it in a while. As my gift to you, here's a bit of it (please pardon the immaturity of the referencing, it was one of my first papers):

'Extent of wounding from gunshot largely depends on the type and caliber of weapon used, as well as type of ammunition. High-powered rifles can generate energy 60 times greater than that of handguns. Distance from the weapon to the injured person mass and velocity of the ammunition, region of the body and organs injured are all determining factors in the damage incurred. Ballistics is a key factor in extent of damage. Bullets can produce direct and indirect tissue damage in three ways:

1. Crushing

2. Cavitation: causing a permanent cavity, and

3. Shock waves: representing the bullet's sound striking the surface of an object, in this case, the body's vital organs. These shock waves can compress tissue and travel ahead of the bullet (Cooper 38).

Secondary damage can also occur from fragments of a fractured bullet or from a high-energy bone impact. If the injury involves high-energy femoral fracture, abdominal injury may occur. Organs close to the bullet trajectory may be damaged by pressure waves, this second damage being frequent in high-energy injury. Bullets also have the capacity for high-speed bounce throughout the body, creating a potential path of destruction. The various 'tumbling' possibilities are yaw, precession and nutation (Ferrera 612).

According to studies done by Janzon and Seeman, there are four distinct measurements for analyzing tissue damage and destruction. They are:

1. Damage by direct contact with, and static disruption of, tissue.

2. Damage caused by high overpressures in the immediate vicinity of a projectile, penetrating at a high velocity. These pressures are caused by the flow of tissue around the projectile, cause a contusion-and-concussion-type injury.

3. Damage caused by expansion of a temporary cavity, reaching its maximum dimensions long after (milliseconds) the passage of the bullet. The injury is by tear damage, caused by stretching beyond the elastic limit of the tissues, and

4. Damage caused by the collapse of the temporary cavity. This injury could be of a contusion/concussion type caused by the pressure being brought about by the violent collapse of the cavity (implosion). It could also be of a tear/disruption type, caused by instabilities of the interior cavity surface during collapse (Cooper 39).

Senior EMS Paramedic *Blank Blank* states the first and foremost considerations for the primary caregiver are always the ABC's, airway, breathing and circulation. Then, oxygen and immediate transport. It's also important to learn the trajectory path of the bullet, which you can observe upon finding the exit wound of the bullet, if there is one. Learning of the type of gun involved and the ammunition can serve greatly in helping the doctors in surgery." ER MD *Blank Blank* states that, "All gunshot trauma cases are regarded as life-threatening injury until proven otherwise. Regardless of mechanism of injury, in any seriously penetrating gunshot wound, you must assume that the surrounding organs are in jeopardy. The work of the primary caregiver is incredibly crucial from the moment they arrive on the scene. Avoiding aspiration should be one of the strongest primary considerations."

Primary consideration would also be given to possibility of cardiovascular shock. "Therapy must proceed quickly before extensive damage to vital organs can occur" (Dambro 978). Direct pressure on the wound is extremely important in the beginning stages of blood loss. Loss of blood from the said penetrating wound, whether an exit wound is present or not, can result in "inadequate perfusion (oxygen supply) of tissues, which results in organ dysfunction, cellular and organ damage, and, if not corrected quickly, death of the patient" (Dambro 378). This type of shock can manifest itself in different contexts in relation to the type of injury sustained. For example, hypovolemic shock refers to severe reduction of cardiac output due to loss of intravascular volume, most often caused by mostly external blood loss resulting in reduced venous return to the heart. In comparison, distributive shock would be in reference to the maldistribution of blood throughout the body, perhaps from the rendering of a major artery (Dambro 978).

Tests can be given to determine which type of shock has been sustained, including Endoscopy/radioisotope bleeding scans. CAT scans, echocardiograms (which may detect and/or quantify pericardial effusions due to pericardial tamponade), lung scans and/or pulmonary arteriography for the detection of vascular injury (including massive pulmonary embolism, and pulmonary artery (Swan-Ganz) catheterization for serial measurement of cardiac output, central venous, pulmonary arterial and pulmonary arterial occlusion pressures, and vascular resistance (Dambro 978).

Debridement (laying open the wound, as well as removing all non-viable tissue) and excision of all foreign objects and contaminants, especially organic matter, is intitially necessary. Finding the distinguishing line between viable and non-viable tissue can be done using the 'four C's'. These are:

1. Color: a dark-red appearance indicating a lack of oxyhaemoglobin in the tissue, due to poor or absent circulation.

2. Contractility: healthy muscle contracts when touched or pinched.

3. Consistency: a mushy appearance indicating damaged tissue, and

4. Capillary bleeding; when cut, blood from capillaries seeps out into healthy muscle.

Also to be considered is the possibility of deep infections such as traumatic gas gangrene, a form of Clostridial infection that encompasses a possible cause of over 60 gram-positive anaerobic spore-forming rods. This condition results from gas that is produced by the bacteria becoming present in tissue, developing first and most commonly after deep, penetrating and/or crush injury that comprises the blood supply (e.g. gunshot wound). It's incubation period is less than 24 hours but ranges from 6 to 8 hours to several days. Gas present in tissue (as in crepitance) may be obvious physical examination, soft tissue radiographs, or CT. Associated signs of systemic toxicity develop rapidly, including tachycardia, fever and diaphoresis, followed by shock and multi-organ failure. Bacteremia occurs in 15% of patients and can be associated with brisk hemolysis (the liberation of hemoglobin from red blood cells, brought about by a certain substance acting in conjunction with complement of clotting factor, causing the dissolution of red blood cells and disseminated intravascular coagulation). Complication can include jaundice, hemorrhage, renal failure, hypotension and liver necrosis (Bennett 1631).

Diagnosis of Clostridial Gas Gangrene consists of recognizing pain at the site of prior injury, together with signs of systemic toxicity and gas in the tissue. Definitive diagnosis depends on discovery of large gram-positive rods at the injury site or in the blood. Surgical exploration is essential and demonstrates muscle that does not bleed or contract when stimulated, though in some cases bleeding is a good sign of circulation. Some surgeons will 'nick' the muscle to check for blood flow. Muscle tissue may be edematous and have reddish blue to black discoloration. Treatment includes the administering of penicillin, clindamycin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, metronidazole, or a number of cephalosporins that have excellent in vitro activity against Clostridia. Aggressive surgical debridement is mandatory to improve survival and prevent further complications. The use of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) has presented equivocal results when combined with antibiotics and surgical debridement (Bennett 1632).

Patients with a diagnosis of gas gangrene of an extremity have a better prognosis than those with truncal or intra-abdominal gas gangrene, largely because it is difficult to operate on such said lesions. It is to be noted that surgical closure of traumatic wounds should be avoided. Antibiotic treatment of such contaminated wounds is foremostly and extremely necessary. Gas gangrene can also occur in the heart and brain, as well as in the extremities. Other possible deep infections with muscle involvement include streptococcal myositis (muscular discomfort or pain resulting from infection or unknown cause), anaerobic myonecrosis, hemolytic streptococcal infection, acute and infectious staphylococcal anaerobic cellulitis, crepitant phelgmon, and Fournier's gangrene. Aspiration and dissemination of air into wounds by muscular activity and subcutaneous emphysema related to air-leak syndrome or trauma are of concern (Dambro 38).'

Your paper is terrible. Sounds like it was written by fourth-grader who was copying out of books.
 
There's more to the paper, but I didn't feel like writing the rest out. I think it's well-written for someone who was in their second semester of community college, who hadn't even started their biology series yet. Thankfully, the ED Director who read it thought it was excellent. You're welcome to look into any of the references.

It should be obvious to anyone who can read, but I'll say it regardless. At the rate you're going, you will make a terrible Doctor (if you even are a Resident at all). At this point, you've proven that you're not worth my time, Panda Bear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajectory

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/foremostly
 
Last edited:
Just had to sneak a peek into this thread...geez, you guys are cutthroat and really cut into each other....makes me glad I'm pre-Pharmacy! :p
 
Sunfire the doctor needs you to see some well woman exams and runny noses.

Have fun being looked at like a tool to make more money for the doctor instead of a peer.
 
Sunfire the doctor needs you to see some well woman exams and runny noses.

Have fun being looked at like a tool to make more money for the doctor instead of a peer.

And what exactly does that mean? We are ALL tools to make money for SOMEONE whether you are a doctor making money for the hospitals and the insurance companies or to the companies that you will be paying your loans back to .........NO ONE is immune...even if you think you have become SOMEBODY because you are a DOCTOR... That statment SCREAMS self-esteem issues! This goes alot deeper than the statement you just made! You are sadly mistaken to think that you YOURSELF are not a tool in society....and with statments such as this, you will be looked at just the same...
 
There's more to the paper, but I didn't feel like writing the rest out. I think it's well-written for someone who was in their second semester of community college, who hadn't even started their biology series yet. Thankfully, the ED Director who read it thought it was excellent. You're welcome to look into any of the references.

It should be obvious to anyone who can read, but I'll say it regardless. At the rate you're going, you will make a terrible Doctor (if you even are a Resident at all). At this point, you've proven that you're not worth my time, Panda Bear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajectory

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/foremostly

Well, I am a licensed physician for whatever that's worth (but not yet board-certified in a specialty if you understand the distinction). Your paper blows. It reads like it was written by somebody in high school who randomly copied a few paragraphs from Wikipedia and just kind of regurgitated them without knowing what they meant. You're the one that put your thing down, trying to impress us with your pre-PA school awesomeness. If you can't take the criticism don't publish your work on line.

Sure, it is "well written for somebody in their second semester of community college." That's the point. You are a community college student with a non-rigorous community college education and it shows. I wrote a dandy little paper called "Our Friend the Gopher" in second grade but I don't list it in my CV.
 
Well, I am a licensed physician for whatever that's worth (but not yet board-certified in a specialty if you understand the distinction). Your paper blows. It reads like it was written by somebody in high school who randomly copied a few paragraphs from Wikipedia and just kind of regurgitated them without knowing what they meant. You're the one that put your thing down, trying to impress us with your pre-PA school awesomeness. If you can't take the criticism don't publish your work on line.

Sure, it is "well written for somebody in their second semester of community college." That's the point. You are a community college student with a non-rigorous community college education and it shows. I wrote a dandy little paper called "Our Friend the Gopher" in second grade but I don't list it in my CV.

Since writing that paper about 6 years ago, I've actually gotten my Bachelor's from the University of California, and am about to start my Graduate work. I wasn't sharing it to impress you or anyone else, I was sharing it as information that I thought you would enjoy reading. I was obviously wrong. As I've already stated, the ED Director who reviewed the essay thought it to be excellent. I did try to cover what I perceived as being the basics...mechanical trauma, and associated dangers including shock and infection. Again...the references are there, in case you would like to look them up. They didn't come from Wikipedia tho, you may have to do deeper research than that.

You've got some serious issues, Panda Bear, and I don't think you have any idea of how you come across. You seem to think that you're an all-powerful reference, someone who impresses others with his insults and belittling, but you only present as an insecure fool who really doesn't have much to say. The comparison to your second-grade paper (which I'd actually love to read, if you have it to post), is further testament to what I'd call your lack of abilities to deal with people in a mature and comprehensive manner. I wouldn't let you near a single patient, and I find it hard to believe that anyone else would either. I could say that I'm the King of Siam...am I?

I'd like to ask you...since the paper is so terrible...anything you'd care to add to it? Any additional points you think need covering? I'd seriously like to hear your additional expertise, since the information that I chose to cover, "blows". Or was "cooking with gas" the best you can come up with?
 
Last edited:
Since writing that paper about 6 years ago, I've actually gotten my Bachelor's from the University of California, and am about to start my Graduate work. I wasn't sharing it to impress you or anyone else, I was sharing it as information that I thought you would enjoy reading. I was obviously wrong. As I've already stated, the ED Director who reviewed the essay thought it to be excellent. I did try to cover what I perceived as being the basics...mechanical trauma, and associated dangers including shock and infection. Again...the references are there, in case you would like to look them up. They didn't come from Wikipedia tho, you may have to do deeper research than that.

You've got some serious issues, Panda Bear, and I don't think you have any idea of how you come across. You seem to think that you're an all-powerful reference, someone who impresses others with his insults and belittling, but you only present as an insecure fool who really doesn't have much to say. The comparison to your second-grade paper (which I'd actually love to read, if you have it to post), is further testament to what I'd call your lack of abilities to deal with people in a mature and comprehensive manner. I wouldn't let you near a single patient, and I find it hard to believe that anyone else would either. I could say that I'm the King of Siam...am I?

I'd like to ask you...since the paper is so terrible...anything you'd care to add to it? Any additional points you think need covering? I'd seriously like to hear your additional expertise, since the information that I chose to cover, "blows". Or was "cooking with gas" the best you can come up with?

Let me put it this way, if you could have read my now defunct blog (which SDN will host at some time in the future when the guy in charge gets a break from his medical school duties) you would know that I am not exactly the biggest booster of the medical profession. I think a lot of what we do is just an exquisitely complicated waste of time and money. This includes futile care, marginally effective but expensive therapies, over-reacting to self-limiting conditions, and generally making everything in this bad old world of ours a medical problem whether it is or not. Adding a rotten crust of frustration to the whole stew are the arcane rules, the paperwork, and the out-of-control bureaucratic requirements that suck up the majority of our productive time.

I would put the proportion of wasted time and resources, conservatively, at fifty percent but it's probably more than that and no doubt varies from specialty to specialty. You have this idea that somehow your two years of PA training where you cleverly manage to avoid learning All That Useless Stuff will allow you to magically dance around all of that bull**** but in fact, the utility of a PA to the medical system is that you are a cheaper alternative to wrestle with it than a residency-trained physician. In other words, suppose you go to work for an interventional cardiologist. She makes her money sticking wires into hearts, not visiting her patients in the hospital or listening to essentially the same Chief Complaint and History of Present Illness from one cookie-cutter patient after the other. She will be overjoyed to have you do these things, freeing her up to do what he really likes to do and what her twelve years of medical training have allowed her to master.

So you need to get this idea out of your head that mid-levels of are some kind of stealth physicians who can do anything real physicians can. Your training is not as "intense" (although I prefer the word "comprehensive") and your extremely useful and much sought-after-niche in the medical world depends on the reality that most of medicine is either strictly bureaucratic (billing, reimbursement, protection from litigation) or relatively simple, often-times not only unnecessary but harmless all around. When you puff yourself up and avow that your limited-but-oh-so-intense training allows you to do eighty percent (or some other arbitrary percentage) of everything a physician can do, well, since sixty percent of my job is bull**** and forty percent of that could be done by an intelligent high school graduate, forgive me for not being impressed. It's that twenty percent that you sort of don't understand.

See my point?
 
Is the 2 years of PA school just as intense as med school?

This is the orignial question. If you have something to add to the answer (as opposed to marking your territory) then feel free to do so. If not, move on. It's been entertaining as one poster has related but it's far from the orignal question.
 
Sunfire's preferred ride...
Failboat.jpg
 
this link, let alone thread,
is getting boring to read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top