3 ms·

Why do some professions get the benefit of cartel protection? Note that pharmacists don't have such restrictions and have similar training. For the data, I had

Why do some professions get the benefit of cartel protection? Note that pharmacists don't have such restrictions and have similar training. For the data, I had done a quick search and found this (which only goes to 2010): https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Trends-in-the-Number-of-U-S-Medical-School-Graduates-Practicing-in-Primary-Care-by_fig1_311249183 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Trends-in-the-Number-of-... However, digging more, even the AAMC is saying you need residency slots: https://www.medicaleconomics.com/view/enrollment-rates-rise-us-medical-schools-s-only-half-battle https://www.medicaleconomics.com/view/enrollment-rates-rise-... Increasing first-year enrollment is a good first step, but doesn't move the needle on the number of doctors who can actually practice because the number of residencies is still limited.

ardy42 6y ago
> However, digging more, even the AAMC is saying you need residency slots: Which are determined by federal government Medicare funding, btw. From your link: > Federally supported residency training slots have been capped by Congress for more than 20 years, limiting the spots for medical school graduates to undergo additional training in a residency program before they can practice medicine. So maybe this is more of a "call your congressman" issue.
- willcipriano 6y ago
  Your congressman probably listens to the AMA more so than you when it comes to medical matters, here is one example of what they have to say on the subject I could find with a quick search: > In March 1997, months before the Balanced Budget Act was enacted, the AMA even suggested reducing the number of US residency positions by approximately 25% from 25,000 to fewer than 19,000. “The United States is on the verge of a serious oversupply of physicians,” said the AMA and other physicians’ groups in a joint statement. Since most states require at least some residency training for medical licensure, reducing the number of residency positions would curtail the supply of doctors in the US. > Fast forward two decades, and what once seemed like a glut now looks like a shortage. The growth in the number of residency positions—and thus the number of doctors—slowed after the passage of the Balanced Budget Act. From 1997 to 2002, the number of residents in the US increased by just 0.1%. Although the number of positions has increased since then, each year thousands of residency applicants fail to secure a position. Factor in an aging population and a projected increase in demand for health care services, and the US is now forecasted to experience a shortage of 46,900 to 121,900 physicians by 2032. Absent a meaningful response from Congress, it will be doctors—particularly residents—and their patients who pay the price. - https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastating-doctor-shortage/ https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastati...
- tdeck 6y ago
  Honestly I don't understand why Congress needs to fund these slots as much as they do. Hospital residents do a big chunk of day-to-day work seeing and treating patients. They routinely work well over 80 hours per week based on the people I've talked to (despite this being illegal). And yet the government pays teaching hospitals $120k per year for each resident, while residents get something like $60k in salary from the hospital. It feels like a broken and exploitative system.
mattkrause 6y ago
If I were king, I'd look into retraining biomedical grad students/postdocs to go into medicine. We've got a massive (taxpayer-funded!) glut of the latter and many of them have a relevant background and even skills. Yet, only a few places currently try to convert PhDs to MDs; most places are overwhelmingly geared up for undergrads coming straight out of pre-med programs.
- vagrantJin 6y ago
  The problem with this is that it's sensible. Politics does not do sensible, it does what is expedient. Consider the US preaching about democracy and consent of the governed and then funding radicals to do a coup and start a civil war to oust a democratic president they don't like in a sovereign state. Why?

ardy42 6y ago

> However, digging more, even the AAMC is saying you need residency slots: Which are determined by federal government Medicare funding, btw. From your link: > Federally supported residency training slots have been capped by Congress for more than 20 years, limiting the spots for medical school graduates to undergo additional training in a residency program before they can practice medicine. So maybe this is more of a "call your congressman" issue.

willcipriano 6y ago
Your congressman probably listens to the AMA more so than you when it comes to medical matters, here is one example of what they have to say on the subject I could find with a quick search: > In March 1997, months before the Balanced Budget Act was enacted, the AMA even suggested reducing the number of US residency positions by approximately 25% from 25,000 to fewer than 19,000. “The United States is on the verge of a serious oversupply of physicians,” said the AMA and other physicians’ groups in a joint statement. Since most states require at least some residency training for medical licensure, reducing the number of residency positions would curtail the supply of doctors in the US. > Fast forward two decades, and what once seemed like a glut now looks like a shortage. The growth in the number of residency positions—and thus the number of doctors—slowed after the passage of the Balanced Budget Act. From 1997 to 2002, the number of residents in the US increased by just 0.1%. Although the number of positions has increased since then, each year thousands of residency applicants fail to secure a position. Factor in an aging population and a projected increase in demand for health care services, and the US is now forecasted to experience a shortage of 46,900 to 121,900 physicians by 2032. Absent a meaningful response from Congress, it will be doctors—particularly residents—and their patients who pay the price. - https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastating-doctor-shortage/ https://qz.com/1676207/the-us-is-on-the-verge-of-a-devastati...
tdeck 6y ago
Honestly I don't understand why Congress needs to fund these slots as much as they do. Hospital residents do a big chunk of day-to-day work seeing and treating patients. They routinely work well over 80 hours per week based on the people I've talked to (despite this being illegal). And yet the government pays teaching hospitals $120k per year for each resident, while residents get something like $60k in salary from the hospital. It feels like a broken and exploitative system.

mattkrause 6y ago

If I were king, I'd look into retraining biomedical grad students/postdocs to go into medicine. We've got a massive (taxpayer-funded!) glut of the latter and many of them have a relevant background and even skills. Yet, only a few places currently try to convert PhDs to MDs; most places are overwhelmingly geared up for undergrads coming straight out of pre-med programs.

vagrantJin 6y ago
The problem with this is that it's sensible. Politics does not do sensible, it does what is expedient. Consider the US preaching about democracy and consent of the governed and then funding radicals to do a coup and start a civil war to oust a democratic president they don't like in a sovereign state. Why?