Isnít it true though that to become an accredited doctor, you need to complete a residency within some hospital? So the experience is built into the degree. Pretty sure thatís how it usually works, I could be wrong.
Gender: Male Location: The Darkest Corner of your Mind
DDM going in for the kill as usual.
1.) If this is the NHS, your mom is fked depending on the severity of her illness, past medical history, etc. The system may elect to put her under hospice care as the time has come to let them go (a.k.a she's not worth saving b/c we're the government and old people are a burden on the welfare state) rather than perform surgery. If not that, maybe she gets put on a wait-list as the operation calls for a niche specialist, and they're not all that accessible since most of them moved to the US where they can actually make good money.
2.) So they've elected to put your mom under surgery; great! As DDM suggested earlier, what if she has a complicated brain tumor that's rarely seen and you have the following choices:
33 year-old newly appointed chief of neurosurgery Dr. Ben Carson, who as a resident was involved in controversial procedures and an overall pioneer in his field.
55 year-old Dr. Joe Blogs who has performed numerous standard procedures over the length of his career, but who has otherwise nothing really special to show that he's capable in niche cases.
OR let's change the scenario again:
Your child needs very involved oral surgery in order to correct a disfigured jaw affecting his/her ability to chew/eat. The outcome of the treatment will determine their overall quality of life. These are your options.
Dr. A is a new attending surgeon having just completed his six-year oral surgery residency. He has been in the field for just two years, but has been implementing new, less invasive, advanced technology and techniques in his procedures. As a result, the few patients he has operated on have had better outcomes, less scarring, less complications, etc. He may be inexperienced, but he is committed to continuous learning and implementing academia with the real world.
Dr. B is a 55 year old oral surgeon who has been operating for 25 years. His personal motto is, "if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it" and "that's how we've alway done it". While Dr. B has much experience under his belt, his methods are antiquated and for the most part no longer taught by moder-day residency programs. Because Dr. B is an older gentleman, his neuroplasticity level is greatly diminished as is his fluid intelligence. He dismisses continuous learning as he believes experience knows all. He can do a great operation with the standards of 20 years ago, but it will leave a higher degree of scarring, pain, and potential for complications. It is, however, the most trusted and proven method.
So what do you choose?
After completing medical school in the us, doctors must attend residency and fellowship programs to assimilate experience and focus on their specialty of interest. Often times they're not making the "big money" until they're in their thirties when they can actually work as an attending. They don't pop out of med school with only book smarts and hack on people.
If the older surgeon has retained the ability to learn and implement new procedures as the younger one has, then sure I'll prefer them. But more often than not, the older guys will stick to their old ways as it is easier and more convenient. In that case, I'll take the young guy who makes his decisions off of what's new and rational over the guy who primarily uses intuition.
__________________ "Technology equals might!" "Evolve or perish"
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Time to be serious for a moment. The illogic in Steve using this thought experiment to say:
Is that he's comparing a huge difference in experience to a small gap in aptitude. That is, even an average surgeon is still one of the most skilled professionals in the world, so there's a clear range restriction in the amount of variance you can have in ability, but you put that against the difference between zero experience and twenty years and expect to prove that experience is *always* more relevant.
__________________ "I judged the Poles by their enemies. And I found it was an almost unfailing truth that their enemies were the enemies of magnanimity and manhood. If a man loved slavery, if he loved usury, if he loved terrorism and all the trampled mire of materialistic politics, I have always found that he added to these affections the passion of a hatred of Poland. She could be judged in the light of that hatred; and the judgment has proved to be right."