To think the BMA have misjudged with another doctor's strike? Thread 2

[Locutus2000]

Rolling this over as people still seem to have something to say but no new poll.

Original post

AIBU to think the BMA have misjudged with another doctor's strike?

Last year they got more than anyone else in the NHS along with an improved deal. Nurses and other AHPs received lower rises.

BMA have just announced another 'resident' doctor strike continuing to chase pay restoration to 2008 levels.

Having just had the major win with changes to IMG prioritisation and the clamp-down on PAs it feels a bit tone-deaf and I can't see Streeting going for it.

"A recent study of A-levels has pointed to the sciences and mathematics, along with languages, as being more difficult than other subjects. In order to meet the UCAS-point entry requirements, this apparently leads to many chemistry students entering universities with an ‘unusual’ combination of A-levels."

Sounds familiar?

It doesn 't!

I remember breezing through chemistry at school. It was both interesting an obvious, and I could not understand why everyone else complained. On the other hand English literature had me baffled, and as for French. Later in life I met someone who already spoke 11 languages and was learning Urdu from the wife of the local takeaway owner just for fun. Harder is subjective.

I assume (way out of my depth) that there is a certain science logic brain and assume also that this, combined with good observation and communication skills and the right knowledge base, is important in medicine.

Mumsneedwine, the first year course seemed to be some way beyond GCSE stats. Most had to work very hard. I remember at the time there was an area which DD had covered at A level (Cambridge OCR MEI) that none of the rest had seen before. She was surprised that syllabi differed so much. She also found her engineering intercalation useful during her radiology rotation. It helps to understand the technology. Specialities differ, but strong science aptitude and knowledge will surely help for some.

DD found the maths v easy (she did A level and FM maths though 😊), but had friends who only did GCSE and they were fine. One now doing research at Oxford. Not sure how anyone doing medicine isn't science biased as would be a strange career if not.

Chemistry is v obviously the hardest A level 😇

Actually the consensus, including some fairly serious analysis using data from Ofqual, is

1. Physics
2. Further Maths
3. Chemistry

to be found at a variety of websites. Occasionally the first two are reversed but Chemistry is a consistent third.

I think the point is that the mathematically highly able may find FM relatively easy and are over-represented amongst those who select it. To some extent this is also true of Physics. But this does not detract from the intrinsic difficulty of these subjects as analysed by Ofqual.

Well I teach 2 out of 3 of them. So totally agree 😊. FM is another language to me.

And Chemistry A level I'd get an A star. Art I'd get a U. And English. Difficult is all relative.

Now I understand why applicants to medicine are offering PE.

PE is a v difficult A level to get an A in. There is a lot of science, statistics, psychology and you need to be a high level sportsperson too. Why people feel the need to denigrate other people's abilities is beyond me.

Unfortunately these boards attract some very strange people.

Some of the comments about Latin and Greek A levels a while back made me laugh. I take anything thst poster says with a pinch of salt as they are a keyboard warrior with an A* in posting nonsense.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2010/may/28/a-level-top-a-star-grade

An old article but things are still the same.

I'm not clear what's amusing about the fact that the more able the students taking a subject, the more A* will be achieved.

Further Maths, Latin, Greek are all good examples.

As it happens my DC went to a state school which didn't offer Latin or Greek even at GCSE, or even Ancient History which was a shame. The funding at the school couldn't stretch to offer those subjects.

It's not any harder than any other subject mumsneedwine. As the Guardian explains, the reason for a relatively low number of A*/A is down to the ability of the cohort choosing the subject in question.

It's incredibly simple. The smart students will get a top grade; but since a greater number of lower ability students take the subject, there will be a lower number of top grades achieved. I really don't think it can be explained in simpler terms than that.

"The point I am making is that though DD decided she wanted to use F1/F2 to get the maximum hospital experience as she wants to be a good doctor,"

And other people do not. How condescending can you get. Medicine is an entry point into an extremely diverse choice of careers. Just because you may be more research focussed does not mean you are a bad doctor.

50% of F2s didn't get a job - of the ones the BMA surveyed and admitted they had not bothered to apply - you do ahve to be in it to win it. So oyu cn not extrapolate that all the jobs went to IMGS unfairly if the FY2s did not bother to apply.

Once again the extrapolation of piss poor biased data floods these threads.

All the F2 s who passed through my speciality - got jobs, 60% CT training, 10% research, 10% went to Australia and 20% gor F3/ standalone contracts.
They all applied for jobs

DD had a horrid weekend recently where patients seemed to be doing their best to die - including the relative of a colleague. Her antidote is to hit the sports field. Others are different

Needmoresleep why do you think your DD believes that she's in a unique position as compared to her peers? You represent her as needing outlets which are special to her. The only difference in her experience as an F1 and F2 as far as I can see is that she doesn't think she needs to do anything extra. Just turn up for shifts and then go and play hockey or whatever. I mean, more fool her in the long run. All these young people see things which are tough and every single one needs an antidote. Your DD is not in any way unique on that front.

@stuffedpeppers
that's amazing ! Every single F2 who passed through your speciality came back and told you where they were going ? That alone is a very strange occurrence.

That is what I thought too. There was a similar assertion by a different postèr on the other thread we were on .🤔

@PurpleFairyLights my old dad would call it a load of old 'round spherical objects'.

I mean vastly less strange than each and every Y13 returning after their FY2 to cry on your shoulder about their status (mostly unemployed as far as I can gather - not a huge accolade for the school)

Could be the same poster with a changed username? Entirely legitimate if it is.

Assuming that the poster in question is in a competitive deanery, given that the graduating F2s were placed with an element of merit, then it’s entirely plausible - likely even - that all are employed. Particularly if the F2s in question haven’t grown up with a sense of entitlement and are putting in the additional work required to succeed. It mirrors my DCs’ experience this year for sure - not one of their university friends left in limbo.

But to state that all the F2s, from all 3 rotation blocks, popped back to tell this one consultant where they were going is v v odd.
First time you've mentioned your DC F2 ? And if everyone they know is employed they are a rarity. Most people know of others who are without jobs in London, Severn and Manchester - I know because the ones I know have told me.

Again, you show your lack of knowledge talking about additional work. For many specialities it doesn't count for anything. And for many F3/JCF jobs it's who you know unfortunately. So children of doctors more likely to get posts.

I don’t find that weird (depending on the size of the specialty). In the past I would personally have maybe 6 trainees in a year (2x3 lots of 4 months) and close colleagues on mine and neighbouring wards the same so I would personally know what a fair sample of 20-30 Drs were doing. We tend to know what they are applying for because they ask for references of course! I can’t shed any light on this year as I am no longer a trainer but when I was I did generally expect all my Drs to apply for rotations which is why I was shocked to find the statistic that 50% were not doing that in recent years.

I most certainly have mentioned at least two DC previously mumsneedwine.

So wrong, yet again (I’ve genuinely lost count of the number of statements you’ve made which your Dad would say were round spherical objects. You just seem to come out with made up nonsense time and again and then go silent as your so called stats are shot down and your internally contradictory claims are called out).

I said another poster

The F2 DC I mentioned went to Oxford. That will account for the difference mumsneedwine.

The older DC is also Oxbridge (indeed about to return to start a funded PhD in their specialty, taking a few years out from training, having been invited to join a lab without seeking it out. I can only assume this is a merit based invitation; it’s not an invitation from an academic they previously knew. Exciting though and good to change it up a bit from time to time).