Originally posted by jenny.navarrette
You see, Jesse will give us anecdotal personal experiences instead of a scientific study. Just like Sanaviv, eh? You want some anectodal stories
Jesse?
Why don't you tell the good folks here about the little girl in Baja for which Mexican medicine failed to diagnose a congenital heart defect for
years. Instead the IMSS doctors just gave her antibiotics. Why don't you tell everybody that after an American intervened and got her to a hospital
that finally got the diagnosis correct, they then told her to try to get the corrective surgery done in the US, as Mexico lacked the capability?
| Quote: | Dr. Genes: How does a Mexican medical school differ from the US model?
MMS: Well, since I have not attended a US school personally, I'm going by what I know through my cousin (who graduated a year ago) and other friends
from whom I got a good idea. Mainly, the biggest difference is the student population: The United States weeds out students before they get in the
door, and attrition/failure is very low. By contrast, the flimsy requirements of many international schools, such as mine, allow entry of people who
either shouldn't be here or who haven't quite "gotten it" yet about what needs to change for them to do well. As such, you have [a student body] that
ranges from brilliant, acing everything, to good, hard-working (by far the majority), to those that seem destined to not make it. There aren't any
quotas for passing/failing, but the M.O. is that you are thrown into the deep end, and you have to sink or swim primarily of your own merit; there are
no retention/tutoring/special programs to help, and most of the faculty teach their own notes with little correlation of what's "on par" with an
LCME-accredited school -- you make up that difference yourself.
It's also impossible to separate culture from where you go to school in a foreign country, and unless you are familiar with the Mexican culture (I was
raised on the border, and even I had quite a bit of adjustment), it can be daunting. I know people who left here, not because they couldn't hack the
academics, but because they refused to assimilate and go with the flow. (You aren't going to change an institution as a whiny foreigner.) There is a
strong patriarchal "What I know is right and to hell with what the American journals say" kind of attitude at times, but thankfully, one sees that
more in the older physicians who will hopefully retire soon and stop endangering patients.
Also, it's not that hard to be a doctor here -- just keep going to school, pass, and take a not-that-difficult test when you're done. That's it;
you're set for as long as you like. Residency here is famously hard to get into, and most doctors just stay with their GP status, even though they'll
advertise treating everything under the sun. Personally, I'm always wary of who I see as a physician here, because I know that Dr. So-and-so could
have done only the 4 years of school (plus internship and social service), or they could have done a residency/fellowship, etc. Believe me, I run for
the hills if I see the former, especially when it's been years since they've opened a book or read a journal. This doesn't describe most general
doctors who try to at least stay somewhat current on recent findings, but there is very little oversight to help find out who isn't that way or to
what degree.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/541993 |
|
