Comment by poirot2 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by poirot2 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This is an ill informed take. It’s common when someone doesn’t know what X role does from the outside to think they are interchangeable. Medical school takes candidates that are already on average much stronger than NP trainees and then trains them more rigorously. Further, the specific training pathway after medical/ nursing school is v different. NPs are trained in seeing ‘textbook’ or standard cases and a flowchart of management for them. Which is great if you are one of them. And since most people present ‘typically’ for that clinic you can use NPs to filter through people and get them seem quickly/ cheaply. However, they don’t have the toolkit to handle greater complexity that is outside the flowchart and don’t generally know how recognise when a standard flowchart approach to management shouldn’t apply.

It’s rather tough to explain in lay terms other than via analogy - you’ve basically said all software engineers should be replaced by data analysts.

No, it's like saying all programmers should be replaced by certified programmers who are all from good families and have 10 years of intense training at top schools and massive debt.

You wouldn't trust some young immigrant or a long haired hippy kid who dropped out of college and started a business in his garage to provide your tech would you? Computers are complicated, we can't let amateurs in hoodies start doing things without some central control.

NP/PA education is far less rigorous And requires far less hours than MD. Many more NP/PA schools have far more lax standards, and are probably better called diploma mills than MD schools.

It is all probabilities, and I would rather bet on an MD. At least compared to the current incarnation of NP/PA.

MD education in the US takes so long because students are required to spend four of those eight years studying something other than medicine.

Nurses actually study medicine as undergraduates before graduate NP education, so one could argue that NPs have more education in medicine.

The problem of NP/PA is not in the design or scalar length of education. It is in the credentialing. MDs have to take MCAT and step exams, which I know weed out many people. From my understanding, there is a relatively very low barrier to entry for NP/PA.

As a side note, the physician credentialing process of the US is far too long.

I doubt those exams select for skilled medical practitioners any more than leetcode interviews select for productive programmers.

In my own experience, I've seen several very good NPs and several very bad MDs.

> the physician credentialing process of the US is far too long.

Also too expensive and too abusive. It tends to select for people who are willing to put up with almost anything in exchange for the status of being an MD, not for people who are motivated to provide quality care for their patients.

NP/PA programs have entry requirements of 80-90% A’s (3.7 avg), GRE, 1000+ patient care hours and like 4% acceptance rates…

I don’t know that you can use the acceptance rate as a direct comparison to med school, you have different populations applying to each.

I remember there was a PA that did end up going to med school and took the PA boards (forget what they call it) just for kicks and ended up scoring in the 99th percentile.

What's the probability you are optimising though? That you as a rich person can get access to the artificially limited supply of <good thing>? Or that society in general gets access to <good thing>?

America has a stereotype that British people have bad teeth. They also have a stereotype that poor American "hillbillies" have even worse teeth. The stats suggest that on average the Brits have better teeth but I'd guess Dentists can make more money by moving from there to the country with the worse teeth on average and helping the Americans with good teeth have even better teeth.

> What's the probability you are optimising though?

The probably of me or my kids receiving a correct diagnosis.

To clarify, my intention was to specifically respond to

> Why the assumption that they're worse?

I have others views on healthcare credentialing on a societal scale.

Likewise: Boot camps and self-teaching are far less rigorous than CS degree programs, which I think is GP’s point.

Part of the problem with the current monopoly is that we're already assuming our choices are NPs vs MDs, as opposed to some other professional identities, with other educational paths, that don't exist because of the monopoly. It's distorted the discussion by shaping our expectations about what's possible.

In any event, med schools are now moving towards 1.5 or even 1 year of course training, there's pressure to compress background as much as possible. The difference between, say, a PA with four years of practice and a second year resident is increasingly difficult to distinguish. This is increasingly reflected in staffing demands.

I don't think the MD model is obsolete, but I do agree that the current anticompetitive system is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com