[blusterXY]

> In recent years, the number of medical residents has become so restricted that even the American Medical Association is pushing to have the number of slots increased.

This does not sound like a system where students can fulfill their residency requirements working at general care facilities with trained doctors who have years of experience.

> The major obstacle at this point is funding. It costs a teaching hospital roughly $150,000 a year for a residency slot.

So why exactly is there a slot shortage if people can literally fulfill their residency requirements pretty much anywhere? There are plenty of hospitals that could easily use the labor.

[stephencanon]

I didn't write either of the quotes you're replying to, so I'm not sure why you're replying on this thread.

[blusterXY]

Scroll up, Stephen. These quotes are in the thread at the heart of this discussion, and they are pulled directly from the article.

I mean... I appreciate getting downvoted for reading the article and addressing it directly, but if there are indeed adequate residency spots then you are disagreeing with the article and would be better served to focus on what it gets wrong instead of attacking me for making rather rudimentary observations that follow from its core premise.

[stephencanon]

Right, but I never said there were adequate residency spots. In fact, I think that there aren't[1]. So again, why are you replying to this thread in particular?

[1] however, from what I've seen it isn't a critical issue for US healthcare; we need more mid-levels and to expand their scope of practice more than we need residents. For residents, it would be far more effective to reduce the span of pre-residency training somehow, so that people aren't starting residency with $300k in debt.