I was not pleased to see that medical physicists are creating new requirements to enter their field (Physics Today, May 2009, page 30.) The reason cited by practitioners is “public safety,” but no evidence of a public safety risk is given. Because the downsides are so high, we should demand compelling evidence before allowing the new requirements to proceed.
New degrees, difficult exams, and residency programs that students would have to pay for all provide large barriers to entry into the field. That means fewer jobs available to the general physics community and downward pressure on our earnings.
Because the supply of medical physicists will be reduced, the cost for those remaining will go up. President Obama says he wants to reduce the cost of medical care in America, but the new requirements will raise the cost of medical physicists’ services.
The only sure winners from those changes are institutions that can charge monopolistic rates for their programs and the current practitioners who will have fewer competitors. Everyone cited in the article in favor of the change is from one of those two groups. Students were mixed, and patients who will be footing the bills for more expensive treatment were not asked.
A physics degree is extremely versatile and should not be limited unnecessarily. Mine has opened numerous doors, and I would like to think it is good enough to get me into medical physics if I so desire; it was good enough for every practitioner today. We should not raise the nation’s medical costs to make a few universities and current practitioners wealthier unless there is a compelling public safety concern.
