Share This

Thursday, 20 March 2025

Bleeding medical talent

 

PETALING JAYA: There has been an increasing trend of medical graduates leaving for Singapore for housemanship, leading to losses of millions of ringgit in educational investment annually, say experts.

Universiti Kebangsaan Malay­sia Faculty of Medicine dean Prof Datin Dr Marina Mat Baki said from only two graduates who moved to the republic in 2020, the number grew to 15 more graduates in 2021, 25 in 2022 and 30 in 2023.

“This is a significant loss for Malaysia as the tuition fees for medical courses are heavily subsidised by the government,” she said.

She urged the government to expedite allocation of hospital postings for graduates after completing their final examinations to retain them in the country. 

“As long as they pass their final examinations, they should be allowed to apply for and get their placement as soon as possible,” she said.

According to the Singapore Medical Council, only medical students who graduated from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) and Universiti Malaya are accepted to undergo training in the republic.

Dr Marina noted that it is harder for graduates who did their housemanship in Singapore to return and practise in Malaysia as they need to prove that they have fulfilled the Malaysian Medical Council’s (MMC) requirements.

“If the training was not completed as per MMC’s requirements, they will need to fulfil the postings that haven’t been done in Malaysia before they can be certified and continue as a medical officer here,” she said.

She added that it is easier to come back as a specialist, but the certification must be from qualified bodies approved by MMC.

This would typically take up to 10 years.

She also highlighted the possibility of less opportunities for Malaysian graduates to pursue specialist programmes in Singa­pore.

Prof Dr Sharifa Ezat Wan Puteh, a health economics and public health specialist at UKM, said the government would have spent an estimated RM500,000 to RM1mil per student for a five-year course.

She said the cost included the study placement comprising capital and assets in training hospitals.

“The government is also paying all lecturers to teach our medical students. This figure is only from one university,” she said, referring to UKM.

“The return on all the investments is lost because once the doctors work abroad, there is no benefit received by the local population.”

Apart from the financial loss, she said, Malaysia is also left with fewer doctors, which could disrupt the ratio of provider-to-population and affect access to medical care.

Hartal Doktor Kontrak spokesperson Dr Muhammad Yassin said the talent outflow would place further strain on Malaysian healthcare workers.

“This will lead to more burnout and overwork, which may in turn lead to more exodus out of the Health Ministry, either to the private sector or overseas.

“The overall effect will be a healthcare system with suboptimal care for the patients as more and more are depending on the public healthcare system due to the increase in insurance price and medical inflation,” he said when contacted.

He said this matter should be addressed by improving the working environment and providing better remuneration for medical officers and specialist doctors.

“Start with increasing on-call allowances. There is also a need to find ways to reduce the workload of healthcare workers in general, not just doctors but also support staff,” he added.

He proposed a private-public partnership or a national insurance scheme that helps offload patients in the government facilities to the private sector without compromising care.

Source link

Related stories:


Related posts:




VOA a biased lens, never ‘an important window’ into China

 


Illustration: Chen Xia/GT

As Voice of America (VOA) ceases operations due to the US administration cutting its public funding, some Western media outlets have immersed themselves in "lamentations," mourning the loss of an "important window into China" and a "significant source of reporting on China." VOA, a propaganda tool that manufactures lies, is somehow hailed by them as the "voice of freedom," prompting the question: Are those lamenting that the "beacon is flickering and faltering" genuinely mourning the loss of "press freedom," or are they lamenting the loss of a tool to smear China?

VOA's "China reporting manual" has long been notorious. Its narratives are never based on facts but are carefully woven stories designed to align with Western political agendas. In their reports, the economic development in Xinjiang is framed as "suppression of human rights," social stability in Xizang is portrayed as "cultural genocide," and China's defense of sovereignty in the South China Sea is depicted as "expansionism"… What VOA produces has never been a source of "reliable information." It selectively edits and distorts the truth to create a narrative that misleads the public. How can such a media outlet be called an "important window into China"? It is, instead, clearly a "funhouse mirror," severely distorted by political manipulation.

Not only is VOA's lie-manufacturing directed at China, but it also serves as a tool for ideological attacks globally. VOA has a history of creating biases, peddling the image of US' "moral high ground," infiltrating ideologies, and exporting political views. However, the changing landscape of information dissemination is making such operations increasingly difficult to sustain. 

For years, the US relied on creating concepts, packaging academic research, and disseminating fake news, using media, research institutions, and think tanks as accomplices to stir up international discourse. But today, with the rise of social media and the diversification of media outlets across various countries, this "media hegemony" built on financial power is gradually losing its effectiveness. VOA and other "mouthpieces" have been marginalized, which is an inevitable consequence of this trend. VOA's fate has provided a lesson: Concocting biases does not bring real influence and lies can never replace facts.

By no means can Western media outlets like VOA be called "important windows into China." VOA has long viewed China through a lens of prejudice and distortion, fabricating news. How could it have ever opened a "window"? It only forces the world to wear "cognitive sunglasses" clouded by ideological fog. 
Truly understanding China requires dismantling these artificial cognitive barriers. 

As the "China Travel" trend grows, more and more foreign bloggers are sharing images of China's high-speed trains, the safety of streets at night, and the overwhelming array of Chinese cuisine… These unfiltered, authentic scenes are the "ultra-high-definition window" through which the world can see the real China.
For Western media outlets like VOA, which thought they could forever dominate public opinion, their logic is that if reality does not fit their interests, they will distort reality. Unfortunately, prejudice can never replace facts, and fictional stories cannot rewrite history. When people can freely access information, lies will eventually fade away.

Wednesday, 19 March 2025

The big browser battle, Can artificial intelligence startups dethrone Google Chrome in the web browser wars?



IN the beginning – well in 1993, to be specific – there was Mosaic .And it was good, or at least good enough. By 1995, however, Mosaic’s time was on the wane, and Netscape was people’s browser of choice. Three years later, Internet Explorer had taken the lead – and seemed poised to hold it forever.

There were challengers, of course. By 2008, Firefox was making a run at winning over the Internet but managed to find only half the audience of Internet Explorer. That was the case until 2012, when they both were left in the dust by

Google’s Chrome.

Other competitors, like Safari, Opera ,and Edge (a rename of Internet Explorer), had a brief moment in the sun, but never came close to market dominance. Today,

Chrome is still firmly in charge, holding a 67% market share as of January 2025.

If history has taught us anything when it comes to web browsers, though, it’s that people’s allegiances to how they navigate the World Wide Web are far from absolute.

The oft-changing nature of web browser leadership was modelled visually by James Eagle, a content creator with a background in the financial services sector.

Emerging contenders

Change could be in the air once again. Artificial intelligence (AI) companies are starting to focus on the Web, which could herald yet another paradigm shift.

Recently, Ai-powered search engine Perplexity teased plans to launch its own web browser called Comet. In a post on X, the company said the browser was “coming soon” and invited people to sign up for a waitlist. It did not offer details on what would make the browser unique or offer any mockups or footage of Comet.

Perplexity has been growing fast, though. Last October, CEO Aravind Srinivas announced on X that the search engine was serving 100 million queries per week.

And in December, the company closed a Us$500mil (Rm2.2bil) funding round (with backers including Nvidia and Jeff Bezos), taking its valuation to Us$9bil (Rm40bil).

Perplexity isn’t the only AI company looking at the browser market. Last November, Openai was reported to be working on its own Ai-infused web browser.

That came roughly a month after the CHATGPT maker integrated web search into its popular chatbot, keeping users inside the app.

The CHATGPT web-search integration wasn’t perfect and, at the moment, falls short of the definition of a browser, but it was good enough to hook Inc. tech columnist Jason Aten, who wrote, “for most of the things I’ve searched for this past week, CHATGPT has been a superior experience”.

Google’s legal troubles

Google is hardly surrendering without a fight. Chrome is an important part of its business these days; however, it’s hard to determine exactly how much revenue the browser contributes, as Alphabet includes it in the same category as Android, Youtube, and search in its earnings reports. Google also uses

Chrome’s browsing history to help target ads.

Last September, Google very quietly added its Gemini AI into

Chrome, letting users access it by typing @gemini in the browser’s query bar before their chatbot question. It has since expanded the offerings, letting people create custom themes with AI, changing their search backgrounds, and doing a deeper dive into their search history. Soon, it says, users will be able to compare information across multiple tabs with an Ai-generated overview.

This could be an ideal time for startups to make a run at Google’s browser market dominance, as the company is busy dealing with other hurdles. Google is awaiting sentencing, expected by August, after it received a guilty verdict in a search monopoly suit. And the US Department of Justice has announced its hopes to break up the company, forcing Alphabet to sell Chrome. Even if that happens, though, it will likely be years before the appeals process runs its course.

A second case, meanwhile, regarding Alphabet’s advertising technology, is awaiting a verdict. And China has launched its own antitrust probe into Google, in response to tariffs. Both US cases, however, were brought by the Biden administration – and the Trump administration may be less enthusiastic about pursuing them. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai recently attended Trump’s inauguration.

Regardless of what happens in those legal battles, though, well-funded competitors have

Chrome in their sights. And the status quo in web surfing could be about to change once again.

By CHRIS MORRIS, Tribune news serv