Dermatologists Push Back on Wall Street Journal Characterization 

Four-day workweeks, double the salary of some colleagues and no emails at night—those were the reasons a Wall Street Journal article concluded that medical residency applications for dermatology slots are up 50% over the past 5 years.

“A younger generation of physicians wants better work-life balance than their predecessors and, unlike pressure-cooker medical specialties such as cardiac surgery, dermatology fits the bill,” 12-year veteran Wall Street Journal reporter Te-Ping Chen wrote in an article published November 18, 2024, titled “$500,000 Pay, Predictable Hours: How Dermatology Became the ‘It’ Job in Medicine.”¹

The Wall Street Journal had nearly 4 million combined print and digital subscribers as of June 30, 2023, according to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.²

The article focuses extensively on cosmetic treatment, citing the US Food and Drug Administration’s 2002 approval of Botox for frown lines as when “the field started attracting more would-be practitioners.” In the last third of the article, the author concedes that dermatology’s “importance to medicine shouldn’t be dismissed,” and follows with three sentences about skin cancer. However, none of the other critical diseases that dermatologists treat—atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, vitiligo, etc.—are mentioned anywhere.

The article disappointed a number of dermatologists, including American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) president and Practical Dermatology Editorial Board member Seemal R. Desai, MD, FAAD, who wrote in a letter to the Wall Street Journal: 

“The article completely overlooks the primary reason why dermatologists choose this career: a lifelong commitment to helping their patients and the public by providing critical medical care for diseases affecting the body’s largest organ. … It is extremely concerning that this article may leave readers with the impression that aspiring dermatologists are primarily driven by flexible schedules and financial gain. This diminishes the profound impact dermatologists have on patients’ health and well-being. While cosmetic procedures are indeed valuable services provided by many dermatologists, they represent only one aspect of the comprehensive medical care we offer.” 

Dr. Desai’s full letter is posted on the AAD’s website.³

The AAD told Practical Dermatology that the reporter did contact them in advance of the article, and that the AAD offered two of its members as potential sources based on their involvement in resident selection, along with a statement from Dr. Desai. The statement was not used, and only a small portion from what was described as a comprehensive interview with one of the AAD sources was used. The AAD added that the reporter was not transparent about their agenda.

Lindsey Zubritsky, MD, FAAD, who is quoted prominently in the article, expressed similar sentiments.

“I am deeply frustrated and disappointed by how our field of dermatology was portrayed in the WSJ article,” Dr. Zubritsky told Practical Dermatology. “Despite having a lengthy and thoughtful conversation with the writer, I feel that my insights were misrepresented and selectively used to fit a narrow narrative. Dermatology is a dynamic and highly impactful specialty, which I expressed in-depth to the writer, explaining how I spend the majority of my time treating general medical dermatology patients. It is disheartening that the article focused predominantly on superficial, financial, and cosmetic aspects of our field, overlooking the immense value and expertise we provide to patients. The incredible work dermatologists do deserves a more accurate and comprehensive portrayal.”

The reporter did not respond to Practical Dermatology’s request for comment.

A number of other Practical Dermatology Editorial Board shared their thoughts on the article, with a common thread being disappointment in what the profession was reduced to by the reporter:

Adam Friedman, MD, FAAD: It’s disappointing that for such a diverse, complex, and ever-expanding field, such a narrow narrative was shared with the public regarding our work and value. From a sky-high perspective, dermatologists are trained to identify and manage of 3,000-plus hair, skin, and nail diseases, which includes diagnostic tools and procedural approaches. As a result of this landscape, the flexibly to curate a unique career path is one of the best characteristics of our specialty. The opportunities to change the lives of patients through research, education, clinical care, and advocacy were clearly missed.

Jennifer Soung, MD: As a dedicated dermatologist, I am deeply disappointed by the recent Wall Street Journal article suggesting dermatology’s growing popularity among physicians is solely due to lifestyle perks and cosmetic procedures. This narrative undermines the profound impact dermatologists have on patient care and trivializes the challenges we face in treating complex, chronic diseases.

Dermatology encompasses far more than aesthetics. We diagnose and manage severe conditions like melanoma, chronic autoimmune disorders such as psoriasis and lupus, and debilitating skin diseases like atopic dermatitis and hidradenitis suppurativa. These diseases often require lifelong care and have a significant impact on patients’ physical and emotional well-being.

The article glossed over these realities and ignored the rigorous training and commitment required to excel in dermatology. A dermatologist must master a unique combination of clinical expertise, procedural skills, and the ability to integrate new scientific developments into practice.

Dermatology’s appeal lies in its dynamic nature—melding medical, surgical, and procedural care—not in the oversimplified caricature the article presented. I encourage the Wall Street Journal to more accurately reflect the diverse and impactful work dermatologists do to improve the lives of our patients.

Raj Chovatiya, MD, PhD, MSCI, FAAD: As someone who has spent decades in school with the ultimate goal of better understanding chronic disease in order to improve individual quality of life, I’m proud to be a dermatologist. There is no other specialty I can think of where I would be able to pursue my clinical, research, educational, and leadership goals in order to address therapeutic barriers for highly prevalent and burdensome diseases. My day-to-day schedule definitely doesn’t read like an “it” job in medicine, and I’m perfectly happy with that. I work hard—weekdays and weekends alike—and I love the opportunities that my specialty has given me.

Graham Litchman, DO, MS: The article depicts a minority in dermatology that is not representative of the whole. For a medical dermatologist like myself, the tone and flagrant misrepresentation are more than a little insulting. I often work outside of hours, personally call patients about results, and manage much more than cosmetic issues. It is important that dermatologists control the narrative around who manages all things cutaneous, including cosmetic procedures; however, we shouldn’t lose our “medical” selves in the process! Our expertise is very much needed, and feeding into the narrative that most practitioners are cosmetic only is dangerous and shortsighted. 

1. Chen T. $500,000 Pay, Predictable Hours: How Dermatology Became the ‘It’ Job in Medicine. Wall Street Journal. Published November 18, 2024.

2. News Corporation. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Published August 15, 2023. Archived March 19, 2024. Accessed December 13, 2024. https://investors.newscorp.com/static-files/3e47bb14-f93c-4358-8118-78c0945c9124

3. AAD letter to the Wall Street Journal in response to “$500,000 Pay, Predictable Hours: How Dermatology Became the ‘It’ Job in Medicine.” American Academy of Dermatology. Published December 2, 2024. Accessed December 13, 2024. https://www.aad.org/news/aad-letter-wsj-response.