How old is TOO old?

If your name on SDN is indicative of your age, you are two years older than me. I'd say you are not too old. I consider myself young.

In all seriousness though, people pursue medicine at all ages. If your heart is in a surgical specialty, I don't see what is wrong with going for it. People may think different than me on this, but I don't think you should limit yourself because of your age.

Are you only going to be happy with the high end jobs? The fellowships, while they pay some $, combined with the long hours worked will really mean deferring "your life" for 2-4 more years.

I think a lot of the practicality of this will have to do with:

a) Do you have some $$$ saved up
b) What about military benifits/GI bill
c) Family/dependants?
d) Do you want to work past a traditional retirement area? (Keep in mind, retirement ages are getting pushed back all the time, so you might end up in the median if you have a high paying job)

StanMarsh1978 said:

A little background. I'm a new member here, and it's only in the past six months that I've begun to seriously consider the possibility of medical school. I'm 30--I have a resume as a lawyer and military officer. My experiences on deployment and in criminal cases have led to a desire to bring a more concrete skill to help the needy and wounded. My stats are quite good--an undergrad GPA of about 3.7, and an SAT of 1520 (800 verbal, 720 math).

The question. Assuming a desire to pursue a high-end surgical practice (trauma surgery, neurosurgery, general surgery, cardiology, etc.), how old is too old? I understand that it's really a ten/twelve-year-plus process considering school and residency. At what point does age upon entrance to medical school begin to become a serious impediment to entry to such elite practices?

Click to expand...

There is no specific age that is "too old" and 30s is not even close. There are folks in med school in their 40s and 50s. That being said, if you are anticipating shooting for something with a 10 year residency/fellowship path on top of med school and whatever you need to do to get your prereqs in order, there is going to be an age (eg 55+?) where this will all be unrealistic, either because you might not outlive the training, and also because a lot of the fields you describe may see themselves as young man's games, and want a youngster they can mold into a protege, not someone older than them (and also because there are a very finite number of slots, some paths can't afford to give them to someone without a decent number of years left in their career). So I probably would say 30s is fine to start down this road, and 40s-50s is not unheard of to become a doctor, but if you have dreams of being a neurosurgeon there is absolutely going to be an age where you needn't bother anymore.

StanMarsh1978 said:

...But that's a pretty wide range--a whole decade, in fact. I guess I'm wondering how the process might look different for a 35-year-old than for a 32-year-old or a 38-year-old. Make sense?

Click to expand...

The number itself is meaningless. There are 38 year olds who can hold their own with 20 year olds at the gym, and 32 year olds who are middle aged.

Medical schools can not discriminate based on age, by law. I'm not trying to tell a lawyer his business. The only reason I know this is because the literature for every medical school that I have seen says "medical schools can not discriminate based on age, by law." That being said, I think schools are wary of those applicants who are coming from one or multiple previous careers. I think they see it as indecisiveness or a lack of commitment. What you need is an iron clad reason for your motivation to enter medicine later in life.

For you and me, as veterans, that reason comes pretty naturally. You already mentioned it in your original post. I'm sure you have the same stories that I do of your buddies who were wounded, whose lives were saved by an Army Doc. Or perhaps you had a soldier who died despite medical intervention. I'm not saying to fake it. What I am saying is that it's easy to see why we soldiers are drawn to medicine as second professions. When we are on the battlefield, we see good docs in action. We see the effects. Use your personal statement to illustrate that. Pair that with some good numbers and you'll be fine.

good insight..I've got a few years on you and have been sensitive to this issue in general. Spoke with one admissions director, midwest school, who said that one thing that schools consider (under the radar, I guess) is the number of years of functional service that they can expect from a physician.

Funny thing was, the example given was neurosurgery..and the age provided as "too old" was somewhere in the 50's as a "start med school age". The admissions person said that they'd be "unlikely" to accept a person who would finish all training around age 65. A post-bacc colleague, who was applying at around age 50, told me that he/she was advised point blank that due to his/her age they would not be accepted at one school. Illegal, but this person wasn't pursuing any legal venue; they were explaining to me why they were pursuing (and ultimately were accepted into) the DO route. As the candidate already had a PhD, academics probably weren't the true concern.

StanMarsh1978 said:

Assuming a desire to pursue a high-end surgical practice (trauma surgery, neurosurgery, general surgery, cardiology, etc.), how old is too old? I understand that it's really a ten/twelve-year-plus process considering school and residency. At what point does age upon entrance to medical school begin to become a serious impediment to entry to such elite practices?

Click to expand...

I'm 45, and I was just accepted into med school this cycle (first time applying). Of course there's no "hard" answer to your question, but I can give you some impressions I've picked up from the interview trail.

First of all, nobody considers 30 to be "old" anymore--I think that designation has shifted to people in their 40's and above. Even in the 40's, as far as I can tell, most specialties don't really care too much about your age--except surgery. Although they're not officially allowed to care, it's pretty clear that they do.

FYI, I don't happen to be interested in surgery. But it's a good thing I'm not, because I think I'd have a pretty tough time getting a residency in it when I graduate from med school. Regardless, I don't think it would be a great choice for me, considering how long the training would be in relation to the potential length of my medical career.

One of my med school interviews was a panel, which had an orthopedic surgeon as one of its members. He was quite friendly and seemed well disposed toward me, but when I was asked what specialties I was interested in, I turned toward him and joked, "No offense to your specialty, but at this stage of my life I don't think I'll be going for surgery. No 9-year residency for me." He immediately smiled and said, "I'm glad to hear you say that, because if you were interested, I think I'd have some questions about your judgment. This is a very physically demanding specialty, and there's a certain age beyond which it gets too difficult."

I kept a smile plastered on my face, but inside I was pretty shocked. This attending was probably only 2 or 3 years older than me, so if I was approaching decrepitude, what was he? And I was surprised that he made no attempt to hide his views on this subject, even though age discrimination is supposed to be illegal.

So, based on my admittedly anecdotal experience, if you enter med school in your 30's, I doubt you'll run into any significant age discrimination if you pursue surgery as a specialty. But in the 40's and beyond, it's quite possible that you will. (BTW, I should mention that I'm female. It may be that as a male, your mileage may vary.)

You're not nearly that old, but getting into those super-competitive fields is a difficult battle no matter what your SAT score is. But I don't think your age actually affects your odds of getting into those fields very much. Low 30's shouldn't make things much harder if you've been reading legal texts for the last few years, and only the first two years of medical school are filled with nonstop reading anyway.

I think your decision mostly has to do with how old you'll be when you're trying to start/join a practice, and the problems of having to move all over the place to go to medical school or residency. Especially if you're going for such competitive fields you may have little control over where you end up geographically.

So I'd think over what you want out of family life and things like that, and where you want to be in a few years.

BTW General Surgery is a "mere" 9 years counting school unless there's some horrible new super-long residency I'm not aware of

student1799 said:

I kept a smile plastered on my face, but inside I was pretty shocked. This attending was probably only 2 or 3 years older than me, so if I was approaching decrepitude, what was he? And I was surprised that he made no attempt to hide his views on this subject, even though age discrimination is supposed to be illegal.

Click to expand...

I think he was mostly referring to internship/residency and building your own practice, etc.
My uncle used to work 100 hours a week when he first started his own practice, so it's not like things are easy once you've gotten through residency.
Once you're an established physician you get a lot more control over your hours and that kind of stuff, so it's a huge difference especially in the more intense specialties.

Established surgeons can work half that much, and the pain of work scales rather exponentially as you add those hours. So being an established surgeon at a certain age isn't at all the same thing as trying to become a surgeon at that age.

See these previous threads for more responses:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=475756

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=482527

Your age does not matter because you are male.
30 is not too old for med school.
Because you are an XY I don't think your age will be a problem as far as your getting the residency you want either. Residencies mostly care about age if you are female because some of them don't like to have people out on maternity leave ever. Otherwise, unless you are obviously not energetic, etc., what residency you get will be determined more by your letters of recommendation, grades and exam scores.

Your SAT score does not matter, although it suggests you are a good standardized test taker, which will likely help you on the MCAT.

Med school and residency is a long, hard haul so I'd make sure you really, really want to do this before your launch yourself in this direction. Surgical residencies are particularly demanding.

P.s. cardiology is not a surgical field. To do cardiology, you need 4 years med school, 3 years of internal medicine residency, then 3-5 years of cardiology fellowship (the 4-5 year fellowship would be if you want to be the cardiologist who puts in stents or fancy pacemakers and defibrillators).

General surgery = 4 years med school + 5-7 years residency
Surgical subspecialties = 4 years med school + 5-7 years residency + however long the fellowships is (1-3 years?)
Neurosurgery = 4 years med school + residency of 5-7 years (I think usually 6-7).

dragonfly99 said:

Your age does not matter because you are male.

Click to expand...

QFT. Kudos for your honesty.

30 is not too old for med school.

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.

Because you are an XY I don't think your age will be a problem as far as your getting the residency you want either.

Click to expand...

Check.

Residencies mostly care about age if you are female because some of them don't like to have people out on maternity leave ever.

Click to expand...

Now this is where I had to laugh. I don't doubt that many programs think that way, which would explain (though of course not justify) discriminating against women in their childbearing years. But how, then, would they justify the attitude I described in my anecdote? I mean, I am SO likely to be out on maternity leave when I'm 50 (which would be my first year of residency). Not that I actually want to do surgery, but you see my point.

I don't think my experience was anomalous, either. I've heard quite a few anecdotes suggesting that "women of a certain age" are not exactly welcome in surgical residencies.

soldier2surgeon said:

... That being said, I think schools are wary of those applicants who are coming from one or multiple previous careers. I think they see it as indecisiveness or a lack of commitment....

Click to expand...

If you just said "multiple" I might have agreed with you. But not the "one or". Med schools LOVE career changers. They bring the kind of life experiences and diversity most med schools enjoy. And every med school class wants to boast a few lawyers, engineers, etc. (so long as the numbers are there). It's good to have a "hook". Where you get into trouble is where you have many jobs in not so many years, or where you try to jump from professional school to professional school without really working.

dragonfly99 said:

...
Surgical subspecialties = 4 years med school + 5-7 years residency + however long the fellowships is (1-3 years?)
Neurosurgery = 4 years med school + residency of 5-7 years (I think usually 6-7).

Click to expand...

A lot of the subspecialties also want you to do 1-3 years or research on top of this at some point during your residency. I know quite a few people who ended up taking well over 10 years post-med school before they reached the attending level.

I know that a lot of people have already commented, but I just thought I'd chime in.

30 is definitely not too old. A good friend in my post-bacc program is 33, and applying this year. I also work with a surgical resident (Fourth year) who is in his late 50s. Certainly he made the switch much later in life. I think he's pursuing trauma surgery, too.
I don't think it's ever really too late to do what you love.

Some schools do not take students older than early to mid 30's. The school I went to was like that...oldest person in our class was 32. However, most other schools are not that way. The OP, in his early to mid 30's and male, is unlikely to have a problem getting in somewhere if he has the stats, etc. Residency can be extremely tiring and is physically demanding, so I can honestly see where some residencies like trauma surg, ortho, etc. might worry about someone getting too worn out by repeated months of Q3 and Q4 overnight call of 30 hours in a row with no sleep, if the person is 40's or 50's, but I guess it really depends on the person. Some ortho surgeons, and ortho programs in general, do not really want women (of any age) but I don't think the OP is going to run into that problem b/c he is male.

somebody with lots of knowledge told me a while back that WashU was not so friendly toward "much" older applicants.

One way to tell is to check the age range of accepted students -- as a mid 30's person, I'd checked everywhere in amcas and couldn't find anything beyond "median" or "average" ages which don't tell much related to the minority of 35+ yr olds.

I don't think as a 32/33 yr old applicant you'd have substantial trouble anywhere. I really think that it's in the 40's+ that some adcomms start to consider age.

we don't really look at age that much as far as I have seen. The main things looked at are whether or not you have a good application. good luck

oh and ps your SAT scores are meaningless (they would only matter if you applied early assurance which since you already have a degree cannot anyways)

dragonfly99 said:

General surgery = 4 years med school + 5-7 years residency
Surgical subspecialties = 4 years med school + 5-7 years residency + however long the fellowships is (1-3 years?)
Neurosurgery = 4 years med school + residency of 5-7 years (I think usually 6-7).

Click to expand...

What about pathology? I heard they also have to go thru longer period of fellowship and residency (longer than 4 years). Is it as demanding as surgery?

Allegro said:

What about pathology? I heard they also have to go thru longer period of fellowship and residency (longer than 4 years). Is it as demanding as surgery?

Click to expand...

Pathology is the field that I'm the most interested in (based on previous work experience). Residency length depends on the program you are in. There are three residency paths: 1) clinical pathology, 2) anatomical pathology, and 3) combined clinical and anatomical pathology. The first two are three years long and you can do fellowship. The third track is four years long.

Most calls that a pathologist takes is from home. For surgical path specimens (frozens), you have to do that in person. You do more call work your first year and goes down each year in residency.

Here is a link: http://www.yalepath.org/residency/

Pathology is one of those fields that most people could not stand doing as a career. You basically work with fluids and tissues and making slides to view under a microscope.
Pathology training takes a while because it isn't something you really learn in medical school. When a person wants to be an immunologist, a pathologists and the like, you have to sort of work at getting your own rotation at one of these places.

student1799 said:

I'm 45, and I was just accepted into med school this cycle (first time applying). Of course there's no "hard" answer to your question, but I can give you some impressions I've picked up from the interview trail.

First of all, nobody considers 30 to be "old" anymore--I think that designation has shifted to people in their 40's and above. Even in the 40's, as far as I can tell, most specialties don't really care too much about your age--except surgery. Although they're not officially allowed to care, it's pretty clear that they do.

FYI, I don't happen to be interested in surgery. But it's a good thing I'm not, because I think I'd have a pretty tough time getting a residency in it when I graduate from med school. Regardless, I don't think it would be a great choice for me, considering how long the training would be in relation to the potential length of my medical career.

One of my med school interviews was a panel, which had an orthopedic surgeon as one of its members. He was quite friendly and seemed well disposed toward me, but when I was asked what specialties I was interested in, I turned toward him and joked, "No offense to your specialty, but at this stage of my life I don't think I'll be going for surgery. No 9-year residency for me." He immediately smiled and said, "I'm glad to hear you say that, because if you were interested, I think I'd have some questions about your judgment. This is a very physically demanding specialty, and there's a certain age beyond which it gets too difficult."

I kept a smile plastered on my face, but inside I was pretty shocked. This attending was probably only 2 or 3 years older than me, so if I was approaching decrepitude, what was he? And I was surprised that he made no attempt to hide his views on this subject, even though age discrimination is supposed to be illegal.

So, based on my admittedly anecdotal experience, if you enter med school in your 30's, I doubt you'll run into any significant age discrimination if you pursue surgery as a specialty. But in the 40's and beyond, it's quite possible that you will. (BTW, I should mention that I'm female. It may be that as a male, your mileage may vary.)

Click to expand...

he's a few years older than you, but he's done with his training, whatever he has left in a career is as a fully trained physician, but you are at an interview to ENTER med school, so you have to shave off med school + residency years from your career to compare to him.
i don't think he's saying you are too old right now, he's just saying it might be too demanding for you by the time you are done with training.

dragonfly99 said:

Some schools do not take students older than early to mid 30's. The school I went to was like that...oldest person in our class was 32. ...

Click to expand...

Things are changing quite rapidly on this front -- It's likely that your school has opened up more to nontrads since you were in med school. At this point I think almost all med schools have folks in their 30s.

murfettie said:

you are at an interview to ENTER med school

Click to expand...

That's part of my point, actually. Why should this issue figure into the question of letting me into med school at all? Yet clearly, in this doctor's mind, it does. If I expressed interest in a specialty for which HE thought I was "too old" (and who says I'd be applying to his residency program anyway?), that would clearly color his judgment as to whether I belonged in med school in the first place.

i don't think he's saying you are too old right now, he's just saying it might be too demanding for you by the time you are done with training.

Click to expand...

Logically, if I'm too old to finish, I'm too old to start. You can't get around that. Yet if you asked this guy about his own physical health today, he'd probably tell you that he's in good condition and could keep going for a long time--whereas the underlying assumption is that I (a few years younger) would fall apart after just a few years of training.

As you can tell, I'm pretty fed up with the intellectual duplicity and double standards here, even though (thankfully) they don't directly affect me at the moment. Women are a liability because we can have kids, yet as soon as we are past that age, somehow we're too old. Translation: any excuse to keep us out.

My impression so far is that in most areas of medicine, women are treated pretty fairly relative to men. Surgery, though, seems to be a different world.

student1799 said:

... If I expressed interest in a specialty for which HE thought I was "too old" (and who says I'd be applying to his residency program anyway?), that would clearly color his judgment as to whether I belonged in med school in the first place. ....

Click to expand...

There are people who only want to go to med school to do X specialty. For them, not being able to do X specialty means the whole 4 years would be a waste. And not everybody gets to do X specialty, either do to age, or stats, or poor comments, etc. So honestly, unless you are expressing the view that you'd be happy to be any kind of doctor, you are suggesting you might be unhappy in med school, which is not something admissions is looking for. They want happy excited people who do well and make them look good in 4 years when they all realistically assort into residencies and don't require the school to help them snare things.

They dont want to hear the older nontrad who says I only want to do neurosurg. They also don't want anyone (young or old) who says the only think I can see myself doing is plastics, derm, etc. Stay general. The first decision tree is surgical vs nonsurgical and you probably should only be expressing a "leaning" toward one or the other at the premed stage.

It is highly school dependent. As a 30 year old, you shouldn't have any problems. I will tell you that when I applied at the age of 38 I was flat out told I was "too old" to go to medical school by more than one. No I won't name them. I am hopeful they have or will change and they are fine schools.

I'm just saying be prepared. Apply early and put your best foot forward.

Law2Doc said:

Stay general. The first decision tree is surgical vs nonsurgical and you probably should only be expressing a "leaning" toward one or the other at the premed stage.

Click to expand...

I didn't mention it in my account because that wasn't the main point, but my whole answer was that (other than the caveat about surgery being unlikely)I had no preconceptions about specialities and was "keeping an open mind."

If you recall, I wasn't the one who started the discussion about specialties--the school brought it up and asked me to comment on it. The only thing I've ever said on this subject was that I didn't know, and wouldn't even have a basis for deciding until the clinical years.

teh heh..
you are really pissed off more than anything.

student1799 said:

That's part of my point, actually. Why should this issue figure into the question of letting me into med school at all? Yet clearly, in this doctor's mind, it does. If I expressed interest in a specialty for which HE thought I was "too old" (and who says I'd be applying to his residency program anyway?), that would clearly color his judgment as to whether I belonged in med school in the first place.

Logically, if I'm too old to finish, I'm too old to start. You can't get around that. Yet if you asked this guy about his own physical health today, he'd probably tell you that he's in good condition and could keep going for a long time--whereas the underlying assumption is that I (a few years younger) would fall apart after just a few years of training.

As you can tell, I'm pretty fed up with the intellectual duplicity and double standards here, even though (thankfully) they don't directly affect me at the moment. Women are a liability because we can have kids, yet as soon as we are past that age, somehow we're too old. Translation: any excuse to keep us out.

My impression so far is that in most areas of medicine, women are treated pretty fairly relative to men. Surgery, though, seems to be a different world.

Click to expand...

I don't think your age would have much to do with getting into a demanding specialty, or being able to hack it. What would be pretty hard, is if you do pick up a family along the way. Subspecialty surgery residencies make for long hours away from home. Everyone I know who's doing surgery, cardiology etc. is pretty torn up over the time they're spending at the hospital instead of with their families. It's a tough decision. Kell

I was not asked much about my age at all. It helped that I look much younger than my age. Any how, I am taking a career break and raising a child while doing the school thing. Med school schedule to me, is going to be far more flexible than my engineering job. Yes, even with all the studying. Bottom line is- I am paying the school, not the other way around.

So, in my case, it is really an absurd thing to think about my age. I can finance my education, thanks to my long career. And by the way, I will be in residency when my kid is 6. By the time he is 9 or 10, Mommy will start making money for his private school.

Another anecdote for you. I was 33 when I started med school (prior military as well). Was accepted to all schools I interviewed at (including WashU - so not sure about them being non-trad unfriendly). Getting ready now to start a 6 year surgical subspecialty at a top program.

So it can be done - you have good UGrad grades (much better than mine). So rock the MCAT, get the rest of your app in order (A's in all pre-reqs you still have to do, get some clinical exp, etc). I would get at least one letter from your mil experience. I had two, and those were the ones everyone talked about on interviews.

Good luck
chopper

Age-wise, you won't have any problems getting into a medical school if your stats/experiences are up-to-par with those of the other applicants. Yes, there will be people that will discrimate because of age, but this will affect you less than you think. The only way this could affect you is if you are dead-set about going to a specific school and they happen to be the one that discriminates. If you apply broadly and early, you will get in somewhere. I always tell people that for every eyebrowse-raising item on your application, you should apply to another 5-10 programs. It's a numbers game. Good luck!

Your GPA is already pretty sound at 3.7 - so continuing the good work would be most important.

The other thing to consider (and probably more important in this case) is your science, or "BCPM (Bio, Chem, Physics, Math)" GPA. That is calculated separately for med school admissions. So your GPA will be reported as 3.7 Cum/3.5 BCPM.

Now - if you did a non-science undergrad, you probably don't have a lot of these courses. So whatever credits you get in a post bacc would have a large effect on that BCPM Grade.

As far as how long a post bacc is, it depends a bit on you and your background. You need to have essentially one year each of Bio, Gen Chem, Physics, and Orgo. All have labs, so you get 8 credits for 2 semesters each. That makes 32 credits minimum. Some add on Biochem. And if you haven't done any math, you might need that as well. (And would definatly want it to do well on some of the science courses).

If you've already done (well) on a couple of the pre-reqs, you might only need to take 16 credits.

Good luck - and once again, don't worry about your cum GPA at this point. For one, it's pretty good, and like you worked out above, very difficult to raise up even with a significant influx of 4.0.

StanMarsh1978 said:

1) How many credits compose a typical full post-bac?

Click to expand...

That depends entirely on which/how many prereqs you have to take, as well as the credit values assigned to those courses by the postbacc institution. I earned 48 credits at my postbacc program, taking all the prereqs from scratch, plus precalc (3 credits) and an optional bio course (2 credits). So I guess the prereqs were worth 43 credits.

These were the courses my school required:

1 yr calc or calc + stats (6 credits)
1 yr inorganic chem + 3-credit lab (10)
1 yr physics + labs (8)
1 yr organic chem + 3-cr lab (10)
1 yr bio + 3-cr lab (9)

This was done over 2 years. If you had a given prereq class already, they expected you to take another upper-level course to fill your schedule. (Full load was considered 4 classes/semester in year 1, 3 in year 2).

2) How do most medical schools assess those additional credits? Are the grades from the post-bac classes simply added to your preexisting credits and the GPA averaged? Or is there some less discernable formula?

Click to expand...

Postbacc classes count in your undergrad GPA [uGPA], because they are undergrad courses. AMCAS (the med school application clearinghouse) computes both a uGPA and a postbacc GPA for you, so schools can see separately how you did in the postbacc program/courses.

Do certain schools emphasize more recent (post-bac) coursework over your earlier grades? Or vice-versa?

Click to expand...

Again, this depends heavily on your individual circumstances, mainly how long it's been since you graduated from college. AMCAS includes both ancient and recent grades in your uGPA (a practice I personally consider ludicrous, but I don't make the rules), and med schools tend to be rather robotically fixated on that uGPA, even more than the BCPM [science GPA]. However, if your undergrad grades are really old--mine are over 20 years old--schools will look more closely at your postbacc GPA, although they never completely ignore the uGPA. In your case it shouldn't really matter, since your uGPA is already good.

4) Is there any additional known way to raise one's GPA, beyond the post-bac programs? Say, non-science post-bac work at your alma mater, prior to formal post-bac science program? If so, are such efforts regarded as transparent by top medical schools, or is it a useful exercise?

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that "post-bacc" merely means undergrad classes that you take after you have already earned a BA (baccalaureate) degree. You can do a formal program, or not--it's up to you, and med schools don't seem to care. But if you are going to take postbacc classes, I'd stick to science classes only (unless you're missing a required English class or something of that nature). You don't want to be seen as padding your GPA, and you do want to demonstrate your prowess in science as much as possible.

Just make sure you take UNDERGRAD courses, though, or they won't count toward the all-important uGPA. As you may have already read in other threads, graduate work (even PhD's in the sciences) is not given much weight by med schools, no matter how meaty it is or how high your grades are. According to PhD's who've been admitted to med school, their degrees are considered no more than a "nice EC" by admissions committees.

-

Law2Doc said:

Things are changing quite rapidly on this front -- It's likely that your school has opened up more to nontrads since you were in med school. At this point I think almost all med schools have folks in their 30s.

Click to expand...

No. My school has not changed. I promise. They do have very occasional people in their early 30's, but they really don't take people older than that. However, I agree that most schools are not necessarily like that any more. My school emphasized doing extra research years, etc. a lot, which is one of the reasons they liked younger applicants. Also, I think the older applicants had traditionally not done as well, probably because of the structure of the curriculum (i.e. not conducive to doing all right if you have a family, because of the tons of hours of lecture and rote memorization).

dragonfly99 said:

No. My school has not changed. I promise. They do have very occasional people in their early 30's, but they really don't take people older than that. However, I agree that most schools are not necessarily like that any more. My school emphasized doing extra research years, etc. a lot, which is one of the reasons they liked younger applicants. Also, I think the older applicants had traditionally not done as well, probably because of the structure of the curriculum (i.e. not conducive to doing all right if you have a family, because of the tons of hours of lecture and rote memorization).

Click to expand...

I agree with this post. There are some schools that are more welcoming to older applicants than some others. Even among DO schools.

Keep in mind that "post-bacc" merely means undergrad classes that you take after you have already earned a BA (baccalaureate) degree. You can do a formal program, or not--it's up to you, and med schools don't seem to care. But if you are going to take postbacc classes, I'd stick to science classes only (unless you're missing a required English class or something of that nature). You don't want to be seen as padding your GPA, and you do want to demonstrate your prowess in science as much as possible.

Click to expand...

I would agree. Post bacc classes should consist of the pre-requisite classes that you did not complete during your undergraduate studies. If this is 20 creds, good for you, if it's 40, more work to deal with. If you were a science major who is just trying to spruce up the GPA, you probably won't be able to take more than a few classes before someone wonders why you are taking classes that have no real value apart from buffing your GPA. In this case, you will need to complete a Master's in one of the sciences at a pretty decent program, getting top notch grades in the process.

Just make sure you take UNDERGRAD courses, though, or they won't count toward the all-important uGPA. As you may have already read in other threads, graduate work (even PhD's in the sciences) is not given much weight by med schools, no matter how meaty it is or how high your grades are. According to PhD's who've been admitted to med school, their degrees are considered no more than a "nice EC" by admissions committees.

Click to expand...

I would have to disagree here. At our program (I am on the admissions committee), good grades from a PhD or a Master's are definitely given credit, as long as they come from a good institution (i.e. nationally recognized program not just nationally accredited).

That said, do really well on the MCAT, because in the end, that is more important than the GPA. We would much rather take a 3.4/35 than a 3.8/26.

StanMarsh1978 said:

Say that before doing the post-bac, one takes three semesters of Spanish at the ol' Alma Mater, and taking the M.D. degree to needy communities/etc. is part of one's vision? Just a hypothetical..

Click to expand...

I don't think this would be seen as "padding," because the Spanish language skills would be very useful if you plan to work in underserved communities. In fact, I think it would be seen favorably by most med schools.

StanMarsh1978 said:

So obvious "padding" in non-science subjects is noted by admissions, and is very bad. See, this is why I ask these questions. Great information. What if I had a genuine interest that I could explain, though, and the credits were relatively minimal? Say that before doing the post-bac, one takes three semesters of Spanish at the ol' Alma Mater, and taking the M.D. degree to needy communities/etc. is part of one's vision? Just a hypothetical.

Ha--doing a masters in any science is not within the realm of possibilities for me at this stage of life. But good advice regardless.

Click to expand...

This is a tricky question. What most people don't know is that there are really 5 sets of peeps that need to be addressed when trying to get through the admissions process.

1. The admin person (aka computer cut-off to even consider your app).
2. The program director who decides to invite you for an interview.
3. Your first interviewer (usually a faculty member - PhD or MD)
4. Your second interviewer (almost all schools have 2+ interviewers) - usually a med student
5. The whole adcom (at our school it's 24 people in a room that look at your app on the overhead and for the most part take what 3 and 4 have to say as long as your numbers aren't too low)

We all see your app and if even one of us says no, the app is done with.