Age starting medical school

[LingoLaine]

I turn 41 in July and start med school in August!

It's only too late to go down this path if you don't start NOW!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ChemMed]

I left the academic rat race at 29, matriculated at 30 and am currently in med school. I'll find my way back to research in some regard though. I like it to much to completely drop it.

 

[GenusTide]

Quit the Fire Service at 29 and will be starting this fall at age 31 ( will be 32 two weeks in ). I could not be more excited or determined. Let's DO this!!!!!!!!!

 

[realmeaning]

28 or 29, with God's grace. A couple years away yet.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Starting next month at 30. No regrets

 

[blee]

Keep it up, guys and gals. Don't let age stop you from reaching from your dreams!

 

[MT Headed]

Matriculating at 42 in a couple of months. The only time age is an issue is when I meet some of my future classmates, and I realize that some of them have a lot of growing up to do before I would let them be my doctor.

 

[smileyman22336]

Yolo.

 

[Msmouth]

Jumping in here....
I am 40 and hope to start dental school next year at age 41!

 

[MakesSense]

Do you think that 35-40 is too late to start medical school? I was just curious about the ages of the non-trads that are starting medical school. Thanks

I started med school at 52.

 

[Signifier]

I will be starting at age 27.

 

[Matt In The Hat]

I'll turn 37 a few weeks after my first year starts in August.

 

[DrMidlife]

Happened to stumble on to this thread and I have to say I'm pretty suprised by how many "older" matriculants there are these days. I am certainly biased in my own way having gone through a 6 year program out of high school and am finishing a 5 year residency at 28 but a question arises from my perspective. With med school spots being at a premium and there being so much competition with very similar applicants to choose from at what point do we take age and subsequent years practicing into consideration. Does it make sense for society (since a large number of med schools are publicly funded and residencies are funded by Medicare) to train a 40 or 50 year old physicians who even if they practce until they are 75 will practice 10 or more years less on average than someone that matriculates at 22-25 especially when data supports a shortage in some specialties and communities. I dont know how this would work with age discrimination claims but with such a precious resource as a med school admission it does seem that these factors need to be put into play.

We don't live in a country where those who benefit from a public investment in medical education are held accountable. In other countries, that investment is secured by public service for all who receive it. No, in the US, we are free to take our publicly funded education and open a botox clinic. We can quit medicine to do a blog. We can run a practice that takes no Medicare or Medicaid patients. We can go work for Oprah. We can go work for big pharm or do Hydroxycut commercials. We're free to do as we like.

My point is that you need a better metric for the public value of a medical education than the likelihood of many years in practice, because that's not specific to age at matriculation.

Please continue, though. Soon you'll find that allowing women to be doctors, when years of productive practice are lost to childbearing, also seems an inappropriate use of public resources. Good luck with that one.

Best of luck to you.

 

[DrMidlife]

I certainly see your point about the funding of our medical education system and the future obligations. That being said I dont think this is as much of a slippery slope arguement as you make; sure you can cite the docs who form a blog, or work for Oprah, etc. but that is why I put on average. I dont think there is any doubt that "on average" younger matriculants (22-25) will practice longer than someone starting at in their 40s and 50s. The question remains is this fact worth changing how we view the admissions process with a med school admission being a scarce resource and with specialties/communities short staffed currently. Your snide remarks aside, the question hasnt really been answered.

I'm quite serious. If you want a system where average anticipated years of service is the metric for "worth a seat", then what's your story for women practicing as physicians?

What's your age cutoff? 25? 30? Why? Why not 26 or 31?

Snide remarks and unanswered questions are par for the course on these issues. The discussion never, ever goes anywhere. It's all slippery slope.

Edit: here's the real question. Why would you ask here, instead of asking med school admissions officers why they admit older students? Posting your question in a forum full of older students is just baiting. Or what?

 

[Algophiliac]

I didn't say that age would be the only a metric, I simply asked whether it should be used as a metric at all. I also never made a comment about a cut off simply suggested that if two similarly qualified applicants are available should age become an issue with the limited spots available.

I don't think so. Many of the older applicants are also the more dedicated, self-aware applicants who truly understand what they want from life. I sincerely doubt that many of them will be retiring at an early age (or even a remotely early age), whereas I have seen numerous traditional-path physicians retiring or wishing to retire earlier than age 60.

I do agree with DrMidlife that this is a very slippery slope, however. If you begin to discriminate against women, those with families or children, individuals with chronic illnesses, and/or those who simply wish to enjoy an easier post-medical school lifestyle, you are running into too many variables to yield any reasonable benefits to society.

There are many, many reasons to accept a nontraditional applicant, and quantifying everything is a bit ridiculous. It's always the quality that matters most.

 

[GenusTide]

I didn't say that age would be the only a metric, I simply asked whether it should be used as a metric at all. I also never made a comment about a cut off simply suggested that if two similarly qualified applicants are available should age become an issue with the limited spots available.

You may consider snide comments the par, not myself. As for why I posted here was that I was speaking with colleagues about this issue recently. I am in a specialty with a lot of older residents due to a high frequency of MD/PhDs and this discussion came up and so when I saw the thread as I was scrolling to the forums I normally post in I decided to look and post. There is no baiting and I tried to disclose my own bias with the post. Seemed like a pretty reasonable question from my perspective. You're a med student and I can tell you after 5 years of residency its comments like yours that can piss off residents. Not every question asked is an attack or a reason to get up in arms.

The subject matter and the stance you take on your post describes the route you have taken thus far in your life and screams of lack of experience outside of academics. Since you have not experienced anything outside of your academic world shows "why" you would think this way? I would personally take a physician who has been through the "trials of life" and could speak on the same level as me rather than a physician who has never or only has had limited exposure to knowing life outside of school. As a very young physician, you may be a great at what you have learned in medical school and/or undergrad and I would certainly let you stitch up a family member but that's about it. I personally feel that someone younger will have a much tougher time relating to many pt's until they reach a more mature age. Amazing things can be achieved at all different ages and it would be very bigoted to think older applicants would not serve their community well. Should we stop a great mind from advancing medicine because they took a different path to get there? I am pretty sure you can answer that one, even if it hasn't shown up in text. Do I give you kuddo's for the path you have chosen and the hard work you have put into your education? absolutely. Would I let you be my physician, absolutely not. Wish you the best though.

 

[MT Headed]

I dont think there is any doubt that "on average" younger matriculants (22-25) will practice longer than someone starting at in their 40s and 50s.

I wonder what the current stats are on this metric. We seem to live in a world of career changers. The federal government invested an awful lot in me becoming a computer engineer in the 1980s after all, and I only lasted in that industry for 7 years.

Do today's younger medical students stay with a career in medicine longer than the older medical students? Seems like an interesting question.

 

[NightGod]

Happened to stumble on to this thread and I have to say I'm pretty suprised by how many "older" matriculants there are these days. I am certainly biased in my own way having gone through a 6 year program out of high school and am finishing a 5 year residency at 28 but a question arises from my perspective. With med school spots being at a premium and there being so much competition with very similar applicants to choose from at what point do we take age and subsequent years practicing into consideration. Does it make sense for society (since a large number of med schools are publicly funded and residencies are funded by Medicare) to train a 40 or 50 year old physicians who even if they practce until they are 75 will practice 10 or more years less on average than someone that matriculates at 22-25 especially when data supports a shortage in some specialties and communities. I dont know how this would work with age discrimination claims but with such a precious resource as a med school admission it does seem that these factors need to be put into play.

I'll try answering this without getting snarky, because I honestly feel that you asked it seriously and weren't trying to bait anyone into a fight.

An important fact to take into consideration is that there are (more than a few) medical schools that actively encourage older medical school applicants. They go to conferences (like the one run by oldpremeds.org) and practically roll out the red carpet for them to apply. Why? Because they state that the find older applicants, who have spent time living their lives and have experienced another field to be more well-rounded and more likely to be completely sure that medicine is what they want to do. You can easily find stories of people who have left very successful careers and thrown their families into financial uncertainty just to schlep back to college with a class full of 18-22 year olds because they are utterly certain medicine is their calling. I haven't personally (very limited metric, I'll grant you) heard of someone who went back to med school at, say, 30+ who quit for anything short of catastrophic injury or illness. Yet, go watch any documentary about medicine and you see younger students dropping out (the first Hopkins 24/7 a girl left a couple of months into residency) or who finished med school, practiced a few years and then got out of practicing medicine because they realized it wasn't their true passion (Doctor Diaries). They have marriages blow up and personal lives that end up in the toilet. They end up being older parents and are lucky to see their grandchildren, let alone any chance at great-grandchildren. The simple fact is that the drop-out rate of someone who has already "lived one career/life" and left it behind to become a doctor is going to be far lower than someone who has only ever thought about being a doctor and has maybe had a glide year's worth of life doing anything other than academics. With the advances in medicine today, the opportunity to remain vital and active in any career is far greater than even 30 or 40 years ago.

I think it would actually be a very interesting study to determine the actual number of years the average doctor (who starts at any age) actively practices. My gut tells me that the number likely averages out to roughly the same number of years across the board. Of course, it will probably be a good 40 years before you could get really meaningful data on a study like this, since it's only been the past decade or so that non-traditional medical students have really become anywhere close to common.

 

[LadyEMT]

I'll be 31 when I matriculate God willing.

 

[Water Top]

Well, looks like we settled that discussion. Now on to the DO vs MD threads....

 

[DrZaiusDrZaius]

I'll be 27 when I start this fall--I can't wait!

 

[mcomeau]

Ill be 42 when I begin on August 6th. Best of luck to all of you "old" guys and gals.

 

[cajun9]

33 matriculating in July....Wagy I feel like a fair solution to your question is this.... I think you feel like they should limit older applicants due to your own reasons (some which you state and some which I’m sure you’re not stating). The goals of all or most med schools are to produce the most diverse (but still qualified) doctors they can. The more diverse our backgrounds are will help increase our ability to relate to people in school and once were out. Medicine and healing is more than just smarts. It’s also how you can relate, motivate, and help patients move forward.(Oncalogist told me this). So wagy I guess my thoughts are this. You keep referring to your use of averages. I think this is also the reason why every class isn't all us old folks lol. Just as it isn't all young folks. It’s because we can learn from you young people and you can learn from us. By mixing these classrooms with age, race, sex, etc. We are all able to get some understanding and different points of view from each other. As the same with our patients. The more life experiences you have the more you can relate to a broader spectrum of people. A good example is if my son wants to know how to really blaze a trail through school and get it done right the first time, then I am not the one to give him advice unless I’m telling him what not to do lol. He should speak to you and there are lots more examples we can give either way. I hope you get the point. We all have something to bring to the table for the benefit of each other and more importantly our patients. This to me is way more important than time of service after residency. Just my thoughts

 

[vitalijus]

You only live once!!!!!

 

[futbolgirl3]

What about at 18 or 19 going into med school, that counts as non-traditional right?

 

[LoLCareerGoals]

Nontrads are already offered less aid on average. So less public resources consumed no?
Pretty sure the pool of admitted nontrad students is already more heavily narrowed down because it is harder to match ECs/MCATs of trads with nontrads background. If a nontrad takes up a seat of a trad it is probably because a nontrad is not just slightly more capable than a trad if he/she managed to produce a more appealing profile. Trads have it a lot easier and ON AVERAGE have much more resources extended to them from parents/etc. Feel free to argue but I would bet average trad comes from a waaay wealthier, more educated family than a nontrad.
I don't think nontrads should be cut any slack despite obv advantages that a trad would have over them, but to consider age for admission as a separate factor? Maybe only for extremes like 50+ starting med school. Even then, it is not like many apply at that age, so why bother.

 

[Prncssbuttercup]

What about at 18 or 19 going into med school, that counts as non-traditional right?

There is a 19yr old in my class... Theoretically I am old enough to be her mother. I am not sure who the oldest in the class is, but I know it's not me, as there's a 41yr old starting with us.

Nontrads are already offered less aid on average. So less public resources consumed no?
Pretty sure the pool of admitted nontrad students is already more heavily narrowed down because it is harder to match ECs/MCATs of trads with nontrads background. If a nontrad takes up a seat of a trad it is probably because a nontrad is not just slightly more capable than a trad if he/she managed to produce a more appealing profile. Trads have it a lot easier and ON AVERAGE have much more resources extended to them from parents/etc. Feel free to argue but I would bet average trad comes from a waaay wealthier, more educated family than a nontrad.
I don't think nontrads should be cut any slack despite obv advantages that a trad would have over them, but to consider age for admission as a separate factor? Maybe only for extremes like 50+ starting med school. Even then, it is not like many apply at that age, so why bother.

I think trads USUALLY have it easier, but I won't say always. I know a fair amount with no family ties, no family assistance, but generally they are URM or financially disadvantaged.

Either way, I will put in probably 35yrs as a doc after I graduate, and I think that's comparable to people who graduate at 25. Even if they have 10yrs on me, big deal, I put my time into biotech and that gives me an edge on others in my class for certain things...

As for people being sheltered if they go straight from HS-College-Med school, sure they are, they've never had a 'real job'. End of story. They are the people who complain about how no one else should go into medicine; that it isn't worth the hassle, why? Because they have no idea what the 'real' world is like. You may have more initial dedication than I have, but I have way more experience knowing what I don't want to do, and knowing how tough it is to actually make it through job interviews, paying bills etc...

 

[DrMidlife]

Nontrads are already offered less aid on average.

Speculative rumor. Cite your sources...there are none? Didn't think so.

Pretty sure the pool of admitted nontrad students is already more heavily narrowed down because it is harder to match ECs/MCATs of trads with nontrads background.

This makes no sense at all. Where are you getting the idea that MCAT scores are subjective? The MCAT is the great equalizer.

If a nontrad takes up a seat of a trad it is probably because a nontrad is not just slightly more capable than a trad if he/she managed to produce a more appealing profile. Trads have it a lot easier and ON AVERAGE have much more resources extended to them from parents/etc. Feel free to argue but I would bet average trad comes from a waaay wealthier, more educated family than a nontrad.

More speculative garbage. What is this line of thinking doing for you? Are you looking for a pre-emptive excuse if you don't get in? Are you confusing "nontrad" with "low GPA"?

If you line up the over-40 female roster that frequents this forum, and there have been about a dozen of us, you'll find that we have nearly nothing in common but age. You've got 4.0/40's, 3.0/30's, rich women, poor women, women with kids in college, women with newborns, women with JDs, women who never worked outside the home, women who will bore you to tears, etc. Saying that age has anything to do with why my demographic gets into med school or doesn't is nonsensical.

 

[startoverat40]

as there's a 41yr old starting with us.

That'll be me at my school

 

[LoLCareerGoals]

Speculative rumor. Cite your sources...there are none? Didn't think so.

Nontrads work longer, have more savings, thus qualify for less need based aid?
I don't have sources and I am fine with dismissing it as a speculative rumor.

This makes no sense at all. Where are you getting the idea that MCAT scores are subjective? The MCAT is the great equalizer.

Didn't say it was subjective. Average trad lives and breathes chemistry/bio/physics and has no other responsibilities. It is fresh in his/her head, while nontrad often has a job, goes to school part time and is spread more thin. Average trad also has better connectivity to professors to do research for them as some independent study, much harder to do the same as part timer that professors do not see as often/know as well.

More speculative garbage. What is this line of thinking doing for you? Are you looking for a pre-emptive excuse if you don't get in? Are you confusing "nontrad" with "low GPA"?

Oh wow. This is coming from a 40 year old woman? This is some pre-allo forum stuff here. I suppose i should create a profile to show off my premed e-pean size so others can see how big it is.

 

[jl lin]

We don't live in a country where those who benefit from a public investment in medical education are held accountable. In other countries, that investment is secured by public service for all who receive it. No, in the US, we are free to take our publicly funded education and open a botox clinic. We can quit medicine to do a blog. We can run a practice that takes no Medicare or Medicaid patients. We can go work for Oprah. We can go work for big pharm or do Hydroxycut commercials. We're free to do as we like.

My point is that you need a better metric for the public value of a medical education than the likelihood of many years in practice, because that's not specific to age at matriculation.

Please continue, though. Soon you'll find that allowing women to be doctors, when years of productive practice are lost to childbearing, also seems an inappropriate use of public resources. Good luck with that one.

Best of luck to you.

 

[NightGod]

Didn't say it was subjective. Average trad lives and breathes chemistry/bio/physics and has no other responsibilities. It is fresh in his/her head, while nontrad often has a job, goes to school part time and is spread more thin. Average trad also has better connectivity to professors to do research for them as some independent study, much harder to do the same as part timer that professors do not see as often/know as well.

Or you could argue it this way. Nontrads have more likely learned the fine art of balancing a heavy school load with other responsibilities in their lives-taking 18 CR, working full time, raising a couple teenagers, volunteering, being involved in school organizations and still pulling a 4.0 looks more impressive on paper than 14 CR and volunteering with a 10 HR/week research gig and a 4.0. Nontrads also tend to find it easier to interact with professors due to being in the same age group and having had experience raising a family, working a full-time job, balancing home/school, etc. Nontrads are also much more likely to have experience with interviewing skills and are likely to feel less intimidated by the interviewers due to being similar ages. They're also likely to have a larger base of life experiences to draw from when it comes time to talk about "what do you do with yourself besides attend class?"

 

[MedPR]

You guys read about that guy who graduated MD/PhD at 21 (started at age 12). If you're older than 12 when you start medical school, you are a complete failure.

 

[572776]

I've heard of someone who was starting med school at 58

 

[MedPR]

I've heard of someone who was starting med school at 58

Really? I think it'd be irresponsible for a medical school to start training someone at the age of 58. They'll not be able to practice until they're 63-64.. So maybe 10-12 years of service when someone younger and equally or better qualified could've had their spot.

Oh well.

 

[MT Headed]

You guys read about that guy who graduated MD/PhD at 21 (started at age 12). If you're older than 12 when you start medical school, you are a complete failure.

Took him NINE YEARS to get through medical school? What an idiot.

 

[MedPR]

Took him NINE YEARS to get through medical school? What an idiot.

Well to his credit it was a MD/PhD. Those normally take 7-8 years, right?

You're right though, most gunners are finishing MD programs in 2 years now.

 

[qwerty2012]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sho_Yano

Yes, I heard of him. Child prodigy.

 

[Water Top]

Really? I think it'd be irresponsible for a medical school to start training someone at the age of 58. They'll not be able to practice until they're 63-64.. So maybe 10-12 years of service when someone younger and equally or better qualified could've had their spot.

Oh well.

Surely you must be kidding.

 

[MedPR]

Surely you must be kidding.

No, I'm pretty serious. 58 is a lot different than 40-45.

 

[jl lin]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MedPR
"Really? I think it'd be irresponsible for a medical school to start training someone at the age of 58. They'll not be able to practice until they're 63-64.. So maybe 10-12 years of service when someone younger and equally or better qualified could've had their spot.

Oh well."

I disagree. He or she would be able to practice at 62. It is after medical school--in residency that practice really begins. True, it is learning mode-=-but it is still very much practice\ing medicine--only under guidance and support. (Some more senior residents, fellows, and attendings are more supportive and use more guidance than others. One thing I have learned in my front row seat and also in direct interaction in healthcare--some people are good at mentoring, guiding, directing, and leading, and just teaching in general, and others are not!. And sometimes it's just an attitude of crap running downhill. It's sad when that happens. It actually brings the tone down all the way around in the particular area.

But of course my point is that you are indeed practicing medicine in residency--for low wages--nonetheless, it is still practicing medicine--and the level of responsibility increases with each year after PGY-1.

Most people are still working at 62 and up. People are not going to be able to retire at 65 anymore. And I'm not all that impressed with retirement, unless someone has a plan that involves some kind of long-term contribution, interaction, and helpfulness to others. People need to feel and be useful or they waste away and die--usually sooner than later.

I know a physician that retired at 58, took off for about five year or so, and he has recently returned to practice. He found out that retirement wasn't all that it was cracked up to be.

 

[jl lin]

No, I'm pretty serious. 58 is a lot different than 40-45.

No. In reality, that all depends on the individual. There is no place for ageism in medicine. The bias is bogus. It may not seem that way when you consider certain folks at 35, 45, or 55; but that is why you have to look at the whole person on a individual level and see if he or she fits the basic requirements needed for the rigors or medical school and medicine. Some folks at 20 or 30 have what it takes, and some don't. You have to look at the individual applicant.

And while general quantitative analysis in medicine looks at various things that include age, the wisest physicians look at the individual. Public health approaches are one thing. Everyday practice is another. And still, to some degree, in public health you look at individuals. Demographics have to be put in place with the whole picture. You miss that, and you have missed the boat in practicing IMHO.

Its a bit of an irksome topic; b/c it separates out people for things they cannot control--dates of birth----and in doing so, it rejects that in fact, for the particular person/candidate, it may not a real or legitimate issue--it may not affect the person's practice.

New medical schools are opening up all the time. The seats need to go those candidates that meet the essential requirements for becoming physicians, period. No one is stealing anything from anyone else. Plenty of folks drop out of medicine well before retirement--especially those that find out what a pain in the butt it can be.
The real issue is getting physicians to areas that are not nearly as densely populated by other physicians. These places need docs, and they could care less if one is more long in the touch than another.

No one knows what life is going to bring to them. And what is also true is the fact that in the absence of some kind of premature death--car accident for example--we will all get old--we are all aging. What will your perspective be when you are 40, 50, or 60? You may find that it might very well change.

If you are stuck in this kind of bias and ageism, do the right thing and avoid being a part of adcom committees or having some influence over them in some way. Your bias is highly problematic and far from objective, or even fair or beneficial for that matter.

I wish you well. This is just one lowly person's two cents.

 

[NightGod]

These places need docs, and they could care less if one is more long in the touch than another.

I dunno, I think most places would be pretty concerned if the doc was too long in the touch

 

[jl lin]

I dunno, I think most places would be pretty concerned if the doc was too long in the touch

Yea. . . LOL screwed that up. . .meant long in the tooth. Hope it isn't early typo dementia.

 

[Oldermom]

I started med school at 52.

You are going to be my inspiration! I'm 48 but I have to get my bachelors done. I figure 3 years to get all the prereq's done. I took biology and college math but it was over 10 years ago so I'll do them again, not to mention it will help me to get back into the groove of college life.

 

[Oldermom]

Here I am, and here is my story. Although it isn't too interesting overall.

I am currently 48. I became a mom at age 42. My pregnancy was considered high risk but I got through with little complications. My daughter was born by a c- section 2 weeks early. She weighed 7 pounds so she was not small. She is now 6 and this fall will be going to school full time.

I have had a bunch of jobs throughout my life, including working as a nanny, at UPS, and a home for severely handicapped kids. I have always had a fascination with medicine and anything medical.

I went to college right out of high school but at the time preferred to party and have fun more than studying. About 10 years ago I took a few classes at a local university and did very well, but I left my job and loss the reimbursement benefit.

Now I am at a cross roads since the past 10 years I have not worked outside the home and loath getting a job to just make money. I want to go back to school finish my degree and possibly go to medical school or a graduate program that is medical related, like the Anesthesia Assistant Masters degree.

I do not think I am too old, and I have maturity and drive to finish anything I undertake.

Thanks for reading this I hope others will help me to make the right decisions.

 

[qwerty2012]

Here I am, and here is my story. Although it isn't too interesting overall.

I am currently 48. I became a mom at age 42. My pregnancy was considered high risk but I got through with little complications. My daughter was born by a c- section 2 weeks early. She weighed 7 pounds so she was not small. She is now 6 and this fall will be going to school full time.

I have had a bunch of jobs throughout my life, including working as a nanny, at UPS, and a home for severely handicapped kids. I have always had a fascination with medicine and anything medical.

I went to college right out of high school but at the time preferred to party and have fun more than studying. About 10 years ago I took a few classes at a local university and did very well, but I left my job and loss the reimbursement benefit.

Now I am at a cross roads since the past 10 years I have not worked outside the home and loath getting a job to just make money. I want to go back to school finish my degree and possibly go to medical school or a graduate program that is medical related, like the Anesthesia Assistant Masters degree.

I do not think I am too old, and I have maturity and drive to finish anything I undertake.

Thanks for reading this I hope others will help me to make the right decisions.

Never too old to learn.
ma'am

 

[Prncssbuttercup]

You are going to be my inspiration! I'm 48 but I have to get my bachelors done. I figure 3 years to get all the prereq's done. I took biology and college math but it was over 10 years ago so I'll do them again, not to mention it will help me to get back into the groove of college life.

If you have some of the pre-reqs taken, you don't HAVE to take them again. I didn't retake any of mine and it's been 15+yrs for most of them

 

[Helen Wheels]

No, I'm pretty serious. 58 is a lot different than 40-45.

I would never want to say to someone, "you're to old to go to med school" because it really would depend on the individual, their personal health and stamina. I have to admit, though, from a purely physical standpoint, I am mighty glad I am doing this at 40 and not 58!

I do think, from a purely financial point of view, it doesn't make sense to go to medical school after you get much above 40. I am saying this from a purely numbers point of view because you would never be able to pay off your student loans before you die. You'd be saddled with those payments until you went into the grave.

 

[NightGod]

If you have some of the pre-reqs taken, you don't HAVE to take them again. I didn't retake any of mine and it's been 15+yrs for most of them

That depends on the school. There's a thread floating around here that lists the schools that have absolute cut-offs on how old of a class they will accept.