Anti-URM sentiment on preAllo

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
"Earned by what?" You really can think of nothing besides stats or race?And no, the only topic at hand is not race.
Saying "so this may be less relevant to you" and "much less competitive" sounds kinda snarky.

Your invitation to read up on recent events is a bit late, i've already been to that party. I am not going to a D.O. school so don't see how my ego would have been hurt by that. Feel free to make more assumptions.:whistle:

Members don't see this ad.
 
"Earned by what?" You really can think of nothing besides stats or race?And no, the only topic at hand is not race.
Saying "so this may be less relevant to you" and "much less competitive" sounds kinda snarky.

Your invitation to read up on recent events is a bit late, i've already been to that party. I am not going to a D.O. school so don't see how my ego would have been hurt by that. Feel free to make more assumptions.:whistle:
Well you fooled me vis-a-vis your being read up on SCUS events and not having your ego hurt. (Well, that's not true- I kinda knew you were trying to bait me with the DO stuff; never assumed you were DO nor do I care). And yes, I can think of other things besides stats and race. They just happen to be the things mentioned in the post as well as the main determinators of admission. Honestly I'm not sure if you should be embarassed by your nonsensical posts or I should be for giving them a response.
 
Last edited:
Your attempts to augment the illusion of your intelligence by feeble attempts at lambasting others via the contrived use of SAT words could not fool even the most emotional of juveniles. Your arguments vis-a-vis the topics at hand are in fact nonsensical verging on utterly childish. Considering we each feel the same regarding what the other writes, surely one of us must be in the wrong. In lieu of an arbiter, I would point out that where I have shown myself capable of understanding and peacefully disagreeing with another (Pg.5), you have shown only ire and have routinely misinterpreted and/or misrepresented the views of myself and others. In light of the history of this thread I would say that you are guilty of nonsensical posts and I should in fact be embarrassed for entertaining such illogical comments.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Same holds true for Harvard and NYU.

Keep in mind that admissions is not about what you want; it's about that the school wants. Schools want a diverse class to mirror American medicine. Not VT medicine; not AL or MT medicine, but the whole country.

Race is birthed, not "earned," nor "meritorious." Nor is our Supreme Court "OK with it" per se. As usual, you're long on rhetoric and short on substance. I'm not going to go into the judicial nity grity, but someone so vocal about it should know the basics before stepping on the soapbox. To recap: just last year the Supreme Court upheld Michigan's AA ban for public universities. The year before they stopped short of striking down Texas's AA usage but had strong remarks against it and required it to be re-vetted by a circuit court of appeals for exclusionary effects. The clear recent precedent: AA is a state-by-state issue, with the supreme court voicing dissension but declining to interfere. (That said, the issue for them is public universities. I understand you work for a D.O. school- which are typically small, private and much less competitive. So this may be less relevant to you.)
 
Last edited:
Your attempts to augment the illusion of your intelligence by feeble attempts at lambasting others via the contrived use of SAT words could not fool even the most emotional of juveniles. Your arguments vis-a-vis the topics at hand are in fact nonsensical verging on utterly childish. Considering we each feel the same regarding what the other writes, surely one of us must be in the wrong. In lieu of an arbiter, I would point out that where I have shown myself capable of understanding and peacefully disagreeing with another (Pg.5), you have shown only ire and have routinely misinterpreted and/or misrepresented the views of myself and others. In light of the history of this thread I would say that you are guilty of nonsensical posts and I should in fact be embarrassed for entertaining such illogical comments.
Do you really believe I'm purposely using "SAT words"? Are you off set by words like 'lambast' and 'vis-a-vis' (I think these were perhaps the two "high school" vocab words)? If so, I can't help you with that. Parroting back all my supposed "SAT words" into 2 jumbled sentences makes me cringe for you. And in no way does your inflammatory language and condescending emjois in this thread qualify for the description "peaceful disagreeing"
 
Last edited:
When people like Jon Stewart make fun of peopl like bill oreilly they often can be successful by repeating what nonsense was said.;)
 
Do you really believe I'm purposely using "SAT words"? Are you off set by words like 'lambast' and 'vis-a-vis' (I think these were perhaps the two "high school" vocab words)? If so, I can't help you with that. Parroting back all my supposed "SAT words" into 2 jumbled sentences makes me cringe for you. And in no way does your inflammatory language and condescending emjois in this thread qualify for the description "peaceful disagreeing"!
Freemontie needs a chill pill!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
When people like Jon Stewart make fun of peopl like bill oreilly they often can be successful by repeating what nonsense was said.;)
Well, you flatter yourself- most people here are not inconvenienced by my grade-school word choice (or I should hope not).
Freemontie needs a chill pill!
Definitely, we should be chill. I come back because that poster regularly puts a smirk on my face. I promise I'm not hurt by his attempt to mock me/my high school-level vocab.
 
Last edited:
I nominate @freemontie for troll of the month.

Well done lad, well done. :thumbup::thumbup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I nominate @freemontie for troll of the month.
I get it- there's a competition and I'm the (name). But making a post just to name-call isn't productive or even clever. But if you want I can refer you to my 5-year old cousin to battle wits, he's going through his naughty word phase. Otherwise, keep it on topic or leave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I get it- there's a competition and I'm the (name). But making a post just to name-call isn't productive or even clever. But if you want I can refer you to my 5-year old cousin to battle wits, he's going through his naughty word phase. Otherwise, keep it on topic or leave.

Bro, you're amazing <3. I really hope you get into med school so that I can be your senior resident some day :) oh the lessons you will learn
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Bro, you're amazing <3. I really hope you get into med school so that I can be your senior resident some day :) oh the lessons you will learn
I would pay to watch that
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
I haven't read through the whole thread, so if this has been said.... it stands to be repeated again.

For many, the topic of Affirmative Action instantly bring to mind the idea of racial discrimination of some sorts (regardless of whom is at the positive receiving end). However, it is worth pointing out just who truly benefits (disproportionately) from AA policies: White Women.

http://ideas.time.com/2013/06/17/affirmative-action-has-helped-white-women-more-than-anyone/
http://www.ncsu.edu/project/oeo-training/aa/beneficiaries.htm
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-death-of-affirmative-action-part-i/44860

The idea that "minority" (for the sake of such policies) is limited to a racial context is BS. Call it what you want, but AA is absolutely not solely a race thing and the majority of it's beneficiaries don't represent the "race" you often complain about.
What the heck? Yes, I agree with the article, white women benefited from Affirmative Action tremendously because pre-1970s they were not even considered for many university seats or jobs. But in no way do white women benefit from affirmative action anywhere in the university setting today*- least of all the medical school. I can't help but think this is a (very) misguided attempt at a scapegoat.

*Edit: forgot about engineering and non-health science schools/programs.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm not name calling, I'd just think it would be funny to watch y'all fight
You're implicitly supporting the disrespectful and unproductive posts. If you want to do that then you shouldn't make self-aggrandizing sermons against such behavior in the exact same thread.
 
You're implicitly supporting the disrespectful and unproductive posts. If you want to do that then you shouldn't make self-aggrandizing sermons against such behavior in the exact same thread.
You must be a joy to be around. Zero sense of humor, don't take yourself so seriously no one else does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
You're implicitly supporting the disrespectful and unproductive posts. If you want to do that then you shouldn't make self-aggrandizing sermons against such behavior in the exact same thread.
You don't think I'm funny. It's okay, not everyone does
 
You must be a joy to be around. Zero sense of humor, don't take yourself so seriously no one else does.
When's the last time you had a legitimate thought about the thread topic vs. replying to attack my latest opinion or randomly calling me out? I get it: this is the underrepresented sub-forum. Everyone or almost everyone here will disagree with my very anti-AA stance. You hate it so much as to become obsessed with me. Get over me.
Can you use words that are actually not from outer space. Nobody is impressed that you can open up a dictionary and try to sound smart.
Not trying to make fun of you, but seriously:

self-aggrandizing: when a guy/girl says/does something to make them seem better than the rest.
sermon: typically that thing a pastor will say in church where he tells you to act like a good guy/girl.

By using those words I got to claim a "bad" motivation for her earlier post that advised us not to name-call, be disrespectful, etc. (to self-aggrandize) and then I got to make fun of it by comparing it to what a pastor would say, knowing that in this context she isn't really a pastor (sermon). Next time you hear someone just "trying to sound smart" consider that certain words can express our sentiments better than others. Sometimes those words may seem to be "from outer space" to a weaker English-language student. Are you a non-native speaker by any chance?
 
Last edited:
When's the last time you had a legitimate thought about the thread topic vs. replying to attack my latest opinion or randomly calling me out? I get it: this is the underrepresented sub-forum. Everyone or almost everyone here will disagree with my very anti-AA stance. You hate it so much as to become obsessed with me. Get over me.

Not trying to make fun of you, but seriously:

self-aggrandizing: when a guy/girl says/does something that makes them seem better than the rest.
sermon: typically that thing a pastor will say in church where he tells you to act like a good guy/girl.

By using those words I got to claim a "bad" motivation for her earlier post that advised us not to name-call, be disrespectful, etc. (to self-aggrandize) and then I got to make fun of it by comparing it to what a pastor would say, knowing that in this context she isn't really a pastor (sermon). Next time you hear someone just "trying to sound smart" consider that certain words can express our sentiments better than others. Sometimes those words may seem to be "from outer space" to a weaker English-language student. Are you a non-native speaker by any chance?
For the third time, there are people with stances different from the general consensus, that make legitimate posts and are given serious replies. All you have to do to see this is to look at people's conversations with posters like sb247. But of course this has been said before but you are convinced you are the lone keeper of wisdom and everyone disagreeing with you could not possibly understand a position like yours, even though we have. What it must be like to live within ones own thoughts.
Edit: For further clarification sb247 called AA morally repugnant and still managed to recieve respect. Why don't you freemontie?
 
For the third time, there are people with stances different from the general consensus, that make legitimate posts and are given serious replies. All you have to do to see this is to look at people's conversations with posters like sb247. But of course this has been said before but you are convinced you are the lone keeper of wisdom and everyone disagreeing with you could not possibly understand a position like yours, even though we have. What it must be like to live within ones own thoughts.
Edit: For further clarification sb247 called AA morally repugnant and still managed to recieve respect. Why don't you freemontie?
It takes 2 to have a flame war. We had this same convo in post #246. Now, the last topic-relevant post on this thread was mine- about white females and AA. Maybe write something topic-relevant vs. just an attack on me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Question dodged.
For further clarification sb247 called AA morally repugnant and still managed to recieve respect. Why don't you freemontie?
And it is not just me either.
 
Medicine probably is not for you, but maybe...
business-commerce-politician-question-public_relations-personnel-interviews-dcrn439_low.jpg
 
Question dodged.
For further clarification sb247 called AA morally repugnant and still managed to recieve respect. Why don't you freemontie?
Dude, I don't know why you are disrespecting or attacking me. Nobody on SDN should have to earn basic respect. So I don't have an answer for you. I'd rather you stick to the thread topics vs. trying to jab me with a fresh insult.
 
When's the last time you had a legitimate thought about the thread topic vs. replying to attack my latest opinion or randomly calling me out? I get it: this is the underrepresented sub-forum. Everyone or almost everyone here will disagree with my very anti-AA stance. You hate it so much as to become obsessed with me. Get over me.

Not trying to make fun of you, but seriously:

self-aggrandizing: when a guy/girl says/does something that makes them seem better than the rest.
sermon: typically that thing a pastor will say in church where he tells you to act like a good guy/girl.

By using those words I got to claim a "bad" motivation for her earlier post that advised us not to name-call, be disrespectful, etc. (to self-aggrandize) and then I got to make fun of it by comparing it to what a pastor would say, knowing that in this context she isn't really a pastor (sermon). Next time you hear someone just "trying to sound smart" consider that certain words can express our sentiments better than others. Sometimes those words may seem to be "from outer space" to a weaker English-language student. Are you a non-native speaker by any chance?
Are you.
 
Last edited:
Dude, I don't know why you are disrespecting or attacking me. Nobody on SDN should have to earn basic respect. So I don't have an answer for you. I'd rather you stick to the thread topics vs. trying to jab me with a fresh insult.
Respect for ideas is earned. People before me wrote many great things which you never properly responded to. Any argument with you will go nowhere until you can figure out why no one can disagree with you while respecting your ideas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The resentment probably stems from the fact that while yes there are some who because of their background had a disadvantage in generating the stats required to apply to medical school, most are actually kids who grew up in the exact same situation as most whites.

Middle-class minorities are reaping the benefits of lower thresholds for acceptance that was not designed for them. Two examples I know of personally:

1. Two students who knew each other from 2nd grade, grew up in the same suburban neighborhood both middle class. The white student was rejected from state school while the minority was let in with lesser stats.

2. My med school has a program specifically designed to give "disadvantaged" students a chance at acceptance through a post-bac. Many of the students who make it struggle the entire 4 years, do poorly on steps, and I'm only assuming make poor physicians. Some of these students have no business being in medical school.

Maybe it's just me, but I can see why there is a bit of resentment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The resentment probably stems from the fact that while yes there are some who because of their background had a disadvantage in generating the stats required to apply to medical school, most are actually kids who grew up in the exact same situation as most whites.

Middle-class minorities are reaping the benefits of lower thresholds for acceptance that was not designed for them. Two examples I know of personally:

1. Two students who knew each other from 2nd grade, grew up in the same suburban neighborhood both middle class. The white student was rejected from state school while the minority was let in with lesser stats.

2. My med school has a program specifically designed to give "disadvantaged" students a chance at acceptance through a post-bac. Many of the students who make it struggle the entire 4 years, do poorly on steps, and I'm only assuming make poor physicians. Some of these students have no business being in medical school.

Maybe it's just me, but I can see why there is a bit of resentment.
1. I am positive there were many more white kids with lesser stats at that state school than minorities. Many people are rejected from many schools every year with competitive stats, and a quick glance around your class would probably tell you that those with lesser stats are not all minorities. But for some reason lesser stats only matter where minorities are concerned. That example is not really evident of anything.
2. If by disadvantaged you mean economically I do not see any relevance in that example. If your quotes around disadvantaged means URM, then you would still need some statistics to show how poorly compared to the general population of the school.

Also, EVERYONE on this thread has acknowledged that there is a general advantage to being a URM during the admissions process so the first example you mentioned is a case everyone is familiar with. My justification for admissions policies is definitely not limited to the fact that there were also many non-URM's who would have gotten into that state school with lesser stats, but the fact that that kind of thing is always brought up while completely ignoring the obvious is concerning. If you do not like current admissions policies that is 100% OK, but targeting minorities with resentment considering the entire process can be unfair is indicative of more than an aversion to injustice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The OP seemed to wonder as to why there was an anti-URM sentiment among the over-represented. The answer is because all things equal a URM has an advantage in admissions because of something completely out of their control. The white person/asian person did not chose to be white/asian and does not reap the benefits of being over-represented in medicine. The black/hispanic person did not chose to be black/hispanic but does reap the benefit of being under-represented in medicine.

However you want to cut it, at the INDIVIDUAL level it is unfair. This is also coming from a URM who very well knows I am in medschool because of the URM advantage.
 
The OP seemed to wonder as to why there was an anti-URM sentiment among the over-represented. The answer is because all things equal a URM has an advantage in admissions because of something completely out of their control. The white person/asian person did not chose to be white/asian and does not reap the benefits of being over-represented in medicine. The black/hispanic person did not chose to be black/hispanic but does reap the benefit of being under-represented in medicine.

However you want to cut it, at the INDIVIDUAL level it is unfair. This is also coming from a URM who very well knows I am in medschool because of the URM advantage.
I know somebody (white), who fresh out of undegrad for business had a great job waiting for him because his parents set it up. His experiences, GPA, or whatever else did not matter. This happens all the time and no one minds that it happens all the time. But a small group of qualified (~3.0,24 generally) minorities accepted with lesser stats is an injustice that must be fought? People see a white guy in a powerful position and say "hardworker", see a black guy and say "affirmative action"(was said many times about the president even) regardless of whether or not they have worked hard. This type of double standard is everywhere and saying you are in school because of URM advantage continues it, I do not know what your application looked like but I got into medical school because of me. Maybe being a URM got me closer looks than if I had not been, but my application was good on its own, better than some and weaker than others. Admissions is unfair, everything is unfair, that is no justification for the anti-URM sentiment. I understand how it exists (ignorance) but it should not, and every instance of "a black guy took my seat" should be met with criticism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
WOW....the sad thing is that this is the future of our health professionals in America
 
I know somebody (white), who fresh out of undegrad for business had a great job waiting for him because his parents set it up. His experiences, GPA, or whatever else did not matter. This happens all the time and no one minds that it happens all the time. But a small group of qualified (~3.0,24 generally) minorities accepted with lesser stats is an injustice that must be fought? People see a white guy in a powerful position and say "hardworker", see a black guy and say "affirmative action"(was said many times about the president even) regardless of whether or not they have worked hard. This type of double standard is everywhere and saying you are in school because of URM advantage continues it, I do not know what your application looked like but I got into medical school because of me. Maybe being a URM got me closer looks than if I had not been, but my application was good on its own, better than some and weaker than others. Admissions is unfair, everything is unfair, that is no justification for the anti-URM sentiment. I understand how it exists (ignorance) but it should not, and every instance of "a black guy took my seat" should be met with criticism.

I understand where you're coming from but it's really not that complicated.

Just answer these two simple questions.

1. Do URM's get accepted at a higher rate than white/asians at a certain lower threshold of GPA/MCAT?

AAMC statistics will tell you that yes, yes they do. Essentially, if getting into medical school was a simple accumulation of 100 points.. URM's are gifted an arbitrary number of those points. A handicap or "advantage" if you will. I'm sure that there would be no problem with this if nobody had to lose because of this, but there are only a certain number of seats. A seat given because of the "advantage" is a seat taken from someone else.

2. Let's assume you had to run a 100m race for entry to medical school. 1 on 1. You're opponent was fast just like you are fast, but they start 20 m ahead of you. You lose. You go shake there hand without any feeling of animosity?

Now well you can say that being an URM means that figuratively "the runner is slower", life has been harder to the URM and had to do more. Basically they have weights on their feet. Well, I'm telling you that many, MANY, of these URM's do not have weights on their feet. Many in fact actually start from better positions than many of their "over-represented" counterparts, yet still gain the advantage based SOLELY on race/color of their skin. While this may be what the schools want, one can certainly understand the "anti-URM sentiment" as was originally posed by the OP.

As a future physician, if you can't understand the very basic emotion behind what the runner who lost was feeling well then.. medicine is going to be interesting for you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I understand where you're coming from but it's really not that complicated.

Just answer these two simple questions.

1. Do URM's get accepted at a higher rate than white/asians at a certain lower threshold of GPA/MCAT?

AAMC statistics will tell you that yes, yes they do. Essentially, if getting into medical school was a simple accumulation of 100 points.. URM's are gifted an arbitrary number of those points. A handicap or "advantage" if you will. I'm sure that there would be no problem with this if nobody had to lose because of this, but there are only a certain number of seats. A seat given because of the "advantage" is a seat taken from someone else.

2. Let's assume you had to run a 100m race for entry to medical school. 1 on 1. You're opponent was fast just like you are fast, but they start 20 m ahead of you. You lose. You go shake there hand without any feeling of animosity?

Now well you can say that being an URM means that figuratively "the runner is slower", life has been harder to the URM and had to do more. Basically they have weights on their feet. Well, I'm telling you that many, MANY, of these URM's do not have weights on their feet. Many in fact actually start from better positions than many of their "over-represented" counterparts, yet still gain the advantage based SOLELY on race/color of their skin. While this may be what the schools want, one can certainly understand the "anti-URM sentiment" as was originally posed by the OP.

As a future physician, if you can't understand the very basic emotion behind what the runner who lost was feeling well then.. medicine is going to be interesting for you.
If you want to use a runner analogy, you really think everyone starts at the same place except for in medical school admissions? Absolutely not. If anything everyone starts anywhere except at the start line.
Edit: And there have been more arguments in favor of current admissions policies that were not URM's being born disadvantaged. You are giving simple answers to what you think are simple questions.
 
If you want to use a runner analogy, you really think everyone starts at the same place except for in medical school admissions? Absolutely not. If anything everyone starts anywhere except at the start line.
AA in its current form might be considered more fair then if all white/asians were privileged like your rich business school friend and all URMs were poor and disadvantaged.

In actuality though- I wouldn't even agree with it then. Besides race, the most important factor in med school admissions is stats, right? GPA and MCAT. What's by far the biggest factor in getting high GPA/MCATs? Hard work. I believe anyone can work hard. Thus the starting point in that race- the med school admissions race- is fairly equal before adding AA into the mix. The only exception are the people - URM or not- who can't afford college at all.
 
AA in its current form might be considered more fair then if all white/asians were privileged like your rich business school friend and all URMs were poor and disadvantaged.

In actuality though- I wouldn't even agree with it then. Besides race, the most important factor in med school admissions is stats, right? GPA and MCAT. What's by far the biggest factor in getting high GPA/MCATs? Hard work. I believe anyone can work hard. Thus the starting point in that race- the med school admissions race- is fairly equal before adding AA into the mix. The only exception are the people - URM or not- who can't afford college at all.

I would agree that admitting someone based on the idea that their race has disadvantaged them is flawed. But you forgot that medical school admissions is not the same thing as AA, if a school wants to increase diversity because they feel it will improve the quality of physicians that is different from admitting them because they may have had a harder time growing up. Medical schools look at having people from diverse backgrounds(again not just race) as a good enough reason to accept them regardless of lower stats ,if you feel that increasing diversity is not something medical schools should consider then that is fine.
Edit: Either way, looking at someone and thinking "you got in only because you're Hispanic" as the OP wrote, is inexcusable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I am not URM, and I wish more URM were at my school. It is absolutely true that a URM status will help you get into medical school, and yes it can be an unfair advantage. People do not like that at all. It is up to the school to make those decisions though, and I am OK with it because I like diversity at the school. Also, caucasian/asian populations are generally not as interested in treating the underserved (just my observation, not sure if this is true).

At the end of the day if you work hard and know your stuff, I don't think anyone cares.
 
I really don't get why so many people don't seem to understand the concept of privilege.

Le sigh

A first generation Asian whose parents earn minimum wage has to score 10 points higher on the MCAT than a black applicant whose parents earn 6 figures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
A first generation Asian whose parents earn minimum wage has to score 10 points higher on the MCAT than a black applicant whose parents earn 6 figures.
I would like to see your sources for these first generation Asians who need to have 10 points higher on the MCAT than black kids whose parents make six figures because that would be quite a leap if you were basing that statement on MCAT-race data from AAMC. And uhh, way to tie that in with the comment you replied to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
A first generation Asian whose parents earn minimum wage has to score 10 points higher on the MCAT than a black applicant whose parents earn 6 figures.
That doesn't have a damn thing to do with what I wrote.

Also i don't understand the fascination with SES, having money doesn't make you immune to the effects of racism
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Higher scores don't equal great physician. After a certain point, GPA and MCAT scores are not going to necessarily make someone do better in med school. I think that's one thing people fail to understand about the application and selection process. So if a school sees someone who meets their cutoff and they have attributes that can add to their class or will make them a more effective physician in the long run, admissions will take notice. Also, UG scores are not a be all end all. Some people run into difficulties or don't know how to study properly and go to med school and kick butt. Med school is not that hard, it isn't rocket science, and undergraduate grades and MCAT scores are not the most important thing to look for in future physicians. It's funny how the same people who get all twisted out of shape about URMs getting in with lower scores will be the first to say that basic science knowledge is pointless, low yield, not important, etc....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Higher scores don't equal great physician. After a certain point, GPA and MCAT scores are not going to necessarily make someone do better in med school. I think that's one thing people fail to understand about the application and selection process. So if a school sees someone who meets their cutoff and they have attributes that can add to their class or will make them a more effective physician in the long run, admissions will take notice. Also, UG scores are not a be all end all. Some people run into difficulties or don't know how to study properly and go to med school and kick butt. Med school is not that hard, it isn't rocket science, and undergraduate grades and MCAT scores are not the most important thing to look for in future physicians. It's funny how the same people who get all twisted out of shape about URMs getting in with lower scores will be the first to say that basic science knowledge is pointless, low yield, not important, etc....
I don't think anyone is arguing whether or not black applicants can survive in medical schools. Their drop out rates are higher than whites and asians but it's still very low. I (and those that agreed with me) are mostly talking about it as an equality issue. Have black scholarships, tutoring, outreach projects- special assistance in a myraid of ways - but AA is essentially giving up on even trying.

PS- And that's a very controversial position you are taking- that skin pigment is more important than academic ability (scores, grades, whatever) in the competency of doctors.
 
I don't think anyone is arguing whether or not black applicants can survive in medical schools. Their drop out rates are higher than whites and asians but it's still very low. I (and those that agreed with me) are mostly talking about it as an equality issue. Have black scholarships, tutoring, outreach projects- special assistance in a myraid of ways - but AA is essentially giving up on even trying.

PS- And that's a very controversial position you are taking- that skin pigment is more important than academic ability (scores, grades, whatever) in the competency of doctors.
You're the man freemontie! Your arguments are spot on and yet all these liberals still continue to fight and spout gibberish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
You're the man freemontie! Your arguments are spot on and yet all these liberals still continue to fight and spout gibberish.
Had to like this.Of all of the times I have written " lol" I have laughed maybe 5 times, now it is six. If you had not posted something earlier in the thread I would have definitely thought this was a joke lol. :lol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
You're the man freemontie! Your arguments are spot on and yet all these liberals still continue to fight and spout gibberish.
Thanks. But I actually consider myself liberal in the sense that I disagree with affirmative action from an anti-discrimination point of view ('liberal' has positive connotations- shouldn't let it get co-opted by defacto anti-white/asian racists)

I would ideally like things like race and gender to have ZERO relevace on admissions- even if we end up with "too many" asians or females.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks for explaining adversity, and thanks for clarifying that discrimination is over; I was worried for a bit there with all that unarmed black people shootings lately by the police. Phew! Why didn't anyone update us on this racism being a thing of the past deal? Guess it was just a big misunderstanding.

I'm going to call of my black friends and tell them it's all over, I know we're going to have a potluck for this. In the future, I hope I'm your senior resident so we can discuss this further — or for some of you I'm on your interview panel.

Thanks, greatly appreciated! Glad racism is over, next let's just take on world peace?

Lollipops for everyone!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 21 users
this never changes on SDN, so sad. We are talking about such few applicants/accepted - comparing let's say white to AA - white about 11K versus AA 1K
schools have the onus to attempt to diversify their classes in accordance to the US population, they can do this in any way they choose and if that means accepting someone that is a URM with lesser stats than an Asian that is their business. Also, do not assume all URM's are "lesser" by numbers as many have outstanding stats.

When in doubt read this


https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education_Facts and Figures 2012.pdf
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 users
At the end of the day, medical practice is about just that, the practice. We need more doctors from every ethnicity in order to ensure the patient population is all catered for. We have black, Asian, Native Americans etc who all trust people their own race more than someone of a different race or ethnicity. This might be due to the human tendency to navigate towards the familiar or it might even be due to past injustices that might have been done to their races. That being said, we need doctors who can take care of them too. So maybe someone somewhere does not like this idea. Tough luck really. Patients are the ones who matter, and they need doctors they can trust. Until the day comes when equality is really and truly realized, there is a need to give allowance to URM's in medical school. You might even argue that the patients would be better taken care of by someone who got better stats and deserved the place more n school, but to be honest, any medical care is better than no medical care...and better stats don't necessarily make one a better doctor.

I know this might poke the bear a little as well, but someone in a bad school with poor access to resources who gets a B is just as smart as someone who went to a top school with an abundance of resources who gets an A (sometimes better). It takes an insane amount of discipline to attain good grades without the resources one needs and an inhuman amount of smarts too. People like that need to have a little bit of slack cut for them because they tried just as hard, if not harder, to get where they got. They need a chance to prove themselves worthy.

Equality is not yet a reality...and while the world works to get there, people who don't have great opportunity in life also need a chance. Of course not everyone understands this, but what are we gonna do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Top