Medical student graduates at age 61

[Goro]

*ahem*


N Engl J Med. 1999 Nov 4;341(19):1426-31.
A comparison of osteopathic spinal manipulation with standard care for patients with low back pain.
Andersson GB1, Lucente T, Davis AM, Kappler RE, Lipton JA, Leurgans S.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 Aug 30;15:286. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-286.
Osteopathic manipulative treatment for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Franke H, Franke JD, Fryer G1.




Man Ther. 2014 Dec;19(6):541-8. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2014.05.012. Epub 2014 Jun 5.
Clinical response and relapse in patients with chronic low back pain following osteopathic manual treatment: results from the OSTEOPATHIC Trial.
Licciardone JC1, Aryal S2.

Harv Womens Health Watch. 2013 Jun;20(10):8.
Hands-on treatment helps low back pain.
[No authors listed]

I won't.

There is absolutely no quality evidence that osteopathic manipulation is effective for musculoskeletal pain.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DepressedEngineer]

This article fascinates me for other reasons. The fact that an aging man went through medical school and had the ability to learn and memorize all that information at his age is intriguing. This truly shows the plasticity of our brains. It is amazing really. It must have been 10X harder for him than the other students due to his aging brain....

 

[PharmHopefulLonghorn2015]

I am very impressed with this man's accomplishments.

 

[jl lin]

This article fascinates me for other reasons. The fact that an aging man went through medical school and had the ability to learn and memorize all that information at his age is intriguing. This truly shows the plasticity of our brains. It is amazing really. It must have been 10X harder for him than the other students due to his aging brain....

I agree, but "aging" man? We're all aging...always. I certainly wouldn't call him an "aged" man.

Here's my point. The idea of aging = aged is socially/culturally built into our thinking. It's like those people, who were brought up a while ago, but are still calling African-Americans, "colored people." For me growing up, that term of influence was strange. And a good part of my family is from the south. We just didn't use that term. For me, it seemed stupid and disrespectful, and well, stupid. I've never seen a colorless person.

So, Our attitudes and biases about human development are dictated by cultural and social influences.

For influences that are biologically based, reproduction/procreation is the subconscious driving force. That's the nature part. But it doesn't negate the powerful socialized influences on our thinking.

Since ahility or desire to procreate has no influence on becoming a physician, we are left then with the mere socialized biases that group-thinking/influences perpetuate.

This is not rocket science. But it is interesting to see how people and groups are influenced.

 

[Nasrudin]

[QUOTE/] This article fascinates me for other reasons. The fact that an aging man went through medical school and had the ability to learn and memorize all that information at his age is intriguing. This truly shows the plasticity of our brains. It is amazing really. It must have been 10X harder for him than the other students due to his aging brain....[/QUOTE]

Yeah that's true. One of the internal benefits to ourselves as older trainees is that the brain continues to work and develop and make new connections as many of our cohorts' are starting to ease into repetitive routines. I saw a fascinating study one time that described the massive effect of routine work, like assembly line type stuff, has on increased rates of Alzheimer's and other types of dementia.

In fact, for the life arc in general, achieving and learning into later ages, I think, tends to make people more satisfied in life than the vague prize of our "golden years."

But yes....that doesn't mean you set better times in the obstacle course against your peers. Most often the opposite.

Re Jlin et al: In terms of aging and it's benefit. I don't think this has been established one way or the other for something like medicine. Objectively the performance appears to decrease. The rigors of training is also more difficult at later age in the same way that allnighters, binge drinking, and athletic events are more difficult to do and recover from. But are there other benefits? Idk. We're obviously benefiting from the assumption that it's better to have us around. Do we provide some sort of calmer temperamental catalyst? Is there some thing that we could point to in sociological/psychological research that say mixed age groups are more responsive to patient populations? idk. These are interesting questions.

Here's what's not true: the older you get the better doctor you'll be. That's a propagandistic ploy.

Some other interesting questions would be what type of experience lends itself to better clinical practice. It's frequently assumed here that my expansive self-deprecation and cynicism is some sort of defect. That can be rebutted by tales of massive success on wall street or a perfect body or a 5 minute mile. idk.

I tend to think transformative experience is the only worthwhile claim that correlates more with self-experimentation and fearlessness than it does with accomplishment and the mere plodding of more years of life.

For instance, if you've never dosed your brain with massive amounts of psilocybin in ritual, healing context then from my point of view your inexperienced and your empathy for the possibilities of human consciousness is infantile. If you've never practiced deliberately trying to silence the noise of thoughts that the mind generates constantly from it's primordial subconscious soup, then you haven't started working on your human white belt with age as a nonfactor.

I have no data to support this directly except by means of my own experimentation and intuitions. Although there is research starting to surface that points in this direction.

For right now, we have the collective unconscious of the baby boomer generation that has created the modern university system, to work with. Nobody knows if the assumptions of inclusion of us older candidates is a good thing or a bad thing. We know only that the cultural software in wide circulation has made this possible for us.

Keep in mind that my prodding the assumption will make no difference to your candidacy as an applicant. And that I assault my own ego as I do yours. A practice I've found useful for not overestimating my own importance.

 

[Mad Jack]

I agree, but "aging" man? We're all aging...always. I certainly wouldn't call him an "aged" man.

Here's my point. The idea of aging = aged is socially/culturally built into our thinking. It's like those people, who were brought up a while ago, but are still calling African-Americans, "colored people." For me growing up, that term of influence was strange. And a good part of my family is from the south. We just didn't use that term. For me, it seemed stupid and disrespectful, and well, stupid. I've never seen a colorless person.

So, Our attitudes and biases about human development are dictated by cultural and social influences.

For influences that are biologically based, reproduction/procreation is the subconscious driving force. That's the nature part. But it doesn't negate the powerful socialized influences on our thinking.

Since ahility or desire to procreate has no influence on becoming a physician, we are left then with the mere socialized biases that group-thinking/influences perpetuate.

This is not rocket science. But it is interesting to see how people and groups are influenced.

Your ability to absorb large quantities of information declines rapidly after middle age. Even basic functions, such as learning traffic routes, decline incrementally as we age, and substantially so after 60. This isn't conjecture- it's a fairly well researched area in regard to normal brain development with age.

 

[jl lin]

Your ability to absorb large quantities of information declines rapidly after middle age. Even basic functions, such as learning traffic routes, decline incrementally as we age, and substantially so after 60. This isn't conjecture- it's a fairly well researched area in regard to normal brain development with age.

Clearly that blanket statement is incomplete. More of the negative affects of aging occur related to varying controllable and uncontrollable mechanisms. So, the blanket statement is weak.

Here's why:

http://www.lef.org/Protocols/Neurological/Age-Related-Cognitive-Decline/Page-01

Even in the following study by Salthouse, note the following:

[What is not yet known is whether these quantitatively different age trends reflect changes in the same set of influences, or the operation of qualitatively different types of influences. However, what does appear clear is that several different types of results converge on the conclusion that age-related cognitive decline begins relatively early in adulthood, and certainly before age 60 in healthy educated adults.]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2683339/

At any rate, it seems then that health and wellness and genetic factors have much to do with influencing physical and mental aging.

What's more, if your generalization were of any substantial truth in terms of effectiveness, millions of physicians, nurses, teachers, scientists, etc., wouldn't be able to aptly perform near or around this age--and apparently their performance would have certainly begun to drop even earlier.

It would seem that even for the 20 somethings, cognitive decline is an issue. And this supports what I said earlier,"We're all aging...always."
It would seem that the rate and affect of aging varies amongst people and would be most affected by individual health and wellness and genetics.

LOL, the age-old question about aging. . .LOL. . .more influenced by biases than anything else.
But of course some people really do believe that the "Aryan" race is the "superior race."

 

[jl lin]

[QUOTE/] This article fascinates me for other reasons. The fact that an aging man went through medical school and had the ability to learn and memorize all that information at his age is intriguing. This truly shows the plasticity of our brains. It is amazing really. It must have been 10X harder for him than the other students due to his aging brain....

Yeah that's true. One of the internal benefits to ourselves as older trainees is that the brain continues to work and develop and make new connections as many of our cohorts' are starting to ease into repetitive routines. I saw a fascinating study one time that described the massive effect of routine work, like assembly line type stuff, has on increased rates of Alzheimer's and other types of dementia.

In fact, for the life arc in general, achieving and learning into later ages, I think, tends to make people more satisfied in life than the vague prize of our "golden years."

But yes....that doesn't mean you set better times in the obstacle course against your peers. Most often the opposite.

Re Jlin et al: In terms of aging and it's benefit. I don't think this has been established one way or the other for something like medicine. Objectively the performance appears to decrease. The rigors of training is also more difficult at later age in the same way that allnighters, binge drinking, and athletic events are more difficult to do and recover from. But are there other benefits? Idk. We're obviously benefiting from the assumption that it's better to have us around. Do we provide some sort of calmer temperamental catalyst? Is there some thing that we could point to in sociological/psychological research that say mixed age groups are more responsive to patient populations? idk. These are interesting questions.

Here's what's not true: the older you get the better doctor you'll be. That's a propagandistic ploy.

Some other interesting questions would be what type of experience lends itself to better clinical practice. It's frequently assumed here that my expansive self-deprecation and cynicism is some sort of defect. That can be rebutted by tales of massive success on wall street or a perfect body or a 5 minute mile. idk.

I tend to think transformative experience is the only worthwhile claim that correlates more with self-experimentation and fearlessness than it does with accomplishment and the mere plodding of more years of life.

For instance, if you've never dosed your brain with massive amounts of psilocybin in ritual, healing context then from my point of view your inexperienced and your empathy for the possibilities of human consciousness is infantile. If you've never practiced deliberately trying to silence the noise of thoughts that the mind generates constantly from it's primordial subconscious soup, then you haven't started working on your human white belt with age as a nonfactor.

I have no data to support this directly except by means of my own experimentation and intuitions. Although there is research starting to surface that points in this direction.

For right now, we have the collective unconscious of the baby boomer generation that has created the modern university system, to work with. Nobody knows if the assumptions of inclusion of us older candidates is a good thing or a bad thing. We know only that the cultural software in wide circulation has made this possible for us.

Keep in mind that my prodding the assumption will make no difference to your candidacy as an applicant. And that I assault my own ego as I do yours. A practice I've found useful for not overestimating my own importance.

I disagree somewhat in that having worked with a number of physicians and nurses and others in HC, why yes, the older they got, they better they got. Why? More experience OVER TIME.
As to whether anyone will be a better physician or not based on either younger age or older age is a nonsensical idea. There is no way to clearly and fairly establish whether one group versus another will necessarily be better 5 years after training or not. This has not been studied, and it would be a waste of money to even initiate such a study, given the many other things we need to focus on right now. And then you would have to separate out the "X" factor (X factor being the very things that can be measured to demonstrate par excellence in physicians, regardless of age or other such demographics).

BTW, my candidacy will be whatever it will be. It has not bearing on my position or possible position. I don't think like that, and I don't live my life like that. I do what I feel led to do, and then let the chips fall where they may.

But I have always taken a strong position against ageism--even as a fresh, young 20's RN.
Ageism is ageism is ageism, period.

 

[Nasrudin]

I disagree somewhat in that having worked with a number of physicians and nurses and others in HC, why yes, the older they got, they better they got. Why? More experience OVER TIME.
As to whether anyone will be a better physician or not based on either younger age or older age is a nonsensical idea. There is no way to clearly and fairly establish whether one group versus another will necessarily be better 5 years after training or not. This has not been studied, and it would be a waste of money to even initiate such a study, given the many other things we need to focus on right now. And then you would have to separate out the "X" factor (X factor being the very things that can be measured to demonstrate par excellence in physicians, regardless of age or other such demographics).

BTW, my candidacy will be whatever it will be. It has not bearing on my position or possible position. I don't think like that, and I don't live my life like that. I do what I feel led to do, and then let the chips fall where they may.

But I have always taken a strong position against ageism--even as a fresh, young 20's RN.
Ageism is ageism is ageism, period.

The issue in question pertains to what the older premed offers not the more experienced clinican compared to the less experienced one. If talent and skill and ability never plateaus then that actually rules against our cause--the one we have in common as current or former older applicants.

I don't think it's an inscrutable phenomenon on what an older applicant might offer. It's not a clean and tidy answer but it could at least be better addressed even speculatively than the dogma this forum adheres to unthinkingly--which is simply that of course older is better because we f'n say so sonnies.

 

[jl lin]

The issue in question pertains to what the older premed offers not the more experienced clinican compared to the less experienced one. If talent and skill and ability never plateaus then that actually rules against our cause--the one we have in common as current or former older applicants.

I don't think it's an inscrutable phenomenon on what an older applicant might offer. It's not a clean and tidy answer but it could at least be better addressed even speculatively than the dogma this forum adheres to unthinkingly--which is simply that of course older is better because we f'n say so sonnies.

LOL. True.

We are who, what, and where we are. Whatever it is, it is. What we do with it and how we make it count, regardless, that's key.
I'm thankful to even be here. I remember telling people when I was in my 20's how I didn't think I'd make it all the way to 30. LOL. My friends had a "Ha! So You Made It After all" party for me. LOL. So much relativity. . .

 

[DepressedEngineer]

I agree, but "aging" man? We're all aging...always. I certainly wouldn't call him an "aged" man.

Here's my point. The idea of aging = aged is socially/culturally built into our thinking. It's like those people, who were brought up a while ago, but are still calling African-Americans, "colored people." For me growing up, that term of influence was strange. And a good part of my family is from the south. We just didn't use that term. For me, it seemed stupid and disrespectful, and well, stupid. I've never seen a colorless person.

So, Our attitudes and biases about human development are dictated by cultural and social influences.

For influences that are biologically based, reproduction/procreation is the subconscious driving force. That's the nature part. But it doesn't negate the powerful socialized influences on our thinking.

Since ability or desire to procreate has no influence on becoming a physician, we are left then with the mere socialized biases that group-thinking/influences perpetuate.

This is not rocket science. But it is interesting to see how people and groups are influenced.

Although I agree with your assumptions about environmental and societal influences, I would have to disagree with you. Cognitive decline is a proven fact . The more you age the slower your cognitive and physical functions get.
Read this from the article :
"The first semester was a challenge," Dr. Nicodemus said. "There are a lot of fundamental medical school subjects, anatomy, biochemistry and genetics, that draw heavily on the presumption that you've just come out of school. My biochemistry was done 35 years earlier."

He found that he had to read material three times to retain it, and with the massive amount of information to learn, he had to focus on only the most important to keep pace."

Also let us not forget that there is a huge bias that exists. This Dr. Nicodemus is not a complete non traditional in a way....

Let me explain... He was a chemical engineer. He studied the sciences extensively during his youth. His brain has been primed for logic and science. His learning process thus should be faster in medical school compared to another 60 year old who did NOT go down the science route....Think of a drama teacher going to medical school at 60....It would be 599 times harder for a person like that...

I believe a younger individual would only read material a couple times and remember minute details...

Nice points though...It would be interesting to conduct a study where no bias from society or environment exist and see exactly how much it does influence learning...I agree with you it must have a role....

 

[jl lin]

Please consider re-reading post 107.

 

[jl lin]

Please consider re-reading post 107.

 

[premedbrah]

But; is he still alive?

 

[Dullhead]

But; is he still alive?

Looks like he did a OMM residency at MSU. He is now in California doing spine manipulations...
www.montereyclinic.com/about-dr.-nicodemus.html

Website is still up. Can't say for sure, but seems he's around.