Should looks play a role in medical school admissions?

[sourgrapes]

I'm an MS1 at a USMD school and I must say there are a lot of fuglies in my class. Should medical schools take looks into consideration when admitting applicants? Med students have a reputation for being homely and I have to say that reputation is pretty accurate based on my class.

After taking social psychology, you learn that looks can get you further in all aspects of life. But are they taking you far enough when it comes to med apps?

People will listen more to their handsome/pretty doctors and are more likely to follow through. No one will listen to fat doctor telling them to lose weight!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mediterranean]

I'm an MS1 at a USMD school and I must say there are a lot of fuglies in my class. Should medical schools take looks into consideration when admitting applicants? Med students have a reputation for being homely and I have to say that reputation is pretty accurate based on my class.

After taking social psychology, you learn that looks can get you further in all aspects of life. But are they taking you far enough when it comes to med apps?

People will listen more to their handsome/pretty doctors and are more likely to follow through. No one will listen to fat doctor telling them to lose weight!

Ouch!

I can understand the overweight doctor haveing no basis to back-up losing weight but how can you be so superficial. You are obviously not humble if you care about looks more than caring for patients or even your studies since you are only a MS1. People do make themselves presentable at interviews and can carry themselves that way for the rest of their lives. But I am guessing you meant physical features, not someone who has decent looks but strolls into class in their PJs with a bedhead and morning breath.

 

[TheLoveMD]

I'm an MS1 at a USMD school and I must say there are a lot of fuglies in my class. Should medical schools take looks into consideration when admitting applicants? Med students have a reputation for being homely and I have to say that reputation is pretty accurate based on my class.

After taking social psychology, you learn that looks can get you further in all aspects of life. But are they taking you far enough when it comes to med apps?

People will listen more to their handsome/pretty doctors and are more likely to follow through. No one will listen to fat doctor telling them to lose weight!

looks do affect how people listen/respond to you...obviously...but id rather the knowledgeable "fuglie" doc than Elliot from scrubs (unless my condition wasn't very serious...in that case, she can treat me...all night long)

 

[airplanes]

haha you have insecurity written all over you. did you get rejected by a your homely classmates you big stud? you're obviously an expert on social psychology from your one undergrad course.

also, your school must totally be representative of every med school out there! it just has to!

 

[sourgrapes]

Ouch!

I can understand the overweight doctor haveing no basis to back-up losing weight but how can you be so superficial. You are obviously not humble if you care about looks more than caring for patients or even your studies since you are only a MS1. People do make themselves presentable at interviews and can carry themselves that way for the rest of their lives. But I am guessing you meant physical features, not someone who has decent looks but strolls into class in their PJs with a bedhead and morning breath.

I never said I care more about looks than caring for patients or my studies. Yes I meant physical features. I'm not saying that it should be as important as someones MCAT score, I'm just saying that it wouldn't hurt if they considered it more.

 

[roseglass6370]

Wow, I can't believe people actually responded "yes" to this.

Do I think that doctors should "practice what they preach" and stay in good shape? Yes. But I don't think that anything outside of MAYBE weight should play any role at all in the process.

Honestly, I'd rather have a fat, ugly-as-sin surgeon operating on me than a less skilled, yet dashingly handsome and ripped one poking around unsure of what the heck is going on.

Those who said "yes," please elaborate.

 

[sourgrapes]

haha you have insecurity written all over you. did you get rejected by a your homely classmates you big stud? you're obviously an expert on social psychology from your one undergrad course.

Actually no, i haven't been interested in anyone in my class. I was a psych major though.

 

[morning]

Yeah, man, we all know uggos have worse x-ray reading comprehension than hotties.

 

[He2]

lets just say this. Looks will always be an important part of anyone's life, whether you like it or not. It might as well be explicit rather than implicit and out of control

 

[tremulousNeedle]

Without saying where I think I fall, I would say that at least 65% of our class is attractive, 5% are model worthy, only about 5-10% I would consider fugly.

 

[illegallysmooth]

It's not exactly clear wheather the question is addressing issues of personal care/hygiene/dress/grooming or facial bone structure and physique. I don't think the latter should factor into a medical school's decision on an applicant, but I think the former should, just a little.

 

[sourgrapes]

It's not exactly clear wheather the question is addressing issues of personal care/hygiene/dress/grooming or facial bone structure and physique. I don't think the latter should factor into a medical school's decision on an applicant, but I think the former should, just a little.

The first one definitely does. The latter factoring in is more what I was going for.

 

[brygguy1]

I responded Yes to this, but not that I think "ugly" people should be rejected and "attractive" people should be accepted. I believe that looks (as in presentability) should play a significant role.

Physicians are professionals, so they should be able to look the part. If you show up to your interview looking scruffy and haggard because you don't take the time to shave or take care of yourself, then you are not showing the admissions committee that you are prepared to be a professional.

So yes, looks should play a part in admissions.

However, I do agree that stunning studly good looks (handsomeness, tall dark and handsome, etc) should NOT play a part in admissions, because it has nothing to do with a practice in medicine.

Also, I feel as though most medical students are pretty average, fit individuals overall. I've also found that many physicians also age very well (e.g. 40 year old surgeons that look like they're 30). I don't agree with your premise that many medical students are "fugly."

 

[sourgrapes]

Yeah, man, we all know uggos have worse x-ray reading comprehension than hotties.

There are lots of things that admissions factor that have nothing to do with reading x-rays e.g. unique extracurriculars, research, altruism, gender, race, quotas etc.

 

[chicubsfan]

Those who said "yes," please elaborate.

I answered yes but I was thinking about looks more along the lines of professionalism, not beauty... I don't think I've seen anyone yet on the interview trail who didn't show up looking professional, so maybe its a moot point.

 

[sourgrapes]

If docs had a reputation for being good looking, i believe it could only help our profession. I heard a standardized pt say to a stunning classmate of mine "I'm coming back. You're very pretty."

 

[morning]

Am I the only one who thought the OP was kidding, not looking for a serious discussion?

 

[TGibson81]

I didnt answer the poll yet. I agree- yes professionalism, grooming should be considered.
I am still taking premed courses and I find that many of my classmates are rather unattractive. Is it because they spend more time learning and less on their appearance? Very possible. However, there are quite a few that fell out of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down.
Do I think they should be declined an acceptance due to their physical appearance at it's best? Absolutely not!
Do I think that an attractive applicant is more likely to impress the interviewers? of course! its human nature, doesnt make it right.

Lets be honest, the people who are truly offended or defensive above are probably the "fugly" ones.

 

[airplanes]

If docs had a reputation for being good looking, i believe it could only help our profession. I heard a standardized pt say to a stunning classmate of mine "I'm coming back. You're very pretty."

Why didn't you say so earlier! a standardized patient! so representative of real patients, everywhere.

 

[Ischemic]

You know that the politically correct and reality-based answer is no. But think about it wouldn't you rather go to school with good looking people rather than fat slobs that drool and wheeze? I'd actually go to class more often. lol

Oh, and I'd like to add that for the most part, there're more good looking/fit people (both males and females) than there are out of shape/unattractive people. I feel it's a personality thing. You gotta be driven to get into med school and that driven attitude extends into other aspects of their lives like working out and maintaining a fit physique. Just a thought.

 

[sourgrapes]

Why didn't you say so earlier! a standardized patient! so representative of real patients, everywhere.

lol well he obviously wasn't reading from a script. People use anecdotal evidence all the time. It doesn't mean that it is not valid.

 

[sourgrapes]

You know that the politically correct and reality-based answer is no. But think about it wouldn't you rather go to school with good looking people rather than fat slobs that drool and wheeze? I'd actually go to class more often. lol

lol well said!

 

[medat101]

Am I the only one who thought the OP was kidding, not looking for a serious discussion?

Uhh i responded yes as a joke.. sorry you people took this so seriously

 

[MJM09]

I think the bigger question instead of "should they" (which I firmly believe is "no"), is "do they?". All these secondaries require pictures and interviewers are looking at you across the table/room... if you look untrustworthy or shifty or something, I'm sure it's bound to affect their perception of you. As far as "this person isn't a supermodel, so we shouldn't admit them", I think that's completely ridiculous. Looks have nothing to do with how effective or talented a physician the person would be, and have no place as a factor in consideration of an applicant.

 

[mcgyver]

lol well said!

i think ugly people should get URM status because they are clearly disadvantaged and under represented.

 

[JonBonesJones]

Does it bother anyone else that whenever an OP asks a questions about GPA, Race, in this case attractiveness, etc. influencing the admissions process, that several people respond "I'd rather have an ugly/non-minority doctor than an attractive/minority stupid one..."

The question is should attractiveness play a role; not should attractiveness be considered above intelligence. So, given two similar applicants, should the acceptance be granted to the more attractive candidate, or go to a die roll?



My feeling is that unless there is a compelling reason to have hotties in medicine, or any group for that matter, that the characteristic shouldn't play a factor. The 'fat doctors not advising weight loss' doesn't really hold a lot of water for me. Should psychiatrists with mommy issues not be allowed to practice psychiatry? Or cardiologists with high blood pressure have to close their practices? Patients come to doctors for their knowledge, not to emulate their lifestyles.

 

[brygguy1]

i think ugly people should get URM status because they are clearly disadvantaged and under represented.

Spot on!

 

[mvenus929]

I responded Yes to this, but not that I think "ugly" people should be rejected and "attractive" people should be accepted. I believe that looks (as in presentability) should play a significant role.

Physicians are professionals, so they should be able to look the part. If you show up to your interview looking scruffy and haggard because you don't take the time to shave or take care of yourself, then you are not showing the admissions committee that you are prepared to be a professional.

So yes, looks should play a part in admissions.

Ditto. Of course, I also think that how you present yourself, not necessarily how you look, can influence whether someone trusts your or not, which is most certainly an important consideration in talking to your doctor.

 

[airplanes]

lol well he obviously wasn't reading from a script. People use anecdotal evidence all the time. It doesn't mean that it is not valid.

the SP was some dude who saw a hot chick, and he's coming back to hit on her and maybe get his junk examined, nothing else. I'm sure that reflects very highly on the profession. And just because fox news uses anecdotal evidence (global warming? the east coast just got hit with its biggest winter storm in years!) that doesn't make it's valid either.

 

[Wolfman89]

I never said I care more about looks than caring for patients or my studies. Yes I meant physical features. I'm not saying that it should be as important as someones MCAT score, I'm just saying that it wouldn't hurt if they considered it more.

How would you define physical attractiveness in a way that has validity and reliability?

 

[FloatOn]

Looks can be more easily fixed than smarts.

 

[sourgrapes]

the SP was some dude who saw a hot chick, and he's coming back to hit on her and maybe get his junk examined, nothing else. I'm sure that reflects very highly on the profession. And just because fox news uses anecdotal evidence (global warming? the east coast just got hit with its biggest winter storm in years!) that doesn't make it's valid either.

are reviews for products not valid because they are "just" anecdotal evidence? i'm just using an experience to help justify an opinion.

How would you define physical attractiveness in a way that has validity and reliability?

IDK, do admissions really have any reliability? you see kids get into harvard but rejected from state U.

each interviewer could judge them on a scale of 1-10 and let it play a small factor in admissions.

 

[Wolfman89]

are reviews for products not valid because they are "just" anecdotal evidence? i'm just using an experience to help justify an opinion.



IDK, do admissions really have any reliability? you see kids get into harvard but rejected from state U.

each interviewer could judge them on a scale of 1-10 and let it play a small factor in admissions.

Then you have issues with rater to rater reliability. One person's 5 is another's 7 and besides while weight can be controlled facial and bone structure cannot.

 

[sourgrapes]

Does it bother anyone else that whenever an OP asks a questions about GPA, Race, in this case attractiveness, etc. influencing the admissions process, that several people respond "I'd rather have an ugly/non-minority doctor than an attractive/minority stupid one..."

The question is should attractiveness play a role; not should attractiveness be considered above intelligence. So, given two similar applicants, should the acceptance be granted to the more attractive candidate, or go to a die roll?



My feeling is that unless there is a compelling reason to have hotties in medicine, or any group for that matter, that the characteristic shouldn't play a factor. The 'fat doctors not advising weight loss' doesn't really hold a lot of water for me. Should psychiatrists with mommy issues not be allowed to practice psychiatry? Or cardiologists with high blood pressure have to close their practices? Patients come to doctors for their knowledge, not to emulate their lifestyles.

Regarding the mommy issues and cardiologist, this is probably not something a patient would be able to pick up on. looks and weight are a different story.

And I believe in general, if you seek advice from someone, you expect them to have wisdom and to also practice what they preach. Would you go to your ***** friend for advice on how to be less slutty? Would you go to a priest for confession if that priest had a history of child molestation?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

They shouldn't but they do. If you come to the interview looking fine in a suit/dress and a perfect face then you'll have a higher chance then a slob thats ugly.

 

[sourgrapes]

Then you have issues with rater to rater reliability. One person's 5 is another's 7 and besides while weight can be controlled facial and bone structure cannot.

LOL so much of the process is subjective, I would argue that determining attractiveness would be less subjective than most factors. It is not too hard to pick out the hotties from the notties lol.

 

[airplanes]

are reviews for products not valid because they are "just" anecdotal evidence? i'm just using an experience to help justify an opinion.

Yah, hydroxycut, shamwow, penis enlargement pills, anything made for tv...they all have people on air saying how great they are. are those all valid?

Do you know what the term "evidence based" means?

You're driving yourself away from your originally ridiculous point either way.

 

[sourgrapes]

Yah, hydroxycut, shamwow, penis enlargement pills, anything made for tv...they all have people on air saying how great they are. are those all valid?

Do you know what the term "evidence based" means?

You're driving yourself away from your originally ridiculous point either way.

i meant more of amazon.com reviews on books, movies, etc.. any ways this is digressing pretty far from the topic

 

[Wolfman89]

LOL so much of the process is subjective, I would argue that determining attractiveness would be less subjective than most factors. It is not too hard to pick out the hotties from the notties lol.

Except one's definition of a "hottie" can be different from someone else's. And besides whether you are hot or not should have zero bearing on whether you are qualified to be a physician.

 

[alibai3ah]

Except one's definition of a "hottie" can be different from someone else's. And besides whether you are hot or not should have zero bearing on whether you are qualified to be a physician.

While beauty is subjective, there are universal hotties and universal uglies. For example, 95% of people would put Angelina Jolie in the hottie category and 95% of people would put Rosie O'Donnel in the uglies category....

 

[sourgrapes]

Except one's definition of a "hottie" can be different from someone else's. And besides whether you are hot or not should have zero bearing on whether you are qualified to be a physician.

however, it does have to do with how others perceive you. And how others perceive you is important as a physician. How important, well that is anyone's guess.

 

[jturkel]

I'm an MS1 at a USMD school and I must say there are a lot of fuglies in my class.

what school do you go to?

 

[sourgrapes]

what school do you go to?

I'd rather not say. Some of my classmates read this forum and I don't want to offend them or give my school a bad reputation.

 

[airplanes]

I'd rather not say. Some of my classmates read this forum and I don't want to offend them or give my school a bad reputation.

it's really not hard to figure out... shoulda thought of that before you made this Win of a thread.

 

[samuraiR]

LOL this thread is hilarious

 

[sourgrapes]

it's really not hard to figure out... shoulda thought of that before you made this Win of a thread.

You seem to have some personal vendetta against me. I really haven't said anything that offensive. Relax.

 

[jturkel]

I'd rather not say. Some of my classmates read this forum and I don't want to offend them or give my school a bad reputation.

understandable. how about a state then? i'm curious if this school is one that i have applied to lol

 

[greatnt249]

however, it does have to do with how others perceive you. And how others perceive you is important as a physician. How important, well that is anyone's guess.

You haven't even established how important intrinsic appearance is to patient perception, let alone made a case as to why it should be considered for admissions.

 

[Wolfman89]

however, it does have to do with how others perceive you. And how others perceive you is important as a physician. How important, well that is anyone's guess.

And the same with any other career. Should assign certain people to certain careers because of how they look?

 

[sourgrapes]

understandable. How about a state then? I'm curious if this school is one that i have applied to lol

ohio