What % of a medical school's applications are junk?

[Nommonnom]

Even using the objective data, easily available for $27, would help applicants moderate their expectations and formulate a reasonable plan. Holistic review does not mean that meeting minimum objective criteria will result in success. Evidence of the other qualities that all schools are looking for will go far in augmenting the applicant's success. These are not a secret: https://www.aamc.org/initiatives/admissionsinitiative/competencies/

Perhaps MSAR should publish a grid of schools' subjective evaluations of competencies vs acceptance rate then?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gyngyn]

Perhaps MSAR should publish a grid of schools' subjective evaluations of competencies vs acceptance rate then?

It would show that those with acceptable MCAT's and gpa's (for that school) who demonstrated abundant evidence of the non-cognitive competencies would be accepted!

Until there is a standardized methodology for expressing the presence of non-cognitive qualities, the odds that this will ever be available in a grid are vanishingly small.

 

[Nommonnom]

I'm sure it would show that those with acceptable MCAT's and gpa's (for that school) that demonstrated evidence of the non-cognitive competencies would be accepted!

Until there is a standardized methodology for expressing the presence of non-cognitive qualities, the odds that this will ever be available in a grid are vanishingly small.

Well the issue is for clarity for the applicant to prevent "junk applications" which bog down people like you. It doesn't really need to be that accurate, it needs to present the information in a way that clearly communicates what is important. Right now you have a mysterious MCAT/GPA grid which basically says to applicants you have a chance in every box, apply everywhere! The way the information is being presented is causing the "junk application" problem. This can be changed.

 

[gyngyn]

Well the issue is for clarity for the applicant to prevent "junk applications" which bog down people like you. It doesn't really need to be that accurate, it needs to present the information in a way that clearly communicates what is important. Right now you have a mysterious MCAT/GPA grid which basically says to applicants you have a chance in every box, apply everywhere! The way the information is being presented is causing the "junk application" problem. This can be changed.

Someone who applies to schools with a track record of matriculating students similar to oneself can easily (though tediously) be formulated using currently available information. There is no mystery. It is like any other math problem.

 

[Nommonnom]

Someone who applies to schools with a track record of matriculating students similar to oneself can easily (though tediously) be formulated using currently available information. There is no mystery. It is like any other math problem.

Well by making things easier or more difficult you have the power to control applicants behavior. You're here complaining about applicants behavior and you are in a position to change applicants behavior, being in academic administration, by changing the presentation of information. The only question is: are you going to do something about it or complain about it perennially?

 

[gyngyn]

Well by making things easier or more difficult you have the power to control applicants behavior. You're here complaining about applicants behavior and you are in a position to change applicants behavior, being in academic administration, by changing the presentation of information. The only question is: are you going to do something about it or complain about it perennially?

I have frequently expressed my opinion that a cap on the the number of applications combined with a free application process would be better for both applicants and schools. My recommendations have not found a fertile field at the AAMC, sadly.

 

[libertyyne]

The MSAR already provides medians as well as 10th and 90th percentiles. This data is used so infrequently that I doubt that more granularity would improve poor choices.
One could reasonably assume that falling outside these norms without a strong reason is a fool's errand and yet, half of our applications come from those that would reasonably be self- identified as "low yield."

Even using the objective data, easily available for $27, would help applicants moderate their expectations and formulate a reasonable plan. Holistic review does not mean that meeting minimum objective criteria will result in success. Evidence of the other qualities that all schools are looking for will go far in augmenting the applicant's success. These are not a secret: https://www.aamc.org/initiatives/admissionsinitiative/competencies/

I have spent a lot of trying to find schools that will give me the best opportunity of matriculation. To accomplish this task I had to manually abstract data and combine self reported data like the SDN LizzyM data. However, it is a little unreasonable to expect everyone will spend 30 hours to do something that could be easily automated by MSAR.

(Image of spreedsheet deleted due to possible assassination by AAMC)

21 data points for each school and to add to the uncertainity MSAR publishes acceptance data rather than Matriculant data! To further insult your purchase of 27 dollars they dont allow raw data extracts nor do they allow you to scrape the website in an automated fashion .
There is a two lizzy point difference between acceptance and matriculant data based on the data available. And there is a 10 point lizzy M difference between possible 10th percentile and 90th percentile acceptees! That is insane, but one could say i have a gpa in the 10th percentile and an mcat in the 10th percentile, I should apply.

All of this is crazy, also they do not publish how late applicants fare.

I dont think it is fair to expect each applicant to fulfill all the requirements for medical school , mcat, volunteerism, gpa, primary, and an almost never ending list of secondary questions and expect them to have enough time and know-how to do what I did. Heck i bet most of the matriculants never even took a basic statistics class and wouldnt be able to tell the difference between mean and median let alone have an excellent working understanding of what the deciles actually mean.

Also do the 10th deciles predominatly consist of URM diversity acceptances?

MSAR should have the following questions
enter your prereqs
enter your sGPA
Enter your cGPA
Enter your MCAT
Enter your time of submission.
Enter your voulnteer hours by type
Enter your research hours by type
Enter the states you have close ties with

and poof magically a list of schools appears and MSAR says " I think you should strongly consider these schools based on your information"

Its not difficult, heck I could write them the program behind it.

Make it easy to do the right thing and people will follow, its not rocket science.[/ATTACH]

 

[gyngyn]

It is because the


This is not the case every time . For example I may have some tendencies that are uncommon that lead to me create a spread sheet which gives me a good list of schools. However, it is a little unreasonable to expect everyone will spend 30 hours to do something that could be easily automated by MSAR.
View attachment 208441

21 data points for each school and to add to the uncertainity MSAR publishes acceptance data rather than Matriculant data! To further insult your purchase of 27 dollars they dont allow raw data extracts nor do they allow you to scrape the website in an automated fashion .
There is a two lizzy point difference between acceptance and matriculant data based on the data available. All of this is crazy, also they do not publish how late applicants fare. I dont think it is fair to expect each applicant to fulfill all the requirements for medical school , mcat, volunteerism, gpa, primary, and an almost never ending list of secondary questions and expect them to have enough time and know-how to do what I did. Heck i bet most of the matriculants never even took a basic statistics class and wouldnt be able to tell the difference between mean and median let alone have an excellent working understanding of what the deciles actually mean.

MSAR should have the following questions
enter your prereqs
enter your sGPA
Enter your cGPA
Enter your MCAT
Enter your time of submission.
Enter your voulnteer hours by type
Enter your research hours by type
Enter the states you have close ties with

and poof magically a list of schools appears and MSAR says " I think you should strongly consider these schools based on your information"

Its not difficult, heck I could write them the program behind it.

Make it easy to do the right thing and people will follow, its not rocket science.

The MSAR is a data base. It is not an oracle.
The mere number of hours is almost irrelevant. It is what you learned from them and the ability to express it that we evaluate!

 

[libertyyne]

I have frequently expressed my opinion that a cap on the the number of applications combined with a free application process would be better for both applicants and schools. My recommendations have not found a fertile field at the AAMC, sadly.

Transparency and honesty coupled with an MSAR that actually works would change this in a heartbeat.

 

[libertyyne]

The MSAR is a data base. It is not an oracle.
The mere number of hours is almost irrelevant. It is what you learned from them and the ability to express it that we evaluate!

That is fair. Leave the quantity of the research out- but i have literally encountered schools that have cutoffs for volunteer hours. It still doesnt address my critic of MSAR not being transparent with the data nor presenting it in a fashion that would make it easier for the average applicant to do the right thing.

 

[gyngyn]

That is fair. Leave the quality of the research out- but i have literally encountered schools that have cutoffs for volunteer hours. It still doesnt address my critic of MSAR not being transparent with the data nor presenting it in a fashion that would make it easier for the average applicant to do the right thing.

Transparency goes both ways. For example, I don't feel the need to know where else you have applied. I can't deny that knowing this might change who we would interview, though. Not knowing it gives you an advantage.

 

[libertyyne]

Transparency goes both ways. For example, I don't feel the need to know where else you have applied. I can't deny that knowing this might change who we would interview, though.

I am curious why would this change your interview invites?

 

[gyngyn]

I am curious why would this change your interview invites?

Years of experience would give us an insight into whether you were likely to be accepted to x number of schools on your list as well as the likelihood that you would prefer them (given expense, "ranking" and location). We could use this to hedge the interviews offered in a way that dramatically reduces expense.

 

[libertyyne]

Years of experience would give us an insight into whether you were likely to be accepted to x number of schools on your list as well as the likelihood that you would prefer them (given expense, "ranking" and location). We could use this to hedge the interviews offered in a way that dramatically reduces needless expense.

With all due respect, the problem is you are using subjective "experience" and "feeling" to mind read an applicant. if all the schools did that, applicants could easily be left out in the cold even though your school was their top choice. I can envision some poor schmuck sitting there with a 3.9 and 37 wondering why he or she didnt event get an invite to your school. Even though he has posters of your medical school on his dormitory wall.

 

[gyngyn]

With all due respect, the problem is you are using subjective "experience" and "feeling" to mind read an applicant. if all the schools did that, applicants could easily be left out in the cold even though your school was their top choice. I can envision some poor schmuck sitting there with a 3.9 and 37 wondering why he or she didnt event get an invite to your school. Even though he has posters of your medical school on his dormitory wall.

Yes, this does happen.
The application that is tailored to convince us of the desire to attend is filtered by years of evidence that any individual will abandon that preference for any number of (often predictable) reasons. We don't take it personally, but to deny that persistent patterns exist would be...unscientific.

 

[libertyyne]

Someone who applies to schools with a track record of matriculating students similar to oneself can easily (though tediously) be formulated using currently available information. There is no mystery. It is like any other math problem.

This i believe is untrue. The MSAR data that is published is aceeptee data not matriculant data. There may be a school that hands out acceptances to candidates who will go elsewhere and make their numbers look inflated. Also they dont publish average data so I have no clue even when looking at the school to see if they top load with 36+ and 3.9 candidates and drop off on the lower end of the median.

The SDN MD applicant data suffers from selection bias. gunners are going to gun and share their data non gunners are going to hide and say a prayer.

 

[gyngyn]

This i believe is untrue. The data that is published is aceeptee data not matriculant data. There may be a school that hands out acceptances to candidates who will go elsewhere and make their numbers look inflated. Also they dont publish average data so I have no clue even when looking at the school to see if they top load with 36+ and 3.9 candidates and drop off on the lower end of the median.

No school has the time or resources to interview and accept a widely divergent class than their acceptance medians. For those who would invest in self-reported "data" on matriculants, there is always US Snooze and World Distort!

 

[libertyyne]

Delete.

 

[libertyyne]

No school has the time or resources to interview and accept a widely divergent class than their acceptance medians. For those who would invest in self-reported "data" on matriculants, there is always US Snooze and World Distort!

Here is a list of schools with a somewhat large difference in median and average mcats


NYU 2 point difference
University of Michigan 2.2
Cornell 2.2
Universityof Virginia 2.5!
Icahn 2.0
Medical University of South carolina 2.3
University of south carolina 2.3
University of Minnesota 3.0!
University of Nevada 2.o
University of Arkansas 2.0
Suny Downstate 3.0
Thomas Jefferson 4.0!!!

Of the 104 schools I have paired data for there is an average .59 mcat point difference
Of the 66 schools that display this difference in a positive manner the average is 1.27.

Schools need to be more transparent. MSAR needs to change.

 

[libertyyne]

Shouldn't the next line, % of total Acceptances, add to 100% as well?

Fixed

 

[LizzyM]

Here is a list of schools with a somewhat large difference in median and average mcats


NYU 2 point difference
University of Michigan 2.2
Cornell 2.2
Universityof Virginia 2.5!
Icahn 2.0
Medical University of South carolina 2.3
University of south carolina 2.3
University of Minnesota 3.0!
University of Nevada 2.o
University of Arkansas 2.0
Suny Downstate 3.0
Thomas Jefferson 4.0!!!

Of the 104 schools I have paired data for there is an average .59 mcat point difference
Of the 66 schools that display this difference in a positive manner the average is 1.27.

Schools need to be more transparent. MSAR needs to change.

By "average" I have to assume you are referring to "mean". We know that the mean is influenced by outliers in a way that median is not. So where there is a large positive difference, my assumption would be that there is a long right tail and a short left tail or no left tail at all but a large proportion of the population at or close to the median due to a minimum cut-off score.

The data on admitted applicants rather than matriculants is most helpful to prospective students because it is, I believe, the best predictor of likelihood of interview. Given that the interview is required for admission and given that some schools interview only 10% of the applicant pool, knowing the characteristics of the students offered interviews (a large subset of those interviewed) is more valuable than knowing more about the admitted applicants who choose that school over all others. In other words, if a school favors interviewing and admitting 3.95/520 applicants but ends up attracting, on average, the 3.77/517 to its class, the applicant with a 3.79/516 needs to recognize that they may be average among the current student body but below average (but acceptable) among applicants who are likely to be interviewed.

One thing that is difficult to assess and share in a table is written and verbal communications and non-verbal communication including the reading of social cues. I'd estimate that a third of the very high stats applicants we interview are cut due to inability to communicate well with interviewers.

 

[Med Ed]

About how many applications (%) does a medical school receive that are just a waste?

100%.

 

[makennacompton]

Years of experience would give us an insight into whether you were likely to be accepted to x number of schools on your list as well as the likelihood that you would prefer them (given expense, "ranking" and location). We could use this to hedge the interviews offered in a way that dramatically reduces expense.

Completely understandable and actually completely the case with Texas applicants outside of Texas, for example. If a competitive candidate from Texas (say, 3.7; 35+ MCAT) applies outside of Texas, they will rarely be granted interviews because the adcom KNOWS that they will have an 85% chance of getting accepted to the best medical schools in Texas whose tuitions are 1/3 of other med schools. This, combined with the historical fact (from MSAR) that only 6% of Texas applicants actually go outside of Texas for medical school, provides a high probability that the applicant will in the end matriculate in Texas. Knowing this, why waste an interview on a Texan -- I expect Goro and gyngyn would not "readily" agree (miracle can happen and something might still push that Texas candidate over the line), but it would be like snow in Houston in July -- not very likely . . .

 

[gyngyn]

Completely understandable and actually completely the case with Texas applicants outside of Texas, for example. If a competitive candidate from Texas (say, 3.7; 35+ MCAT) applies outside of Texas, they will rarely be granted interviews because the adcom KNOWS that they will have an 85% chance of getting accepted to the best medical schools in Texas whose tuitions are 1/3 of other med schools. This, combined with the historical fact (from MSAR) that only 6% of Texas applicants actually go outside of Texas for medical school, provides a high probability that the applicant will in the end matriculate in Texas. Knowing this, why waste an interview on a Texan -- I expect Goro and gyngyn would not "readily" agree (miracle can happen and something might still push that Texas candidate over the line), but it would be like snow in Houston in July -- not very likely . . .

I completely agree with you. We can only interview Texans who are likely to be recruitment scholars. The odds that they will stay in TX is too high.

 

[libertyyne]

By "average" I have to assume you are referring to "mean". We know that the mean is influenced by outliers in a way that median is not. So where there is a large positive difference, my assumption would be that there is a long right tail and a short left tail or no left tail at all but a large proportion of the population at or close to the median due to a minimum cut-off score.

You are correct I worded that out poorly.

The data on admitted applicants rather than matriculants is most helpful to prospective students because it is, I believe, the best predictor of likelihood of interview. Given that the interview is required for admission and given that some schools interview only 10% of the applicant pool, knowing the characteristics of the students offered interviews (a large subset of those interviewed) is more valuable than knowing more about the admitted applicants who choose that school over all others. In other words, if a school favors interviewing and admitting 3.95/520 applicants but ends up attracting, on average, the 3.77/517 to its class, the applicant with a 3.79/516 needs to recognize that they may be average among the current student body but below average (but acceptable) among applicants who are likely to be interviewed.

I disagree with this, even if the mean is skewed, why not publish the Median matriculant data? I am willing to bet that if the mean is skewed the median for matriculants is also skewed. I dont have access to this data because MSAR does not publish it. In your example the 3.77 and 517 may constitute a large portion of its aceptees but for a variety of reasons these applicants end up going to other schools. This problem is exacerbated by the higher end of the distribution students gaining acceptance to many schools thereby also inflating their median acceptee data.

I still have yet to hear a compelling reason for not overhauling MSAR to provide more data and for schools to be more open and transparent about their class data. Also, the MSAR is also incapable of filtering based on specific numbers which once again just goes to show that this process is kept purposely vauge leading to the resultant "junk" application problem. If MSAR told me: "hey, buddy based on your stats you have the highest chance of matriculating if you apply to these schools since their matriculants look like you." I would say: "thank you MSAR!" and not apply to 30 schools. We need more transparency to give individuals the actual chances of matriculation. If MSAR told me that less than 5 percent of matriculants to this school had a LizzyM less than or equal to mine, I would say : "nope that is not an acceptable use of a secondary fee for me."

If there is a 2-4 point MCAT and a .1 point gpa difference between the median aceptee and matriculant that is insane to me. A potential 5 lizzyM point difference between acceptees and matriculants is just insane and is not conducive to good decision making for students.

This might be tin-foilish, but i think schools do this on purpose to make it seem like they are more competitive to attend then they really are. It appears misleading at best and intentionally devious at worst.

 

[LizzyM]

If there is a 2-4 point MCAT and a .1 point gpa difference between the median aceptee and matriculant that is insane to me. A potential 5 LizzyM point difference between acceptees and matriculants is just insane and is not conducive to good decision making for students.

This might be tin-foilish, but i think schools do this on purpose to make it seem like they are more competitive to attend then they really are. It appears misleading at best and intentionally devious at worst.

It is no surprise that a great many schools are chasing the high fliers. There is a great hope that a few will choose "us". Why shouldn't someone with a 3.95/520 have 5 offers and if that is the type of applicant school X wants to interview, why shouldn't it broadcast its mean and/or median for applicants with offers.

If you apply to the schools where you are most similar to other applicants who have been interviewed there, you may be fortunate enough to be interviewed, too. You will be above the average matriculant which means you are likely to be offered a slot. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Regarding Matriculants

Average (either mean or median depending on the school) stats for the incoming class is usually posted on every school's web site under the admissions tab.

 

[libertyyne]

It is no surprise that a great many schools are chasing the high fliers. There is a great hope that a few will choose "us". Why shouldn't someone with a 3.95/520 have 5 offers and if that is the type of applicant school X wants to interview, why shouldn't it broadcast its mean and/or median for applicants with offers.

If you apply to the schools where you are most similar to other applicants who have been interviewed there, you may be fortunate enough to be interviewed, too. You will be above the average matriculant which means you are likely to be offered a slot. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Regarding Matriculants

Average (either mean or median depending on the school) stats for the incoming class is usually posted on every school's web site under the admissions tab.

I guess all I was trying to emphasize was that we get the results the system is designed for. GYNGYN was complaining about both junk applications and higher stat switchers. I think that the system encourages both activities by purposeful data obfuscation and poor tools(MSAR). I don't think the applicant behavior is the sole cause of this issue.

 

[GinnyWeasley]

I completely agree with you. We can only interview Texans who are likely to be recruitment scholars. The odds that they will stay in TX is too high.

What's a recruitment scholar? Honestly I'm wondering why I got an OOS II as a Texan. I'm not some academic genius, nor is my application very attractive towards a mission based school.

 

[gyngyn]

What's a recruitment scholar? Honestly I'm wondering why I got an OOS II as a Texan. I'm not some academic genius, nor is my application very attractive towards a mission based school.

If you have a quality that is in short supply and adds significantly to a class, you are a recruitment scholar.

 

[gyngyn]

I guess all I was trying to emphasize was that we get the results the system is designed for. GYNGYN was complaining about both junk applications and higher stat switchers. I think that the system encourages both activities by purposeful data obfuscation and poor tools(MSAR). I don't think the applicant behavior is the sole cause of this issue.

To clarify, I am not complaining. I am sad when people spend FAP or actual $ on an application that could easily be found to be hopeless based on easily available information. I have no problem competing with any school for the best candidates.

 

[Psai]

100%.

:'(

 

[libertyyne]

If you have a quality that is in short supply and adds significantly to a class, you are a recruitment scholar.

is that only URM candidates?

 

[gyngyn]

is that only URM candidates?

Not at all. UiM's are too scarce.

 

[vendtex]

Unfortunately it's a flawed process as many physicians with major personality disorders make it through. Once in the system it's hard to get rid of the bad apples.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GapLustrum]

Here is a list of schools with a somewhat large difference in median and average mcats


NYU 2 point difference
University of Michigan 2.2
Cornell 2.2
Universityof Virginia 2.5!
Icahn 2.0
Medical University of South carolina 2.3
University of south carolina 2.3
University of Minnesota 3.0!
University of Nevada 2.o
University of Arkansas 2.0
Suny Downstate 3.0
Thomas Jefferson 4.0!!!

Of the 104 schools I have paired data for there is an average .59 mcat point difference
Of the 66 schools that display this difference in a positive manner the average is 1.27.

Schools need to be more transparent. MSAR needs to change.

Are all of these differences "Average matric. MCAT is X points above the median matric. MCAT"? aka most matriculants are below the mean? (Mainly interested in MUSC, S. Carolina)

 

[libertyyne]

Are all of these differences "Average matric. MCAT is X points above the median matric. MCAT"? aka most matriculants are below the mean? (Mainly interested in MUSC, S. Carolina)

Yes, average matriculants are below the average for acceptees.

 

[Holmwood]

One man's junk is another man's treasure.

 

[Dagrimsta1]

Someone should just make an app where you put in your stats, location, and undergrad, then the it would spit out probabilities of getting in based on location, and previous application acceptance stats.
Call it; Med School?

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Someone should just make an app where you put in your stats, location, and undergrad, then the it would spit out probabilities of getting in based on location, and previous application acceptance stats.
Call it; Med School?

LSAC has something like this for law schools. You put in your GPA and LSAT, and it gives you the quartiles for all the schools and where you fall, including a probability of acceptance.

 

[tessellations]

Someone should just make an app where you put in your stats, location, and undergrad, then the it would spit out probabilities of getting in based on location, and previous application acceptance stats.
Call it; Med School?

I would pay good money for an app like that. Or for more data, because I love data.

 

[libertyyne]

I would pay good money for an app like that. Or for more data, because I love data.

Hmm, what is good money for such an app?

 

[tessellations]

Hmm, what is good money for such an app?

I'd be willing to pay about the same amount as I payed for MSAR, give or take some dollars.

 

[libertyyne]

I'd be willing to pay about the same amount as I payed for MSAR, give or take some dollars.

The problem is getting the data from AAMC, they have no reason to sell the data that would undercut their product.

 

[tessellations]

The problem is getting the data from AAMC, they have no reason to sell the data that would undercut their product.

You're totally right, unfortunately. I guess I can only dream of more transparency...

 

[libertyyne]

You're totally right, unfortunately. I guess I can only dream of more transparency...

I have a rant about it on the first page of this thread! How slick would it be to have the number of hours @JOB / volunteer/clinical / teaching/ underserved community service etc and be able to give a prediction to an applicant based on all those inputs. definitely would save hundreds of thousands of hours of "finding" the right school or reading every page in MSAR over the span of a cycle.

 

[NeuResurgens]

With all due respect, the problem is you are using subjective "experience" and "feeling" to mind read an applicant. if all the schools did that, applicants could easily be left out in the cold even though your school was their top choice. I can envision some poor schmuck sitting there with a 3.9 and 37 wondering why he or she didnt event get an invite to your school. Even though he has posters of your medical school on his dormitory wall.

That's kind of funny - those are close to my exact stats and so far the 3-4 schools that I considered my "favorites" have either already rejected me or are still sitting on my secondary. I'm not sure what those schools saw in me that made them think I'd either not be interested in them or not good enough for them. Meanwhile I've had success with schools I knew less about.

 

[NeuResurgens]

I have a rant about it on the first page of this thread! How slick would it be to have the number of hours @JOB / volunteer/clinical / teaching/ underserved community service etc and be able to give a prediction to an applicant based on all those inputs. definitely would save hundreds of thousands of hours of "finding" the right school or reading every page in MSAR over the span of a cycle.

Also I imagine this is what a WARS using actual stats from AAMC for ECs would look like.

 

[libertyyne]

Also I imagine this is what a WARS using actual stats from AAMC for ECs would look like.

Yeah, it would be able to provide more granular detail on the preferences of the schools.

 

[BombsAway]

I completely agree with you. We can only interview Texans who are likely to be recruitment scholars. The odds that they will stay in TX is too high.

The Lone Star State. That should be its Yelp rating.

Please don't leave me here!! It's too hot, flat, and socially regressive.

 

[libertyyne]

The Lone Star State. That should be its Yelp rating.

Please don't leave me here!! It's too hot, flat, and socially regressive.

I'd take the heat over the Arctic Tundra that I inhabit.