Med schools to avoid

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

ckent

Membership Revoked
Removed
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2000
Messages
2,138
Reaction score
2
Article from the Baltimore Sun:
Study of punished doctors notes 4 schools

http://www.sunspot.net/news/health/...n29,0,1602980.story?coll=bal-health-headlines

By Jack Dolan and Andrew Julien
Special To The Sun
Originally published June 29, 2003


A handful of medical schools in the United States and abroad graduate troubled doctors at about 10 times the rate of the best schools, an eight-month Hartford Courant investigation found.
Four medical schools - the Autonomous University of Guadalajara in Mexico, Howard University in Washington, Manila Central University in the Philippines and Meharry Medical College in Nashville, Tenn. - ranked at the bottom in analyses of three databases containing records of disciplinary actions against thousands of physicians across the United States.

Other medical schools also fared poorly in The Courant's review, but only Guadalajara, Howard, Manila Central and Meharry appeared in the bottom 5 percent of about 200 schools ranked by rates of disciplinary actions against graduates in each analysis. Together, these large, well-established schools have produced more than 600 doctors cited by licensing boards for negligence, incompetence, sexual assault, drug abuse or fraud.


History of concern

Within the medical profession, some of these schools have long been watched with concern. Howard and Meharry ranked at the bottom of a National Science Foundation-funded survey of U.S. medical school quality in 1977, and questions have been raised about Guadalajara for years.

Although it is difficult to draw conclusions about individual doctors based on where they went to school, the Connecticut newspaper's findings point to a link between medical schools that have raised concerns in various settings and troubling behavior by some of their graduates.


'Incredible information'

"This is incredible information," said Dr. Rebecca Patchin, chairwoman of the American Medical Association's council on medical education. "This could shake up the whole community and force people to take another look at the licensing criteria."

The reasons for the poor showing of these schools are unclear, but most have one thing in common: a practice of admitting students with lower grades or scores on standardized tests who might have trouble being accepted in many other places.

At least one school, Guadalajara, has accepted would-be doctors who never finished college.

"There is no excuse for students being allowed into medical school if they aren't adequately prepared," said Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of health research for Public Citizen, a consumer group based in Washington.

"Maybe this means that it's worth requiring that anyone practicing medicine in this country had adequate preparation before medical school," Wolfe said.


Study criticized

The findings of The Courant drew a sharp response from the head of the trade group representing U.S. medical schools, who said it was impossible to pin the performance of physicians on the schools they graduated from because too many other variables determine success or failure.

"I think it's kind of an irrational approach to analyzing a very complex set of issues," said Dr. Jordan Cohen, president of the American Association of Medical Colleges, who characterized the effort as "simplistic" and "foolish."

"I don't think there are any bad medical schools" in the United States, Cohen said. "That's a null set."

The Courant analyzed national and state databases containing the type of disciplinary information consumers can get through "physician profile" Web sites run by state licensing boards.

The broadest database, compiled by Public Citizen, contained information on more than 19,000 physicians disciplined between 1990 and 1999 by state licensing boards, the federal Medicare and Medicaid programs, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The Courant also obtained "physician profile" databases from two large-population, geographically distinct states, California and Ohio, which together contain the records for about 240,000 doctors who have held licenses over the past 50 years. The California database also contains information on some malpractice payments made by physicians.


Study's methodology

The schools represented were then ranked according to rates of disciplined graduates. After eliminating small schools with statistically insignificant numbers of graduates, only Guadalajara, Howard, Manila and Meharry consistently stood out with the highest rates of disciplined doctors in all three databases.

In California, approximately one of every 10 graduates from each of the schools has faced disciplinary action. For most schools, fewer than half that many graduates have been disciplined.


Admission standards

The schools differ in many ways, but the clearest common denominator is their flexible admission standards.

The two U.S. schools, Howard and Meharry, have played a critical role in the history of American medical education, training generations of black physicians when the doors to most schools were largely open only to whites. Doctors trained at these schools have gone on to provide care for many who were being turned away by all-white hospitals, or by physicians who refused to treat minorities.

They are also among a handful of historically black institutions that attract students who often come from underprivileged backgrounds and may score lower on standardized tests.

"Many, although not all, of our students come from disadvantaged backgrounds and therefore have not had the same educational advantages as other students in their formative years," Meharry spokeswoman Jill Scoggins said in a statement.

Howard and Meharry refused the newspaper's requests to meet with school officials. Instead, The Courant provided the schools with a written summary of the analysis and a list of questions.

Howard officials declined to comment. Officials at Manila Central did not respond to questions about the newspaper's findings.


Opportunity in Mexico

The Autonomous University of Guadalajara also has more flexible admissions standards, but for a different reason. The school draws U.S. citizens south of the border by catering to college students who do not have the grades, or the Medical College Admission Test scores, to get into a medical school in the United States.

"We don't frown on someone with a 'B' average," said Peter Himonidis, a Guadalajara dean. "We provide an opportunity for people who are determined to become doctors but are denied that opportunity at home."

While the majority of Guadalajara's graduates go on to practice without tarnished records, others have dismayed courts and regulators across the country with their lack of preparation for the safe practice of medicine.


Insufficient training

Dr. Jose Nabut of Florida, a graduate of Guadalajara, seriously injured at least five patients using a surgical technique that plaintiffs' lawyers said he learned by practicing on a pig at a weekend seminar after graduation. One of those patients, Glenn O'Loughlin, required eight corrective surgeries after Nabut mistakenly stapled shut his bile duct during what should have been a routine gallbladder removal.

O'Loughlin said he was stunned to discover, much later, that Nabut had been accepted at Guadalajara without earning a college degree.

"If I had known any of that, I never would have gone to him," O'Loughlin said. "But when your insurance company refers you to a doctor, you just trust that they know what they're doing."

Jack Dolan and Andrew Julien are reporters for The Hartford Courant, a Tribune Publishing newspaper.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Originally posted by ckent
At least one school, Guadalajara, has accepted would-be doctors who never finished college.
This isn't that big of a deal is it? aren't there like 20 or so US medical schools that have students that didn't get a Bachelors? Maybe it makes the schools look worse for the article.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
moskeeto,

by itself, no thats not a problem.

The real problem with Guadalajara is that if you have enough money, their admissions standards go out the window.

Whether or not you get accepted to Guadalajara has more to do with how much money you pay them rather than how qualified you are.
 
who would want to go to mexico for med school:confused:
i wouldnt take my chances down there
 
Someone should post this on the URM post where they tout the brilliance of Howard and Meharry as graduating equally talented doctors as the rest of the country. Oh yeah, and the equally touchy story of "WHY MCAT SCORES MEAN NOTHING"

Here we come, full circle.

All I gotta say is "LOL"
 
Originally posted by mecute
Someone should post this on the URM post

What is a URM post? The laundry is done, I think you'd better get your sheets now!:laugh: :laugh:
 
Originally posted by mecute
Someone should post this on the URM post where they tout the brilliance of Howard and Meharry as graduating equally talented doctors as the rest of the country. Oh yeah, and the equally touchy story of "WHY MCAT SCORES MEAN NOTHING"

Here we come, full circle.

All I gotta say is "LOL"

You have serious issues. Howard and Meharry do produce brilliant doctors; the article doesn't dispute that. What it said was that they also produce doctors that are not as skilled at a higher rate than other schools. The 2 are not in conflict. If you lack the ability to discern the difference, it would not shock me.
 
Originally posted by bubbajones
who would want to go to mexico for med school:confused:
i wouldnt take my chances down there

why not? What about the good Mexican doctors in US hospitals who studied in Mexico. I may be wrong, but you are implying that because it is Mexico people should not go there.
 
I think Bubba means there are inherent dangers and corruption in Mexico. I wouldn't consider taking my family to live there for four years. I have seen a mexican jail (not b/c I was in it thankfully). I was with someone who got thrown in. If you have money and don't mind blowing it, you can buy favors.
 
I would say that the statistics presented in this article indicate at least some relationship between academic performance as an undergrad and performance as a physician. Obviously I'm not trying to say that everyone who gets a 45 on the MCAT becomes a great doctor or that everyone with a low score becomes a bad doctor. However there does seem to be a trend between schools that accept applicants with below average scores and a much higher than average rate of gross medical incompetency. I wonder if DO schools were included in the study. That would make for some interesting comparisons.
 
id rather be a MD than a DO.
 
Originally posted by bubbajones
id rather be a MD than a DO.

Me too, just b/c of the stigma that exists. I think that gives you an uphill battle for competitive residencies.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Originally posted by size_tens
I wonder if DO schools were included in the study. That would make for some interesting comparisons.
The DO's were not included in the study. The front page of the article links to pdf's that contain all of the included schools. Even though the DO schools produce relatively few doctors, I'm sure they've killed more than their fair share of patients.
 
I think the DO approach to medicine is fine. It is the perceptions that make it less attractive to me personally. It is generally true that the entrance credentials are slightly lower.

My closest Dr. friend is a DO, very capable. I never asked him why he chose it though. In the old days, DO's didn't even have hospital privleges in most parts of the US. That is why they have some Osteopathic Hospitals (or used to).
 
Originally posted by OrthoFixation
I think Bubba means there are inherent dangers and corruption in Mexico. I wouldn't consider taking my family to live there for four years. I have seen a mexican jail (not b/c I was in it thankfully). I was with someone who got thrown in. If you have money and don't mind blowing it, you can buy favors.

ortho,
you would not consider taking your family to mexico but others would and have done it. There are inherent dangers and corruption in the States too not just over there. Money and connection can buy favors in the USA also. Anywhere you go you are bound to find the good, the bad and the ugly.
 
Originally posted by do2md
Even though the DO schools produce relatively few doctors, I'm sure they've killed more than their fair share of patients.

Hmm, it's a shame that the study didn't include DO schools - it would be interesting.

Anyway, I was curious whether or not your statement has any validity.

Let's test that claim in NJ. The New Jersey medical board has oversight of both MD and DO in that state.

In 1999, the board took the following actions:

Suspension of license
3 DOs
22 MDs

Revocation of license
0 DOs
13 MDs

Surrender of license
0 DOs
9 MDs

TOTAL: 47 (3DOs, 44 MDs)
Source: http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/bme/bmenews.pdf

According to the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), there were 2411 active osteopathic physicians in New Jersey in 2001
Source: http://www.aacom.org/data/annualreport/annualreport2002.pdf

According to the AMA Physician Data Resource, there are 31960 physicians in the state of New Jersey
(746 in Atlantic County, 5175 in Bergen, 1600 in Burlington, 2389 in Camden, 242 in Cape May, 260 Cumberland, 4022 Essex, 396 Gloucester, 1334 Hudson, 444 Huterdon, 1557 Mercer,
3017 Middlesex, 2550 Monmouth, 2113 Morris, 1016 Ocean, 1226 Passiac, 104 Salem, 1545 Somerset, 250 Sussex, 1724 Union, 205 in Warren County)
Source: http://www.ama-assn.org/cgi-bin/sserver/datalist.cgi


  • Osteopathic physicians make up 7.54% of physicians in NJ (2411/31960).
    Osteopathic physicians make up 6.38% of the disciplined physicians in NJ (3/47)
    Disciplined DOs make up 0.124% of DOs in NJ (3/2411)
    Disciplined MDs make up 0.149% of MDs in NJ (44/29549)
Note: The number 29549 was obtained by using 31960 (total physicians) - 2411 (DOs)


From the numbers, it seems that DOs are not disciplined at a higher rate than their allopathic counterpart. However, one must note several potential sources of error. The first is the discrepancy in the years. Ideally, data about total physicians and total osteopathic physicians should be from 1999. The second potential source of error is from the AMA Physician Data Resourse. The webpage states that the figures (which claims to include both MD and DO) are self-reported. It is entirely possible that the figures from the AMA website could be under-reported OR over-reported.

Despite a lack of standard deviation (and/or an attempt to quantify the errors mentioned), it seems that DOs and MDs in the state of New Jersey are at equal footing in regards to disciplinary action. Whether this conclusion is valid in other states remains to be tested.

What this study did not do was study whether nor not DOs kill more patients than MDs. That is for another author to ponder and study.

Group_theory
osteopathic basher and trasher
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Originally posted by OrthoFixation
It is generally true that the entrance credentials are slightly lower.
This is a common misperception. Entrance credentials for DO schools are phenomenally lower. Unlimited class retakes are allowed to replace poor grades. Even one retake can bump a GPA up substantially. And MCAT scores are lower than the Howard/Meharry level after correcting for the DO "best of each section" reporting.
I would love to see the DOs included in the next study.
 
Originally posted by do2md
This is a common misperception. Entrance credentials for DO schools are phenomenally lower. Unlimited class retakes are allowed to replace poor grades. Even one retake can bump a GPA up substantially. And MCAT scores are lower than the Howard/Meharry level after correcting for the DO "best of each section" reporting.
I would love to see the DOs included in the next study.

Hmmmm... guess it depends on your definition of phenomenal.
DO schools do have lower entrance credentials than MD schools. That is not disputed.

According to AACOM annual report (http://www.aacom.org/data/annualreport/annualreport2002.pdf)
the average MCAT scores for incoming students (year 2000) are:
Biological Science - 8.69
Physical Science - 8.18
Verbal Reasoning - 8.11

Science GPA - 3.36
Non-Science GPA - 3.50
Mean GPA - 3.43

It is true that retakes replace your previous course grade. However, both will show up on your report sent to the school. If you take orgo 5 times and get (D, D, C, C, A) - yeah, the A gets counted while the 2Ds and 2Cs are discounted - but the adcom will see the 2Ds and 2Cs and will be very suspicious.

But there is a misconception here. A lot of people believe that if they apply DO, they'll get accepted. Well, for the 2000-01 cycle, there were 43,948 applications (and first-year enrollment of 2927). Granted, people apply to multiple schools (like they do on AMCAS), but there are a significant amount of people who do not get accepted at all.

Just curious do2md, why the hatred of DOs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
i would avoid meharry and howard because they overtly discriminate against non URMs, and i would rather not be privy to ANY sort of discrimination on racial or ethnic grounds.
 
Originally posted by group_theory

Osteopathic physicians make up 7.54% of physicians in NJ (2411/31960).
Osteopathic physicians make up 6.38% of the disciplined physicians in NJ (3/47)
Disciplined DOs make up 0.124% of DOs in NJ (3/2411)
Disciplined MDs make up 0.149% of MDs in NJ (44/29549)
[/list]
Note: The number 29549 was obtained by using 31960 (total physicians) - 2411 (DOs)

another source of error is that DO's go into internal med at a far higher rate than their MD counterparts. Because the specialties are sued and disciplined at a higher rate, the MDs are bound to have a higher rate of disciplinary action (I belive that 60% of disciplinary actions are in ob and neurosurgury).
 
Originally posted by doctalaughs
another source of error is that DO's go into internal med at a far higher rate than their MD counterparts. Because the specialties are sued and disciplined at a higher rate, the MDs are bound to have a higher rate of disciplinary action (I belive that 60% of disciplinary actions are in ob and neurosurgury).

Hmmm, never thought of that.

I am sure people in high-risk speciality have a higher rate of being sued. However, usually a state medical board will take action if there is solid evidence of misconduct and incompetence - which can be found in neurosurgery, OB/GYN, Internal Meds, Family Med, EM, etc.. When I read the reasons why these NJ doctors were disciplined, I didn't get the sense that it was due to their field of specialization.

Perhaps you can read it yourself and make your own conclusion
http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/bme/bmenews.pdf
Page 4-7

Also take into account that the people who sits on the boards are usually physicians - so you're being judged by your peers - instead of a jury w/o knowledge or experience about the practice of medicine - and lawyers.

But my survey was very informal - and there are lots of errors involved (and maybe miscalculations). It's not like I was writing it for JAMA or NEJM ;)
 
Originally posted by group_theory
It's not like I was writing it for JAMA or NEJM
Nor does it appear that you were striving to be thorough or accurate:
1999 -- "In New Jersey, there were disciplinary actions reported against 897 doctors including 55 who were disciplined for substance abuse, 73 for misprescribing or overprescribing drugs, 14 for sexual abuse of or sexual misconduct with a patient, 67 for substandard care, incompetence or negligence and 48 who were convicted of a crime."
www.citizen.org/hrg/qdsite/STATES/newjersey.htm
 
Originally posted by group_theory
Biological Science - 8.69
Physical Science - 8.18
Verbal Reasoning - 8.11

Science GPA - 3.36
Non-Science GPA - 3.50
Mean GPA - 3.43
Are these not the numbers I just referred to as being grossly overinflated?

Originally posted by group_theory
Just curious do2md, why the hatred of DOs?
I think it may have something to do with the poor reading comprehension and reasoning skills evidenced all too often by the defenders of those great think tanks we refer to as DO schools.
 
Originally posted by do2md
Nor does it appear that you were striving to be thorough or accurate:
1999 -- "In New Jersey, there were disciplinary actions reported against 897 doctors including 55 who were disciplined for substance abuse, 73 for misprescribing or overprescribing drugs, 14 for sexual abuse of or sexual misconduct with a patient, 67 for substandard care, incompetence or negligence and 48 who were convicted of a crime."
www.citizen.org/hrg/qdsite/STATES/newjersey.htm

Hmmm, the website isn't showing up right now (nor can I access www.citizen.org).

As to the numbers, it comes from the NJ State Board of Medical Examiners website. The page is hosted on the state's website. So I had every reason to believe it was accurate.

However, your numbers seem more reasonable. Why the difference? Your guess is as good as mine. Oh well - it was an honest attempt to either confirm or dispute your claims. Who knows, maybe there is a higher percentage of DO being disciplined in PA, or FL or Texas.
 
Originally posted by do2md
Are these not the numbers I just referred to as being grossly overinflated?

Well, those are the number reported. Whether nor not they are grossly overinflated - well, that's your statement and opinion. You have yet to provide proof/evidence/links to support your claim.

Originally posted by do2md
I think it may have something to do with the poor reading comprehension and reasoning skills evidenced all too often by the defenders of those great think tanks we refer to as DO schools.

no comment
 
Originally posted by nanosomic
ortho,
you would not consider taking your family to mexico but others would and have done it. There are inherent dangers and corruption in the States too not just over there. Money and connection can buy favors in the USA also. Anywhere you go you are bound to find the good, the bad and the ugly.

Comparing corruption between USA and Mexico is laughable.

Mexican schools routinely take under the the table money to let people in their schools that dont even begin to meet the minimum academic requirements.

Its not just Mexico, its a fair number of foreign med schools that do this.
 
Originally posted by MacGyver
Comparing corruption between USA and Mexico is laughable.

Mexican schools routinely take under the the table money to let people in their schools that dont even begin to meet the minimum academic requirements.

Its not just Mexico, its a fair number of foreign med schools that do this.

What is laughable is your ignorance to corruption going on in American schools. I am not comparing the two, what I am saying is corruption exists everywhere in various degrees.
 
Originally posted by vladtaltos
You have serious issues. Howard and Meharry do produce brilliant doctors; the article doesn't dispute that. What it said was that they also produce doctors that are not as skilled at a higher rate than other schools. The 2 are not in conflict. If you lack the ability to discern the difference, it would not shock me.

Actually, you're in denial. The article states in more ways than one how MeHarry and Howard were consistently at the lower end of Medical School performance rankings, ranked last and 6th from last, even as far back as 1977. The article also implies (or outright states, I can't remember) that these problematic schools were having a hard time staying accredited and maintaining standards from the credentialing boards. The article also states in more ways than one that there is a correlation that the same four problematic schools had significantly lower entrance requirements than other schools. I recall a specific example that stated the average MCAT at Meharry and Howard being a 7, whereas the average MCAT at Harvard and Johns Hopkins being 11.5 and 11.7. If that were an MCAT passage you would have failed miserably at discerning the main idea of the passage, and also fail to make inferences from the data that was presented. I believe it wouldn't have been politically correct for the author of the article to outright say that Howard and Meharry produced sub-par physicians, however when taking into account that those schools produced 10x the number of infractions/mortalities of the other schools, combined with sharing the characteristic of having the lowest entrance requirements, you have to sometimes put one and one together and get two. Sorry if you are offended, but the statistics and studies don't lie.
 
wow. lots of people with issues.

incompetent people can come from all sorts of schools. highly competent people can come from all sorts of schools. there is a spectrum. call me crazy, but i think it *may* have something to do with the person, the individual in question, rather than the institution exclusively. for some folks, school is what they make of it, not what the school makes of them. i'm not about to go ask my highly competent physician if she went to Meharry and then find out *gasp* she DID, and subsequently seek another physician.

gawd and this is just a soapbox of mine but i am SO tired of people on these boards thinking they're inherently somehow *better* than other people solely on the basis of the school they attend or if they're allopathic or osteopathic or their mcat or board scores or their gpa or whether or not they're a non-US student or a US-student or whether they're asian or maorian or canadian or tibetan. i am so excited to work with colleagues having these issues and constant superiority complexes and nanna-nanna-boo-boo attitudes. :(

sorry my rant ended up on this thread.
 
howard is not a bad school. my friend goes there. the only thing is its in the bad part of DC I wouldnt want to walk down the block at night in that neighborhood
 
Originally posted by do2md
I think it may have something to do with the poor reading comprehension and reasoning skills evidenced all too often by the defenders of those great think tanks we refer to as DO schools.

Ouch.
 
Guess I've learned a lot from this thread.
 
why not? What about the good Mexican doctors in US hospitals who studied in Mexico. I may be wrong, but you are implying that because it is Mexico people should not go there.

I agree.

It's not really that bad. I'm assuming you are picturing a city with dirt-roads and people wearing sombreros everywhere...

I've seen American "ghettos" (pardon the term, but I couldn't find a better way to describe it so everyone would get it) that are much worse than any poor neighborhood in Mexico.

Either way, Mexico has good medical schools ( I lived there ), and good doctors come out of them.
 
wow old thread. but i think more blame lies on the system that allows these physicians to get licensed than the md schools themselves. like if students from guadelajara demonstrate through boards etc that they're competent, and boards and other measures are actually reliable, then i see no reason to discriminate against guad. grads. however, there's something wrong with how we license MDs if there are significant numbers of bad doctors.
 
However there does seem to be a trend between schools that accept applicants with below average scores and a much higher than average rate of gross medical incompetency.

Does this shock anyone? The results of the study do not surprise me at all.
 
wow. lots of people with issues.

incompetent people can come from all sorts of schools. highly competent people can come from all sorts of schools. there is a spectrum. call me crazy, but i think it *may* have something to do with the person, the individual in question, rather than the institution exclusively. for some folks, school is what they make of it, not what the school makes of them. i'm not about to go ask my highly competent physician if she went to Meharry and then find out *gasp* she DID, and subsequently seek another physician.

gawd and this is just a soapbox of mine but i am SO tired of people on these boards thinking they're inherently somehow *better* than other people solely on the basis of the school they attend or if they're allopathic or osteopathic or their mcat or board scores or their gpa or whether or not they're a non-US student or a US-student or whether they're asian or maorian or canadian or tibetan. i am so excited to work with colleagues having these issues and constant superiority complexes and nanna-nanna-boo-boo attitudes. :(

sorry my rant ended up on this thread.

Agreed
 
This thread was created(3 years ago) and resurrected for mischievious reasons. Worthless IMO.
 
Does this shock anyone? The results of the study do not surprise me at all.
Yeah I'm not surprised.

I'm actually more amused. I love when articles say "the <asdfasdf> did not respond" or "<asdfasdfa> declined an interview." ahahaha:laugh:
 
Can we just end this thread. really, like no more posts.
 
wow. lots of people with issues.

incompetent people can come from all sorts of schools. highly competent people can come from all sorts of schools. there is a spectrum. call me crazy, but i think it *may* have something to do with the person, the individual in question, rather than the institution exclusively. for some folks, school is what they make of it, not what the school makes of them. i'm not about to go ask my highly competent physician if she went to Meharry and then find out *gasp* she DID, and subsequently seek another physician.

gawd and this is just a soapbox of mine but i am SO tired of people on these boards thinking they're inherently somehow *better* than other people solely on the basis of the school they attend or if they're allopathic or osteopathic or their mcat or board scores or their gpa or whether or not they're a non-US student or a US-student or whether they're asian or maorian or canadian or tibetan. i am so excited to work with colleagues having these issues and constant superiority complexes and nanna-nanna-boo-boo attitudes. :(

sorry my rant ended up on this thread.

:thumbup:
 
hmm ok. I'll just turn a blind eye to the truth like you. Maybe we can start a club.:laugh:

Wow, you are funny. Just to let you know, what is in the media is not always the truth. Why don't you open your eyes!!:)
 
You guys are a bunch of real nice people. First, you start by banshing your fellow US MD schools, then some IMG places, then you drag in DO's to do some more bashing, even though you had data showing they were no worse or better. Whats next? Look up people on MDapps and see who got in with subpar stats and badger them on how lucky they are? Get over yourselves.:mad:


Now who is gonna be the jerk that says the MDapps thing is a good idea?
 
I'll say mdapps is a good thing...when used the right way. On the one hand, it's nice to see underdogs tell their tales of ultimate success. On the other, it's also nice to see pompous number ****** with great stats get humbled. As for this thread, it's admittedly pretty worthless. Mexico is more corrupt in many ways than the US. It's a fact. Mexico certainly does produce great doctors. Fact. Meharry and Howard do produce great doctors. Fact. Schools that tend to be a little less stringent in their admissions process will admittedly get some bad apples. What's the big deal? These are all facts and should not reflect negatively on a person because he/she went to Howard, Meharry, Mexico, Ross, SGU, etc...unless, of course, that somebody happens to be one of the bad apples or is simply too insecure to deal with the perceived stigma. We might as well end this thread unless somebody has some insightful information. As for exceptions to the so-called facts, forget it. There are always exceptions.
 
Wow, you are funny. Just to let you know, what is in the media is not always the truth. Why don't you open your eyes!!:)
Look, do you wanna start a club with me or not? I'm a busy man and I don't have time for this indecisiveness.
 
Top