2018-2019 NYU Long Island

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Embryo said:
When do y’all think we’ll start hearing decisions post interview?
Click to expand...

First of all, I'm liking that gender-neutral use of "y'all"

Just going off of numbers alone, they would have known enough bottom-of-the-list applicants after the first week of interviewing to start sending those epochal R's... but we know that they didn't.

They said during interviews that they are sending R's and A's based on ~what's best for students, and not based on what makes decisions easier for other schools.~

This was mentioned in regards to the April 15th, 30th, and May 20th.

So, they are probably gonna stick to May 14th-21st and maybe even further. Who knows ‍♂️ .

It's a new school and they are already accredited *cough* NYU power *cough*.

They'll do what they want at the end of the day, and I will still be here shirking off my papers until Ultra-Instinct anxiety mode kicks in.

P.S. If you can read this hit me with that like button... Feed ego plz -> need food -> ego starving
 
Applicants gather, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my acceptance. I shall take no R's, hold no waitlists, father no specialties. I shall pursue no fellowships and win no residencies. I shall tend and befriend at my post. I am the scalpel in the darkness. I am the watcher on the threads. I am the shield that guards the realms of the underserved. I pledge my life and honor to primary care, for this night and all the nights to come.

―The primary care physician's oath
 
I’m really nervous for my interview. I don’t even know what to wear lol
 
Is anyone out there... are you still alive?
 
Last edited:
MarcNg said:
I am pretty sure everyone is still waiting for the call and trying to avoid checking this thread. But I am here if you want to discuss the meaning of life 😛
Click to expand...

So on that topic of the meaning of life, I think we are all created by random chance due to the inherent properties of a variety of particles. Given enough time basic macromolecules would come to assemble and eventually come together in a combination that induces self-replication. Giving this process enough time and under the right circumstances, these self-replicating units (if allowing for imperfect replication) would slowly change over time. Eventually, they would become complex enough to interact with stimuli in their environment becoming more complex until they had a better means to facilitate their self-replication (like evolutionary enzymes allowing for changes to happen faster and faster). I think all these processes would lead to more changes that ultimately speed up the change and advancement of this process. So as time goes on these changes can happen faster and faster allowing for more changes until we get some stable cellular organism that could reproduce. I think over time these evolutionary processes would accelerate until we have some semblance of life, but this path would have had innumerable set-backs over time. Like a thread-of-life in time that could be snapped at any point removing billions of years of random molecular interactions and completely erasing life as we know it.

In our case, the thread didn't snap, and we became complex enough in a pattern that was fast enough to resist and environmental setbacks. I also think life was able to advance to this point because we had both literal and figurative enzymes that could speed up both reactions and evolutionary changes respectively. I think modern technology is one of these figurative enzymes and we don't treat it as such because of the way we frame our perspective in the world around us. I think technology like the Cas9/CRISPR system that is highly debated is one of these "evolutionary enzymes" and people are aware that because our timeline is a thread this technology could either help us resist environmental stresses or snap the thread-of-life.

I think that the universe has existed forever and by some random event (maybe in the past trillion years black holes swallowing everything in the universe led to some major collapsing instability which ultimately created the big bang, and this process could have been happening for trillions of years, and in this big bang cycle we just happened to be created by random chance).

Getting back to the meaning of life, you might think my explanation means that we are nothing special and here simply because of a random chance, but my view on the matter is actually on the contrary. Each person on this planet has literally had an almost one in infinity chance of being here, and that is something that we should value and cherish. I think each individual person and culture is something amazing which might not have been here in another cycle of life and the fact that we all have the capacity to learn about all these different cultures, religions, people and lifestyles is something we are desensitized to because they've been around us for so long and we all have our own cultures and values that we have a tendency to stick to. I think working in medicine will give me the opportunity to help people enjoy more of their life by giving them more time to learn about the world around them. Life may be a speck of time in an endless existence that cycles forever, and this may mean that random chance could make an exact replica of you in a trillion years from now that would have no idea that you ever existed. While all this is hypothetical what isn't hypothetical is the fact that you are alive now, in a world filled with more information than you could ever hope to understand and you have your life and vitality. While this may mean we have no distinct purpose in the world, you can give yourself purpose by doing whatever you can to explore the world around you and learn more about it or make a mark on society which allows your name to be cherished for a longer speck of time.
 
Last edited:
nihil_nomen said:
So on that topic of the meaning of life, I think we are all created by random chance due to the inherent properties of a variety of particles. Given enough time basic macromolecules would come to assemble and eventually come together in a combination that induces self-replication. Giving this process enough time and under the right circumstances, these self-replicating units (if allowing for imperfect replication) would slowly change over time. Eventually, they would become complex enough to interact with stimuli in their environment becoming more complex until they had a better means to facilitate their self-replication (like evolutionary enzymes allowing for changes to happen faster and faster). I think all these processes would lead to more changes that ultimately speed up the change and advancement of this process. So as time goes on these changes can happen faster and faster allowing for more changes until we get some stable cellular organism that could reproduce. I think over time these evolutionary processes would accelerate until we have some semblance of life, but this path would have had innumerable set-backs over time. Like a thread-of-life in time that could be snapped at any point removing billions of years of random molecular interactions and completely erasing life as we know it.

In our case, the thread didn't snap, and we became complex enough in a pattern that was fast enough to resist and environmental setbacks. I also think life was able to advance to this point because we had both literal and figurative enzymes that could speed up both reactions and evolutionary changes respectively. I think modern technology is one of these figurative enzymes and we don't treat it as such because of the way we frame our perspective in the world around us. I think technology like the Cas9/CRISPR system that is highly debated is one of these "evolutionary enzymes" and people are aware that because our timeline is a thread this technology could either help us resist environmental stresses or snap the thread-of-life.

I think that the universe has existed forever and by some random event (maybe in the past trillion years black holes swallowing everything in the universe led to some major collapsing instability which ultimately created the big bang, and this process could have been happening for trillions of years, and in this big bang cycle we just happened to be created by random chance).

Getting back to the meaning of life, you might think my explanation means that we are nothing special, but a random chance but my view on the matter is actually on the contrary. Each person on this planet has literally had an almost one in infinity chance of being here, and that is something that we should value and cherish. I think each individual person and culture is something amazing which might not have been here in another cycle of life and the fact that we all have the capacity to learn about all these different cultures, religions, people and lifestyles is something we are desensitized to because they've been around us for so long and we all have our own cultures and values that we have a tendency to stick to. I think working in medicine will give me the opportunity to help people enjoy more of their life by giving them more time to learn about the world around them. Life may be a speck of time in an endless existence that cycles forever, and this may mean that random chance could make an exact replica of you in a trillion years from now that would have no idea that you ever existed. While all this is hypothetical what isn't hypothetical is the fact that you are alive now, in a world filled with more information than you could ever hope to understand and you have your life and vitality. While this may mean we have no distinct purpose in the world, you can give yourself purpose by doing whatever you can to explore the world around you and learn more about it or make a mark on society which allows your name to be cherished for a longer speck of time.
Click to expand...

The universe has existed for billions of years, and we're existing just in time to browse dank memes.
 
nihil_nomen said:
So on that topic of the meaning of life, I think we are all created by random chance due to the inherent properties of a variety of particles. Given enough time basic macromolecules would come to assemble and eventually come together in a combination that induces self-replication. Giving this process enough time and under the right circumstances, these self-replicating units (if allowing for imperfect replication) would slowly change over time. Eventually, they would become complex enough to interact with stimuli in their environment becoming more complex until they had a better means to facilitate their self-replication (like evolutionary enzymes allowing for changes to happen faster and faster). I think all these processes would lead to more changes that ultimately speed up the change and advancement of this process. So as time goes on these changes can happen faster and faster allowing for more changes until we get some stable cellular organism that could reproduce. I think over time these evolutionary processes would accelerate until we have some semblance of life, but this path would have had innumerable set-backs over time. Like a thread-of-life in time that could be snapped at any point removing billions of years of random molecular interactions and completely erasing life as we know it.

In our case, the thread didn't snap, and we became complex enough in a pattern that was fast enough to resist and environmental setbacks. I also think life was able to advance to this point because we had both literal and figurative enzymes that could speed up both reactions and evolutionary changes respectively. I think modern technology is one of these figurative enzymes and we don't treat it as such because of the way we frame our perspective in the world around us. I think technology like the Cas9/CRISPR system that is highly debated is one of these "evolutionary enzymes" and people are aware that because our timeline is a thread this technology could either help us resist environmental stresses or snap the thread-of-life.

I think that the universe has existed forever and by some random event (maybe in the past trillion years black holes swallowing everything in the universe led to some major collapsing instability which ultimately created the big bang, and this process could have been happening for trillions of years, and in this big bang cycle we just happened to be created by random chance).

Getting back to the meaning of life, you might think my explanation means that we are nothing special and here simply because of a random chance, but my view on the matter is actually on the contrary. Each person on this planet has literally had an almost one in infinity chance of being here, and that is something that we should value and cherish. I think each individual person and culture is something amazing which might not have been here in another cycle of life and the fact that we all have the capacity to learn about all these different cultures, religions, people and lifestyles is something we are desensitized to because they've been around us for so long and we all have our own cultures and values that we have a tendency to stick to. I think working in medicine will give me the opportunity to help people enjoy more of their life by giving them more time to learn about the world around them. Life may be a speck of time in an endless existence that cycles forever, and this may mean that random chance could make an exact replica of you in a trillion years from now that would have no idea that you ever existed. While all this is hypothetical what isn't hypothetical is the fact that you are alive now, in a world filled with more information than you could ever hope to understand and you have your life and vitality. While this may mean we have no distinct purpose in the world, you can give yourself purpose by doing whatever you can to explore the world around you and learn more about it or make a mark on society which allows your name to be cherished for a longer speck of time.
Click to expand...

What a wall of text! I agree with your probabilistic perspective. I think you might enjoy the selfish gene and its sequel, the extended phenotype.
 
Embryo said:
So bets on what will come first, GoT finale or NYULISOM decisions?
Click to expand...
At my interview Dr. Barlev said that, while they have been trickling out very few rolling A’s, the majority of decisions will be sent the week of the 13th (most likely towards the end of the week).
 
They probably trickled a few acceptances before 4/30 to see what kind of applicants they could snag before the plan to enroll deadline so they could estimate out how many acceptances to give out.

If I had to guess, there likely wont be many if any decisions released before they're ready to send them out en masse.
 
doctahdoctah2019 said:
Was your interview before or after the email he sent where he mentioned the majority would be sent 2nd to 3rd week of May?
Click to expand...
I interviewed this week and Dean Barlev said next Wednesday is the last (and I think only left) interview day and we should hear roughly a week after that so around the 15th to maybe the 17th
 
Last edited:
doctahdoctah2019 said:
maybe. seems too early to say though based on what's been posted here.
Click to expand...
well think about it, if 2 people have already been accepted on sdn, it's not unreasonable to assume that 24 people total have been accepted (or will be), since I imagine the majority of applicants wouldn't post their acceptances on sdn.
 
doctahdoctah2019 said:
well they haven't finished interviews yet, I don't think they'd accept all 24 before interviews are over. Dean Barlev said on my interview day that nobody is interviewing for waitlist spots, everyone is interviewing for an actual seat in the class. I would imagine that what is happening is exactly what they told us- a handful of acceptances have been sent out, and the remaining acceptances will be sent out in the next week/1.5 weeks. I hope that waitlist/rejection emails are sent out in the same time frame so we all know where we stand.
Click to expand...
Ah yeah, you are right I remember him saying that too now that you mention it.
 
Do ya'll think there will be anyone who turns down their acceptance to this program or is it really going to be just 24 acceptances for 400 interviews.
 
Embryo said:
Do ya'll think there will be anyone who turns down their acceptance to this program or is it really going to be just 24 acceptances for 400 interviews.
Click to expand...
I think there'll be a few people who will. It might be free, but some people will be scared off by the fact that it's a new school, and people may have gotten into more established schools they'd prefer to go to.
 
Embryo said:
Do ya'll think there will be anyone who turns down their acceptance to this program or is it really going to be just 24 acceptances for 400 interviews.
Click to expand...

I think there will be some people who don't accept it, but very few, because of the time of year. Not enough to justify like 40 acceptances, so they'll likely only give out 24 and move from there based on when applicants commit.
 
I'll be interested to see what the overall stats/background of the class ends up being; if it ends up just being top stats people then they should have interviewed more conservatively, but if there is a range of stats then they were clearly looking for a specific type of person so they had to interview liberally.
 
Embryo said:
I'll be interested to see what the overall stats/background of the class ends up being; if it ends up just being top stats people then they should have interviewed more conservatively, but if there is a range of stats then they were clearly looking for a specific type of person so they had to interview liberally.
Click to expand...
Yeah that makes sense. It seems like they're doing a truly holistic review from what I've seen here and on my interview day.
 
Embryo said:
I'll be interested to see what the overall stats/background of the class ends up being; if it ends up just being top stats people then they should have interviewed more conservatively, but if there is a range of stats then they were clearly looking for a specific type of person so they had to interview liberally.
Click to expand...

To speak to this, I have very modest stats when it comes to gpa and mcat. I certainly am not in the top tier of applicants when it comes to this. I have a lot of professional experience in public health grant funded programs (HIV/STD, Chronic Disease Prevention) which is think they really liked. Obviously I can only speculate on the reasons for my acceptance.
 
DRoverTru said:
To speak to this, I have very modest stats when it comes to gpa and mcat. I certainly am not in the top tier of applicants when it comes to this. I have a lot of professional experience in public health grant funded programs (HIV/STD, Chronic Disease Prevention) which is think they really liked. Obviously I can only speculate on the reasons for my acceptance.
Click to expand...


That's so refreshing to hear! I feel like I'm in the same boat when it comes to stats. Do you think you'll be going there in the fall?
 
lil_nae said:
That's so refreshing to hear! I feel like I'm in the same boat when it comes to stats. Do you think you'll be going there in the fall?
Click to expand...

Yes I have already comitted to attend here. The tuition reprieve, and subsidized housing is hard to pass up. The program looks solid too. So I am definitely going to go!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wysdoc
2024-2025 NYU - Long Island
2 3 4
Replies
167
Views
45K
cheesegirlpuff
C
chilly_md
2023-2024 NYU - Long Island
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
322
Views
76K
drdream314
D
wysdoc
2022-2023 NYU - Long Island
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
373
Views
84K
showkayaker
S
wysdoc
2021-2022 NYU, Long Island
19 20 21 22 23
Replies
1K
Views
162K
whataweirdo
W
wysdoc
2024-2025 NYU (Grossman)
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
640
Views
233K
sz909
S
Top