Originally posted by JKDMed
Anyone know what kinda stats one would need to get into TUCOM as a non-resident?
It's a private school so I don't think there is any difference between in state and out of state.
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Originally posted by JKDMed
Anyone know what kinda stats one would need to get into TUCOM as a non-resident?
Originally posted by modelcitizen
Undergrad: UCSD (transferred)
Undergrad GPA: 2.83
MCAT: 22L
Major: Biology
Applied: SGU, Ross, OSU-COM, COMP, TUCOM, Univ. of Oklahoma, UCSD
Interviewed: SGU, OSU-COM, TUCOM, COMP
Accepted: OSU-COM
Rejected: SGU, Ross, OU & UCSD? (i assume)
I feel rejuvenated.Originally posted by DrMom
I don't know what the story is with modelcitizen, but because of some of his (or her) inflammatory statements about DOs while claiming to be accepted at a DO school & some PMs between us, I went to the admissions office at OSU. They have not interviewed or accepted anyone with stats anything like modelcitizen's (as posted below from another thread), nor have they accepted anyone with a degree from UCSD.
There is definitely some misrepresentation of some form going on here.
DrMom wrote on 01-28-2004 07:03 PM:
I wanted to let you know that, like many other schools do, the admissions office at OSU has been known to read these forums to see what people are saying about the school. You may want to keep that in mind.
modelcitizen wrote on 01-28-2004 09:26 PM:
Thanks, I didn't think about that.
I don't think I've said anything bad about OSU, or any other school that I can think of. I'm just very skeptical of the whole OMM thing. And from the responses I've seen to my inquiries about OMM, I'm finding myself even more skeptical. I'm sure schools would much rather have someone subject it to scientific scrutiny rather than just accept it on its face. Just as I would any bio-organic chemical reaction mechanism, for instance. Do you find it scientifically valid?
At any rate, thanks again and I'll keep in mind that they review these boards.
DrMom wrote on 01-28-2004 07:44 PM:
You may not have said anything negative about OSU, but you have said that DOs are clinically more incompetent. You haven't just been questioning OMM (which isn't a problem), you've been quite negative about it. There is a difference.
As to my opinions, there are aspects of OMM that have been scientifically explained & justified as effective. There are a few problems with OMM research, a major one is blinding (very difficult to do). Also, unfortunately many of the full-time OMM docs are not interested in doing research. I find that very frustrating. We do have a physiology PhD and a pediatrician (an MD, no less) doing OMM research (different studies). The pediatrician recently had a study on OMM and otitis media published.
All that said, I have had wonderful experiences with OMM (patient and treater). I ask that you go into it with an open mind. There are some methods that are a bit odd & I don't think they do a very good job explaining, but methods like muscle energy, counterstrain, and HVLA can be scientifically explained & work well if you have some idea what you're doing. Just like any other skill, it takes practice to be able to do it decently. Most of this comes from treating classmates. I do put time and effort into OMM, but it doesn't take all that much time overall. Only 3 hrs of class/week are devoted to OMM.
I don't have any classmates that I know of who accept OMM blindly (although I've seen 1 or 2 in other classes). We have a wide range of student interest in OMM from gurus to uninterested. I can't think of anyone, though, who comes across as anti-OMM.
Anyways, I just wanted to give you a heads up & try to give you a bit of the info you're wanting.
modelcitizen wrote on 01-28-2004 10:06 PM:
i'll have to disagree here.
1. the published, peer-reviewed article i cited refers to osteopaths' clinical "incompetence." And no one provided anything to rebut this.
2. clearly merely questioning this stuff has become a problem -- it provokes all sorts of attacks that the mods (i.e., you) are willing to turn your back to. it only turns negative in the responses to my questions, never before.
3. to go in with an "open mind" is something you do when evaluating a new religion, not a medical treatment method. all medicine should be subjected to strict scrutiny from the getgo. you would never administer a new drug with an open mind; you would examine every aspect of it as critically as possible. if you don't question OMM now, you'll be just like the old folks you're referring to who have too much vested at this point to start questioning it now. this crap has been around for 130yrs, and it's worse than chiropracty as far as I'm concerned because the people in DO schools are smarter and should know better. we should go in with a *critical* mind.
DrMom wrote on 01-29-2004 03:36 AM:
1.) It is always tenuous to make broad statements based on one study.
2.) As I said, I don't see any problem with questioning, but your tone has not been questioning, it has been outright negative.
3.) An open mind is used in medicine constantly. Surgeries have been performed without double-blinded studies without people having fits over it being unproven. (interestingly enough, I saw a study where they did do some single-blinded surgeries (can't blind the surgeon) ie: lap choles and found that there actually was a placebo effect to surgery. People with proven stones got better without having them removed.) While it is important for scientific studies to be done to prove the efficacy of OMM, you're fooling yourself if you think that all of medicine is scientividally proven.
My whole point has been that your attitude about all of this is negative. You have already decided that OMM is worthless. If you go in thinking that, you won't see it's value at all.
modelcitizen wrote on 01-29-2004 08:11 AM:
1. the "broad statement" is the authors' *conclusion*. if you assert it's wrong, all you have to do is cite *any* evidence to the contrary to defeat it.
2. my "outright negative" tone is called healthy skepticism everywhere else in the scientific world. look at the responses to this questioning; there's where you'll find your outright negative tone.
3. (a) double-blind studies are not the only way to validate (although they could certainly be used in many aspects of OMM). (b) if your example below is true, then surgeons have either stopped performing it, or more validated studies have shown that these earlier results were wrong. either way, surgeons would not have a problem at all stopping said technique and moving on to something that works. in fact, that's what they try to do all the time. that's why research exists. they don't define their "philosophy" by the technique they are using.
4. again, nowhere else (except possibly chiropracty) will you find your "open mind" approach to learning medicine. you will certainly not find it in surgery. i know it is against the DO credo, but i would urge you to stop blinding accepting this hogwash, and critically examine A.T.Still's methods like you would any other medical procedure. it's the only way you're going to get rid of the stuff you have already admitted goes unexplained.
5. finally, requiring proof that something does what it purports to do is not being negative, it's being critical. if there's any "value," it will be have to be proven, which is nothing more than you would ask of any allopathic procedure.
good luck to you. i'm sure you'll make a fine A.T.Still follower. see you next semester.
DrMom wrote on 01-29-2004 02:14 PM:
just out of curiosity, how did you manage to get into OSU-COM with such low stats (as you posted them in a thread around here)?
modelcitizen wrote on 01-29-2004 06:10 PM:
now that sounds a bit mean-spirited...
DrMom wrote on 01-29-2004 06:25 PM:
No, I'm truly curious.
modelcitizen wrote on 01-29-2004 08:32 PM:
i didn't do anything special that i know of. i don't think they're really that low for OSU. in fact one girl that was there when i was interviewing had lower stats than i did. not sure whether she was accepted or not, though.
i think my gpa may have been calculated a bit higher because of a class that i repeated, but i'm not sure about that. my ec's aren't too bad, either. other than that, i just put on the charm that you've seen in these threads 🙂.
DrMom wrote on 01-29-2004 06:55 PM:
Your stats are very low for OSU.
modelcitizen wrote on 01-29-2004 09:04 PM:
thanks for the kind words.
DrMom wrote on 01-31-2004 12:09 PM:
Truly, I'm curious. I don't know of anyone here with stats like that...and they usually interview those with lower stats later in the spring.
Where are you from origninally?
-------modelcitizen wrote on 01-31-2004 07:16 PM:
enid.
aren't the avg stats around 3.4/26? that means for every 4.0/31 there's a 2.9/21. again, i wasn't even the lowest at my interview. from what i've seen, especially among DO applicants, is that the people with the lower stats either (i) lie about them, or (ii) never disclose them.
Originally posted by DrMom
They're all the real PMs.
Originally posted by modelcitizen
Inflammatory statements about DO's?
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=1134444#post1134444Originally posted by modelcitizen
I think we've firmly established that:
1. A DO education causes extremely low USMLE scores; and
2. DO's are clinically more incompetent than any other group of physicians (which JP attributes to an "inferior education").
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=1137822#post1137822Originally posted by modelcitizen
that looks about right. i'd put sgu/ross above all do schools. and auc above certain do schools.
Originally posted by bullhorn
I am a little PERTURBED by DrMom's interrogation in regards to his stats and his acceptance to OSU-COM. I mean I know everyone wants to have pride in their school, but is the school THAT small that you know every single person in every single classes' stats? Furthermore,I have to agree with modelcitizen in that I have run into alot of people that chose DO as a backup, not willing to admit it....pad stats and then act like they chose DO period. (ie they fronting like they are me or Slickness). I am sure there are their share of them in every class. Finally, how is it possible for you to walk into your admissions office and request information regarding applicants' stats...AND be given it. Is this normal practice? Overall I am thinking DrMom's actions are type sketchy DESPITE being right that modelcitizen is an A$$.
Originally posted by DrMom
I certainly don't mind people using DO schools as a backup, but I don't appreciate them doing this and being publically negative about DOs.
I was asking about his stats, because I already knew that the school doesn't even interview anyone with below a 3.0 GPA and they almost never accept anyone with an MCAT of 22. It is not that I think I know everyone's stats here, it is because this is information that has been stated by the admissions office.
I did not go in to admissions and ask for info about his stats. I simply said that there was someone with the stats listed saying they were in the next class. They said that there was no way. They then double checked & called me back & said nobody had stats anything like that. I was given no information about anyone's stats, nor any information about any individual in the class of 2008. I can understand why you'd be upset if I had, though.
That cleared things right up for you, did it?Originally posted by bullhorn
Oh ok. I certainly understand your perspective about the negative image. Surprised that the office felt they needed to call you back....but they probably wanted to clear up any misconceptions also. thanks for the clarification.
So true.Originally posted by fdfirefly
bump....this is such an informing, helpful thread, just trying to get it going again 😀
Nice stats UCIgrad. So if you get into all the schools that you interviewed at, where would you go. I think you should go to COMP.Originally posted by UCIgrad2002
GPA: 3.5
Science GPA: 3.5
MCAT: 29
Accepted: TUCOM, NYCOM
Waiting: COMP, Drexel, VCU, GW

Dang Kry, pull out the big guns. I'm sure you'll get into one of the schools you're waiting for.Originally posted by Kry
GPA: 3.83
Science GPA: 3.71
MCAT: 33 L (11v 11b 11p)
Accepted: NYCOM
Interviews left: UMDNJ (04/16/04)
Waiting: Albany, Drexel, MSSM, NYMC
ECs: 700+ hours of volunteering (child life in pediatrics)
100 hours at a herbarium in a botanical garden
Research: 2 years in botany and 1 year in organic chem
Excellent LORs, but no DO letter.
Accepted with a 19 on the MCAT? WOW!!Originally posted by DocRadak
Undergrad: University of Wyoming
GPA: 3.45
Sci SPA: 3.35
Major: Zoology/Physiology
Minor: Biology
MCAT: 19O (5-VR, 6-PS, 8-BS)
Applied: LECOM, COMP, TUCOM, AZCOM, CCOM, NSUCOM, KCOM, PCOM, DMU/COMS, OUCOM
Interviewed: LECOM (Erie & Bradenton)
Accepted: LECOM - Bradenton
Declined Interview: TUCOM - Las Vegas (after accepted at LECOM)
Employment: 4 years summer archaeologist
Research: 2 years research in neuroscience and neuroanatomy lab
Extra Curriculars: Numerous hours shadowing/volunteering (MD and DO), Hospital extended care facility volunteer (2 months), Hospice volunteer (1 year), AED (premed honor society) Pre-Med Chairman, S.P.A. (activist and equal rights organization) Co-Chair and Board of Directors secretary.
Letters of Rec: excellent letters from organic chem and physics professors, and an extremely important LOR from LECOM graduate that I shadowed numerous times.
Just goes to show ya that schools look not only at the numbers, but at everything else you do. My GPA and MCAT scores dont at all show what I'll do as a med student and as an osteopathic physician. I know I'll be as great, if not better, than those brilliant minds that got excellent grades and MCAT scores.
Good luck to everybody in your respective medical programs... see ya at the residency programs... BE READY CUZ IM COMING!
Originally posted by DocRadak
Undergrad: University of Wyoming
GPA: 3.45
Sci SPA: 3.35
Major: Zoology/Physiology
Minor: Biology
MCAT: 19O (5-VR, 6-PS, 8-BS)
Applied: LECOM, COMP, TUCOM, AZCOM, CCOM, NSUCOM, KCOM, PCOM, DMU/COMS, OUCOM
Interviewed: LECOM (Erie & Bradenton)
Accepted: LECOM - Bradenton
Declined Interview: TUCOM - Las Vegas (after accepted at LECOM)
Employment: 4 years summer archaeologist
Research: 2 years research in neuroscience and neuroanatomy lab
Extra Curriculars: Numerous hours shadowing/volunteering (MD and DO), Hospital extended care facility volunteer (2 months), Hospice volunteer (1 year), AED (premed honor society) Pre-Med Chairman, S.P.A. (activist and equal rights organization) Co-Chair and Board of Directors secretary.
Letters of Rec: excellent letters from organic chem and physics professors, and an extremely important LOR from LECOM graduate that I shadowed numerous times.
Just goes to show ya that schools look not only at the numbers, but at everything else you do. My GPA and MCAT scores dont at all show what I'll do as a med student and as an osteopathic physician. I know I'll be as great, if not better, than those brilliant minds that got excellent grades and MCAT scores.
Good luck to everybody in your respective medical programs... see ya at the residency programs... BE READY CUZ IM COMING!

modelcitizen said:Undergrad: UCSD (transferred)
Undergrad GPA: 2.83
MCAT: 22L
Major: Biology
Applied: SGU, Ross, OSU-COM, COMP, TUCOM, Univ. of Oklahoma, UCSD
Interviewed: SGU, OSU-COM, TUCOM, COMP
Accepted: OSU-COM
Rejected: SGU, Ross, OU, UCSD, COMP & TUCOM
Now have to decide whether to defer a year and try for SGU/Ross again, or go ahead and go.
modelcitizen said:Undergrad: UCSD (transferred)
Undergrad GPA: 2.83
MCAT: 22L
Major: Biology
Applied: SGU, Ross, OSU-COM, COMP, TUCOM, Univ. of Oklahoma, UCSD
Interviewed: SGU, OSU-COM, TUCOM, COMP
Accepted: OSU-COM
Rejected: SGU, Ross, OU, UCSD, COMP & TUCOM
Now have to decide whether to defer a year and try for SGU/Ross again, or go ahead and go.
See what I mean? A less defensive response might have been "Good luck to you Modelcitizen!"Test Boy said:Anyone who is considering going to SGU/Ross over OSU-COM should go to the carribean. Good riddance.
modelcitizen said:See what I mean? A less defensive response might have been "Good luck to you Modelcitizen!"
It's not about the initials. But thanks!Robz said:If that means you want the MD initials then go for it.
Test Boy said:Anyone who is considering going to SGU/Ross over OSU-COM should go to the carribean. Good riddance.
DocRadak said:Undergrad: University of Wyoming
GPA: 3.45
Sci SPA: 3.35
Major: Zoology/Physiology
Minor: Biology
MCAT: 19O (5-VR, 6-PS, 8-BS)
Applied: LECOM, COMP, TUCOM, AZCOM, CCOM, NSUCOM, KCOM, PCOM, DMU/COMS, OUCOM
Interviewed: LECOM (Erie & Bradenton)
Accepted: LECOM - Bradenton
Declined Interview: TUCOM - Las Vegas (after accepted at LECOM)
Employment: 4 years summer archaeologist
Research: 2 years research in neuroscience and neuroanatomy lab
Extra Curriculars: Numerous hours shadowing/volunteering (MD and DO), Hospital extended care facility volunteer (2 months), Hospice volunteer (1 year), AED (premed honor society) Pre-Med Chairman, S.P.A. (activist and equal rights organization) Co-Chair and Board of Directors secretary.
Letters of Rec: excellent letters from organic chem and physics professors, and an extremely important LOR from LECOM graduate that I shadowed numerous times.
Just goes to show ya that schools look not only at the numbers, but at everything else you do. My GPA and MCAT scores dont at all show what I'll do as a med student and as an osteopathic physician. I know I'll be as great, if not better, than those brilliant minds that got excellent grades and MCAT scores.
Good luck to everybody in your respective medical programs... see ya at the residency programs... BE READY CUZ IM COMING!

Aren't you the pharmacist/optometrist wannabe? What brings you over here?South2006 said:At least modeltroll would be happy as an MD. I don't believe he would cut it for a DO, given his statements. Then again, grades and mcat don't really prove anything according to him right?
Our mission is to provide students with free, unbiased information, resources, and advising for careers in the health professions. We believe every student deserves access to trustworthy guidance, regardless of background or ability to pay.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.