Are acceptances for minorities really that skewed?

[touchpause13]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Yes, I am quite aware of how much responsibility I have as a doctor, as I've graduated from medical school and am currently a resident. So yes, I'm pretty sure I have a good idea, by now. But please keep lecturing to me about how much certain objective metrics demonstrate clairvoyance on clinical ability.

 

[Lucca]

I'm happy to call it how I see it for you guys all day long... and it's still early.

I encourage you to keep calling it how you see it in your interviews.

But maybe you can go see @DermViser about all those burns?

 

[touchpause13]

The vapors wafting thru Pre-Allopathic must be stronger than any mj joint, when premeds seem to believe that MCAT score and undergraduate GPA (even science GPA) is somehow indicative of how good of a doctor you'll be, or how well you can take care of patients.

Yo pass that @MDforMee clearly you have been hogging it for too long

 

[deleted480308]

I'm happy to call it how I see it for you guys all day long... and it's still early.

 

[MDforMee]

Are you geniuses even cognizant of what I posted, above?

The Supreme Court upheld a ban on affirmative action, and Asians in California black balled an affirmative action re-enactment referendum in California SPECIFICALLY IN HIGHER EDUCATION; both of these things happened within the last month.

 

[NuttyEngDude]

Asians are so overrepresented in medicine, even the HBCU medical schools Howard, Morehouse, Meharry are like 25-30% Asian. As soon as an Asian child is born their parents start saving for their med school tuition.

Asians are 5% of HBCUs

Take one look at the MSAR, and anyone can see this isn't true.

I hate misinformation so trying to correct this, though in the span of 30 minutes we've already more than 25 more posts, but anyways....

From the online MSAR, just now:
Morehouse 8/70 = 11.4%
Meharry 8/105 = 7.6%
Howard 17/118 = 14.4%

Total 33/293 = 11.3%
Legend: asian (non-duplicated) / total matriculants

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

That's racist

Which definition of racism are we operating under today? I can't keep up.
Is all stereotyping now considered racism?

 

[Mr Interesting]

I'm happy to call it how I see it for you guys all day long... and it's still early.

That's fine just know no one cares.

 

[deleted480308]

Are you geniuses even cognizant of what I posted, above?

The Supreme Court upheld a ban on affirmative action, and Asians in California black balled an affirmative action re-enactment referendum in California SPECIFICALLY IN HIGHER EDUCATION; both of these things happened within the last month.

Dude, I'm with you on not liking race based considerations.....but you are WAY WRONG on the implication that someone with a slightly lower mcat/gpa is incapable of learning to be a good doctor

 

[touchpause13]

Which definition of racism are we operating under today? I can't keep up.
Is all stereotyping now considered racism?

The more correct way to put my post would be that's prejudiced thinking. But it doesn't sound as good and I didn't want to get into a debate about what technically counts as racist in terms of sociology.

 

[Mad Jack]

Explain, then, how the hippocratic oath is supported by placing providers with inferior grades and test scores in charge of patient's care?

This is a logical fallacy if the admissions system is based on these same grades, test scores, and personal characteristics (excluding ethnicity).

If you're so concerned about high levels of patient care, you should be clamoring for us to take on more FMGs instead of US MDs and DOs. Or for DOs and IMGs with higher test scores to be snagging up spots in the match that are taken by "lesser qualified" US MDs that have lower (sometimes substantially so) board scores.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/20679648/

Best as I can tell, there isn't any research out there that correlates high test scores to better patient outcomes. Medicine is not a multiple choice exam, and relies far more on one's utilization of their senses and their data integration skills than on their quickly reading and picking the right answer from a list skills. A poor test taker might be an excellent physician and vice versa.

You must also keep in mind that each physician does not operate in isolation- medicine is a community. Diversity provides the medical community with unique insights that are particular to the background of each provider. These insights can be critical in dealing with some of the most underserved communities in the country, thus medicine as a whole would be losing a great asset of cultural competence were it to simply take people based on stats without consideration of their background.

 

[MDforMee]

Dude, I'm with you on not liking race based considerations.....but you are WAY WRONG on the implication that someone with a slightly lower mcat/gpa is incapable of learning to be a good doctor

I see your points, and I agree with the first.

But, I have to agree to disagree about race-based admissions.

Skin color is just that... skin color. It doesn't always translate to personal hardships overcome, socioeconomic status, adversity, etc. It sends the wrong message to people, and goes against civil rights.

 

[mexdoc91]

The answer is yes and no. Just because I am UIM, that doesn't mean I can get in strictly based on my background. I still need to work as hard as everyone else. We still have to be competent in science, have a great gpa and a competitive MCAT score.

Dont rely on your race to get in.

 

[DermViser]

I'm happy to call it how I see it for you guys all day long... and it's still early.

See that's the beauty of opinions, you can keep giving your unadulterated, uninformed opinions about clinical medicine (which you have no real experience in) and the rest of us can continue to laugh at them, esp. with evidence to the contrary. It doesn't make you any more correct.

 

[DermViser]

I encourage you to keep calling it how you see it in your interviews.

But maybe you can go see @DermViser about all those burns?

Hard to effectively treat a patient for burns when he purposefully keeps running back into the flames.

 

[Lucca]

I hate misinformation so trying to correct this, though in the span of 30 minutes we've already more than 25 more posts, but anyways....

From the online MSAR, just now:
Morehouse 8/70 = 11.4%
Meharry 8/105 = 7.6%
Howard 17/118 = 14.4%

Total 33/293 = 11.3%
Legend: asian (non-duplicated) / total matriculants

My data is from 2011 so thank u for the correction. I'm surprised its doubled in 3 yrs.

 

[DermViser]

If you're so concerned about high levels of patient care, you should be clamoring for us to take on more FMGs instead of US MDs and DOs. Or for DOs and IMGs with higher test scores to be snagging up spots in the match that are taken by "lesser qualified" US MDs that have lower (sometimes substantially so) board scores.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/20679648/

Best as I can tell, there isn't any research out there that correlates high test scores to better patient outcomes. Medicine is not a multiple choice exam, and relies far more on one's utilization of their senses and their data integration skills than on their quickly reading and picking the right answer from a list skills. A poor test taker might be an excellent physician and vice versa.

You must also keep in mind that each physician does not operate in isolation- medicine is a community. Diversity provides the medical community with unique insights that are particular to the background of each provider. These insights can be critical in dealing with some of the most underserved communities in the country, thus medicine as a whole would be losing a great asset of cultural competence were it to simply take people based on stats without consideration of their background.

BINGO.

 

[DermViser]

It sends the wrong message to people, and goes against civil rights.

Well, please lead us to the promise land, Dr. Martin Luther King.

 

[MDforMee]

Well, please lead us to the promise land, Dr. Martin Luther King.

Have you even read the responses that the Supreme Court Justices gave for upholding a ban on affirmative action?

And again, the Supreme Court upheld a ban on affirmative action, and Asians in California black balled an affirmative action re-enactment referendum in California SPECIFICALLY IN HIGHER EDUCATION; both of these things happened within the last month.

I'd welcome an intelligent debate on this topic, honestly. I posted in this thread with the intent of encouraging a debate on this issue... apparently, you kiddies don't want to do that, and play tit for tat, instead, but I'll be here if you change your minds.

 

[DermViser]

Yo pass that @MDforMee clearly you have been hogging it for too long

Something tells me that joint is laced with cocaine, based on the completely lack of reality-based thinking.

 

[mexdoc91]

What's interesting is that according to AAMC data from 2008, 75% of MD's are white.

6.3% are African American and 5.5% are Hispanic/Latino.

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

Have you even read the responses that the Supreme Court Justices gave for upholding a ban on affirmative action?

BroHoss, have you even read the justification given for URM status in medical school admissions?

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

What's interesting is that according to AAMC data from 2008, 75% of MD's are white.

6.3% are African American and 5.5% are Hispanic/Latino.

Help me out, what's interesting about that?

 

[DermViser]

Have you even read the responses that the Supreme Court Justices gave for upholding a ban on affirmative action?

The SCOTUS case confirmed that states have the ability to decide whether states can pass their own laws on the use of affirmative action practiced by public institutions who are accountable to taxpayers of that state who fund those institutions with their tax payer dollars.

The SCOTUS majority stated that they were NOT making a judgement on the right or wrong of affirmative action itself in this case.

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

I'd welcome an intelligent debate on this topic, honestly. I posted in this thread with the intent of encouraging a debate on this issue... apparently, you kiddies don't want to do that, and play tit for tat, instead, but I'll be here if you change your minds.

You're going to be crushed. This is going to be embarrassing.

 

[touchpause13]

Skin color is just that... skin color. It doesn't always translate to personal hardships overcome, socioeconomic status, adversity, etc. It sends the wrong message to people, and goes against civil rights.

This is literally the dumbest thing I have ever heard. In your world does racism seriously not exist?

 

[MDforMee]

The SCOTUS case confirmed that states have the ability to decide whether states can pass their own laws on the use of affirmative action practiced by public institutions who are accountable to taxpayers of that state who fund those institutions with their tax payer dollars.

The SCOTUS majority stated that they were NOT making a judgement on the right or wrong of affirmative action itself in this case.

So you didn't read them?

Let me help you... here's one:
... Were a public university to defend its use of a race-based admissions policy "on the ground that it was designed to benefit primarily minorities (as opposed to all students, regardless of color, by enhancing diversity), we would hold the policy unconstitutional," (Scalia)

 

[mexdoc91]

People who ignore skin color and say it doesn't matter are ignorant.

 

[Lucca]

1. A bitter ORM student will post how unfair it is then claim that all minorities are really rich but abuse welfare and "the system."

2. A minority poster will post a comment schooling the ORM poster about what the true goal of schools recruiting more minorities really is. If necessary the minority poster will also give a free history lesson and provide data specifically from the AAMC on this topic which will go purposely unnoticed by the ORM poster.

3. The ORM student will post a statement that starts with, "I have black friends but..." then post one of the most racist and ignorant things you have ever heard in your life.

4. The minority poster will then laugh and ignore the poster

5.The ORM student will then post another aggressively pathetic comment explaining how unfair it is that a minority person took their seat in med school without ever considering A) They were never promised a seat at any med school to begin with B)another ORM student with lower stats then them took their seat.

When you skim really fast it basically looks like this:

....

The prophecy has come to pass.

 

[mexdoc91]

Help me out, what's interesting about that?

The physician pool is severely skewed. So it makes sense why schools favor URM.

 

[DermViser]

So you didn't read them?

No, I did. And I'm telling you what they said. If this had just been an MCAT passage, you would have FAILED the reading comprehension part bc you reached the wrong conclusion.

 

[listener23]

.

 

[EMDO2018]

1. You don't know what a logical fallacy is.
2. What does this have to do with the hippocratic oath.
3. Just like any other academic metric, grades and test scores scale logarithmically with their utility. Saying someone is less qualified to be a physician because of grades and test scores is ridiculous. If you feel this way stop going to any doctor accepted in the 80s and early 00s because they had much easier than us. The metric is so high because of competition not because there is some ghost authority saying that is what you need to be a doctor hurrdurr.
4. When are you even applying?


http://www.gse.upenn.edu/pdf/cmsi/Changing_Face_HBCUs.pdf

You realize I was talking about HBCU medical schools right? Of course Asians are not at HBCU colleges.

 

[touchpause13]

This is getting to pigeon chess level guise

 

[Lucca]

Asians are so overrepresented in medicine, even the HBCU medical schools Howard, Morehouse, Meharry are like 25-30% Asian. As soon as an Asian child is born their parents start saving for their med school tuition.

You realize I was talking about HBCU medical schools right? Of course Asians are not at HBCU colleges.

If I misread, clearly I was misled.

 

[MDforMee]

No, I did. And I'm telling you what they said. If this had just been an MCAT passage, you would have FAILED the reading comprehension part bc you reached the wrong conclusion.

What part of encouraging intelligent debate didn't you understand? Reference your quotes with author's names, too. Why do I even bother?

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

The physician pool is severely skewed. So it makes sense why schools favor URM.

Skewed based on what? Are you not considering demographics? Or are you just going off of the total percentages?

 

[DermViser]

I'd welcome an intelligent debate on this topic, honestly. I posted in this thread with the intent of encouraging a debate on this issue... apparently, you kiddies don't want to do that, and play tit for tat, instead, but I'll be here if you change your minds.

Yes, we've seen how "intelligent" the debate has been thus far, in which you've miraculously been able to extrapolate clinical ability, ability to manage complex illnesses, and future patient's abilities to recover from their medical problems, based on the metrics of undergraduate GPA and MCAT scores. Such a claim is something even the medical literature and admissions committees don't make, and they have years of data from their matriculants.

 

[listener23]

I am a Nigerian American female. While feeling down about my GPA and overall stats and thinking about how crappy they seem compared to everyone else's, I found some charts on a thread on here that showed an extremely biased favor for black people. As in, a black person with a 30 MCAT and a 3.5 GPA being accepted over an Asian or Caucasian with the same stats.

Is that a reflection of reality? Do adcoms favor diversity that much? I don't want to get my hopes up if that graph isn't entirely accurate >_>

Next time ask these type of questionings on the underrepresented forum. Your Going to get nothing but hate and anger on this forum.

 

[mexdoc91]

Skewed based on what? Are you not considering demographics? Or are you just going off of the total percentages?

And that matters why? Any way we look at the data, the majority of physicians are white.

 

[MDforMee]

Yes, we've seen how "intelligent" the debate has been thus far, in which you've miraculously been able to extrapolate clinical ability, ability to manage complex illnesses, and future patient's abilities to recover from their medical problems, based on the metrics of undergraduate GPA and MCAT scores. Such a claim is something even the medical literature and admissions committees don't make, and they have years of data from their matriculants.

Okay, then, you must be aware of the Asian senator's responses to their affirmative action block, too.

What's your magnanimous opinion on that?

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

And that matters why? Any way we look at the data, the majority of physicians are white.

So you would rather that a minority be over represented than proportionally represented? Would you back a policy to encourage that?

 

[DermViser]

So you didn't read them?

Let me help you... here's one:
... Were a public university to defend its use of a race-based admissions policy "on the ground that it was designed to benefit primarily minorities (as opposed to all students, regardless of color, by enhancing diversity), we would hold the policy unconstitutional," (Scalia)

"This case is not about how the debate (over racial preferences) should be resolved," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in announcing the ruling. But to stop Michigan voters from making their own decision on affirmative action would be "an unprecedented restriction on a fundamental right held by all in common."

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

Okay, then, you must be aware of the Asian senator's responses to their affirmative action block, too.

What's your magnanimous opinion on that?

Who are you talking to? Quote someone if you want to engage them.

 

[MDforMee]

"This case is not about how the debate (over racial preferences) should be resolved," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in announcing the ruling. But to stop Michigan voters from making their own decision on affirmative action would be "an unprecedented restriction on a fundamental right held by all in common."

Context specificity, yes?

I said that the Justices ruled against AA based on the fact that it sets back civil rights.

 

[EMDO2018]

wow almost 100 post in just under an hour,

 

[DermViser]

Who are you talking to? Quote someone if you want to engage them.

Yes. I have no idea what an Asian senator's opinion has anything to do with this. It's a non sequitur.

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

Context specificity, yes?

I said that the Justices ruled against AA based on the fact that it sets back civil rights.

Seriously, Future-CardiologistOnFire, the "reply" button is what you're looking for.

 

[Lucca]

Context specificity, yes?

I said that the Justices ruled against AA based on the fact that it sets back civil rights.

That's not what you said. You linked Scalias quote saying that they would rule such an argument unconstitutional. I couldve discerned his commentary without reading anything he wrote, Scalia is the most right-wing activist judge on that court of right wing judges.

 

[WhippleWhileWeWork]

Scalia is the most right-wing activist judge on that court of right wing judges.

I can't ever make up my mind if I think he's brilliant or a raving lunatic.