Are acceptances for minorities really that skewed?

[Mad Jack]

---

Members do not see this ad.

That's only a recent trend in 2012 due to having their butts handed to them previously. Democrats showed them they can no longer ignore it.

Let's be cereal Derm, you and I both know that both parties are out to screw us. One will screw you for the guy who has a bigger wallet than you, while the other will screw you for the guys with smaller wallets. On the right, insurance companies, large hospital groups, big pharma, and medical device makers win, on the left side, the poor, uneducated, disabled, and basically everyone that makes peasant wages wins. But physicians are in this weird place in the middle- they make too much to be a part of the "real" middle class, but they're way too poor to be considered truly "wealthy" on the level that could shape the Republican platform. It's an Alien versus Predator situation, and we're the Marines.

 

[DermViser]

Let's be cereal Derm, you and I both know that both parties are out to screw us. One will screw you for the guy who has a bigger wallet than you, while the other will screw you for the guys with smaller wallets. On the right, insurance companies, large hospital groups, big pharma, and medical device makers win, on the left side, the poor, uneducated, disabled, and basically everyone that makes peasant wages wins. But physicians are in this weird place in the middle- they make too much to be a part of the "real" middle class, but they're way too poor to be considered truly "wealthy" on the level that could shape the Republican platform. It's an Alien versus Predator situation, and we're the Marines.

Right, so I'm going to go with the party that screws me less. Republicans have never advocated for single payer healthcare, and support tort reform. By the way, Obamacare (passed by Democrats) helps insurance companies, large hospital groups, big pharma, and medical device makers much more than doctors.

 

[Mad Jack]

Right, so I'm going to go with the party that screws me less. Republicans have never advocated for single payer healthcare, and support tort reform.

I can't vote for either party in good conscience. To do so would make me feel partly responsible for the ensuing flurry of whargharbl were my party of choice to win. Screw them all.

 

[touchpause13]

Right, so I'm going to go with the party that screws me less. Republicans have never advocated for single payer healthcare, and support tort reform. By the way, Obamacare (passed by Democrats) helps insurance companies, large hospital groups, big pharma, and medical device makers much more than doctors.

If your sole concern is as a physician that makes sense. But dems are certainly the lesser of 2 evils for someone like me.

 

[DermViser]

If your sole concern is as a physician that makes sense. But dems are certainly the lesser of 2 evils for someone like me.

Remember that when they prop up mental health Nurse NPs (who are infiltrating Psych) as good alternatives to hiring physicians.

 

[Mad Jack]

Remember that when they prop up mental health Nurse NPs (who are infiltrating Psych) as good alternatives to hiring physicians.

She's got more riding on the sociopolitical side of things than the economic one.

 

[WillburCobb]

Republicans have never advocated for single payer healthcare, and support tort reform.

You should do some research on bills/policies some past Republican presidents (the most obvious example was ovet 50 years ago) tried to pass/supported related to this...the push for this in at least some form has been going on for almost a century by both parties.

 

[DermViser]

She's got more riding on the sociopolitical side of things than the economic one.

Yes, I figured that was likely the case.

 

[DermViser]

You should do some research on bills/policies some past Republican presidents (the most obvious example was ovet 50 years ago) tried to pass/supported related to this...the push for this in at least some form has been going on for almost a century by both parties.

Yes, but I'm dealing with the parties in modern day history. There has been a lot of party realignment in the past few decades.

 

[touchpause13]

She's got more riding on the sociopolitical side of things than the economic one.

Yeah. Financially, I will always be fine so it's not as big of a concern to me as social issues are.

 

[Mad Jack]

I wish someone would start a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party that isn't libtard extreme. I really feel such a party would be far more aligned with today's voters than the current parties are. Maybe I'll do it someday, who knows.

 

[deleted480308]

I wish someone would start a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party that isn't libtard extreme. I really feel such a party would be far more aligned with today's voters than the current parties are. Maybe I'll do it someday, who knows.

that would be libertarians.....don't want the government to do almost anything, and you can do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt people

 

[DrLeon]

Man, we have another one of these threads....

Although I have been thoroughly entertained by the banter going on here I feel as though I have to say something because of all of the misinformation and misaligned anger being thrown about. I feel like I am almost uniquely qualified to talk on this subject matter for a few reasons. 1. I am an African American male medical school student (almost the rarest of all the types of medical students) 2. I am a student member of my schools Admissions Committee and I have passed judgement over hundreds of prospective applicants. 3. I conducted a presentation on the need for diversity in our admissions policy in front the accrediting body of Osteopathic medical schools (COCA).

I can tell you all right now that you are having the wrong argument. AA largely has no place in our admissions process, or any school that I know of. The Institute of Medicine released a landmark report in 2004 titled "In the Nation's Compelling Interest". This report detailed the need to diversify the healthcare workforce to better meet the changing demographics of America. After the IOM report, the LCME decided to make it a standard for all MD granting institutions in America to value diversity. To that end they passed standads MS-8 and IS-16 around 2009 I think. These standards basically require all LCME school to both recruit and maintain students from diverse backgrounds. Diversity valuation is built into the system, so premed arguments about AA are moot.

On the Osteopathic side, our standards lag a little behind and we currently only have a non-discrimination policy in place (Hence the reason I conducted my presentation.

As far as my school goes, diversity is part of our mission. "The School seeks to develop clinically skillful, compassionate and culturally competent physicians from diverse backgrounds, who are prepared to become leaders in their communities." I think that diversity is part of the mission of more than just a couple of med schools. With that said, I have personally voted rejected URM candidates with low number and accept ORM candidates with low numbers. There was a URM candidate that barely made the cut off for ourMCAT requirements. When they couldn't provide a compelling story for how they spent their time since graduating and applying, they were swiftly rejected. Conversely, I personally interviewed an ORM candidate with similar numbers. His background and story compelled the committee to offer him an acceptance. I would love for other ADCOM members to chime in on this, so we get the perspective from multiple angles.

And for the record, my MCAT score was less than a point below my school's average at the time of my application, and my GPA was around 3.9 (Grad). Also, I'm an actual African American (My parents, and their parents, and their parents' parents were born here); in fact, I think my last name belonged to the family that owned my ancestors.

 

[DrLeon]

Oh yeah forgot to mention...When URM status was a part of our admissions process it was only one part of the overall review of the applicant. It was a category like In state, or research, or MCAT, or GPA, or varsity athlete. It could not make or break an applicant.

When we accept applicants we make a tremendous investment in them. Why would we waste years and money on a student that couldn't become a competent physician. This whole notion of GPA/MCAT=good physician is a fallacy. We wouldn't subject a person to crushing debt and cheat our state out of a physician just to say we have diversity in our class.

 

[Mad Jack]

that would be libertarians.....don't want the government to do almost anything, and you can do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt people

Libertarians are too far right generally though on the economic side for most American's tastes. I want a party that is more moderate than the Libs on the social side, more moderate than the republicans on the economic side, not off the chain on both like the Libtards.

 

[touchpause13]

More libertarians vote Republican

 

[MDforMee]

Are any of you planning on practicing in underserved areas?

I'm planning on practicing in rural Northern California. I'm the big white savior, baby

Great. Another white person thinking they are helping people of color. Your white-savior complex is really messed up.

 

[touchpause13]

Are any of you planning on practicing in underserved areas?

I'm planning on practicing in rural Northern California. I'm the big white savior, baby

Do ya want a cookie?

 

[MDforMee]

Do ya want a cookie?

I want a hug, actually.

Gimme a huggy wuggy, snoochie boochie?

 

[touchpause13]

I want a hug, actually.

Gimme a huggy wuggy, snoochie boochie?

 

[MDforMee]

I'm serious, though.

I'm not just talking to hear myself talk, here. I just think that it's funny how people complain about race based admissions, SES disparities, etc etc, but when you bring up actually lifting a finger to help other people, it gets all quiet.

 

[Mr Interesting]

I want a hug, actually.

Gimme a huggy wuggy, snoochie boochie?

 

[Mad Jack]

I'm serious, though.

I'm not just talking to hear myself talk, here. I just think that it's funny how people complain about race based admissions, SES disparities, etc etc, but when you bring up actually lifting a finger to help other people, it gets all quiet.

Oh, for a second there I thought you were serious about the hug. That would just be sad lol.

 

[MDforMee]

Oh, for a second there I thought you were serious about the hug. That would just be sad lol.

I'm going to write a better response when I have a minute

 

[touchpause13]

Oh, for a second there I thought you were serious about the hug. That would just be sad lol.

Me too. Like dude I'm not touching anyone

 

[Mad Jack]

We should dredge up that thread that was on here a while ago, asking if being compassionate should be required for becoming a physician.

I think the title of it was something like "Do you really have to care about helping people to be a doctor?" Hahaha

Maybe I'm just delusional to think that I can do something with an MD besides hand out pills?

I plan on practicing in the middle of nowhere because the money is good and it will limit my precious snowflake exposure, as they tend to aggregate in more affluent areas. I'll happen to be doing good in the process, but I ain't taking credit for that.

 

[Mad Jack]

On another note, I'm pretty thrilled this thread hasn't degenerated into a bunch of poo flinging shenanigans yet.

 

[BamaNicole]

Are any of you planning on practicing in underserved areas?

I'm planning on practicing in rural Northern California. I'm the big white savior, baby

I plan to spend time on reservations as a physician....so yes.

 

[touchpause13]

For the record I'm planning on staying in the Midwest and want to work within the LGBTQ community. So yeah

 

[Lucca]

For the record I'm planning on staying in the Midwest and want to work within the LGBTQ community. So yeah

That's disgusting.....the Midwest?

 

[touchpause13]

That's disgusting.....the Midwest?

Lol I really love snow guys.

 

[BamaNicole]

Libertarians are too far right generally though on the economic side for most American's tastes. I want a party that is more moderate than the Libs on the social side, more moderate than the republicans on the economic side, not off the chain on both like the Libtards.

See I don't think that works. Your idea makes sense.....you can't make sense in politics.

 

[touchpause13]

See I don't think that works. Your idea makes sense.....you can't make sense in politics.

Haha I knew there had to be a fatal flaw in there somewhere!

 

[sat0ri]

White people might very well choose to go back and serve underserved communities, but they typically pick different communities. They might go to Appalachia, the rural Midwest, or other areas that access to care but have primarily white populations, not because they're racist, but because these surroundings are more familiar and easier to adjust to. The same situation often applies to URM applicants. Another issue is that, while whites and Asians can easily integrate into upper-class communities, many URMs find themselves in a situation where they have the choice of moving into a white communjity and abandoning their culture in the process, or retaining their culture by living in a predominantly AA or Hispanic community, but conversely sacrificing some of the amenities of affluent communities. If you're white or Asian, there's not a lot of sacrifice- you get to keep your culture and move to a more affluent area, it's just a win across the board. To many URM applicants, either the transition proves too difficult, or they find their culture more important than upscale houses and good public schools, so they return to their roots. The underserved aren't one broad category of people, they're several communities, and you need to have the right mix of physicians to help as many of those communities as possible.

Sure that seems reasonable enough. Those are somewhat abstract ideas that I'm admittedly under-read in (I'm trying to fix that). It makes me a bit skeptical as well, because the ideas are more narratives than hard-science fact, but I think I buy into the story nonetheless.

Where I have trouble following, to put it very plainly, is that while I think the idea is great for the AA (et al.) community, I sort of sympathize Asian community as well in that they have to earn so much higher of a grade and score on the MCAT simply because they were born a certain way that is beyond their control. Very plainly, why can you take away from the Asians (and lesser extent the whites, but I really don't care about us, we have plenty of, so called "privelage", is the trending word) to benefit the AA's (et al.). My problem is that I don't accept utilitarianism (I don't think the ends justify the means) so I have trouble then what is the ethical basis for this. I have trouble answering "why? why should an asian have to work so much harder?". While systematic and discrimination is not acceptable, I'm not so convinced that alleviating the disadvantages imposed by society based on race by in turn disadvantaging based others based on race is the best idea (that's right, I just made a case for reverse racism, feminists in the house where you at? @touchpause13 ). If you don't accept the utilitarian framework, how can you say the good of others (alleviating racism/descrimantion/systematic oppression) can be based off the harm of others? Again, it's not that I don't think the motivation is good, because I do think it's good and noble, but it's that I don't think the ends justify the means. I don't think it's logically impossible, I just haven't resolved this myself yet, nor heard anyone put a reasonable argument forward for the idea. Again, I'm a product of the 90's, "not the color of your skin, but the content of your character", Obama administration era, and it just is so counter-intuitive these sensibilities.

I do think it's funny that white people seem so threatened by this. It's not immediately clear from the data, but it's entirely possible that we might need even higher GPA's and MCAT scores to be competitive if we were playing on an egalitarian playing field (that is, if we had to compete with the higher Asian stats). On the other side too though, it seems to much easier for people to vilify white people, but when it becomes clear that Asians are the one predominnatly more affected, they become more reticent.

 

[NontradCA]

Remember that when they prop up mental health Nurse NPs (who are infiltrating Psych) as good alternatives to hiring physicians.

Who cares...I don't look at healthcare as an US vs. Them. The majority of physicians, nurses, and other workers don't. Everyone's cashing in together and the good of the patient gets trivialized. If physicians lose money in this model, I don't feel sorry for them. Especially when they are hypocritical about it.

 

[DermViser]

Who cares...I don't look at healthcare as an US vs. Them. The majority of physicians, nurses, and other workers don't. Everyone's cashing in together and the good of the patient gets trivialized. If physicians lose money in this model, I don't feel sorry for them. Especially when they are hypocritical about it.

Remember that when you're 6 figures in debt. Physicians are hardly being hypocritical.

 

[NontradCA]

Remember that when you're 6 figures in debt. Physicians are hardly being hypocritical.

I don't have, and will not have any debt.

 

[DermViser]

I don't have, and will not have any debt.

All the more reason then why you could care less, bc you don't have anything to lose. The "good of the patient", is being cared for by the most knowledgeable provider and that is the physician.

 

[Mad Jack]

Sure that seems reasonable enough. Those are somewhat abstract ideas that I'm admittedly under-read in (I'm trying to fix that). It makes me a bit skeptical as well, because the ideas are more narratives than hard-science fact, but I think I buy into the story nonetheless.

Where I have trouble following, to put it very plainly, is that while I think the idea is great for the AA (et al.) community, I sort of sympathize Asian community as well in that they have to earn so much higher of a grade and score on the MCAT simply because they were born a certain way that is beyond their control. Very plainly, why can you take away from the Asians (and lesser extent the whites, but I really don't care about us, we have plenty of, so called "privelage", is the trending word) to benefit the AA's (et al.). My problem is that I don't accept utilitarianism (I don't think the ends justify the means) so I have trouble then what is the ethical basis for this. I have trouble answering "why? why should an asian have to work so much harder?". While systematic and discrimination is not acceptable, I'm not so convinced that alleviating the disadvantages imposed by society based on race by in turn disadvantaging based others based on race is the best idea (that's right, I just made a case for reverse racism, feminists in the house where you at? @touchpause13 ). If you don't accept the utilitarian framework, how can you say the good of others (alleviating racism/descrimantion/systematic oppression) can be based off the harm of others? Again, it's not that I don't think the motivation is good, because I do think it's good and noble, but it's that I don't think the ends justify the means. I don't think it's logically impossible, I just haven't resolved this myself yet, nor heard anyone put a reasonable argument forward for the idea. Again, I'm a product of the 90's, "not the color of your skin, but the content of your character", Obama administration era, and it just is so counter-intuitive these sensibilities.

I do think it's funny that white people seem so threatened by this. It's not immediately clear from the data, but it's entirely possible that we might need even higher GPA's and MCAT scores to be competitive if we were playing on an egalitarian playing field (that is, if we had to compete with the higher Asian stats). On the other side too though, it seems to much easier for people to vilify white people, but when it becomes clear that Asians are the one predominnatly more affected, they become more reticent.

I'm pretty well read on the subject. There is ample data out there that URM physicians disproportionately serve underserved URM communities. I'm also a utilitarian, but here's the thing- I'm a utilitarian that believes in providing the best care for the most people. The most utilitarian scenario possible is a completely even distribution of physicians, which isn't going to happen with medical schools that are largely white and Asian. Supply and demand will never, ever push a white or Asian doc (unless they're a FMG- FMGs are the most prolific providers of underserved care in the country) into the North End of Hartford. Making it all about stats would thus deprive communities like that one of much needed physicians, since whites and Asians would push most of the URM candidates out and then congregate in affluent areas post-residency.

A big reason you're hitting some dissonance is that you are transfixed on the racial aspect but forgetting the cultural side of things. It is the culture of the candidates, not the color of their skin, that is more likely to result in them practicing in these communities. Culture can't be quantified or measured, but it is an extremely important aspect of candidate selection.

 

[MDforMee]

I'm pretty well read on the subject. There is ample data out there that URM physicians disproportionately serve underserved URM communities. I'm also a utilitarian, but here's the thing- I'm a utilitarian that believes in providing the best care for the most people. The most utilitarian scenario possible is a completely even distribution of physicians, which isn't going to happen with medical schools that are largely white and Asian. Supply and demand will never, ever push a white or Asian doc (unless they're a FMG- FMGs are the most prolific providers of underserved care in the country) into the North End of Hartford. Making it all about stats would thus deprive communities like that one of much needed physicians, since whites and Asians would push most of the URM candidates out and then congregate in affluent areas post-residency.

A big reason you're hitting some dissonance is that you are transfixed on the racial aspect but forgetting the cultural side of things. It is the culture of the candidates, not the color of their skin, that is more likely to result in them practicing in these communities. Culture can't be quantified or measured, but it is an extremely important aspect of candidate selection.

I'm just going to leave this here:
"Twenty percent of the population in California lives in rural areas, but only nine percent of physicians practice rurally."

 

[touchpause13]

For the record NP overreach does greatly piss me off. There are a lot of things that piss me off about the Democratic party. There are just more things that the Republican party does that I feel will have a negative impact on my life. It's a lesser of two evils pick for me, it's not like I'm particularly gun ho about the dems, I just hate them less.

 

[Mad Jack]

I'm just going to leave this here:
"Twenty percent of the population in California lives in rural areas, but only nine percent of physicians practice rurally."

Trust me, you'll get an app boost if you plan on doing rural primary care and grew up in a rural area but are white. Schools loved that I plan to practice in underserved communities, and that I had the background and clinical experience to make such a commitment not seem like BS.

 

[NontradCA]

All the more reason then why you could care less, bc you don't have anything to lose. The "good of the patient", is being cared for by the most knowledgeable provider and that is the physician.

NPs are taking advantage of a system that physicians take advantage of. The only difference is that nurses are smart enough to band together to have powerful lobbies. Physicians spend too much time worrying about their own tails, that they do not have any power collectively.

 

[MDforMee]

Trust me, you'll get an app boost if you plan on doing rural primary care and grew up in a rural area but are white. Schools loved that I plan to practice in underserved communities, and that I had the background and clinical experience to make such a commitment not seem like BS.

Interesting. Thanks for this tidbit. Yeah, I'm from the country... I had cows, pigs, chickens, and lived on a lot of land (15 acres) in rural Northern California from 3-18. I'm white, too. Corn pone. It's not a lie, either. I have a picture of me as a little kid in a cowboy outfit riding on a sheep, and I went to community colleges in BFE, so I've got transcriptual evidence, lol.

I'm definitely going back to rural Northern California for primary care.

 

[sat0ri]

I'm pretty well read on the subject. There is ample data out there that URM physicians disproportionately serve underserved URM communities. I'm also a utilitarian, but here's the thing- I'm a utilitarian that believes in providing the best care for the most people. The most utilitarian scenario possible is a completely even distribution of physicians, which isn't going to happen with medical schools that are largely white and Asian. Supply and demand will never, ever push a white or Asian doc (unless they're a FMG- FMGs are the most prolific providers of underserved care in the country) into the North End of Hartford. Making it all about stats would thus deprive communities like that one of much needed physicians, since whites and Asians would push most of the URM candidates out and then congregate in affluent areas post-residency.

A big reason you're hitting some dissonance is that you are transfixed on the racial aspect but forgetting the cultural side of things. It is the culture of the candidates, not the color of their skin, that is more likely to result in them practicing in these communities. Culture can't be quantified or measured, but it is an extremely important aspect of candidate selection.

Right there is some cognitive dissonance. If someone asked me, is this a good thing?, I'd probably say it's for the best. If someone asked me why, like a rigorous philosophical why, If don't think I could explain it to them. I a little Asian child came up to me and asked me why he has to work so much harder, I still don't think I could explain it to him. I'm more Kantian in my ethics, so I might be asking the wrong person then, but I don't know how I could tell him that. Like if a black child and a asian child where in the room, idk how I could explain those infamous SDN graphs. That said, I love showing them to my distraught URM friends when they think they might not have the stats to get in.

"never, ever" I see what you're saying, but I'm jumping off the train at this point. Everything else is fine, but are you saying, in this absolutist's hypothetical, that even when all the hospitals are booked in the 'gentrified' areas, and the hospitals in the "Hartford" (idk where that is.. embarassing) are vacant of doctors, and there's doctors with no jobs, they would not go work in the rougher parts? No way. Btw whats FMG?

Since you are well-read on this, is there any remark on why the URM goes to those areas? Is it possible it is because the other areas are so competitive? I mean, of course you'll say no, but is there any way to show that it is by choice, not circumstance? Sorry, it might sound insensitive, but it reminds me of when you don't get into a good school you say I'm going to this other school because it more aligns with my mission. Like maybe, but there's always that doubt I guess.

 

[DermViser]

NPs are taking advantage of a system that physicians take advantage of. The only difference is that nurses are smart enough to band together to have powerful lobbies. Physicians spend too much time worrying about their own tails, that they do not have any power collectively.

And pray tell, what is the system that physicians are taking advantage of? NPs present themselves as "cheaper" versions of physicians - with "equivalent" outcomes to legislative bodies that are trying to cut healthcare costs and say that they're willing to fill the primary care gap. However, when you look you see that most are in specialties, not primary care.

The only reason that it hasn't worked as well, is bc American patients as a whole demand to be seen by physicians.

 

[NontradCA]

And pray tell, what is the system that physicians are taking advantage of?

The only reason that it hasn't worked as well, is bc American patients as a whole demand to be seen by physicians.

What system? That medicine is a business? How is this not obvious?

NPs present themselves as "cheaper" versions of physicians - with "equivalent" outcomes to legislative bodies that are trying to cut healthcare costs and say that they're willing to fill the primary care gap. However, when you look you see that most are in specialties, not primary care.

This is hilarious, didn't you read what I said about taking advantage of the same system? Primary Care residencies go unfilled by the hundreds. Because specialties is where the money is. And you are looking down on NPs cause they're going where the money is, just like their physician overlords? C'mon man.

 

[DermViser]

What system? That medicine is a business? How is this not obvious?

This is hilarious, didn't you read what I said about taking advantage of the same system? Primary Care residencies go unfilled by the hundreds. Because specialties is where the money is. And you are looking down on NPs cause they're going where the money is, just like their physician overlords? C'mon man.

Genius, primary care residencies don't go "unfilled". They're filled, except by IMGs. I know this will shock you, but it's not just bc of the money that AMGs don't like primary care.

 

[NontradCA]

Genius, primary care residencies don't go "unfilled". They're filled, except by IMGs. I know this will shock you, but it's not just bc of the money that AMGs don't like primary care.

Right...so you're sidetracking. So bottom of the barrel students fill primary care, fair enough. Lel. There's still hundreds of DO PC spots that go unfilled every year.

Whatever the reason you want to come up with other than money, NPs are going to want it for the same reason. But let's be real. If FP paid as much as Ortho , it would be super competitive.

I get why physicians are upset about NP coming into their territory and decreasing their money for more work. But you have to realize that outsiders aren't going to see it that way. Ever. So long as our system remains a business.

 

[DermViser]

Right...so you're sidetracking. So bottom of the barrel students fill primary care, fair enough. Lel. There's still hundreds of DO PC spots that go unfilled every year.

Whatever the reason you want to come up with other than money, NPs are going to want it for the same reason. But let's be real. If FP paid as much as Ortho , it would be super competitive.

Right, I'm sidetracking. You say that primary care spots go "unfilled" (WRONG) and I correct you, which means I'm "sidetracking". How are allopathic applicants responsible for DO primary spots going unfilled, when they can't even apply for those residencies?