Are medical students naturally arrogant?

Burrell College of Osteopathic Medicine
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Kahreek said:
i swear i encounter disney people like you, everyday, like colleagues that are fascinated by disney movies, i just never really got into disney (maybe because i didnt watch them as a young lad) Well i did watch a few, i just didnt like them, if you think about it all disney movies are pretty sad, every single one of them.
Click to expand...

They're meant to give you the feels.

Doctor Bob said:
(singing) Do you want to place a foley? Or push a stretcher down the hall?
Click to expand...

Sounds like a veiled threat.
 
Last edited:
Kahreek said:
i swear i encounter disney people like you, everyday, like colleagues that are fascinated by disney movies, i just never really got into disney (maybe because i didnt watch them as a young lad) Well i did watch a few, i just didnt like them, if you think about it all disney movies are pretty sad, every single one of them.
Click to expand...

I've seen tons of Disney movies as a kid and teen...and even in my 20s, good happy stuff 🙂

Plus, I've lived near Disneyworld, happiest place on Earth 😀
 
I like how this thread continues to go on long after the OP was banned for this post.
 
sidefx said:
I completely agree that a lot of laypersons out there could spend all day on the internet researching their symptoms and still not be able to tell their ass from their elbow. However, and I'm sure this will be taken offensively by any PCPs who read this, if you're an intelligent person with a university background in the sciences and are familiar with journals and effective researching, its not hard to learn more about a lot of pathologies than an FM knows, after spending about 20-30 minutes on google and pubmed. Not hating on them by any means (I will probably become one myself), its just simply the nature of the job as a PCP that the scope of practice is so broad there is no possible way they can have detailed knowledge of every disease and injury out there.

Back in undergrad I had a bit of seborrheic dermatitis on my face I wanted to get taken care of. Did about 30 minutes of researching on google to arrive at a definitive self-diagnosis (it was an extremely classical presentation of seborrheic dermatitis) and I knew exactly what the most effective and up-to-date treatments were for it. I knew the detailed presentation, I knew the pathophysiology. Definitely not saying that I was anything special for knowing any of this, just pointing out that it is easily possible to learn a hell of a lot about one specific disease in a relatively short period of time if you are an intelligent and scientifically minded person.

I went to the FM knowing exactly what I was looking for, and yes I tried to steer the doctors clinical decision... as I should. Luckily the doc did not respond as condescendingly as you would have. I get there and she wasn't even sure if it was dermatitis, psoriasis, rosacea or something else. I explained to her why I thought it was seborrheic dermatitis and luckily she did not become smug and defensive, but humbly agreed that I was probably right and prescribed the appropriate medication. To think that its not possible for an intelligent and educated patient to learn more detailed information about a specific disease than an average FM would know (especially the more obscure / uncommon pathologies) after 30 minutes of effective internet researching is a little bit out of touch with reality in the age of google, pubmed and uptodate. I know its tough to swallow that after a decade of medical education an intelligent patient can learn more about some diseases in 30 minutes of googling than I will know about the disease as an attending. It's the reality of the internet age though.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Because I can more accurately recite l'hopital's rule, soon after researching it on google, than my old phd mathematician prof I am at parity with his understanding of that field of mathematics and application of the rule. We're all experts at anything today because of the internet. Seriously, it's not like we're less intelligent yet simultaneously more confident.

main.png
 
Last edited:
yappy said:
I totally agree. Because I can more accurately recite l'hopital's rule, soon after researching it on google, than my old phd mathematician prof I am at parity with his understanding of that field of mathematics and application of the rule. We're all experts at anything today because of the internet. Seriously, it's not like we're less intelligent yet simultaneously more confident.
Click to expand...

So I guess reading a 1 paragraph synopsis about a disease in first aid or BRS pathology makes you more of an expert than an intelligent person who has spent several hours researching that same topic in detail, simply because you went to med school and they didnt... makes sense. We'll all be better off when this kind of blind arrogance dies out of medicine, and I believe it will in the coming decades (at least to some extent). Although by the looks of it you're not even in medicine...

I think the problem is that physicians are reluctant to adapt to the internet age, no longer is it the case where all patients are completely oblivious to their own problems and we are the all-knowing authority on all things medicine who simply dictates what treatments are being prescribed and the patient takes our word for it. There is far too much to know nowadays to be able to learn and retain even a significant portion of it, especially as a PCP. And detailed medical information is far too easily accessible to the public to expect that intelligent and well-read patients are always going to be completely oblivious to their own medical concerns and will never have anything useful to add to clinical decision making. This isn't the pre-internet era when there was no effective way of learning about medical conditions outside of medical school, and as a new generation of doctor I'd suggest you get used to patients always giving their input. Because you can be damn sure that anyone with access to google is going to be reading about their problems and will have something to say. It's our job to discern between people who are just confusing themselves and dont know wtf they are talking about, and those who can actually provide valuable insight into their healthcare decisions. If one thing is for sure though, it is that condescendingly scoffing at people who try to have an intelligent discussion with you about their medical problems is a sure-fire way of getting a bad rep in the public eye and losing patients.
 
sidefx said:
So I guess reading a 1 paragraph synopsis about a disease in first aid or BRS pathology makes you more of an expert than an intelligent person who has spent several hours researching that same topic in detail, simply because you went to med school and they didnt... makes sense. We'll all be better off when this kind of blind arrogance dies out of medicine, and I believe it will in the coming decades (at least to some extent). Although by the looks of it you're not even in medicine...

I think the problem is that physicians are reluctant to adapt to the internet age, no longer is it the case where all patients are completely oblivious to their own problems and we are the all-knowing authority on all things medicine who simply dictates what treatments are being prescribed and the patient takes our word for it. There is far too much to know nowadays to be able to learn and retain even a significant portion of it, especially as a PCP. And detailed medical information is far too easily accessible to the public to expect that intelligent and well-read patients are always going to be completely oblivious to their own medical concerns and will never have anything useful to add to clinical decision making. This isn't the pre-internet era when there was no effective way of learning about medical conditions outside of medical school, and as a new generation of doctor I'd suggest you get used to patients always giving their input. Because you can be damn sure that anyone with access to google is going to be reading about their problems and will have something to say. It's our job to discern between people who are just confusing themselves and dont know wtf they are talking about, and those who can actually provide valuable insight into their healthcare decisions. If one thing is for sure though, it is that condescendingly scoffing at people who try to have an intelligent discussion with you about their medical problems is a sure-fire way of getting a bad rep in the public eye and losing patients.
Click to expand...

Your arguments are all over the place. In one post you're comparing a layperson's' knowledge, albeit with an introductory undergraduate science background, to that of a practicing physician. In another post you're comparing said layperson's knowledge to BRS or first aid. Which is it? Then you proceed to call me arrogant for acknowledging differences between the global knowledge of a physician, with lots of practical application, to narrow focused, unsupported, novel, internet searches of a intro-science-literate-layperson.

We're really arguing about a larger issue. The rest of your post reads like it was written by the typical 21st century technologists. Logic as follows - "Becuz da' internet". Indeed, the IQ of westerners had been steadily declining for some time now. I could go into how this intellectual decline, coupled with technologist logic, is really some sort of populist movement but it would go against your internet-dogma. Brass tacks - despite reading an economics journal that person's opinion about the activity of the Fed is not as informed as an actual economist. Code monkey =/= engineer. And a self dx by a lay person, despite novel cases of success, is not as informed as a competent physician.

“I know that I am intelligent, because I know that I know nothing.” ~Socrates
 
Last edited:
yappy said:
I totally agree. Because I can more accurately recite l'hopital's rule, soon after researching it on google, than my old phd mathematician prof I am at parity with his understanding of that field of mathematics and application of the rule. We're all experts at anything today because of the internet.

main.png
Click to expand...
Ironically, I'm now an actual expert on Star Trek after searching what seemed like the bowels of the internet for this meme reference.
 
WhippleWhileWeWork said:
Bribes and veiled threats, I thought this is how everyone did it?
Click to expand...
No, only the weak ones have to resort to veiling their threats. Real winners don't bother with cryptic speak, because they are above any repercussions. Glad it worked out for you, but know that you have definitely lowered the bar though. You should use your time to raise your narcissism to insufferable levels and then the rest of us may consider you for an invitation to the club.
 
NeuroSpeed said:
No, only the weak ones have to resort to veiling their threats. Real winners don't bother with cryptic speak, because they are above any repercussions. Glad it worked out for you, but know that you have definitely lowered the bar though. You should use your time to raise your narcissism to insufferable levels and then the rest of us may consider you for an invitation to the club.
Click to expand...

I knew it, this place is full of maniacs. :whoa:
 
Is it arrogant to think your class is smarter than a class above/below yours if your test scores and clinic performances are statistically proven to be better?
 
yappy said:
Your arguments are all over the place. In one post you're comparing a layperson's' knowledge, albeit with an introductory undergraduate science background, to that of a practicing physician. In another post you're comparing said layperson's knowledge to BRS or first aid. Which is it? Then you proceed to call me arrogant for acknowledging differences between the global knowledge of a physician, with lots of practical application, to narrow focused, unsupported, novel, internet searches of a intro-science-literate-layperson.

We're really arguing about a larger issue. The rest of your post reads like it was written by the typical 21st century technologists. Logic as follows - "Becuz da' internet". Indeed, the IQ of westerners had been steadily declining for some time now. I could go into how this intellectual decline, coupled with technologist logic, is really some sort of populist movement but it would go against your internet-dogma. Brass tacks - despite reading an economics journal that person's opinion about the activity of the Fed is not as informed as an actual economist. Code monkey =/= engineer. And a self dx by a lay person, despite novel cases of success, is not as informed as a competent physician.
Click to expand...

Nope I've been referring to the same thing the entire time, try to keep up.

- You fail to recognize that not every pathology is taught in medical school, and not every pathology is seen on the wards during training. The extent of a PCPs immediate knowledge on it might be a brief paragraph they read in BRS and first aid, if they even remember it at all. Yes there are a lot of things that are quite complex and someone who hasn't undergone medical training will not be able to appreciate the interconnectedness and implications of certain things. It is also extremely plausible that an intelligent person who has done their research can know significantly more about a disease than a PCP. If you think because you went to medical school it means that nobody could possibly know more about anything medicine related than you, you are indeed arrogant and quite naive.

- You seem to think that anyone who uses the internet other than a physician is a complete incompetent ***** with no clue how to research. "Becuz da internetz" Seriously? Are you that sheltered? Yes there are plenty of *****s out there who couldn't tell their ass from their elbow no matter how long they pound on their keyboards, there are also plenty of intelligent people out there who know how to think critically and differentiate between the mountains of garbage found on the internet and the mountains of useful information. It is absolutely laughable that you think the entire internet is an "unsupported" resource. You do realize that you can access nearly every text book and every journal article in existence on the internet right? You do realize that BY FAR the most widely used resource by actual physicians who are researching something themselves is the internet right? Yet here you are laughing about the idea of someone actually learning something reliable from the internet. Doesn't surprise me that you think the internet is somehow making people stupid. Giving some people a false sense of understanding? Sure. Is it lowering their IQ? LOL... no. You are completely out of touch with reality dude.

- Not sure what IQ has to do with any of this to begin with. Yes there are a lot of dumb people out there. Nothing new. Those aren't the people we have been talking about. We are also not talking about how much medical knowledge a physician has compared to a non-physician, obviously it is not even comparable. A physicians opinion will usually be far more well informed, and that is why we have physicians... But what we are talking about here, is the possibility that there are intelligent people out there who are quite capable of learning things about medicine over the internet and are able to differentiate between reliable sources and garbage. You specifically stated that you don't think an engineer could possibly learn more than any physician about a very specific medical condition, and expressed your desire to scoff at him for even suggesting that he has a clue what he's talking about. This is simply wrong and naive. It's like you are living in your own little fantasy world where every physician is a demigod with exhaustively detailed flawless knowledge and foresight about every medical condition in existence (not even close to being true), while every non-physician is mentally-handicapped and completely incapable of such rudimentary tasks as using the internet effectively or comprehending anything they read about medicine (also not even close to being true). And you wonder why I call you arrogant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sidefx said:
I completely agree that a lot of laypersons out there could spend all day on the internet researching their symptoms and still not be able to tell their ass from their elbow. However, and I'm sure this will be taken offensively by any PCPs who read this, if you're an intelligent person with a university background in the sciences and are familiar with journals and effective researching, its not hard to learn more about a lot of pathologies than an FM knows, after spending about 20-30 minutes on google and pubmed. Not hating on them by any means (I will probably become one myself), its just simply the nature of the job as a PCP that the scope of practice is so broad there is no possible way they can have detailed knowledge of every disease and injury out there.
Click to expand...

yappy said:
I totally agree. Because I can more accurately recite l'hopital's rule, soon after researching it on google, than my old phd mathematician prof I am at parity with his understanding of that field of mathematics and application of the rule.
Click to expand...

I think Yappy would need university background in mathematics, not science, for this analogy to track. Faulty analogy, as it stands.
 
Nidor said:
I feel like you are brazing over the fact that PCP's have years of clinical experience. Based on internet knowledge it can be very challenging to separate a horse presenting in an uncommon way from a zebra. I would argue that medicine is about more then factual knowledge. Furthermore, I feel like it would be extraordinarily difficult to understand and have insight in most pathology without at least an undergraduate understanding of human physiology. Not to say patients using the internet is a bad thing, as long as they use correct and up to date information (some patients will find this on their own, others can be recommended certain websites) it can be a valuable source for those patients that find comfort in knowing specifics about their pathology.
Click to expand...

I completely agree, and not intending to undervalue the importance of clinical experience. Like I said, there are a lot of diseases out there that are pretty complicated for your everyday patient to try and fully understand (such as diabetes) and a lot that are difficult to even identify without a good amount of experience and a sound knowledge base. Once again, not trying to hate on PCPs or undervalue the important services that they provide. My only point is to refute his argument that it is impossible for someone like an engineer to learn a lot about a disease by using the internet, and certainly possible *in some cases* to learn more than a PCP might know about it given how broad their scope of practice is and how infrequently certain conditions will present to their clinic. I know because I've experienced this exact thing personally when I've gone to see an FM. It's really not that hard to do a bit of reading as someone with a science background and learn a substantial amount about a medical condition like seborrheic dermatitis in a relatively short amount of time. Certainly more than most PCPs would know off hand, and certainly enough to warrant the PCP listening to their input. And I'm glad that there are physicians out there that are humble enough to recognize this fact.
 
sidefx said:
I completely agree, and not intending to undervalue the importance of clinical experience. Like I said, there are a lot of diseases out there that are pretty complicated for your everyday patient to try and fully understand (such as diabetes) and a lot that are difficult to even identify without a good amount of experience and a sound knowledge base. Once again, not trying to hate on PCPs or undervalue the important services that they provide. My only point is to refute his argument that it is impossible for someone like an engineer to learn a lot about a disease by using the internet, and certainly possible *in some cases* to learn more than a PCP might know about it given how broad their scope of practice is and how infrequently certain conditions will present to their clinic. I know because I've experienced this exact thing personally when I've gone to see an FM. It's really not that hard to do a bit of reading as someone with a science background and learn a substantial amount about a medical condition like seborrheic dermatitis in a relatively short amount of time. Certainly more than most PCPs would know off hand, and certainly enough to warrant the PCP listening to their input. And I'm glad that there are physicians out there that are humble enough to recognize this fact.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure about this. Maybe a patient would know more about something like seborrheic dermatitis than the average FM intern, but by the end of residency I would think that most FPs know a great deal about relatively common illnesses such as these that would present in their offices. And if not, they could probably do that internet research much more effectively, and with much greater understanding, than a layperson.
 
Serous Demilune said:
I'm not so sure about this. Maybe a patient would know more about something like seborrheic dermatitis than the average FM intern, but by the end of residency I would think that most FPs know a great deal about relatively common illnesses such as these that would present in their offices. And if not, they could probably do that internet research much more effectively, and with much greater understanding, than a layperson.
Click to expand...

I disagree that they would necessarily know more about something like seborrheic dermatitis, because the FM I went to when I had it definitely did not know that much about it. She was not able to differentiate my dermatitis from psoriasis, rosacea, or other skin conditions. I had done a bit of researching myself and had to explain to her why I thought it was seborrheic dermatitis and not something else. Luckily she listened to what I had to say. I do however, completely agree with you that if the doctor actually took the time to do the research on it themselves if their knowledge is a bit hazy on a subject that they would obviously be much better at it than the patient given their breadth of pre-existing medical knowledge. The problem is that most PCPs simply don't have the time to do that or won't do that. We live in an age where FMs are compensated by piece work and are therefore encouraged to rush through consults as quickly as possible without having time to be overly thorough.
 
"Think about how dumb the average person is. Now, think about how half of the population is even dumber."
 
sidefx said:
I disagree that they would necessarily know more about something like seborrheic dermatitis, because the FM I went to when I had it definitely did not know that much about it. She was not able to differentiate my dermatitis from psoriasis, rosacea, or other skin conditions. I had done a bit of researching myself and had to explain to her why I thought it was seborrheic dermatitis and not something else. Luckily she listened to what I had to say. I do however, completely agree with you that if the doctor actually took the time to do the research on it themselves if their knowledge is a bit hazy on a subject that they would obviously be much better at it than the patient given their breadth of pre-existing medical knowledge. The problem is that most PCPs simply don't have the time to do that or won't do that. We live in an age where FMs are compensated by piece work and are therefore encouraged to rush through consults as quickly as possible without having time to be overly thorough.
Click to expand...

There it is
 
College level sciences is analogous to college level mathematics; in fact, at my ug you could not have taken the former without the latter - No false analogy. Since we're on the topic of logical fallacies...

The post I quoted is a strawman. My advice is that you use a sample size of more than 1 before making sweeping generalizations - referring to your experience with your FP - and learn to listen to, or read, peoples ideas more carefully. Both of these things are important for you to correct before you start treating patients. Done.


sidefx said:
Nope I've been referring to the same thing the entire time, try to keep up.

- You fail to recognize that not every pathology is taught in medical school, and not every pathology is seen on the wards during training. The extent of a PCPs immediate knowledge on it might be a brief paragraph they read in BRS and first aid, if they even remember it at all. Yes there are a lot of things that are quite complex and someone who hasn't undergone medical training will not be able to appreciate the interconnectedness and implications of certain things. It is also extremely plausible that an intelligent person who has done their research can know significantly more about a disease than a PCP. If you think because you went to medical school it means that nobody could possibly know more about anything medicine related than you, you are indeed arrogant and quite naive.

- You seem to think that anyone who uses the internet other than a physician is a complete incompetent ***** with no clue how to research. "Becuz da internetz" Seriously? Are you that sheltered? Yes there are plenty of *****s out there who couldn't tell their ass from their elbow no matter how long they pound on their keyboards, there are also plenty of intelligent people out there who know how to think critically and differentiate between the mountains of garbage found on the internet and the mountains of useful information. It is absolutely laughable that you think the entire internet is an "unsupported" resource. You do realize that you can access nearly every text book and every journal article in existence on the internet right? You do realize that BY FAR the most widely used resource by actual physicians who are researching something themselves is the internet right? Yet here you are laughing about the idea of someone actually learning something reliable from the internet. Doesn't surprise me that you think the internet is somehow making people stupid. Giving some people a false sense of understanding? Sure. Is it lowering their IQ? LOL... no. You are completely out of touch with reality dude.

- Not sure what IQ has to do with any of this to begin with. Yes there are a lot of dumb people out there. Nothing new. Those aren't the people we have been talking about. We are also not talking about how much medical knowledge a physician has compared to a non-physician, obviously it is not even comparable. A physicians opinion will usually be far more well informed, and that is why we have physicians... But what we are talking about here, is the possibility that there are intelligent people out there who are quite capable of learning things about medicine over the internet and are able to differentiate between reliable sources and garbage. You specifically stated that you don't think an engineer could possibly learn more than any physician about a very specific medical condition, and expressed your desire to scoff at him for even suggesting that he has a clue what he's talking about. This is simply wrong and naive. It's like you are living in your own little fantasy world where every physician is a demigod with exhaustively detailed flawless knowledge and foresight about every medical condition in existence (not even close to being true), while every non-physician is mentally-handicapped and completely incapable of such rudimentary tasks as using the internet effectively or comprehending anything they read about medicine (also not even close to being true). And you wonder why I call you arrogant.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
yappy said:
College level sciences is analogous to college level mathematics; in fact, at my ug you could not have taken the former without the latter - No false analogy. Since we're on the topic of logical fallacies...

The post I quoted is a strawman. My advice is that you use a sample size of more than 1 before making sweeping generalizations - referring to your experience with your FP - and learn to listen to, or read, peoples ideas more carefully. Both of these things are important for you to correct before you start treating patients. Done.
Click to expand...

Oh sweet mother of irony... Ok well, my advice is that you use a sample size of more than 0 before making sweeping generalization that nobody outside of medicine knows how to use the internet effectively. My argument that some people are capable of effective medical self-education was presented using words like *sometimes* and *it's possible* and was never used to generalize all patients being capable of such, as I am fully aware that is simply untrue. You on the other hand, are the one who made quite sweeping generalizations about an entire demographic (one of the most educated demographics no less) being incompetent at using the internet.

Your argument was that you don't think an engineer could possibly learn anything about a medical condition that is worthy of a PCP even remotely considering during clinical decision making. So yes, I've definitely "read your ideas" and they are simply fallacious.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sidefx said:
Oh sweet mother of irony... Ok well, my advice is that you use a sample size of more than 0 before making sweeping generalization that nobody outside of medicine knows how to use the internet effectively. My argument that some people are capable of effective medical self-education was presented using words like *sometimes* and *it's possible* and was never used to generalize all patients being capable of such, as I am fully aware that is simply untrue. You on the other hand, are the one who made quite sweeping generalizations about an entire demographic (one of the most educated demographics no less) being incompetent at using the internet.

Your argument was that you don't think an engineer could possibly learn anything about a medical condition that is worthy of a PCP even remotely considering during clinical decision making. So yes, I've definitely "read your ideas" and they are simply fallacious.
Click to expand...

To me effectively using the internet =/= being able to steer clinical decision making. I view those as independent and the former doesn't lead to the latter.

My argument is that someone outside of medicine "using the internet effectively" will not accurately self diagnose their condition consistently; or, accurately guide a physician to treat them more appropriately. I think most people can use the internet effectively, however.

Bias, misconception, conflated ideas, lack of training, lack of context, lack of experience, errors of assumption, and an unsupported educational framework does not lend itself well to someone picking up the E-version of latest journals, or medical text, and making an accurate self dx/rx for their specific unknown diagnosis and disease state. Have you ever had the opportunity to take care of patients in an environment free of safety nets? Of course it's not nearly as flippant as internet searches & adaptations of knowledge gained in ug science. I hope that when you're done with your training you'll be more knowledgeable than your patients.

I feel like there is a larger issue that we're arguing about and this is just an example/application, however. As I said earlier there seems to be an emerging populist beliefs spreading that states we're all experts in everything due to the internet. I was first exposed to the dogma in my digital diversity UG course; we're apart of the trophy generation 2.0. At the time I bought into the premise but have had this belief blow apart again and again every time I meet someone who actually is an expert*. If I seem out of touch it is because I'm no longer buying into the hype.

*expert - as in the actual definition of the world - "a person who has a comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area."
 
Last edited:
Druggernaut said:
The question is, “Am I naturally arrogant?” Which makes me wonder if this… poster, has any idea as to the kind of grades one has to receive in college to be accepted at a top medical school? Or if you have the vaguest clue as to how talented someone has to be to lead the class? I have a B.S. from Harvard. I am certified in BLS and ACLS. I have been awarded scholarships from seven different honor societies in New England and I am never, ever sick at sea. So I ask you: when someone goes into that classroom and they fall on their knees and they pray to God that they don't forget that theorem or that their writing hand doesn't cramp, or that they don't suffer test anxiety and fail the exam, who do you think they’re praying they could be like? Now, go ahead and read your textbook, Patty. And you go to your classroom and, with any luck you might get a B. But if you’re looking for the best student, he was in lecture hall number two on November 17th, and he doesn't like to be second guessed. You ask me if I'm naturally arrogant? Let me tell you something: I am the most educated.
Click to expand...

I must say when I signed up for SDN I never expected any of the posters to take my breath away!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Re-admitted Dismissed Medical Students
Replies
2
Views
2K
LucidSplash
LucidSplash
S
SDN Article: Specialty Choices for Burned Out Medical Students
Replies
7
Views
3K
Powdermonkey
Powdermonkey
T
Disability insurance as medical student?
Replies
15
Views
1K
RangerBob
RangerBob
Mr.Smile12
MD & DO New AAMC resource supports students along their medical school journey
Replies
1
Views
601
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
C
CHOP Summer URM Medical Student Research (SUMMR) Program
Replies
1
Views
899
coolknight99
C
Top