Hi everyone, I'm very lucky to have these two great choices. I'm from the bay area and very grateful and excited to be going to medical school here. I have always thought I would go to UCSF if accepted. It seems to offer slightly stronger clinical training than Stanford, especially since I'm interested in primary care and community medicine. I also like how the curriculum has recently been modernized. I'm a big fan of integrated learning, less class time, and more early patient contact which the UCSF new curriculum has. The tuition of course can't be beat. So it seems academically, UCSF has it all, not to mention the most beautiful medical school library on earth, and top notch, cutting edge learning facilities. I've been looking very hard at Stanford though because I really like how it's part of a large university with lots of other graduate programs and students. I'm also interested in taking graduate classes outside of medicine -I really like their flexible curriculum. I also think I might be a bit happier in the environment at Stanford. I'm not a big city person and I love the suburban environment in Palo Alto. I liked UCSF when I visited but somehow I felt I fit in better at Stanford. I felt very at peace there. Stanford medical students also seem extremely happy and relaxed while I have heard of a number of UCSF students being unhappy. Even considering all this though, I don't think those are good enough reasons to justify the huge cost difference ($60,000 to $80,000) of attending Stanford. It also does seem UCSF is academically stronger. I'm not a big fan of rankings, but SF is ranked consistenly higher than Stanford and many of UCSF's departments seem to be top 3 or top 5 in the nation which is not the case with Stanford. My focus is to be a great clinician. I don't love research, so I wouldn't take advantage of Stanford's great research programs. UCSF is constructing the new Mission Bay Campus which will double its size and they will rebuild UCSF medical center by 2010. Many of the facilities at Stanford are surpringly low quality for a school of that caliber. My high school had higher quality library than the Stanford Medical Library. The hospital though impressive didn't seem as big or busy as UCSF's hospitals. But then again, maybe I've been brainwashed a bit by those U.S. news rankings. I mean, what are they really based on? I know Stanford professors are excellent and dedicated teachers. Stanford also has a lower ranking because it's a smaller medical school and gets less research money. I know a smaller medical school also has advantages. I just find something alluring about Stanford. Maybe it's just the Stanford name (I hope not), and the seductingly beautiful campus.....I can't put my finger on it. If there is something about Stanford that truly draws me to it, then maybe I should just follow my heart and go there and ignore all that facts on paper that seem to say UCSF is better. I mean, no one can say Stanford med grads aren't excellent too. We're starting to really split hairs if we say Stanford isn't great. What I'm asking is beyond the obvious, is there truly that much of a difference in quality of education and academic reputation between these two schools? Does UCSF truly have a slightly stronger reputation in medicine than Stanford? Is Stanford med truly overrated because of it's undergrad school as many people seem to say. Is it true clinical training at Stanford is not as strong as UCSF? What could possibly justify spending $80,000 more to attend Stanford? And finally, are there a significant number of unhappy students at UCSF which most people really don't talk about? I know I'm bringing up lots of issues and I greatly appreciate any insights. Thanks!