'For the first time ever, more women than men are enrolling in medical school'

[W19]

For the first time ever, more women than men are enrolling in medical school

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Brorthopedic]

*adds underrepresented minority to strengthen residency application*

 

[wontonsoup]

While this is probably due in part to admission practices at medical schools, this is probably more related to the recent (last 15ish years) explosion of software engineering/IT jobs and compensation. Tech jobs are more and more lucrative every year and are extremely male-dominated. Lots of driven guys who want to apply their skills to make money are going into tech instead of healthcare, and unfortunately the tech environment is still quite misogynistic.

 

[CharlieBillings]

.

 

[TheIllusionist]

Not enough money in the game

 

[libertyyne]

Not enough money in the game

I think this is not necessarily due to the money itself. Men are less likely to be enrolled in college compared to their female peers, this will probably influence ratio's at professional schools as well.
Why Men Are the New Minority on College Campuses

 

[Poit]

Triggering intensifies.

 

[Entadus]

When are we going to see M/F ratio equality in the prison population?

 

[raiderette]

When are we going to see M/F ratio equality in the prison population?

When men stop committing so many crimes.

Sent from my [device_name] using SDN mobile

 

[failedatlife]

...and they are all still stuck up princesses with unworldly expectations in men...

 

[KingD]

...and they are all still stuck up princesses with unworldly expectations in men...

250+ isn't an unworldly expectation.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[JP2740]

So

 

[Rhizobium]

While this is probably due in part to admission practices at medical schools, this is probably more related to the recent (last 15ish years) explosion of software engineering/IT jobs and compensation. Tech jobs are more and more lucrative every year and are extremely male-dominated. Lots of driven guys who want to apply their skills to make money are going into tech instead of healthcare, and unfortunately the tech environment is still quite misogynistic.

Not enough money in the game

I find it interesting that both of your arguments boil down to "There are more women in medicine because the men chose something better." It's not that women are talented, smart, determined, or hard-working enough to earn these positions. It's because men left the opening for them.

 

[Brorthopedic]

I find it interesting that both of your arguments boil down to "There are more women in medicine because the men chose something better." It's not that women are talented, smart, determined, or hard-working enough to earn these positions. It's because men left the opening for them.

His argument that men are pursuing jobs in IT/software engineering instead of medicine (which is likely true) does not mean that women aren't talented, smart, etc. Both scenarios can and are likely occuring together.

Don't be so defensive, your insecurities are showing.

 

[Rhizobium]

His argument that men are pursuing jobs in IT/software engineering instead of medicine (which is likely true) does not mean that women aren't talented, smart, etc. Both scenarios can and are likely occuring together.

I never said he was giving false information. Just mentioning that there's an interesting theme among the comments.

 

[Perfect Hair Day]

Not for much longer if this guy has anything to do with it.
Pics of Miami medical students posted to sex fetish sites. The suspect is a classmate.

 

[rabbott1971]

Of course you must be smart and dedicated to become a doctor or a good software engineer, and the women in medical school I am sure are both. I am only making the point that this new lucrative career path of computer science is de facto really only open for men presently, so it is natural to see a decline in the proportion of men in other fields as they leave for the hot new profession.

But men were still in the majority of med school applicants...

 

[OrthoTraumaMD]

For the first time ever, more women than men are enrolling in medical school

This isn’t inherently a good or bad thing. It’s just stating a trend.
It would be interesting to see what the absolute numbers are, rather than percentages.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[libertyyne]

But men were still in the majority of med school applicants...

Yet , applicant and matriculant women on average had lower mcat and sgpas compared to men.

 

[68PGunner]

Yet , applicant and matriculant women on average had lower mcat and sgpas compared to men.

Nobody gives a damn about the MCAT and sgpas excepts little premed children or medical student year 1 still in premed mode around here.

Disclosure: doesn’t have a low mcat or sgpa.

 

[FourniersGreenGang]

250+ isn't an unworldly expectation.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Neither is >6ft in height. Right @failedatlife ??

 

[libertyyne]

Nobody gives a damn about the MCAT and sgpas excepts little premed children or medical student year 1 still in premed mode around here.

Disclosure: doesn’t have a low mcat or sgpa.

I understand that CARS might not be your strong suit. But, it is is a discussion about more women ENROLLING into medical school.

I am sure the love for OMM, holistic philosophy and match prospects is what drove you to DO.

 

[68PGunner]

I understand that CARS might not be your strong suit. But, it is is a discussion about more women ENROLLING into medical school.

I am sure the love for OMM, holistic philosophy and match prospects is what drove you to DO.

Got a 11 on CARS on the old scale. Come back to me 18 months from now and give me your board scale before we continue this discussion. I have seen too many students with low MCATs who are doing relatively well to care much about some child exam.

 

[libertyyne]

Got a 11 on CARS on the old scale. Come back to me 18 months from now and give me your board scale before we continue this discussion. I have seen too many students with low MCATs who are doing relatively well to care much about some child exam.

You should read the thread again then.
I am sure your anecdotes outweigh years of research.

 

[68PGunner]

You should read the thread again then.
I am sure your anecdotes outweigh years of research.

Don’t need to read the thread again. At this point, you just sound like an obnoxious year 1 medical student. Stop derailing threads w/ ridiculous garbage about the MCAT. I have seen enough threads from you talking about this nonstop. I expect more from a non-trad who seems to have a good grasp on other things in life like finance and laws.

 

[libertyyne]

You've left a few data points out, pal. Women had a higher non-science GPA and cGPA. Also forgot to mention that the differential between male and female matriculant sGPA is only 0.02 (and 0.05 for applicants). Does that sound statistically significant to you? Similarly, the MCAT differential for matriculants is <2 points. Certainly a bigger difference, but still only 80th vs 85th percentile and 509 is well within the range compatible with success in medical school.

My point still stands. Sgpa and MCAT are better predictors of performance in medical school.Even if the GPA is a wash, the MCAT difference is significant. That being said, the point was that the pool of women applicants is not outperforming the men applicants on the traditional metrics used to guide admissions. Yet more women are being admitted vs Men, so that is interesting. Does it signify people moving towards a holistic evaluation?

 

[mehc012]

Not for much longer if this guy has anything to do with it.
Pics of Miami medical students posted to sex fetish sites. The suspect is a classmate.

If women let creeps like this deter them from careers or jobs or public spaces, there wouldn't be any females in any industry. Sadly, we're well accustomed to persevering despite the occasional blatant skeaze.

 

[68PGunner]

Wake me up when the ratio hits min 60:40 in either directions.

Otherwise, this thread is garbage and I’m hitting the snooze button.

 

[libertyyne]

You've left a few data points out, pal. Women had a higher non-science GPA and cGPA. Also forgot to mention that the differential between male and female matriculant sGPA is only 0.02 (and 0.05 for applicants). Does that sound statistically significant to you? Similarly, the MCAT differential for matriculants is <2 points. Certainly a bigger difference, but still only 80th vs 85th percentile and 509 is well within the range compatible with success in medical school.

ETA: And I certainly have yet to read anything from a single adcom on this site suggesting that they are in any way considering gender as a factor when making admissions decisions. Applicants are still approximately 50/50, so are matriculants. 50.7% women isn't that much of a difference.

I wonder if women are only compared to other women ? It isnt a secret that schools try to balance classes to have a 50/50 ratio. But you are right we are only talking about 300 or more women compared to men. What i found was interesting is that in eastern europe women doctors are more common compared to male doctors. Eastern Europe leads the developed world in female doctors
We are still behind EU in terms of Male /Female ratio of practicing physicians. Perhaps a few years of more women entering medicine compared to men might equalize that.

 

[radsisrad]

When men stop committing so many crimes.

Sent from my [device_name] using SDN mobile

Same applies to racial differences.

 

[libertyyne]

Same applies to racial differences.

Or you know , we could start enforcing the law equally.
"“The Commission’s updated multivariate regression analysis showed, among other outcomes, that black male offenders have continued to receive longer sentences than similarly situated white male offenders.... In addition, female offenders have received shorter sentences than similarly situated male offenders.” (Commission, 2012, p. 9)
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fsd0512.pdf

 

[Winged Scapula]

Its really disappointing how nasty some of you are to each other. As future professional colleagues, I'd like to believe that you can carry on discussions without personal insults.

Moving to TIH

 

[rabbott1971]

Yet , applicant and matriculant women on average had lower mcat and sgpas compared to men.

Then the women must have had some killer EC's, or else been more personally appealing in an interview. I saw you wrote that the point you're trying to make is whether admissions is becoming more holistic. But there have always been admissions factors beyond MCAT and GPA.

 

[libertyyne]

Then the women must have had some killer EC's, or else been more personally appealing in an interview. I saw you wrote that the point you're trying to make is whether admissions is becoming more holistic. But there have always been admissions factors beyond MCAT and GPA.

I havent seen any evidence published that there is a significant difference in the quality of ECs or interview performance amongst Genders. Perhaps you could link something to support your point.

Again, no adcom on this site has ever even come close to suggesting that gender makes a difference in admissions. Schools don't have to "try" to balance classes, the applicant pool is 50/50 and the difference in statistics is negligible (though anecdotally speaking, at least where I went to undergrad, women were more likely to be heavily involved in ECs, leadership, service, etc. so I would definitely agree that plays a role). While perhaps the MCAT difference is statistically significant, I'm not sure I would agree that it is significant in real life. Maybe if it were 511 vs like 504 or something, but I'm not convinced the 85th percentile MCAT scorer performs that much better in medical school (on tests or on the wards) than the 80th percentile scorer all else being equal.

I dont disagree with your assessment regarding significant real world difference in 80th vs 85th percentile. However, there does seem to be a positive correlation between MCAT + GPA and graduation. The Predictive Validity of the MCAT Exam in Relation to... : Academic Medicine

There is almost a 10% discrepancy between number of male and female applicants. It seems like schools do want to balance incoming classes. It could be related to other factors as well, disproportionate amount of female applicants could be URM or hail from SES disadvantaged backgrounds which could drive the numbers down. Furthermore there seems to be concern regarding recruiting of women in medicine by AAMC which could also be contributing.

 

[libertyyne]

1) The study you're citing is over 10 years old and doesn't use the current version of the MCAT. Even so, if we can approximate 509/511 to 30/31 respectively, it shows a marginal difference in success between those groups. Again, I might agree if it was 511 vs. like 504 or something on the lower end, but I don't think someone with a 509 is going to have a harder time graduating on time than someone with a 511.

2) The data I'm looking at here shows that in the last cycle the applicant pool was 49.5% women, and even 10 years ago it was 48.2% women. Not a 10% difference. Are you looking at different data?

https://www.aamc.org/download/321504/data/factstablea21.pdf
This is what I was looking at, the difference was more like 5-6% for 2017.27,250 men vs 25779 women .

 

[Suprachiasmatik]

I am only making the point that this new lucrative career path of computer science is de facto really only open for men presently, so it is natural to see a decline in the proportion of men in other fields as they leave for the hot new profession.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Any woman who can do great work in computer science will be recruited heavily by top tier tech companies. They are absolutely desperate for female tech talent. Hell, even if she isn't that great, a reasonably competent female software engineer can write her own ticket with a bit of hard work and proper networking.

To say that computer science is only open to men is unbelievably ignorant.

 

[Suprachiasmatik]

You seem to have misunderstood me. Let me try to make myself clear. Yes, if you are a female deadset on going into CS, you will be recruited. But by and large, there are not many women going into tech. Here is some evidence. By your own admission, top tech companies are desperate for female talent. The reason is because there are a lot of implicit, societal factors in place which are steering women away from CS, which is what I was alluding to in my post when I said "computer science is de factor really only open for men presently."

Here is a telling quote from the Gallup analysis I linked above: "Students, parents and teachers in the U.S. are all more likely to view computer science as a male field than a female field. This belief is illustrated in the perceptions among students, parents and teachers that girls are less interested in the field and are less likely than boys to be successful in learning computer science, and girls' own lack of confidence, relative to boys, in their ability to learn computer science."

The field is wide open for women. Nobody is stopping women from having fruitful careers in CS besides women themselves. Some of the most productive software engineers I have ever worked with are women.

It's one of the most libertarian fields in existence, and all one needs in order to participate is a computer and an internet connection.

The truth is that many women don't want to do CS, and there is nothing wrong with that. Companies have rolled out the red carpet for women in the industry, and yet it remains a male-dominated field.

 

[Suprachiasmatik]

Key question: why don't women want to go into CS/tech? why do the women who do go into CS/tech leave the field at higher rates than men?

Women are more likely to leave medicine than men as well.

Why is this the case?

I have my suspicions, but I don't want to ruffle too many feathers.

I will say that both fields are "all-in" professions. If one wants to stay employed in tech for the long run, one has to study and keep up with the constant changes in addition to his/her duties at work. Medicine requires similar dedication. "All-in" professions are rather unforgiving and not conducive to childbearing and childrearing. And let's be honest, until artificial wombs are a reality, women are going to be bearing and rearing children. Some female doctors and technology professionals are willing to forgo having a family in order to pursue their career, but some are not. We are all bound by biological realities and constraints, and those that women face present unique challenges for balancing a lasting career with raising a family.

 

[Suprachiasmatik]

I agree with the physically having children aspect of what you're saying. (Worth noting, just anecdotally from articles I've read, it seems that it has been more difficult for women to get reasonable accommodations for maternity leave in traditionally male fields that haven't historically had to deal with this issue, and thus they are forced to leave the job/field when they would prefer not to). However, I would suggest that the idea that mothers should be more involved in raising kids than fathers is not so much a "biological reality" and more of a societal expectation. This is in itself a systemic barrier to women fully participating in these fields.

I'd also add that there are many, many anecdotes and studies out there showing that women face a significant amount of gender-related harassment in some of the fields you mentioned and tend to cite that as a reason for leaving.

The truth is that most employers don't care about their employees. They may pay lip service to your wants, needs, and well-being, but what they really care about is that you do what they tell you to do when they tell you to do it. Medical/disability accommodations, maternity leave, etc. are inconveniences that are unfortunate costs of doing business.

As far as the harassment issues go, I've read the stories about West coast technology firms but have never personally witnessed female employees not treated as equals during my career. I have witnessed discrimination, but not in the forms that are so vocally projected by the mainstream media.

 

[OrthoTraumaMD]

Key question: why don't women want to go into CS/tech? why do the women who do go into CS/tech leave the field at higher rates than men?

Because by and large, women prefer working with people, and men prefer working with things. This is borne out in literally hundreds of social science studies. Our brains are (for the most part) built that way, and reinforced by society.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[wontonsoup]

The truth is that most employers don't care about their employees. They may pay lip service to your wants, needs, and well-being, but what they really care about is that you do what they tell you to do when they tell you to do it. Medical/disability accommodations, maternity leave, etc. are inconveniences that are unfortunate costs of doing business.

As far as the harassment issues go, I've read the stories about West coast technology firms but have never personally witnessed female employees not treated as equals during my career. I have witnessed discrimination, but not in the forms that are so vocally projected by the mainstream media.

Well, a representative sample of women in STEM/tech would disagree. Here is a particularly relevant quote:

"Some 74% of women in computer jobs, such as software development or data science, say they have experienced discrimination because of their gender, compared with 16% of men in these jobs. Women in computer jobs are less likely than men in such jobs to believe that women are “usually” given a fair shake where they work when it comes to opportunities for promotion and advancement (43% of women in computer jobs say this usually occurs, compared with 77% of men)."

This attitude is another part of the problem. There is a large volume of data showing that women feel discriminated against, but most men don't see it and don't think it exists or is a problem. If there were more acknowledgement of the problem by male employees (and not just employers who "pay lip service to your wants, needs, and well-being"), this problem might go away faster.

 

[deleted480308]

I'm not contending the point that employers don't care about you and your life. I'm just saying that right or wrong, this approach disproportionately hurts working women because we live in a society where women are expected to take on the majority of child-raising responsibilities. The fact remains that it is a systemic issue that prevents women from being as successful in higher intensity careers, and not something that is necessarily the fault of women at the individual level.

Regarding special treatment of people who have kids vs those who don't (assuming you don't mean special treatment of women because these policies should obviously benefit ALL parents, male or female)...if this was something that affected small group of workers, I might agree with you. However when something like 80-85% of people >40 y/o have kids, you'll have a hard time convincing me that being a little more flexible for employees with family responsibilities "special treatment" because the policy benefits the majority of employees. These policies could also benefit people who are caregivers for sick parents or other relatives, not just those with kids.

Doubling salary would also benefit workers at first glance. But neither wage nor benefits should be pushed by the govt. if you are worth it in terms of what you bring as an employee, you can negotiate terms

 

[deleted480308]

Again: not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that the issue disproportionately affects women because of the role women are often expected to take in their families.

Women who are adults and make choices about where they work and how they divide childcare with the fathers

 

[deleted480308]

Sure, but unless you feel that men are inherently less likely to want to spend time with their children I find it hard to believe that socialization doesn't play a significant role in that. I don't think either of us are going to convince each other to change our minds on this issue.

I’m not at all denying socialization...just saying that’s not the role for govt to be pushing employers around

You want paid time off for kids? Be good enough that your employer thinks you are worth the demand

 

[deleted480308]

For the third time, I was not making a value judgment about the fact that employers provide little flexibility for their employees to take care of family responsibilities. I was merely stating that it is true. And I never said anything even close to suggesting that government ought to regulate private businesses' policies on the matter. You're arguing against points I never made.

Lots of employers provide good leave options, you just need to be of a skill level that makes that the norm