Having just finished college now there a couple things really I've come to learn and come away with which I guess you can say I wish I had known a little sooner is whom you get advice from is by far and away more important than any little tidbit of advice people might have for you. I bring this up because there's always ths message you'll hear from people "you need to get in a lab. you need to get into research from med school" which is something you hear from tons of pre-meds and pre-med advisors themselves.
And yes you need research to be competitive for the top tier medical schools. But really the emphasis placed on it in hindsight when I really think about it isn't all that justified. There is a video often cited on here where they polled ADCOMs from Ohio State and asked them to rank the factors that really matter for admission. One of the questions was what one thing if lacking is enough for you to really consider rejecting someone(slightly paraphrasing don't remember exact wording). Anyway, 57% cited a lack of volunteering experience. 3% cited a lack of research experience. That says it all right there. What people need EC wise at all costs is a) clinical exposure b) ability to demonstrate altruism through volunteering experiences. This along with a GPA and competitive MCAT score are what matter and are the pillars of a successful med school app. It's not spending 3 years in a lab doing research 10+ hours a week during the school year and 40+ hours during the summer for 3 years. It's not racking up publications(btw people really should realize most students even at top schools weren't published as undergrads). It's not spending devouting all your time EC wise to the lab. Because ultimately here's the reality; a not so insignificant number of people get into medical school without any research experience. A not so insignificant number of people get into top 20 schools programs with just a summer or two of research. Most matriculants don't have publications.
Ultimately when you see stats cited as "% of people who did research in undergrad" even for lower tiers in the MSAR those stats are often over 75%. Well my real only take away from that is it shows people a) are getting bad advice from pre-med advisors about how research is necessary for med school and force themselves to do it b) it shows a lack of diversity amongst applicants and willingness to do what most people don't. Because, no in itself, a lower tier med school won't look at someone who doesn't have research experience and downgrade them in most cases if they have made other good uses of their time and have other stand out experiences that document their passion for medicine and hit on the two big things EC Wise clinical exposure and demonstrating altruism I mentioned above. What they are far more likely to downgrade them is the generic pre-med who spent all his time in the lab and has a good PI letter and a summer fellowship or two but who can't express their passion through medicine through their EC's. That means generic volunteering and limited clinical exposure. It reveals not getting out of their comfort zone. It reveals someone who didn't really maximize their time in a way to highlight their passion for medicine. Are there people who get into top med schools all the time following this rubric of top stats, research experience and generic everything else? Of course. But there are two pathways you see amongst pre-meds a) the ones who go down this generic path, spend their summers in research and their main time during the school year b) Those who dedicate significant time to really exposing themselves to the field and getting out of their comfort zone. That means amongst many other examples working with less fortunate, hospice work, tutoring those with disabilities, volunteering in some places that aren't the funest and can have some rather tough experiences, really getting involved with the community, having meaningful leadership experience(not being VP of the pre-med club)---ultimately really demonstrating that altruism and showing you have clinical exposure and know what you are getting into. Sure these latter people also get a summer or two of research, but they have more that defines them. I think you'll find amongst these two groups of people, it's the latter who EC wise who tend to stand out more in the majority of cases. And really, while these sound like major time commitments, if over 4 years you spend those 15 hours a week you would be in lab on volunteering, working with the less fortunate and working your way up to meaningful leadership positions, I think in many cases you'll find that if you are into it is not unrealistic to accomplish these things in the same amount of time that you would have spent on school year research.
Anyway, those are just my take away thoughts having just finished college and spending alot of time looking back on things. It's not particularly relevant to the OP really I spent time writing this just as a general message and if this is relevant to anyone fantastic. But bottom line, never ever get attached to any one activity and act like your application hinges on it. It doesn't. This thread isn't to talk poorly of those who spend large amounts of time in research labs; there are many successful people who do this. But the key is there are always alternatives; as long as the GPA and MCAT are in place and you have a willingness to use your time not spent on those wisely, you can make yourself a very compelling candidate doing many different things and only one of those includes research.
