I am so F****** sick of med students!!!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
*takes bow*

I mean really, how do you not call out someone who uses "punch bowl spiked with meconium" as a metaphor? It doesn't even make sense.

I thought it was deep :smuggrin:

Members don't see this ad.
 
Completely agree with this. :thumbup:

I feel sorry for thefritz for having such a bad experience with research. So far, I've enjoyed academia and enjoy the thinking that research requires rather than the mindless memorization that my bio degree required. Maybe it's specific to my field of research, but it's not that common to find a paper with 150+ references unless it was a review article. Maybe the OP was exaggerating? "Identical papers" (which are rarely truly identical, in my experience) being published by independent labs is not a bad thing either. If two independent labs can get the same results, it further supports the data/conclusions.

I'd imagine that most papers you're reading in med school are related to clinical research rather than basic science research. If that's the case, I can easily understand why some papers have a lot of authors. Large, multi-center trials (which, again, I'd imagine you'd be reading rather than the smaller pilot studies or retrospectives or whatever) mean that a lot of people are involved in the study. Hence, many authorships.

Don't be so quick to paint research with such a broad brush. There are pros and cons to every field, even medicine.

Edit: I might have misread thefritz's post. You mentioned that you're reading a lot of papers "first semester." So, are you reading a ton of basic science papers then? Or is it clinical, like I originally assumed?

What's your field of research? I'd loooove to find a field that had something more than a vague connection to real world events and healthcare. The mental masturbation and self congratulation I've seen in academia has been pretty nauseating. Especially when only 8 people who are studying the same thing happen to read the paper.

My gripe of the week is HIPAA. I get it. Privacy is important. It still gets way too much lip service. But that's only because its easy to track and call someone out on it. Because, we all know, if you mention a hipaa violation, that makes you a superior human being. I don't care that someone forgot to blur out the name on the CT scan he's presenting. Why isn't everyone talking about preventing drug mix ups and preventable infection?
 
Yeah to reflect on OP's feelings, I hate a good portion of our class as well. I feel like most people here are stuck up beyond belief, the arrogance is mind-boggling at times. Its amazing to see the devolution of people from orientation to now. People you met during orientation and were friendly with at that time now actively ignore you if you're not in their clique or TBL group. I remember second years telling us how people overcompensate in the beginning to act like they're not gunners/nerds, but once classes started and s*** hit the fan, the true colors of people showed. People need to get over themselves, and its only first year, I'm afraid to see what these people will turn into down the road. That said, there are a few good people remaining, and those are the people I keep in touch with, those that will speak to you even though you're not in their cool people clique or whatnot. I don't know what it is about med school that attracts the most socially 'imbalanced' characters, and how they manage to put a front to admissions to get through all the weed out stages. End of rant.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I don't know what you guys are talking about. I wish there was more promiscuity, drinking, and partying at my medical school. I guess I got stuck with a boring class.
 
Yeah to reflect on OP's feelings, I hate a good portion of our class as well. I feel like most people here are stuck up beyond belief, the arrogance is mind-boggling at times. Its amazing to see the devolution of people from orientation to now. People you met during orientation and were friendly with at that time now actively ignore you if you're not in their clique or TBL group. I remember second years telling us how people overcompensate in the beginning to act like they're not gunners/nerds, but once classes started and s*** hit the fan, the true colors of people showed. People need to get over themselves, and its only first year, I'm afraid to see what these people will turn into down the road. That said, there are a few good people remaining, and those are the people I keep in touch with, those that will speak to you even though you're not in their cool people clique or whatnot. I don't know what it is about med school that attracts the most socially 'imbalanced' characters, and how they manage to put a front to admissions to get through all the weed out stages. End of rant.

seriously, dude. i feel like i'm back in middle school. my high school wasn't even this clique-y. I always thought nerds became doctors...but that's not true at all. Apparently its the rare jock or cheerleader that actually has some smarts that med school attracts...

Oh well. I'll stick to my clique haha
 
seriously, dude. i feel like i'm back in middle school. my high school wasn't even this clique-y. I always thought nerds became doctors...but that's not true at all. Apparently its the rare jock or cheerleader that actually has some smarts that med school attracts...

Oh well. I'll stick to my clique haha

This.
 
What's your field of research? I'd loooove to find a field that had something more than a vague connection to real world events and healthcare.
Sorry for the late response. I do radiation oncology research. My work is related to the DNA damage response (I work in a translational lab, so it has a good bit of relevance to the clinical world) and the radiosensitizing drug I work with is currently in phase I/II trials for a wide variety of cancers. I'm predicting that several phase IIIs with this drug +/- radiotherapy will occur over the next 5-10 years and that this drug will become a gold standard in the treatment regimen of several cancers.

I enjoy basic science research. I was a Molecular & Cellular Biology major in undergrad and bio, to be honest (except for physio and immuno, in my experience) doesn't require much thinking. Conducting research gives me a chance to use my brain to solve problems, so I'm a bit biased towards the academic side. I don't have any experience with clinical research so I can't say how intellectually satisfying (or not) it is.
 
Is it just me or does communicating with fellow medical students leave you frustrated and annoyed?? Why is it that science people tend to criticize and overanalyze everything you do or say??

To answer the first question, I would say it depends. One key point is if you're annoyed, likely they are as well. What modification to your behavior, including increasing your tolerance for this everyday nuisance, can you make to make life more simple?

To answer the latter, it's because scientifically oriented individuals tend to have a well developed broca's area, so words have a sharper meaning to them. They are extremely good at synthesizing syntax in various ways, but beyond that they can form multiple neuronal thought pathways to arrive at a similar final conclusion. They can, therefore, play the devil's advocate quite often, as you would be the one who is "leaning" too much towards one rationale for your answer. They can think of more than one, and they will focus on the one you didn't because you were unable to be comprehensive enough to account for all possibilities.

At other times, they may focus on your syntactical usage, especially if what you say is open to ambiguous interpretation, no matter how seemingly bizarre the alternative interpretation is. Thus, you must be careful to say exactly and precisely what you mean, avoiding to a meticulous extent any generalizing statements you cannot support with evidence. In theoretical arguments with scientifically inclined individuals, use the premises the opponent presents to deduce your conclusions. Show contrast whenever possible.

When they address you, they may not be lenient if you forgot the exact order in which they presented their argument, which requires quite a bit of cognitive resources to remember the statements in chronological fashion. This can be a source of frustration, as they "put you on the spot," so to speak, when you're incorrect. But quite honestly, there is no excuse at this level for being unable to do that.

Although I'm not sure what you argue about, one of the most common points of debate is differential diagnosis. If someone is too scientific, they may actually obsess over certain details and overlook the big picture in the case. Atypical presentations of common cases are more common than rare diagnoses that hinge on striking details (that may be evident in your patient) due to genetic variances in human exons that code for varying degrees of disease regulation. These variations permit atypical presentation. A good strategy for dealing with these folks is to do the differential diagnosis chart where you list 5 or 6 of the key signs and symptoms, and then for a given diagnosis you assign nominal values (--, -, 0, +, ++) that are subjective. Add up the number of +'s, subtracting a point for each -. a 0 means nothing. the highest score quantitatively can win if you accept the subjective nature of how the underpinnings are assigned. Again, assigning the values will boil down to accepting an atypical presentation of a common condition.
 
Last edited:
To answer the first question, I would say it depends. One key point is if you're annoyed, likely they are as well. What modification to your behavior, including increasing your tolerance for this everyday nuisance, can you make to make life more simple?

To answer the latter, it's because scientifically oriented individuals tend to have a well developed broca's area, so words have a sharper meaning to them. They are extremely good at synthesizing syntax in various ways, but beyond that they can form multiple neuronal thought pathways to arrive at a similar final conclusion. They can, therefore, play the devil's advocate quite often, as you would be the one who is "leaning" too much towards one rationale for your answer. They can think of more than one, and they will focus on the one you didn't because you were unable to be comprehensive enough to account for all possibilities.

At other times, they may focus on your syntactical usage, especially if what you say is open to ambiguous interpretation, no matter how seemingly bizarre the alternative interpretation is. Thus, you must be careful to say exactly and precisely what you mean, avoiding to a meticulous extent any generalizing statements you cannot support with evidence. In theoretical arguments with scientifically inclined individuals, use the premises the opponent presents to deduce your conclusions. Show contrast whenever possible.

When they address you, they may not be lenient if you forgot the exact order in which they presented their argument, which requires quite a bit of cognitive resources to remember the statements in chronological fashion. This can be a source of frustration, as they "put you on the spot," so to speak, when you're incorrect. But quite honestly, there is no excuse at this level for being unable to do that.

Although I'm not sure what you argue about, one of the most common points of debate is differential diagnosis. If someone is too scientific, they may actually obsess over certain details and overlook the big picture in the case. Atypical presentations of common cases are more common than rare diagnoses that hinge on striking details (that may be evident in your patient) due to genetic variances in human exons that code for varying degrees of disease regulation. These variations permit atypical presentation. A good strategy for dealing with these folks is to do the differential diagnosis chart where you list 5 or 6 of the key signs and symptoms, and then for a given diagnosis you assign nominal values (--, -, 0, +, ++) that are subjective. Add up the number of +'s, subtracting a point for each -. a 0 means nothing. the highest score quantitatively can win if you accept the subjective nature of how the underpinnings are assigned. Again, assigning the values will boil down to accepting an atypical presentation of a common condition.

Oh wow, I haven't laughed this hard in a while. I love how the response is genuinely devoid of all irony. I knew it would only be a matter of time before the archetypal uptight, hopelessly myopic, self-indulgent med student came forward to enlighten us with their pseudo-intellectual, textbook-ish oversimplifications of social relationships. S/he is the personification of the OP's gripe. Part of me is disturbed by the fact that someone could be so unaware of their extreme douchey-ness, but, on the whole, I'm really glad people like this exist.
 
Oh wow, I haven't laughed this hard in a while. I love how the response is genuinely devoid of all irony. I knew it would only be a matter of time before the archetypal uptight, hopelessly myopic, self-indulgent med student came forward to enlighten us with their pseudo-intellectual, textbook-ish oversimplifications of social relationships. S/he is the personification of the OP's gripe. Part of me is disturbed by the fact that someone could be so unaware of their extreme douchey-ness, but, on the whole, I'm really glad people like this exist.
Definitely good stuff. :thumbup:
 
Oh wow, I haven't laughed this hard in a while. I love how the response is genuinely devoid of all irony. I knew it would only be a matter of time before the archetypal uptight, hopelessly myopic, self-indulgent med student came forward to enlighten us with their pseudo-intellectual, textbook-ish oversimplifications of social relationships. S/he is the personification of the OP's gripe. Part of me is disturbed by the fact that someone could be so unaware of their extreme douchey-ness, but, on the whole, I'm really glad people like this exist.

Definitely good stuff. :thumbup:

I was kind of hoping it was intentional, but looking at past posts... yeah, I don't know about that.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
To answer the first question, I would say it depends. One key point is if you're annoyed, likely they are as well. What modification to your behavior, including increasing your tolerance for this everyday nuisance, can you make to make life more simple?

To answer the latter, it's because scientifically oriented individuals tend to have a well developed broca's area, so words have a sharper meaning to them. They are extremely good at synthesizing syntax in various ways, but beyond that they can form multiple neuronal thought pathways to arrive at a similar final conclusion. They can, therefore, play the devil's advocate quite often, as you would be the one who is "leaning" too much towards one rationale for your answer. They can think of more than one, and they will focus on the one you didn't because you were unable to be comprehensive enough to account for all possibilities.

At other times, they may focus on your syntactical usage, especially if what you say is open to ambiguous interpretation, no matter how seemingly bizarre the alternative interpretation is. Thus, you must be careful to say exactly and precisely what you mean, avoiding to a meticulous extent any generalizing statements you cannot support with evidence. In theoretical arguments with scientifically inclined individuals, use the premises the opponent presents to deduce your conclusions. Show contrast whenever possible.

When they address you, they may not be lenient if you forgot the exact order in which they presented their argument, which requires quite a bit of cognitive resources to remember the statements in chronological fashion. This can be a source of frustration, as they "put you on the spot," so to speak, when you're incorrect. But quite honestly, there is no excuse at this level for being unable to do that.

Although I'm not sure what you argue about, one of the most common points of debate is differential diagnosis. If someone is too scientific, they may actually obsess over certain details and overlook the big picture in the case. Atypical presentations of common cases are more common than rare diagnoses that hinge on striking details (that may be evident in your patient) due to genetic variances in human exons that code for varying degrees of disease regulation. These variations permit atypical presentation. A good strategy for dealing with these folks is to do the differential diagnosis chart where you list 5 or 6 of the key signs and symptoms, and then for a given diagnosis you assign nominal values (--, -, 0, +, ++) that are subjective. Add up the number of +'s, subtracting a point for each -. a 0 means nothing. the highest score quantitatively can win if you accept the subjective nature of how the underpinnings are assigned. Again, assigning the values will boil down to accepting an atypical presentation of a common condition.

This is either genius and super hilarious.....or a sad confirmation of the OP's argument, depending on who wrote it. The problem is I know people who think/act like this in my class...
 
I don't know what you guys are talking about. I wish there was more promiscuity, drinking, and partying at my medical school. I guess I got stuck with a boring class.

Wow... different from what I hear from my MS friends. Maybe you are hanging out with the wrong crowd!
 
I also am sadly disappointed with my medical school classmates as well. I have taken 2-3 years off before medical school and the amount of maturity gained in those few years is contrasted pretty heavily in many kids who came straight from undergrad. (Not saying there aren't mature younger students. Or immature older students. But in general.) Anyway, what can you do - you have to make the best of what you have and just realize you are there to get your MD. The Real World isn't full of high school immature drama that manifests itself whenever you have a small group of kids planted together in a bubble we call med school. Try to find solace in that.

My advice is to focus on yourself and be strong and proud of who you are. Don't let others influence your happiness and try to find things that remind you there is a world outside of medical school. I've learned it's no use getting worked up and irritated, as I've found myself ranting a lot the first semester of school for nothing. Take that energy and try to put it towards something positive. I personally have taken up yoga to help me clear my mind and realign my sense of self whenever classmates/school gets to me. Do whatever works for you. In a few short years you will leave it all behind and walk away with an MD. Good luck
 
To answer the first question, I would say it depends. One key point is if you're annoyed, likely they are as well. What modification to your behavior, including increasing your tolerance for this everyday nuisance, can you make to make life more simple?

To answer the latter, it's because scientifically oriented individuals tend to have a well developed broca's area, so words have a sharper meaning to them. They are extremely good at synthesizing syntax in various ways, but beyond that they can form multiple neuronal thought pathways to arrive at a similar final conclusion. They can, therefore, play the devil's advocate quite often, as you would be the one who is "leaning" too much towards one rationale for your answer. They can think of more than one, and they will focus on the one you didn't because you were unable to be comprehensive enough to account for all possibilities.

At other times, they may focus on your syntactical usage, especially if what you say is open to ambiguous interpretation, no matter how seemingly bizarre the alternative interpretation is. Thus, you must be careful to say exactly and precisely what you mean, avoiding to a meticulous extent any generalizing statements you cannot support with evidence. In theoretical arguments with scientifically inclined individuals, use the premises the opponent presents to deduce your conclusions. Show contrast whenever possible.

When they address you, they may not be lenient if you forgot the exact order in which they presented their argument, which requires quite a bit of cognitive resources to remember the statements in chronological fashion. This can be a source of frustration, as they "put you on the spot," so to speak, when you're incorrect. But quite honestly, there is no excuse at this level for being unable to do that.

Although I'm not sure what you argue about, one of the most common points of debate is differential diagnosis. If someone is too scientific, they may actually obsess over certain details and overlook the big picture in the case. Atypical presentations of common cases are more common than rare diagnoses that hinge on striking details (that may be evident in your patient) due to genetic variances in human exons that code for varying degrees of disease regulation. These variations permit atypical presentation. A good strategy for dealing with these folks is to do the differential diagnosis chart where you list 5 or 6 of the key signs and symptoms, and then for a given diagnosis you assign nominal values (--, -, 0, +, ++) that are subjective. Add up the number of +'s, subtracting a point for each -. a 0 means nothing. the highest score quantitatively can win if you accept the subjective nature of how the underpinnings are assigned. Again, assigning the values will boil down to accepting an atypical presentation of a common condition.

I really, REALLY hope this is some excellent trolling and not serious.
 
Yeah to reflect on OP's feelings, I hate a good portion of our class as well. I feel like most people here are stuck up beyond belief, the arrogance is mind-boggling at times. Its amazing to see the devolution of people from orientation to now. People you met during orientation and were friendly with at that time now actively ignore you if you're not in their clique or TBL group. I remember second years telling us how people overcompensate in the beginning to act like they're not gunners/nerds, but once classes started and s*** hit the fan, the true colors of people showed. People need to get over themselves, and its only first year, I'm afraid to see what these people will turn into down the road. That said, there are a few good people remaining, and those are the people I keep in touch with, those that will speak to you even though you're not in their cool people clique or whatnot. I don't know what it is about med school that attracts the most socially 'imbalanced' characters, and how they manage to put a front to admissions to get through all the weed out stages. End of rant.

I'm almost 95% sure we both go to the same school.
 
So granted I am one. But I think I'm an anomaly.

Is it just me or does communicating with fellow medical students leave you frustrated and annoyed?? Why is it that science people tend to criticize and overanalyze everything you do or say?? Or passive aggressively make statements that are supposed to irk you into a debate??

Ok, GUNNER I don't want to debate/argue/make a point for you. I don't want to talk to you and have you look at me as if you were looking through a magnifying glass.

Ugh and yet I have to see these people every day with their righteous, I'm better than GOD attitudes.

Does everyone in this profession have such an inflated ego??? I swear, I have not found one normal, uncritical person - everyone has that stupid "science" mentality and God forbid you misuse a verb.

Also, why do people act like they are high school freshmen? I mean, honestly - keg stands for God's sake?! rumors?! calling people odd if they don't attend these stupid parties where a ping pong ball gets tossed around into gross cups of stale cheap beer, or if they don't sleep with every other person in the class?? what is this?? how is this an f****** profession? and yet they feel that they have a right to judge you. ew. what am I doing here? why did I expect something else? I can't believe the route to becoming such an important figure in people's lives is paved with so much unnecessary bull****.

Think the heaven allowed you to SERVE people, not to become their king. You will be in peace :D:D:D:D:D:D:D.
 
seriously, dude. i feel like i'm back in middle school. my high school wasn't even this clique-y. I always thought nerds became doctors...but that's not true at all. Apparently its the rare jock or cheerleader that actually has some smarts that med school attracts...

Oh well. I'll stick to my clique haha

This is from another thread but I LOL'd IRL reading it

Yes it's just like HS, yes there will be cliques, yes you will know everyone by name, and yes you will desperately miss college by the end of the first week. However, no, you won't necessarily be unpopular again. Keep in mind that most of your class is also very, very socially inept. It's like entering a beauty contest at Walmart: if you're within spitting distance of normal you'll at least place. Now is your time to shine.
 
To answer the first question, I would say it depends. One key point is if you're annoyed, likely they are as well. What modification to your behavior, including increasing your tolerance for this everyday nuisance, can you make to make life more simple?

To answer the latter, it's because scientifically oriented individuals tend to have a well developed broca's area, so words have a sharper meaning to them. They are extremely good at synthesizing syntax in various ways, but beyond that they can form multiple neuronal thought pathways to arrive at a similar final conclusion. They can, therefore, play the devil's advocate quite often, as you would be the one who is "leaning" too much towards one rationale for your answer. They can think of more than one, and they will focus on the one you didn't because you were unable to be comprehensive enough to account for all possibilities.

At other times, they may focus on your syntactical usage, especially if what you say is open to ambiguous interpretation, no matter how seemingly bizarre the alternative interpretation is. Thus, you must be careful to say exactly and precisely what you mean, avoiding to a meticulous extent any generalizing statements you cannot support with evidence. In theoretical arguments with scientifically inclined individuals, use the premises the opponent presents to deduce your conclusions. Show contrast whenever possible.

When they address you, they may not be lenient if you forgot the exact order in which they presented their argument, which requires quite a bit of cognitive resources to remember the statements in chronological fashion. This can be a source of frustration, as they "put you on the spot," so to speak, when you're incorrect. But quite honestly, there is no excuse at this level for being unable to do that.

Although I'm not sure what you argue about, one of the most common points of debate is differential diagnosis. If someone is too scientific, they may actually obsess over certain details and overlook the big picture in the case. Atypical presentations of common cases are more common than rare diagnoses that hinge on striking details (that may be evident in your patient) due to genetic variances in human exons that code for varying degrees of disease regulation. These variations permit atypical presentation. A good strategy for dealing with these folks is to do the differential diagnosis chart where you list 5 or 6 of the key signs and symptoms, and then for a given diagnosis you assign nominal values (--, -, 0, +, ++) that are subjective. Add up the number of +'s, subtracting a point for each -. a 0 means nothing. the highest score quantitatively can win if you accept the subjective nature of how the underpinnings are assigned. Again, assigning the values will boil down to accepting an atypical presentation of a common condition.

I think you mean Wernicke's area.
 
seriously, dude. i feel like i'm back in middle school. my high school wasn't even this clique-y. I always thought nerds became doctors...but that's not true at all. Apparently its the rare jock or cheerleader that actually has some smarts that med school attracts...

Oh well. I'll stick to my clique haha


Oh nerds still become doctors. :laugh: After spending four years with my fellow med students, it has become very apparent that the unpopular/socially inept people in high school and undergrad decided that they needed to do the stereotypical "cool things" of which the OP and many of you spoke. So, in med school, they became popular amongst the rest of the socially inept, formerly unpopular group and they all feed of each others' annoyances, conceit, and ubergunnerism.

At least in my class/school, those that were well known and well-liked in their pre- med school years are the more laid back, secure folk. These people still have fun and have the work hard/play hard attitude, but it's not done in a manner to draw attention to themselves to stroke their egos.

How's that for role reversal? :D
 
The faculty pisses me off just as much when it comes to the "science thing."

Their obsession with initials after their names makes me want to puke. Every single document we get sent with an instructors name on it has the long string of initials after the name. The world would go to hell in a handbasket if we didn't know what kind of degree someone had because apparently you can't process anything said or written by someone without knowing his/her educational background.

I don't mind when faculty do it, but I hate when students do. I'll get e-mails about lunch lectures signed
Someone
MD candidate of 201X
20XX BS Major, College of USA
I can understand where such a signature is necessary, but god does everyone seem to have it for no reason.

Don't remember the exact circumstances, but one time at the beginning of first year I was discussing something with a group, and someone was like "well I'm a med student" as a reason they were right or something. The little voice in my head wanted to say hey dumba** I'm in your class, but I refrained in hopes to not make enemies. Poor decision on my part.
 
The profession self selects for anal people. And these days immaturity is standard for people early-mid 20's. It's not just medicine.
 
:laugh: After spending four years with my fellow med students, it has become very apparent that the unpopular/socially inept people in high school and undergrad decided that they needed to do the stereotypical "cool things" of which the OP and many of you spoke. So, in med school, they became popular amongst the rest of the socially inept, formerly unpopular group and they all feed of each others' annoyances, conceit, and ubergunnerism.

...

How's that for role reversal? :D

There's actually some truth to this. Hell, some of them had never seen a funnel, a kegstand, or a beer pong winning streak > 3 games EVER until they went to a medical school party. And someone "passing out" drunk in the corner was some huge story for like 3 months after it happened. Sorry, but this stuff is supposed to be a novelty when you're 17. You don't have to impress anyone after you turn 21 and your liver is all fatty and stuff.

WTF. Seriously. Get with the program.

I'm so glad I had my fun in college when it still actually meant something.
 
There's actually some truth to this. Hell, some of them had never seen a funnel, a kegstand, or a beer pong winning streak > 3 games EVER until they went to a medical school party. And someone "passing out" drunk in the corner was some huge story for like 3 months after it happened. Sorry, but this stuff is supposed to be a novelty when you're 17. You don't have to impress anyone after you turn 21 and your liver is all fatty and stuff.

WTF. Seriously. Get with the program.

I'm so glad I had my fun in college when it still actually meant something.

Sure. And then also. This seems to attract a certain mental contrictivism from both camps--nerds and whoever else. The sort of people who watch CNN and think nothing other than, "oh, that must be what's happening in the world...golly." This whole **** is chomsky-occluded.

It seems everyone really believes in the notion that we are the good people in white coats who are going out there to battle with those other evil things--disease, ignorance, etc. We get so good at capturing warehouses of facts in tidy mental images, that we can hardly do anything else.

And we seem to have no limit for self-congratulation. We mistake ambition and emotional bankruptcy--thinking that these points are more important than out loved ones or our sanity--for enlightened states.

We have succeeded in a very competitive scenario. Therefore we must be beautiful, enlightened beings. Hence the shock you hear all the time on sdn when the nurses on cell block 9 tear us a new one, when we show up pristeenly at their unit.
 
Sure. And then also. This seems to attract a certain mental contrictivism from both camps--nerds and whoever else. The sort of people who watch CNN and think nothing other than, "oh, that must be what's happening in the world...golly." This whole **** is chomsky-occluded.

It seems everyone really believes in the notion that we are the good people in white coats who are going out there to battle with those other evil things--disease, ignorance, etc. We get so good at capturing warehouses of facts in tidy mental images, that we can hardly do anything else.

And we seem to have no limit for self-congratulation. We mistake ambition and emotional bankruptcy--thinking that these points are more important than out loved ones or our sanity--for enlightened states.

We have succeeded in a very competitive scenario. Therefore we must be beautiful, enlightened beings. Hence the shock you hear all the time on sdn when the nurses on cell block 9 tear us a new one, when we show up pristeenly at their unit.

And then there are all the pseudointellectuals.
 
I don't mind when faculty do it, but I hate when students do. I'll get e-mails about lunch lectures signed
Someone
MD candidate of 201X
20XX BS Major, College of USA
I can understand where such a signature is necessary, but god does everyone seem to have it for no reason.

There is NEVER a good reason to have this in your signature. EVER. Your signature isn't a resume.
 
haha thanks for resurrecting this.
I had no idea there were so many angry angry people in medical school. Angry people are usually trying to compensate for their insecurity and inadequacy (yes south park). Don't have publications or research experience? Rant against academics, established institutions, and the pointlessness of advancing science in general. Don't socialize or party? Grief about promiscuity, sluts, and med student frat nerd gunners.
I'm not saying there's no truth to any of this, but I'm sure its also not all doom, gloom, emo, my life sucks, i hate everyone else in my class, why won't they talk to me like "normal" people would.
 
There is NEVER a good reason to have this in your signature. EVER. Your signature isn't a resume.

I don't have it anymore in my email signature but I use to when I was in my MBA program. Why? Because everyone else had it, and I was supposed to be learning to act like a professional. Same reason to do it in med school, it's no different than wearing a white coat with your name on it....and no M.D. next to it.

Only reason I don't have it still is laziness. Plus I no longer email anyone for work related reasons so I haven't had to come up with a new signature.
 
I don't have it anymore in my email signature but I use to when I was in my MBA program. Why? Because everyone else had it, and I was supposed to be learning to act like a professional. Same reason to do it in med school, it's no different than wearing a white coat with your name on it....and no M.D. next to it.

if everyone else jumped off a....

...nevermind....

you should learn to act like a "professional" from actual professionals not other students
 
newsflash - for every person you find insufferable there are probably an equal number who find you insufferable.

furthermore i'm sick of hearing med students talk about how insane med students are and how everyone outside the medical school is normal. This is bull****, you'll find an equal fraction of inane bungholes in any group, from med school to law school to plumber school.

+100000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The OP sounds like the typical immature teenager who thinks his parents and family are the biggest dorks in the world while believing the true losers in society to be the coolest people ever. When that teenager grows up and starts his own family, he'll appreciate his old family members a lot more and realize that people are the same everywhere and we do the best with what we got.

Sounds like the OP has a lot of growing up to do.
 
Last edited:
if everyone else jumped off a....

...nevermind....

you should learn to act like a "professional" from actual professionals not other students

Obviously you have never studied in a business program before, that's just how things are done.

The sooner you realize that free thinking doesn't govern everything in life, the more apt you'll be to dealing with patients who constantly want whatever their friend got from x doctor or they saw on tv on Y ad.

Let people be, if they want to start feeling more grown up and superior by adding a signature in their email, let them be.

Med school is too much like high school as is, it's good for people to try to step out of the regression.
 
Obviously you have never studied in a business program before, that's just how things are done.

The sooner you realize that free thinking doesn't govern everything in life, the more apt you'll be to dealing with patients who constantly want whatever their friend got from x doctor or they saw on tv on Y ad.

Let people be, if they want to start feeling more grown up and superior by adding a signature in their email, let them be.

Med school is too much like high school as is, it's good for people to try to step out of the regression.

this post barely makes sense but i'd like to point out that i never said you shouldn't have a signature at all I just said that there is never a reason to put your undergrad school and major in your signature. You're right I did not pay $50-100k to learn few if any new skills and drink cocktails but I doubt that it is common practice to include your undergraduate school in your signature when you're in business school.

not really sure how me suggesting that you shouldn't be a douche if everyone else is doing it has any relationship to dealing with patients :rolleyes:
 
So at which schools exactly can I find these kegs and promiscuous girls
 
Some people here need to learn how to socialize...but then again I guess that's why they're on SDN. Anyhow, it is pretty funny to look back and think who were my friends in undergrad. I literally wasn't friends with ONE pre-med. Now I'm stuck with these chuckleheads.

I would also liked to be filled in on where these kids go that party all the time with scandalous honey-dips. I have to beg my classmates to go out and 85% of the girls in my class are swampdonkeys, so it's really a lose/lose.
 
Some people here need to learn how to socialize...but then again I guess that's why they're on SDN.

Irony, thy name is JimmyChitwood.

Anyhow, it is pretty funny to look back and think who were my friends in undergrad. I literally wasn't friends with ONE pre-med. Now I'm stuck with these chuckleheads.

I would also liked to be filled in on where these kids go that party all the time with scandalous honey-dips. I have to beg my classmates to go out and 85% of the girls in my class are swampdonkeys, so it's really a lose/lose.

And what percentage of your fellow male classmates are just plain old donkeys like you?
 
Yeah to reflect on OP's feelings, I hate a good portion of our class as well. I feel like most people here are stuck up beyond belief, the arrogance is mind-boggling at times. Its amazing to see the devolution of people from orientation to now. People you met during orientation and were friendly with at that time now actively ignore you if you're not in their clique or TBL group. I remember second years telling us how people overcompensate in the beginning to act like they're not gunners/nerds, but once classes started and s*** hit the fan, the true colors of people showed. People need to get over themselves, and its only first year, I'm afraid to see what these people will turn into down the road. That said, there are a few good people remaining, and those are the people I keep in touch with, those that will speak to you even though you're not in their cool people clique or whatnot. I don't know what it is about med school that attracts the most socially 'imbalanced' characters, and how they manage to put a front to admissions to get through all the weed out stages. End of rant.

Socially Imbalance characters are everywhere. I don't know but i sense that there are fewl people on here who feel a need to be liked. My altitude through academia and employment has been this; I am friendly, If you don't speak to me I don't speak to you. I worked for six years in industry and there were people who I only interacted with once a month at team meetings. When work requires we share data we do. other than that we keep to our lanes. They put their head down when in the elevator and put my up. Life goes on whether someone speaks to me or not. August will be no different for me I plan to hit class and return home. If I meet like minded folks then so be it.
 
:laugh:

I don't agree or disagree with the OP.

What I think people in this thread aren't addressing (maybe because it was never really brought up) is what if you came into medical school as the college party clown who was never sober (i.e. me) who suddenly finds in medical school that he has NOTHING in common with the social/goes out/party crew in medical school? IMHO, that sucks even more.

:thumbup: You're the first person who feels me on this. I was rather social in high school and undergrad and still am. Big difference is the way people let loose in my med school vs the way I'm used to unwinding. I just usually pretend I'm having fun until I either actually start having fun or fall asleep. But, I think that has more to do with diversity issues than the med student body...though, those issues might be one and the same. Just sayin'...

I think we've all felt the sentiments of the OP at one point or another every month of med school (whether we're on his/her side or the opposing side)...med school's insular - we're bound to annoy one another. Creating space for yourself is key, imo. I don't care one way or another what you do or do not do, but the moment you pass judgment...we're going to have some problems
 
stupid parties where a ping pong ball gets tossed around into gross cups of stale cheap beer

Please tell me a lot of med students play beer pong!!!! :love:

Quite frankly, you run into different types of people no matter where you go; even in med school. You learn who to befriend and who to avoid. It shouldn't be worth wasting sleep over.
 
Irony, thy name is JimmyChitwood.



And what percentage of your fellow male classmates are just plain old donkeys like you?


Easy there Boss...I get on this site about once every week or so, quite evident by my prolific post rate. If I have a facebook does that make me an antisocial recluse, too?
 
When I had too much to drink while in the company of friends in college, they'd tell me the following day that I was very drunk/very funny/had a great time.

When I had too much to drink while in the company of my med school colleagues (I say *had* because I've pretty much stopped going out with them), they'd tell me the following day that I had too much to drink and I'm a drunk/I should learn how to control myself/etc.

Pretty much sums up why I hate them lol
 
Top