Match 2024

[deleted1183938]

---

Members don't see this ad.

FYI. It’s no secret either. I know it’s a dirty taboo subject. But male ob gyn have better patient satisfaction scores than their female ob gyn counterparts.

In study, female OB/GYNs less likely than males to receive top patient satisfaction scores

Stanford Health Care delivers the highest levels of care and compassion. SHC treats cancer, heart disease, brain disorders, primary care issues, and many more.

scopeblog.stanford.edu

So should more women only go to male ob gyn? Should be have more of a 50/50 split and get more men into ob gyn. lol. I love taking. About this.

It’s true.

But if anyone ever reads that posted article. There is a reason why.

And it’s a super DEI consequence subject no one really wants to discuss in the surgery world. Ob gyn is part surgery and part office base. Absolutely taboo. But male surgeons tend to just be better because it’s a technical skill and some of it is inherent nature. Again. Don’t shoot the messenger. These are things many male surgeon colleagues say.

There was actually a recent study showing female surgeons overall had better outcomes compared to men. Came out last fall.

Surgeon Sex and Patients’ Long-Term Postoperative Outcomes

This cohort study examines differences in 90-day and 1-year postoperative outcomes in patients treated by female vs male surgeons.

jamanetwork.com

 

[aneftp]

There was actually a recent study showing female surgeons overall had better outcomes compared to men. Came out last fall.

Surgeon Sex and Patients’ Long-Term Postoperative Outcomes

This cohort study examines differences in 90-day and 1-year postoperative outcomes in patients treated by female vs male surgeons.

jamanetwork.com

Selection bias. The article even mentions it that female surgeons choose safer cases

Like crnas saying they are equally safe solo….cause many rural hospitals punt the difficult cases elsewhere.

So if u have a difficult case to do. Who do u want to have operated on. Think about that.

 

[deleted1183938]

Selection bias. The article even mentions it that female surgeons choose safer cases

Like crnas saying they are equally safe solo….cause many rural hospitals punt the difficult cases elsewhere.

So if u have a difficult case to do. Who do u want to have operated on. Think about that.

A great Male CV surgeon once told me, To be a good surgeon you also need to know when NOT to operate. May he RIP he was the kindest CV surgeon I ever met.
First do no harm. One of the first things We learn in medical school. Many Male surgeons can be cowboys and do cases where risk outweighs the benefit.

I have never seen a female surgeon race against the clock to beat her fastest times in the OR. However I have seen plenty of males do.

Females listen to their patients more and take more time as well and are more meticulous.

We are not going to compare women surgeons to CRNAs especially ones working in little hospital. That’s just asenine.

 

[sevo00]

I have never seen a female surgeon race against the clock to beat her fastest times in the OR. However I have seen plenty of males do.

if we are going to just compare anecdotes then the only surgeon I have ever met that tried to beat previous operating times was a female surgeon. So just stop. You know that study posted is complete BS

 

[deleted1183938]

if we are going to just compare anecdotes then the only surgeon I have ever met that tried to beat previous operating times was a female surgeon. So just stop. You know that study posted is complete BS

It’s no complete BS.
You only say that because you’re most likely a man who doesn’t like the idea of being challenged.
Anyway, looks like the link I gave you guys was the editor rebuttal which you guys basically copied Word for Word and run with it. I read the study when it first came out in JAMA six months ago.
Anyway, now that I have bothered to peruse the article I challenged above about, I realize I wasted my time. It’s literally Press Ganey scores. Yeah, that correlates with actual outcomes.

Have a good one.

 

[deleted1183938]

Selection bias. The article even mentions it that female surgeons choose safer cases

Like crnas saying they are equally safe solo….cause many rural hospitals punt the difficult cases elsewhere.

So if u have a difficult case to do. Who do u want to have operated on. Think about that.

You posted an article about Pres Ganey likebility scores. Meant to address unconscious biases. Is that even really a study?

 

[sevo00]

It’s no complete BS.
You only say that because you’re most likely a man who doesn’t like the idea of being challenged.
Anyway, looks like the link I gave you guys was the editor rebuttal which you guys basically copied Word for Word and run with it. I read the study when it first came out in JAMA six months ago.
Anyway, now that I have bothered to peruse the article I challenged above about, I realize I wasted my time. It’s literally Press Ganey scores. Yeah, that correlates with actual outcomes.

Have a good one.

Yes make it into me being a sexist. Great. Classic Choco.

 

[GassYous]

A great Male CV surgeon once told me, To be a good surgeon you also need to know when NOT to operate. May he RIP he was the kindest CV surgeon I ever met.
First do no harm. One of the first things We learn in medical school. Many Male surgeons can be cowboys and do cases where risk outweighs the benefit.

I have never seen a female surgeon race against the clock to beat her fastest times in the OR. However I have seen plenty of males do.

Females listen to their patients more and take more time as well and are more meticulous.

We are not going to compare women surgeons to CRNAs especially ones working in little hospital. That’s just asenine.

There was just a nytimes article about female surgeons who were racing each other

 

[deleted1183938]

There was just a nytimes article about female surgeons who were racing each other

Oh really? I missed it. Interesting. Got a link?

 

[deleted1183938]

Yes make it into me being a sexist. Great. Classic Choco.

This Choco sure has left some people upset on here. I wonder if she’s the only feminist in the world.
Literally an actual study versus a PressGaney score article. And you choose to call it trash. Why?
Have a good day.

 

[nimbus]

Oh really? I missed it. Interesting. Got a link?

A Famed Hospital Churns Poor Patients Through Weight-Loss Surgery (Published 2023)

New York’s Bellevue Hospital performs thousands of the lucrative surgeries a year, even on Rikers Island prisoners and other inappropriate patients.

www.nytimes.com

“Two of Bellevue’s bariatric surgeons often race each other to see how many operations they can perform in a day, at times even relying on unlicensed equipment technicians to assist them, The Times found. Anesthesiologists sometimes reduce doses of pain medication so that patients wake up sooner and operating rooms can be cleared faster. This year, as the volume of operations surged, doctors accidentally operated on a pregnant woman after medical staff neglected to check her test results.
The bariatric department has an incentive to move fast. The hospital receives at least $11,000, and sometimes much more, for most weight-loss surgeries. And unlike many doctors at Bellevue, who get paid flat salaries, the bariatric surgeons earn more money when they perform more operations.“

“The overriding principle of the bariatric department, according to more than two dozen Bellevue employees, is to operate on as many patients as possible as quickly as possible.
“Two female bariatric surgeons involve their residents in a well-known daily ‘race,’” a manager wrote in 2021 to Bellevue leadership, outlining a variety of concerns about the hospital’s operating rooms. Six other employees said they knew about the race.
Mr. Miller said Bellevue’s bariatric surgeries were only slightly faster — about 10 minutes quicker on a roughly hourlong procedure — than the national average.
Doctors, nurses and other hospital staff described a hurried process to get patients into surgery and swiftly turn over rooms. That allows surgeons to squeeze up to six or seven patients into a single day.
When they have been short on assistants, bariatric surgeons at times have asked equipment technicians, who were not hospital employees or licensed to treat patients, to scrub in and participate in surgeries, two Bellevue doctors said.
Mr. Miller did not dispute the doctors’ accounts.
Earlier this year, Bellevue’s staff forgot to check a patient’s pregnancy test before surgery, four employees said. It was positive. After the procedure, doctors counseled her about potentially terminating the pregnancy because her body might not be able to absorb enough nutrients to support the growing fetus.“

 

[deleted1183938]

A Famed Hospital Churns Poor Patients Through Weight-Loss Surgery (Published 2023)

New York’s Bellevue Hospital performs thousands of the lucrative surgeries a year, even on Rikers Island prisoners and other inappropriate patients.

www.nytimes.com

“Two of Bellevue’s bariatric surgeons often race each other to see how many operations they can perform in a day, at times even relying on unlicensed equipment technicians to assist them, The Times found. Anesthesiologists sometimes reduce doses of pain medication so that patients wake up sooner and operating rooms can be cleared faster. This year, as the volume of operations surged, doctors accidentally operated on a pregnant woman after medical staff neglected to check her test results.
The bariatric department has an incentive to move fast. The hospital receives at least $11,000, and sometimes much more, for most weight-loss surgeries. And unlike many doctors at Bellevue, who get paid flat salaries, the bariatric surgeons earn more money when they perform more operations.“

“The overriding principle of the bariatric department, according to more than two dozen Bellevue employees, is to operate on as many patients as possible as quickly as possible.
“Two female bariatric surgeons involve their residents in a well-known daily ‘race,’” a manager wrote in 2021 to Bellevue leadership, outlining a variety of concerns about the hospital’s operating rooms. Six other employees said they knew about the race.
Mr. Miller said Bellevue’s bariatric surgeries were only slightly faster — about 10 minutes quicker on a roughly hourlong procedure — than the national average.
Doctors, nurses and other hospital staff described a hurried process to get patients into surgery and swiftly turn over rooms. That allows surgeons to squeeze up to six or seven patients into a single day.
When they have been short on assistants, bariatric surgeons at times have asked equipment technicians, who were not hospital employees or licensed to treat patients, to scrub in and participate in surgeries, two Bellevue doctors said.
Mr. Miller did not dispute the doctors’ accounts.
Earlier this year, Bellevue’s staff forgot to check a patient’s pregnancy test before surgery, four employees said. It was positive. After the procedure, doctors counseled her about potentially terminating the pregnancy because her body might not be able to absorb enough nutrients to support the growing fetus.“

Wow!! Wow!! Wow!!

 

[mmag]

I'm not certain that the same arguments presented in the article can't be shown wrt asian students, but I admit I never read the SFFA cases and my article doesn't reference them.

The crux of the Stat News article is that because there's so few black applicants and matriculants, they don't change overall white admissions even with a higher admit rate. So let's set aside Black and hispanic because they are so few per your article.
Last year there were 12.6k Asian applicants vs 21.1K White applicants. Using the previously shared table on this thread a middle of the road 27-29 mcat 3.4-3.6 the admission rate for Asian was 20.6% vs 29% for white.
Let's even out the white advantage in admissions so 20.6% for both. 2,595 for Asian still. Now its 4,347 for white vs 6119 before. That's 1,772 extra white applicants admitted. Let's add those 1772 to the Asian pool for admittance yielding 4367 which now has a 34.7% chance of admission or a 68% increase. Very high chance that Asian are losing spots to lower stat white applicants.

Race based admissions in white dominated academic medicine.
Black ->help but so few attend so doesn't really hurt white folks
Hispanic -> help and some more attend but they are white per the census and more white adjacent.
Asian -> Hurt so they don't take the seat of white applicants and tell them they are white adjacent and not URM (underrepresented minority). Even If they get through med school admissions, power hierarchies will make sure they don't make to leadership.

So many posts on this thread lump Asian and White together to cover up the discrimination.

 

[deleted1183938]

The crux of the Stat News article is that because there's so few black applicants and matriculants, they don't change overall white admissions even with a higher admit rate. So let's set aside Black and hispanic because they are so few per your article.
Last year there were 12.6k Asian applicants vs 21.1K White applicants. Using the previously shared table on this thread a middle of the road 27-29 mcat 3.4-3.6 the admission rate for Asian was 20.6% vs 29% for white.
Let's even out the white advantage in admissions so 20.6% for both. 2,595 for Asian still. Now its 4,347 for white vs 6119 before. That's 1,772 extra white applicants admitted. Let's add those 1772 to the Asian pool for admittance yielding 4367 which now has a 34.7% chance of admission or a 68% increase. Very high chance that Asian are losing spots to lower stat white applicants.

Race based admissions in white dominated academic medicine.
Black ->help but so few attend so doesn't really hurt white folks
Hispanic -> help and some more attend but they are white per the census and more white adjacent.
Asian -> Hurt so they don't take the seat of white applicants and tell them they are white adjacent and not URM (underrepresented minority). Even If they get through med school admissions, power hierarchies will make sure they don't make to leadership.

So many posts on this thread lump Asian and White together to cover up the discrimination.
View attachment 384631View attachment 384631

Wow! I have to admit my head hurt a bit trying to decipher your numbers but this is a nice breakdown and very insightful. Thank you

Question, do you think getting rid of Affirmative Action is going to help the Asians or hurt them?

 

[triggermaster]

The crux of the Stat News article is that because there's so few black applicants and matriculants, they don't change overall white admissions even with a higher admit rate. So let's set aside Black and hispanic because they are so few per your article.
Last year there were 12.6k Asian applicants vs 21.1K White applicants. Using the previously shared table on this thread a middle of the road 27-29 mcat 3.4-3.6 the admission rate for Asian was 20.6% vs 29% for white.
Let's even out the white advantage in admissions so 20.6% for both. 2,595 for Asian still. Now its 4,347 for white vs 6119 before. That's 1,772 extra white applicants admitted. Let's add those 1772 to the Asian pool for admittance yielding 4367 which now has a 34.7% chance of admission or a 68% increase. Very high chance that Asian are losing spots to lower stat white applicants.

Race based admissions in white dominated academic medicine.
Black ->help but so few attend so doesn't really hurt white folks
Hispanic -> help and some more attend but they are white per the census and more white adjacent.
Asian -> Hurt so they don't take the seat of white applicants and tell them they are white adjacent and not URM (underrepresented minority). Even If they get through med school admissions, power hierarchies will make sure they don't make to leadership.

So many posts on this thread lump Asian and White together to cover up the discrimination.
View attachment 384631View attachment 384631

Nope. The lower ranking applicants of all races would be replaced by higher ranking white and Asian applicants and to a minimal degree by higher ranking black and Hispanic applicants.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

The crux of the Stat News article is that because there's so few black applicants and matriculants, they don't change overall white admissions even with a higher admit rate. So let's set aside Black and hispanic because they are so few per your article.
Last year there were 12.6k Asian applicants vs 21.1K White applicants. Using the previously shared table on this thread a middle of the road 27-29 mcat 3.4-3.6 the admission rate for Asian was 20.6% vs 29% for white.
Let's even out the white advantage in admissions so 20.6% for both. 2,595 for Asian still. Now its 4,347 for white vs 6119 before. That's 1,772 extra white applicants admitted. Let's add those 1772 to the Asian pool for admittance yielding 4367 which now has a 34.7% chance of admission or a 68% increase. Very high chance that Asian are losing spots to lower stat white applicants.

Race based admissions in white dominated academic medicine.
Black ->help but so few attend so doesn't really hurt white folks
Hispanic -> help and some more attend but they are white per the census and more white adjacent.
Asian -> Hurt so they don't take the seat of white applicants and tell them they are white adjacent and not URM (underrepresented minority). Even If they get through med school admissions, power hierarchies will make sure they don't make to leadership.

So many posts on this thread lump Asian and White together to cover up the discrimination.
View attachment 384631View attachment 384631

Here we go with the systemic racism again...

The 2023 Cencus report showed whites make up 58.9% of the population, asians make up 6.3%, blacks make up 13.6%, and hispanics 19.9%. Without taking anything else into account it would make statiscal sense for whites to make up more than half of medical school matriculants. If we are going to play the game you want to play then you should acknowledge that white applicants are actually underrepresented in medicine school classes today. The 2023-24 acceptance data showed that white only represent 41.5% of medical school students while asians, with a US make up of only 6.3%, represent 25.7% of all medical school students. So tell me again how there is white privelage and discrimiation.

When you look at the core of your arguement, academics, you see that the two highest performing racial groups are asians and whites. The difference in GPA and MCAT are irrelevant because they are so similar. But just to solidify my point, asians had a higher acceptance rate to medical school which constitutes their 0.03 higher GPA and 1.9 higher MCAT.

 

[rowsdower88]

Race based admissions in white dominated academic medicine.
Black ->help but so few attend so doesn't really hurt white folks
Hispanic -> help and some more attend but they are white per the census and more white adjacent.
Asian -> Hurt so they don't take the seat of white applicants and tell them they are white adjacent and not URM (underrepresented minority). Even If they get through med school admissions, power hierarchies will make sure they don't make to leadership.

So many posts on this thread lump Asian and White together to cover up the discrimination.

The status quo hurts asian American applicants, no doubt. As you suggest, it is unlikely black people are taking their spots.

The only thing I'll quibble with is that "race based admissions" isn't a binary (I would just say status quo admissions). We could have a system that improved Asian students chances closer to our meritocraric ideals if we wanted to while maintaining some preference for black students for diversity, reparative or other reasons.

 

[mmag]

Wow! I have to admit my head hurt a bit trying to decipher your numbers but this is a nice breakdown and very insightful. Thank you

Question, do you think getting rid of Affirmative Action is going to help the Asians or hurt them?

I think it will help only if it also leads to the elimination of legacy and donor preferences at the college level. Every group had their own special preference. White -> legacy and donor boost. Black, Hispanic -> affirmative action. Asians got nothing. So yes Asians were used by the conservatives to bring down affirmative action. However that lead to Black and hispanic groups suing to bring down legacy preferences. So hopefully no one will have a boost and level the playing field.
In reality, holistic review and test optional will probably cover up any discriminatory practices. Admissions offices are much better now at covering their tracks in light of the Harvard and UNC lawsuits.

 

[mmag]

Nope. The lower ranking applicants of all races would be replaced by higher ranking white and Asian applicants and to a minimal degree by higher ranking black and Hispanic applicants.

You are lumping white and Asian together again. Whites are benefiting from the current system because they have lower admissions rates at every GPA/MCAT than Asians. As a minority group targeted with over a century of statutory discrimination in the US, can't Asians be treated the same as whites. Don't even have to get any boost like Black and Hispanics ...

 

[triggermaster]

I think it will help only if it also leads to the elimination of legacy and donor preferences at the college level. Every group had their own special preference. White -> legacy and donor boost. Black, Hispanic -> affirmative action. Asians got nothing. So yes Asians were used by the conservatives to bring down affirmative action. However that lead to Black and hispanic groups suing to bring down legacy preferences. So hopefully no one will have a boost and level the playing field.
In reality, holistic review and test optional will probably cover up any discriminatory practices. Admissions offices are much better now at covering their tracks in light of the Harvard and UNC lawsuits.

You just couldn’t be more wrong. ‘White people’ didn’t have legacy and donor boost. A tiny percentage of white people had a legacy or donor boost while the vast majority had nothing. You might be surprised to know that white people without connections aren’t at all satisfied that some white people get special treatment while they get discriminated against. We actual haven’t taken on the identity politics that are so popular these days and prefer to succeed as individuals.

 

[mmag]

Here we go with the systemic racism again...

The 2023 Cencus report showed whites make up 58.9% of the population, asians make up 6.3%, blacks make up 13.6%, and hispanics 19.9%. Without taking anything else into account it would make statiscal sense for whites to make up more than half of medical school matriculants. If we are going to play the game you want to play then you should acknowledge that white applicants are actually underrepresented in medicine school classes today. The 2023-24 acceptance data showed that white only represent 41.5% of medical school students while asians, with a US make up of only 6.3%, represent 25.7% of all medical school students. So tell me again how there is white privelage and discrimiation.

When you look at the core of your arguement, academics, you see that the two highest performing racial groups are asians and whites. The difference in GPA and MCAT are irrelevant because they are so similar. But just to solidify my point, asians had a higher acceptance rate to medical school which constitutes their 0.03 higher GPA and 1.9 higher MCAT.

You'd have to consider the demographics of the medical school applicant pool and not the demographics of the US as whole. Whites were only 40.2% of the applicants and 41.5% of matriculants per your chart. An equal or slight over representation it seems.

 

[mmag]

You just couldn’t be more wrong. ‘White people’ didn’t have legacy and donor boost. A tiny percentage of white people had a legacy or donor boost while the vast majority had nothing. You might be surprised to know that white people without connections aren’t at all satisfied that some white people get special treatment while they get discriminated against. We actual haven’t taken on the identity politics that are so popular these days and prefer to succeed as individuals.

Are we talking about elite colleges admissions here? I agree with you that most white people are not legacy, donor, or athletes but those who have that tag are disproportionately admitted to institutions whose alumni hold power. It wasn't until Affirmative Action as it was practiced by elite college admissions offices was struck down was there any efforts to ban legacy preferences. If you belong to the majority of white people then banning legacy and donor preferences shouldn't be controversial at all.

"Harvard gives preference to applicants who are recruited athletes, legacies, relatives of donors and children of faculty and staff. As a group, they make up less than 5 percent of applicants, but around 30 percent of those admitted each year."

Education Dept. Opens Civil Rights Inquiry Into Harvard’s Legacy Admissions (Published 2023)

An inquiry into admissions preference for family of alumni and donors began after the Supreme Court’s decision last month limiting affirmative action.

www.nytimes.com

 

[triggermaster]

Are we talking about elite colleges admissions here? I agree with you that most white people are not legacy, donor, or athletes but those who have it are dispositionally admitted to institutions whose alumni hold power. It wasn't until Affirmative Action as it was practiced by elite college admissions offices was struck down was there any efforts to ban legacy preferences. If you belong to the majority of white people then banning legacy and donor preferences shouldn't be controversial at all.

"Harvard gives preference to applicants who are recruited athletes, legacies, relatives of donors and children of faculty and staff. As a group, they make up less than 5 percent of applicants, but around 30 percent of those admitted each year."

Education Dept. Opens Civil Rights Inquiry Into Harvard’s Legacy Admissions (Published 2023)

An inquiry into admissions preference for family of alumni and donors began after the Supreme Court’s decision last month limiting affirmative action.

www.nytimes.com

I don’t know how you can ban it without making admissions 100% based on a formula, but I agree in principle that preference for alumni and donor’s children should be banned.
I don’t agree about athletes etc. People who demonstrate excellence in things outside the library and classroom can have those things taken into account. We don’t really need a bunch of joyless study machines taking over the profession/country/world. It’s not progress to make people give up everything else in life to be able to compete for admission to a career. It’s hard to know how much weight being a well rounded individual should hold in admissions, but it isn’t zero.

 

[BLADEMDA]

We all agree that Asian Americans are discriminated the most for elite college and professional school admissions. The question is can we justify this discrimination based on DEI or societal benefits. A well rounded class means limiting the number of Asians in each class. I say look at each person on his/her merits and as individuals. This means holistic admissions not based on race. I suspect such an admissions process would reduce the number of whites admitted with little effect on minorities based on how schools use the term holistic.

The Harvard Crimson | Class of 2024 By the Numbers

features.thecrimson.com

 

[rowsdower88]

We all agree that Asian Americans are discriminated the most for elite college and professional school admissions. The question is can we justify this discrimination based on DEI or societal benefits. A well rounded class means limiting the number of Asians in each class. I say look at each person on his/her merits and as individuals. This means holistic admissions not based on race. I suspect such an admissions process would reduce the number of whites admitted with little effect on minorities based on how schools use the term holistic.

The Harvard Crimson | Class of 2024 By the Numbers

features.thecrimson.com

What does "holistic admissions" mean to you and how do you distinguish it from affirmative action if the end result is some racial preference outside of test scores?

I could get on board if your idea of holistic merit was: parental net worth <100k, born in poorest US zip codes, lived near US Superfund sites... Those factors shape a person's life and prospects tremendously as well as their community's and I think should be part of a "holistic" evaluation. These priorities would be facially race neutral, but would absolutely favor poor black, native and hispanic Americans. If that's holistic to you, I'm on board.

If holistic merit to you means: "mission trip" to Costa Rica, graduated from feeder school, lacrosse team captain... then I don't know if our sensibilities about what is/isn't holistic merit worthy of admissions preference are simpatico. Not that I would ever penalize a person for those merits, just highlighting that many people would weigh these very highly.

An additional problem is that when you enact policies which "reduce whites with little effect on minorities", you're always going to have the people who chime in that the deviation from test scores/academic merit is unfair/unacceptable/bad.

People who say things like this:

I didn't say that the class was unqualified; what I said was that pure stats no longer matter like they did 10 years ago. That's factually correct and aligns with your statement above. I doubt AOA matters either because class diversity takes precedent at many programs particularly those in the top 10-15. Contrary to what the hard core Bernie Sanders' fans on this board think about me I have accepted (grudgingly) the new reality of this country across every field from airline pilots to supreme court justices to anesthesiologists. But, I doubt the Chinese or Japanese or Koreans care one iota about diversity for entrance into their programs/schools.

The lower ranking applicants of all races would be replaced by higher ranking white and Asian applicants and to a minimal degree by higher ranking black and Hispanic applicants.

Why are blacks and Latinos getting admitted at a higher percentage than whites and Asians? Look at the graph/charts.

Even at lowers scores. Percentage wise. The black student is much more higher likely to take a spot from a higher performing white student.

 

[mmag]

We all agree that Asian Americans are discriminated the most for elite college and professional school admissions. The question is can we justify this discrimination based on DEI or societal benefits. A well rounded class means limiting the number of Asians in each class. I say look at each person on his/her merits and as individuals. This means holistic admissions not based on race. I suspect such an admissions process would reduce the number of whites admitted with little effect on minorities based on how schools use the term holistic.

The Harvard Crimson | Class of 2024 By the Numbers

features.thecrimson.com

Are people ok with elite universities and medical schools with majority Asian students in a system that looks at individuals and not their race? Do Asians by mere race decrease the "well roundedness" of a class even more than whites?

Look at what NYC's specialized high schools - Stuyvesant is ~72% Asian. In New York City, Asians have twice the poverty rate as Whites and do worse than Whites in every socio-economic measure. Yet everyone is clamoring to change them because well too many Asians is not a good look.

New York City Health Indicators by Race and Ethnicity, 2019-2021

description

www.health.ny.gov

 

[nimbus]

Are people ok with elite universities and medical schools with majority Asian students in a system that looks at individuals and not their race? Do Asians by mere race decrease the "well roundedness" of a class even more than whites?

Look at what NYC's specialized high schools - Stuyvesant is ~72% Asian. In New York City, Asians have twice the poverty rate as Whites and do worse than Whites in every socio-economic measure. Yet everyone is clamoring to change them because well too many Asians is not a good look.

New York City Health Indicators by Race and Ethnicity, 2019-2021

description

www.health.ny.gov

Asians are the largest ethnic group at some of the UC campuses. In high school, my daughter would overhear kids saying they wouldn’t apply to certain campuses because they were “too Asian.”

 

[deleted1183938]

Asians are the largest ethnic group at some of the UC campuses. In high school, my daughter would overhear kids saying they wouldn’t apply to certain campuses because they were “too Asian.”

As in Asians outnumber White People? Or outnumber other minorities? If the former then sure, the majority does not want to be placed in a situation where they are now the majority. People want to be around people who have commonalities with them.
If the latter, then that’s weird.

 

[mmag]

Asians are the largest ethnic group at some of the UC campuses. In high school, my daughter would overhear kids saying they wouldn’t apply to certain campuses because they were “too Asian.”

White flight is still happening but this time by educated white people who don't want their kids in schools with Asian American kids.

https://psmag.com/news/ghosts-of-white-people-past-witnessing-white-flight-from-an-asian-ethnoburb

 

[nimbus]

As in Asians outnumber White People? Or outnumber other minorities? If the former then sure, the majority does not want to be placed in a situation where they are now the majority. People want to be around people who have commonalities with them.
If the latter, then that’s weird.

Yes.

Berkeley is about 40% Asian, 20% White, and 20% Hispanic.

Irvine is 37% Asian, 25% Hispanic, 15% White.

San Diego is about 30% Asian, 20% White, and 20% Hispanic.

Everyone would benefit from experiencing life as a minority at some point in their life.

 

[deleted1183938]

Yes.

Berkeley is about 40% Asian, 20% White, and 20% Hispanic.

Irvine is 37% Asian, 25% Hispanic, 15% White.

San Diego is about 30% Asian, 20% White, and 20% Hispanic.

Everyone would benefit from experiencing life as a minority at some point in their life.

Of course people would benefit. Question is, do they want to? And of course they don’t have to. What’s the population of Asians in California?

 

[triggermaster]

Of course people would benefit. Question is, do they want to? And of course they don’t have to. What’s the population of Asians in California?

Of course? There’s an upside to diversity, but let’s not pretend there aren’t also downsides.

 

[deleted1183938]

Of course? There’s an upside to diversity, but let’s not pretend there aren’t also downsides.

Tell me more. You seem very triggered by this comment which is a very innocent comment. Why are you upset?

 

[triggermaster]

Tell me more. You seem very triggered by this comment which is a very innocent comment. Why are you upset?

I didn’t say anything to suggest I’m upset. I don’t think your statement is innocent or true, but I’m not upset.

 

[deleted1130227]

 

[triggermaster]

View attachment 384729

Can you do one for China, Japan, India, Nigeria, etc? They don’t seem to prioritize diversity even though it’s an unqualified gift for the countries who receive the most foreign immigrants.

 

[deleted1130227]

Can you do one for China, Japan, India, Nigeria, etc? They don’t seem to prioritize diversity even though it’s an unqualified gift for the countries who receive the most foreign immigrants.

It's from Austin Powers.

 

[triggermaster]

It's from Austin Powers.

I know. I’ve seen that before. It’s funny.

 

[aneftp]

While we are still talking about diversity in college and higher learning.

Why can’t we have diversity in college sports particularly Division 1 power house posts. Football and basketball.

 

[deleted1183938]

I didn’t say anything to suggest I’m upset. I don’t think your statement is innocent or true, but I’m not upset.

I literally just agreed with @nimbus though. Is there a reason you didn’t respond to him and instead with me? And you still haven’t told me the bad things you speak of, experiencing being a minority for once.

 

[deleted1130227]

While we are still talking about diversity in college and higher learning.

Why can’t we have diversity in college sports particularly Division 1 power house posts. Football and basketball.

 

[deleted1183938]

Can you do one for China, Japan, India, Nigeria, etc? They don’t seem to prioritize diversity even though it’s an unqualified gift for the countries who receive the most foreign immigrants.

You keep making comments like these and you don’t think you are triggered? Take a break from the internet. You are exposing yourself but I guess that is easy in the world of anonymity.

 

[deleted1183938]

While we are still talking about diversity in college and higher learning.

Why can’t we have diversity in college sports particularly Division 1 power house posts. Football and basketball.

Who wants to have losing teams? You? I think these colleges know what they are doing when they pick their teams. 😂😂😂😂.

 

[deleted1130227]

Who wants to have losing teams? You? I think these colleges know what they are doing when they pick their teams. 😂😂😂😂.

So it's all about merit?

 

[aneftp]

Who wants to have losing teams? You? I think these colleges know what they are doing when they pick their teams. 😂😂😂😂.

U never know. Slow short wide receivers show less “standard testing scores” like 40 yard dash or jumping ability.

Shouldn’t they be given a chance? Some do make it. Through hard work. And succeed.

 

[Cornfed101]

So it's all about merit?

Yes, but the comparison kinda falls apart because nobody pays to watch me go to med school. I wish they did

 

[nimbus]

Of course people would benefit. Question is, do they want to? And of course they don’t have to. What’s the population of Asians in California?

About 15%

 

[aneftp]

Yes, but the comparison kinda falls apart because nobody pays to watch me go to med school. I wish they did

No one paid to watch women’s basketball either. Used to be free tickets. …so ur argument falls.

You never know till u give a kid a chance who shows some type of talent.

Med schools aren’t admitting DEI students with D averages. They will admit borderline students for diversity.

So an athlete (not elite by college standard) should be given the same reverse DEI chance.

 

[deleted1183938]

No one paid to watch women’s basketball either. Used to be free tickets. …so ur argument falls.

You never know till u give a kid a chance who shows some type of talent.

Med schools aren’t admitting DEI students with D averages. They will admit borderline students for diversity.

So an athlete (not elite by college standard) should be given the same reverse DEI chance.

Except these colleges are making tons of extra money from these elite minority students. This is America, the land of making money. They take borderline kids, less chance of them making extra money.
Whereas in medical school they make the same regardless of who they admit as long as the seat is filled.

 

[triggermaster]

You keep making comments like these and you don’t think you are triggered? Take a break from the internet. You are exposing yourself but I guess that is easy in the world of anonymity.

I’ve yet to hear an argument or explanation from you, just baseless assertions.
You act like I have some secret. I don’t. There are pluses and minuses to diversity/immigration. I don’t deny the former, but you don’t seem to want to admit the latter.