MCAT higher the better?

[DrBowtie]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I like the idea, it is identical to the system they use to place people into residency.

Yea...thats where I got it from.
What if FA could be decided beforehand? Sort of like a deal. They rank the scholarship student top and tell them if they match their aka rank the school top there is a full ride waiting for them.

 

[CTSballer11]

Yea...thats where I got it from.
What if FA could be decided beforehand? Sort of like a deal. They rank the scholarship student top and tell them if they match their aka rank the school top there is a full ride waiting for them.

I would be for that if they gave the "scholarship student" a contract. This potential "scholarship student" could get screwed over by this school.

 

[willthatsall]

All applicants submit their applications to the schools they want to attend.
The school then interviews the candidates.
After all the interviews have been conducted, both the applicant and school rank each other (apps rank schools, schools rank apps).
Then a computer matches the students to the highest school they ranked that ranked them.

This would virtually eliminate waitlists since it would be a contract to enroll in the school you match. If you didn't match, you would get to start on next years app immediately.

Thinking about it, this idea would hurt us as applicants much more than it would help us I think. After all, it's not like we are in a position to be selective as applicants anyway. Sure, we could rank our list from 1-15, but if #15 is the only school that wants us, we are going to be happy to show up in the fall. So really, the match system only makes sure that we end up at the school highest on our list that wants us. But the system now already ensures that. If a school wants you, they will accept you sooner or later, after all the waitlist has settled out. The main problem with a match system for us applicants is that it gets rid of the small amount of leverage that we have in the current system. For example, say my #1 choice on my match list decides to rank me and so I match with them. Well let's say that my #5 choice wanted me REALLY badly, and they would have been willing to offer me a 3/4 scholarship to attend their school. Under the current system, we are free to take that scholarship and either attend that school, or maybe even use it as bargaining leverage at our #1 choice. If we used the match system, schools no longer have any incentive to give us merit money because once we match we don't have any other options. I think you could possibly take steps to take this into account in the computer, but at some point the system becomes so complicated that we are better off how we are now. The only real problem with the process now is the waiting part, because everything invariably works out by the end of the process and everyone ends up at their favorite school that wants them.

 

[gujuDoc]

I, too, don't think the match is the greatest idea on earth.

I know a lot of people here think the idea of having a match for med school acceptance will be good. But honestly, I rather have the system as it is now. There are a few minor changes I'd make like removal of secondaries and more essays on the primary if they really wanted it.

However, I rather have it the way it is now.

 

[DrBowtie]

Both of you have made strong points. The match works perfectly for residency since it is a paying job. Financials come into play in med school selection.

I think it is just terrible that an applicant stays in limbo for 3 or more months not knowing whether they should reregister for the MCAT, enroll in a post-bacc.

 

[Will Hunting]

Both of you have made strong points. The match works perfectly for residency since it is a paying job. Financials come into play in med school selection.

I think it is just terrible that an applicant stays in limbo for 3 or more months not knowing whether they should reregister for the MCAT, enroll in a post-bacc.

Yea, I agree. A match would be great but FA has to be considered. This thread blew up. In my first post I meant the difference between a 34 and a 38 might make a difference. Not like 29/30 because I know there seems to be a big statistical difference between the two.

 

[Will Hunting]

Hey Will, I've always wondered. Is that you dunking in your avatar?

 

[MoosePilot]

All applicants submit their applications to the schools they want to attend.
The school then interviews the candidates.
After all the interviews have been conducted, both the applicant and school rank each other (apps rank schools, schools rank apps).
Then a computer matches the students to the highest school they ranked that ranked them.

This would virtually eliminate waitlists since it would be a contract to enroll in the school you match. If you didn't match, you would get to start on next years app immediately.

Bad thing about the match is that it would probably delay acceptances until the Spring. Everyone would have to get accepted (or rejected) at the same time. It would eliminate the benefit of getting your app in early.

 

[willthatsall]

Yeah, it's me dunking. Back to the original point of this thread, I think one point absolutely makes a difference in admissions, but it might be such a small difference that nobody would notice it just from personal experience. But numbers don't lie. For instance, people say that one point doesn't really matter because it is such a small difference, but if you look at the data (I'm pretty sure AAMC posts this somewhere) you will see that 30's get accepted at a higher rate than 29's, and 31's get accepted more than 30's, 32's more than 31's, and so on. Now, this probably breaks down in the high 30's and 40's just because the sample size gets small, but one point definitely matters. I think the reason it is enticing to say, "Oh, well one point doesn't matter because EC's can make up for it and a good interview, etc..." is that one point doesn't matter THAT much. So yes, EC's and other things probably often make more of a difference than one point on the MCAT does. But let's say that two applicants both apply to the same place 100 times. They have identical EC's and LOR's and they interview equally well, on average. Applicant A has a 32 on the MCAT, while Applicant B has a 31. They are competing for the last spot in the class. I think in this situation, Applicant A would probably be accepted over Applicant B slightly more than the other way around. Maybe 55-60/100 for Applicant A and 40-45/100 for Applicant B. Obviously one point isn't enough to ensure that Applicant A will be accepted every time, or even a sizeable majority of the time. But I think one point is enough to ensure that Applicant A would be accepted slightly more than Applicant B. The small difference in the success rates means that no anecdotal evidence is going to be able to clearly illustrate the situation, because the difference is just not large enough. However, if you look at the numbers on a large scale, it should become obvious.

 

[Will Hunting]

Yeah, it's me dunking. Back to the original point of this thread, I think one point absolutely makes a difference in admissions, but it might be such a small difference that nobody would notice it just from personal experience. But numbers don't lie. For instance, people say that one point doesn't really matter because it is such a small difference, but if you look at the data (I'm pretty sure AAMC posts this somewhere) you will see that 30's get accepted at a higher rate than 29's, and 31's get accepted more than 30's, 32's more than 31's, and so on. Now, this probably breaks down in the high 30's and 40's just because the sample size gets small, but one point definitely matters. I think the reason it is enticing to say, "Oh, well one point doesn't matter because EC's can make up for it and a good interview, etc..." is that one point doesn't matter THAT much. So yes, EC's and other things probably often make more of a difference than one point on the MCAT does. But let's say that two applicants both apply to the same place 100 times. They have identical EC's and LOR's and they interview equally well, on average. Applicant A has a 32 on the MCAT, while Applicant B has a 31. They are competing for the last spot in the class. I think in this situation, Applicant A would probably be accepted over Applicant B slightly more than the other way around. Maybe 55-60/100 for Applicant A and 40-45/100 for Applicant B. Obviously one point isn't enough to ensure that Applicant A will be accepted every time, or even a sizeable majority of the time. But I think one point is enough to ensure that Applicant A would be accepted slightly more than Applicant B. The small difference in the success rates means that no anecdotal evidence is going to be able to clearly illustrate the situation, because the difference is just not large enough. However, if you look at the numbers on a large scale, it should become obvious.

good point. People have said that some schools reject students with high numbers. However, I think it's because of weaknesses in othe parts of the app. I'd still like to be a 3.8/38 with mediocre ec's/lors, etc than 3.5/30 with great ecs.

 

[Steiner]

Wow! What is your master's degree in? Anything business related? The reason I'm asking is that there are TONS of finance jobs out there.

MS in Movement and Sport Science (Exercise Physiology)

I can't even get a job working at the gym, and I've been studying exercise for 8 yrs.

 

[gujuDoc]

Both of you have made strong points. The match works perfectly for residency since it is a paying job. Financials come into play in med school selection.

I think it is just terrible that an applicant stays in limbo for 3 or more months not knowing whether they should reregister for the MCAT, enroll in a post-bacc.

I think the place where ranking systems should be implemented are in waitlists. USF and other schools already do this, but besides USF and a few others, most are really really really bad in telling you how good or bad of a chance you have of getting off the waitlist. USF is good in that they are generally very on target in their ability to tell hard facts on what month you'll most likely get off the list, etc.

 

[gujuDoc]

good point. People have said that some schools reject students with high numbers. However, I think it's because of weaknesses in othe parts of the app. I'd still like to be a 3.8/38 with mediocre ec's/lors, etc than 3.5/30 with great ecs.

Usually if someone has a 3.8+ and 35+ and gets rejected, it is for one of two reasons most likely........

1. The person had no ECs at all
2. They felt that the person would probably not go there most likely and so would rather offer the spot to someone who was more likely to matriculate there. Remember that people who go to med school, go with intent of different pursuits. So applicant A might be more into research, and applicant B might be more into clinical medicine.

If School B focuses very little on research, but quite a bit on clinical medicine, and applicant A has been accepted to many different research schools that are top ranked, with good financial aid packets.......

Then most likely, the school B won't want to accept applicant A, because applicant A may be wanting something different then the goals and missions of School B's philosophy and hence, better off for opting with School A.

I hope my post didn't confuse you too much. 😀

 

[QofQuimica]

A friend told me that we were graded on a different (i.e. tougher) curve than everyone else since our test was postponed. Do you know if this is true? He was saying something along the lines that our overall scores were about 1 to 2 points lower due to statistical adjustment.

I don't think that's true. My understanding is that we were graded against a former curve (my book even said 2003 on it). Though if it IS true, you tell BrettBachelor that I got that 45 after all. 😉

 

[DrBowtie]

👍 Well Q I guess you didn't "choke" hahaha

 

[rugirlie]

My favorite myth, though, is the one about the state schools that don't accept high stat applicants because the applicants will probably go somewhere else anyway. Like any good urban legend, this one occasionally gets supported by some phantom adcom member that somebody knows. Usually it turns out that the member in question is saying they heard that other schools do that, but their school doesn't. Or they were trying to comfort someone who got rejected. "Tough break, dude. I guess your MCAT was just too high." Ridiculous. ADCOMS accept the best applicants available to them. Applicants, of all stat levels, matriculating elsewhere is part of the standard routine for ADCOMS. Many state schools ultimately accept 3 people for every seat filled. The waitlist shuffle is old hat to them. They are not going to pass on you because they fear rejection. Now don't get me wrong, Adcoms do not want disgruntled students in their class. So if you indicate to them that you don't want to go there and they are only a safety school, then you are minus one safety school. This situation perpetuates the myth, but the school is not passing on you because they are afraid you'll go somewhere else if they accept you, they are passing on you because they are afraid you might actually show up as the only unhappy person at orientation. You better convey at every interview your desire to be at that school, or you just wasted plane fare.

Just curious.. whats your explanation for when low ranked schools don't take you, but high ones do?

 

[gujuDoc]

I don't think that's true. My understanding is that we were graded against a former curve (my book even said 2003 on it). Though if it IS true, you tell BrettBachelor that I got that 45 after all. 😉

Well..........

You missed the discussion on the Columbia med school's secondary, but.........

according to them, anyone with a 13 or 14, was told to put 15 in where it asks for MCAT scores.

So technically, by virtue of Columbia you'd have hit the 45 mark.

😀 😛 🙂 😉

 

[willthatsall]

Just curious.. whats your explanation for when low ranked schools don't take you, but high ones do?

I would chalk it up to chance. I tend to agree with the person you quoted. I don't think less selective schools would reject top applicants just because they don't think the applicant will matriculate. It just doesn't make sense. Simply, the school doesn't have any incentive to make such a decision. Why not take a chance on the best applicant available and then if he/she tells you "no", you move down to the next highest spot on the waitlist? The only possible incentive I can think of would be to keep acceptance rates low and boost the school's selectivity ranking, but for a school that isn't very selective to begin with, that doesn't seem like much of an incentive. It seems like the incentive to have the best incoming class possible would outweigh the desire to not be passed over by accepted applicants.

 

[MoosePilot]

Well..........

You missed the discussion on the Columbia med school's secondary, but.........

according to them, anyone with a 13 or 14, was told to put 15 in where it asks for MCAT scores.

So technically, by virtue of Columbia you'd have hit the 45 mark.

😀 😛 🙂 😉

I never did get a reply to the question of whether they intended that for modern MCAT scores that don't range 13-15 like they used to...

 

[gujuDoc]

I would chalk it up to chance. I tend to agree with the person you quoted. I don't think less selective schools would reject top applicants just because they don't think the applicant will matriculate. It just doesn't make sense. Simply, the school doesn't have any incentive to make such a decision. Why not take a chance on the best applicant available and then if he/she tells you "no", you move down to the next highest spot on the waitlist? The only possible incentive I can think of would be to keep acceptance rates low and boost the school's selectivity ranking, but for a school that isn't very selective to begin with, that doesn't seem like much of an incentive. It seems like the incentive to have the best incoming class possible would outweigh the desire to not be passed over by accepted applicants.

You do bring up some good points. I was just saying things I've heard, but since I have not heard them from official resources, I suppose they could mount to rumors. Who knows what these adcoms really think.

 

[gujuDoc]

I never did get a reply to the question of whether they intended that for modern MCAT scores that don't range 13-15 like they used to...

Hmmmmm........I'm guessing since they recently changed the secondary, (see drinklord's thread--I think it was him who created the revised secondary thread anyhow) this means that they don't really want you to do that. So yah, you are probably right. It probably has to do with the old application and what not.

But I only brought that up to mess with Q, cuz its fun to do so.

 

[MoosePilot]

Hmmmmm........I'm guessing since they recently changed the secondary, (see drinklord's thread--I think it was him who created the revised secondary thread anyhow) this means that they don't really want you to do that. So yah, you are probably right. It probably has to do with the old application and what not.

But I only brought that up to mess with Q, cuz its fun to do so.

I haven't seen the new secondary yet. I think they changed it for other reasons, but I'll report back

 

[dajimmers]

I have friends who applied to MSU allopathic last year, as MSU undergrads, and were rejected pre-secondary, apparently due only to having too good of stats. One is now a Marshall Scholar/MSTP student going to WashU for MD, the other is at U of Chicago Pritzker on scholarship.

I was wondering about how adcoms put together your "whole package". Do you think, or have any of you heard, of adcoms converting all of your stats into numbers? Say, take GPA x 10 + MCAT to get your base number. Add or subtract from that standard values for difficulty of institution, course difficulty, postbacc vs. undergrad, community college, upward trend, skewed MCAT, etc. Then add points for perceived strength in PS, LORs, EC's, secondary essays, and interviews. Final number is compared w/ other applicants, and determines final decision.

Or is it really more subjective once you've made the final cut? If one adcom member says "I liked his tie" or "his shirtless picture is hot", they may sway overall opinion?

 

[TheMightyAngus]

I guess committee letters might count for a little more since people are normally required to get one. On the other hand, I think most committees still tend to write nice things. I do know of a few students who have gotten the shaft by a pre-med committee. And I'll say this: I'm not sure if a good LOR helps, but I am pretty sure that a really bad LOR from the committee can kill your chances.

I think that LOR's actually factor in way more than most people think. It really shows when a faculty member takes the time to write a detailed letter of recommendation about you and puts you in the top 1-2% of people that they've taught/worked with. Keep in mind that most professors have a template that they use for the majority of their students. Ad coms are aware of this, so when they see an extremely positive and detailed letter, they take notice.

Unless you actually see your letters, you can't tell if they're good or not. Its a common misconception that if you get an A+ in a course, your prof is going to write you a good letter. Faculty members have told me that they usually write short neutral letters unless they know the student personally, i.e. "Vicky Sentence took my class Molecular Biology and was one of five students to get an A+. I support her decision to apply to medical school." If you get a two-sentence letter of rec reaffirming your grade and your decision to purseu medicine, you're jacked!

Recs are an application component for every field in academia. When you apply for fellowships, teaching positions, tenure, etc., you have to submit references. What senior faculty members think about you and how they compare you to other students really gives an accurate impression to the committee on how strong of a candidate you actually are. This applies to med school as well.

 

[limetree6]

Yeah, it's me dunking. Back to the original point of this thread, I think one point absolutely makes a difference in admissions, but it might be such a small difference that nobody would notice it just from personal experience. But numbers don't lie. For instance, people say that one point doesn't really matter because it is such a small difference, but if you look at the data (I'm pretty sure AAMC posts this somewhere) you will see that 30's get accepted at a higher rate than 29's, and 31's get accepted more than 30's, 32's more than 31's, and so on. Now, this probably breaks down in the high 30's and 40's just because the sample size gets small, but one point definitely matters. I think the reason it is enticing to say, "Oh, well one point doesn't matter because EC's can make up for it and a good interview, etc..." is that one point doesn't matter THAT much. So yes, EC's and other things probably often make more of a difference than one point on the MCAT does. But let's say that two applicants both apply to the same place 100 times. They have identical EC's and LOR's and they interview equally well, on average. Applicant A has a 32 on the MCAT, while Applicant B has a 31. They are competing for the last spot in the class. I think in this situation, Applicant A would probably be accepted over Applicant B slightly more than the other way around. Maybe 55-60/100 for Applicant A and 40-45/100 for Applicant B. Obviously one point isn't enough to ensure that Applicant A will be accepted every time, or even a sizeable majority of the time. But I think one point is enough to ensure that Applicant A would be accepted slightly more than Applicant B. The small difference in the success rates means that no anecdotal evidence is going to be able to clearly illustrate the situation, because the difference is just not large enough. However, if you look at the numbers on a large scale, it should become obvious.

Thank God there is actually someone who understood the point of my thread. You've elucidated my point more precisely. I wanted to point out 1 point difference can make a difference even if you're up in the 35+ range, but this can be obscured by other factors.

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

I agree with those that doubt LORs significantly improve your application, since everyone's going to have decent to excellent ones. I'm guessing it's more to gauge your personality, learn specifics, and maybe give clues as to things that need to be brought up in interviews. I doubt it clarifies the difference in capability like GPA or MCAT or difference in motivation like ECs do.

This is off-topic, but I'm really annoyed by non-screening schools. I don't mind jumping through primary/secondary/interview hoops, but there's really no point in having a primary stage if everyone goes onto the secondary stage. I know, I know, it's all about the money. If that's the case, they should just have the AMCAS fees for those schools be higher, so you can just pay and get it out of the way.

 

[Wiggy73]

I wanted to point out 1 point difference can make a difference even if you're up in the 35+ range, but this can be obscured by other factors.

Trouble is, the standard error may be small for the overall population, but the standard deviation for the individual student is very large, especially considering that most people apply to 15ish schools.

I've got more to say about my earlier arguments (and some of y'all's responses), but the thread has moved on. In the unlikely event that anyone cares, feel free to PM me. 🙂

 

[QofQuimica]

Well..........

You missed the discussion on the Columbia med school's secondary, but.........
according to them, anyone with a 13 or 14, was told to put 15 in where it asks for MCAT scores. So technically, by virtue of Columbia you'd have hit the 45 mark.

Well, that settles it: I obviously should have looked at how the schools report applicants' MCAT scores and based my decision on where to apply that way. But alas, I didn't apply to Columbia, so no 45 for me. 😳 😛

Come to think of it, using this rule would allow dozens of people to claim that they scored 45s. Kind of bizarre!

 

[MoosePilot]

Well, that settles it: I obviously should have looked at how the schools report applicants' MCAT scores and based my decision on where to apply that way. But alas, I didn't apply to Columbia, so no 45 for me. 😳 😛

Come to think of it, using this rule would allow dozens of people to claim that they scored 45s. Kind of bizarre!

But really, those dozen people made the top score anyway, so does it matter?

Until someone beats a 43 (and I haven't heard of it yet), a 43 *is* today's 45 😛

 

[gujuDoc]

But really, those dozen people made the top score anyway, so does it matter?

Until someone beats a 43 (and I haven't heard of it yet), a 43 *is* today's 45 😛

Very true. 99% or 100%, its all the same.

 

[Iwy Em Hotep]

Just curious.. whats your explanation for when low ranked schools don't take you, but high ones do?

That the ranking system is a POS. 😛

 

[QofQuimica]

But really, those dozen people made the top score anyway, so does it matter?

Not "a dozen," DOZENS, with an S. Because there will be some people with 39s that can do it, if they scored three 13s, along with some 40s, 41s, and 42s. Taking two administrations into account, that's going to be several dozen people all getting 45s. You could even have the bizarre outcome that student A, with three 13s and a total of 39, gets bumped up to a 45, while student B scores one 12 and two 15s for a total of 42 but doesn't get bumped at all.

I would really like to see someone get a 45 for real just for the heck of it. 😎 But if this Columbia system is true, then it supports my idea that above a certain point, scoring even better isn't going to do much to help you. In this example, 13 per section is the magic number.

 

[Centinel]

Not "a dozen," DOZENS, with an S. Because there will be some people with 39s that can do it, if they scored three 13s, along with some 40s, 41s, and 42s. Taking two administrations into account, that's going to be several dozen people all getting 45s. You could even have the bizarre outcome that student A, with three 13s and a total of 39, gets bumped up to a 45, while student B scores one 12 and two 15s for a total of 42 but doesn't get bumped at all.

I would really like to see someone get a 45 for real just for the heck of it. 😎 But if this Columbia system is true, then it supports my idea that above a certain point, scoring even better isn't going to do much to help you. In this example, 13 per section is the magic number.

Only for your verbal score does Columbia ask you to change a 13-15 to a 15, so really only people with 43s that consist of V13P15B15 could make the 45 claim.

 

[SailCrazy]

The difference between one student who scores 36 and another student who scores 38 (or even one who scores 43 😉 ) isn't going to significantly distinguish them with regards to their academic qualification for medical school.

This application process will be a very happy one for me if schools don't determine that I am less qualified for medical school than you are Q! 😀

 

[criminallyinane]

Not necessarily true...see my mdapps. I think "numbers discrimination" is real. If your numbers are too high, adcoms sometimes seem to think that either you're an antisocial robot with no outside interests, or you'll get in somewhere else and won't want to go to their school (an adcom member actually told me the latter). Some of the top tens get a little snobbish, like "we could have filled our class with 4.0's and 40's, but we picked you people with lower stats because want the world to know that we look at the whole applicant;" so while they're making a political point by accepting lower stats people, where does that leave the ones with high stats? (I'm not saying that those people with "lower" stats don't deserve their acceptances and won't make excellent doctors, and I'm not saying that stats are the whole story and that the only reason to accept "lower" stats people is to make a political point. Just so we're clear here. Now don't flame me!)

I think the point of these schools is that a 3.8/35 with clinical and research experience is more valuable to their school than a 4.0/44 with no clinical or research experience. It takes intelligence + experience to know that medicine is right for you.

 

[gujuDoc]

Sail crazy,

😀

 

[MoosePilot]

Not "a dozen," DOZENS, with an S. Because there will be some people with 39s that can do it, if they scored three 13s, along with some 40s, 41s, and 42s. Taking two administrations into account, that's going to be several dozen people all getting 45s. You could even have the bizarre outcome that student A, with three 13s and a total of 39, gets bumped up to a 45, while student B scores one 12 and two 15s for a total of 42 but doesn't get bumped at all.

I would really like to see someone get a 45 for real just for the heck of it. 😎 But if this Columbia system is true, then it supports my idea that above a certain point, scoring even better isn't going to do much to help you. In this example, 13 per section is the magic number.

I've decided it's not right to list a 13 as a 15. It says if your score is 13-15. My score isn't 13-15, it's 13. I don't know, it's stupid, but I'd rather err on the side of appearing honest and they won't answer my question about it. I'm not very pleased with them. Their app sucks and they don't answer questions 😡

 

[QofQuimica]

Only for your verbal score does Columbia ask you to change a 13-15 to a 15, so really only people with 43s that consist of V13P15B15 could make the 45 claim.

Ah, ok. That makes more sense, but no one explained that stipulation before. So no 45 for me....guess it's ok that I didn't apply to Columbia after all. 😉

 

[QofQuimica]

This application process will be a very happy one for me if schools don't determine that I am less qualified for medical school than you are Q! 😀

If you keep talking like that, I'm going to rechristen you as just plain "Crazy." 😛 😍 I don't think anyone could possibly doubt your qualifications!!!

 

[gujuDoc]

Ah, ok. That makes more sense, but no one explained that stipulation before. So no 45 for me....guess it's ok that I didn't apply to Columbia after all. 😉

Ah, but you still would be improved a bit to 44 with that stipulation. 😀 Meanie:

 

[SailCrazy]

If you keep talking like that, I'm going to rechristen you as just plain "Crazy." 😛 😍 I don't think anyone could possibly doubt your qualifications!!!

I'm quite sure that there will be many adcom members who do just that! As long is its not all of them, that's fine with me! 🙂

 

[gujuDoc]

I'm quite sure that there will be many adcom members who do just that! As long is its not all of them, that's fine with me! 🙂

Yah but that crazy title could be a compliment. 😀

 

[SailCrazy]

If you keep talking like that, I'm going to rechristen you as just plain "Crazy." 😛 😍 I don't think anyone could possibly doubt your qualifications!!!

Yah but that crazy title could be a compliment. 😀

It might be... but the only rechristening that I've ever heard of involved breaking a full bottle of champagne over the object/person being rechristened! 😱

Not only does that sound rather painful, but it is a horrible waste of bubbly! I guess I'll have to stop my talk - I think I'd like to avoid rechristening!

 

[gujuDoc]

It might be... but the only rechristening that I've ever heard of involved breaking a full bottle of champagne over the object/person being rechristened! 😱

Not only does that sound rather painful, but it is a horrible waste of bubbly! I guess I'll have to stop my talk - I think I'd like to avoid rechristening!

 

[calcrew14]

It can't be both? 😛 😉

"http://www.mdapplicants.com/viewprofile.php?id=2081
Vanderbilt Med Class of 2009"

Almost 0 for 11, either you or them must be detrimental to medicine. I know some one with 3.6998,27P and six months of hospital volunteer. He was accepted at a school that, believe it or not, would reject you too. Now don't go break every mirror in sight, yet. 😀

 

[cooldreams]

just do your best. if you do not succeed then try again 🙄

and dont take any of those brain enhancers before the test. im surprised they dont test for that stuff, but its not moral.