Med School at 40+

[HK33]

Hi

I am turning 40 this year and want to try a second career in medicine. In College (Top 10 public school) I studied Finance but also did pre med; hence wondering if these grades are still valid. I received 3.7 overall GPA and 3.75 science GPA but it has been over a decade since I took any science class. I am wondering if I need to do post bac to prep/refresh for the MCAT or is there alternative less expensive way of doing this. Also I am a bit hesitant to do post bac not only from money and time perspective but also don't want to jeopardize my science GPA which I think is already quite competitive. For those of you who started late, as in 40+, any recommendations and advice will be deeply appreciated.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ChopinLiszt]

If you've already taken all the med school pre-reqs (biology, inorganic and organic chemistry, biochemistry, and physics), you could try to refresh the content material on your own or through an MCAT course and then just focus on killing the MCAT. Keep in mind that you'll have to only apply to schools that don't have a rule about age of prereq courses. You'll also need to get some updated volunteer and clinical/shadowing experience. Some recent coursework isn't a bad idea. If there's a good school near you, it might be wise to take a few science courses to show that you can still hack academics - but it's not necessary to do a formal, expensive post-bacc unless you don't have your prereqs done and need the advising they offer, etc. You can also do a DIY post-bacc to complete any remaining prereqs. Definitely pay for the MSAR so that you can check the requirements of any school you're interested in.
Good luck! I'm in much the same situation, hoping to apply at 37-38.

 

[Eccesignum]

Be aware many schools do have limits on age for pre-req courses, particularly science (humanities tends to be more lenient). This is just because part of assessing your readiness for medical school is seeing how you're able to handle a rigorous load of courses right now where you are in life. It is probably in your best interest to consider retaking your pre-reqs if they're that old -- you don't have to do it in a formal post-bacc; most of us just do it a la carte to save money.

I would invest in the MSAR, make a list of schools that seem to interest you, and begin calling/emailing to see what their policies are and what they'd recommend. Then you can make an informed decision about what to do. Best of luck to you.

 

[BombsAway]

Why not just take some upper levels in the bio and chem departments? That would indicate your current ability to excel in school. Going backwards and repeating things you've previously done well at seems lame. I'm nobody, but i'd rather see somebody raise the bar, rather than meet their previous mark.

Also, Don't be scared of jeopardizing your GPA:
1) You have so many credits at this point that an A- or B+ would have little noticeable impact on your numbers, maybe the 2nd or 3rd decimal place.
2) Undergrad was probably way tougher back when you did it. Now that you have a better sense of yourself, your goals, presumably dedication, and motivation, you'll have to go out of your way to not get an A.
3) If you're in a position where getting good grades in pre reqs or upper levels becomes a challenge, you may need to reevaluate either your goals or your execution. MS1/2 will probably be more rigorous.

Good luck!

 

[DrMikeP]

Many schools want required sciences taken within last 5-7yr so check the schools you are specifically interested in to see what they require. No use in wasting an app or missing out on a school you'd love to attend. You can get courses however is easiest, but make mostly As. Also take biochem to prep for mcat. You'll need good LORs for science profs anyway. It's usually best to enroll in a second bachelor's degree prog so you get to more easily register for classes. You don't have to finish it if you get admitted. You need to research MD and DO to see which you like best. DO is much more nontrad friendly with older applicants.

Best of luck

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[DrMidlife]

You could be ready to apply to med school a year from now if during the next year:
1. You spend hundreds of hours in a clinical environment with patient contact, such as a 4 hr/wk volunteer gig at a hospital
2. You fill any gaps in your med school prereqs (generally 1 year each with labs of bio, chem, ochem, physics)
3. And/or you take at least a couple of science classes, such as microbiology or biochem, to show you can still do well in a classroom, and to get faculty letters of recommendation. You need 3-4 of these, mostly from science faculty
4. You rigorously study the MSAR and obsessively study the best practices of successful applicants. Clutch info on what not to do is in the reapplicant forum.
5. You spend time, money and effort on MCAT prep and get your best possible score in April or May. Med schools going to cost about $250k or worse, so don't nickel and dime the MCAT.

Medicine is very Yoda. There is no try. People can quit if they hate it, but generally you can't just get a taste of it. You're a decade away from independent practice, and it's safe to assume you won't be the same person after a decade of training.

Doesn't sound like you want to take on a lot of effort to go after med school, and if that's true, then just stop now. You're up against rabid hordes of single-minded premeds who will do absolutely anything to take your seat, and 60% of the applicant pool gets rejected every year.

Best of luck to you.

 

[PassThePropofol]

I did not go back and take some basic sciences again even though it had been more than 5-7 years. I did take upper level stuff to satisfy requirements. When you research the school pay attention to what the requirements are. Some schools just want a 200 level course in a science and it doesn't much matter that you took the level before. It would be assumed since you took the higher level. In any case, I refused to go back and take Chem 101/102. It so happens I also never took biology in my first undergrad degree and CLEP'd it to fulfill the requirement to take genetics and a couple of other upper level bio courses. Of course each school varies and you should talk to the counselor at the school you are interested in. I got two acceptances so it was not an issue for those schools.

 

[jl lin]

IDK, if you can make it work, but personally, my take is that CLEP is BS, even if it isn't. Depends. Refresh yourself, so to speak. If you want it, it's worth it.

 

[backside_attack]

I'm guessing your credits are 15+ years old, if you're 40 and graduated UG on a typical timeline. A LOT has changed in science in the past 15 years, so even if you did go into upper level courses, it would still be worth your while to audit or independently study some intro-level courses.

Additionally, you might be SOL with how old your courses are - make a list of schools you're potentially interested in attending (not just 2 or 3) and find out if they'll even accept your old credits.

 

[PassThePropofol]

IDK, if you can make it work, but personally, my take is that CLEP is BS, even if it isn't. Depends. Refresh yourself, so to speak. If you want it, it's worth it.

CLEP is crap, but it worked for me to take be able to take upper level stuff. Each journey is different and it didn't harm my chances of getting in. Frankly, I'm glad I didn't have to take intro bio as a regular class, spend $3-5k on a full year of bio and then be able to move into upper level courses like genetics, a&p. I spent $150 in books, A MONTH OR SO STUDYING for the CLEP exam and was well on my way. Worked really well for me. Bio concepts were easy for me to negotiate if I didn't get them. Chem was a little harder and physics was brutal. Never retook any of them, retaught them to myself for the MCAT and had a choice of med school acceptances. I was just of the mindset that it was a waste to go back and take them again. It can happen! But each school was different. Check them out.

 

[To be MD]

Look at your timeline:
- 40 now
- 42 by the time you can retake required classes in a postbacc, apply to schools, and take the MCAT. Unfortunately, none of your old science classes count towards your prerequisites. You have to retake those.
- 43 when you get in (earliest)
- 47 when you are done with med school
- 50 when you are done with residency and internship
- 50+ starting to practice or beginning a fellowship

I don't think it's impossible or that it's a 'bad idea'... I just think that if you spend the next 10 years spending your life getting a medical education, you're only going to be able to get 10-20 solid years out of it (unless your health is fantastic).

You'll have to explain why an American school should sacrifice a spot (for a young person) for you. Medical schools want a return on their investments, too. A doctor that's going to be around for 40 years is better than one that can only do it for 20... unless you can convince them otherwise.

If you want to do it, go ahead. Just realize what you're getting into and be ready to defend yourself!

 

[Law2Doc]

Look at your timeline:
- 40 now
- 42 by the time you can retake required classes in a postbacc, apply to schools, and take the MCAT. Unfortunately, none of your old science classes count towards your prerequisites. You have to retake those.
- 43 when you get in (earliest)
- 47 when you are done with med school
- 50 when you are done with residency and internship
- 50+ starting to practice or beginning a fellowship

I don't think it's impossible or that it's a 'bad idea'... I just think that if you spend the next 10 years spending your life getting a medical education, you're only going to be able to get 10-20 solid years out of it (unless your health is fantastic).

You'll have to explain why an American school should sacrifice a spot (for a young person) for you. Medical schools want a return on their investments, too. A doctor that's going to be around for 40 years is better than one that can only do it for 20... unless you can convince them otherwise.
...

Well, to be fair, plenty of young people get admitted who have misperceptions of medicine or grass is greener mindsets and start losing focus 20 years in, so OP would be no worse for society than them. And if you look at actuarial tables a 40 yo in good health will have a much longer life than an obese 20 yo who smokes. And nobody "retires" young in medicine anymore, so OP might have a career as long as those people in an earlier generation who retired in their 50s. A young 40 is not too old.

 

[Law2Doc]

You could be ready to apply to med school a year from now if during the next year:
1. You spend hundreds of hours in a clinical environment with patient contact, such as a 4 hr/wk volunteer gig at a hospital
2. You fill any gaps in your med school prereqs (generally 1 year each with labs of bio, chem, ochem, physics)
3. And/or you take at least a couple of science classes, such as microbiology or biochem, to show you can still do well in a classroom, and to get faculty letters of recommendation. You need 3-4 of these, mostly from science faculty
4. You rigorously study the MSAR and obsessively study the best practices of successful applicants. Clutch info on what not to do is in the reapplicant forum.
5. You spend time, money and effort on MCAT prep and get your best possible score in April or May. Med schools going to cost about $250k or worse, so don't nickel and dime the MCAT.

Medicine is very Yoda. There is no try. People can quit if they hate it, but generally you can't just get a taste of it. You're a decade away from independent practice, and it's safe to assume you won't be the same person after a decade of training.

Doesn't sound like you want to take on a lot of effort to go after med school, and if that's true, then just stop now. You're up against rabid hordes of single-minded premeds who will do absolutely anything to take your seat, and 60% of the applicant pool gets rejected every year.

Best of luck to you.

Love the Yoda comment.

 

[To be MD]

Well, to be fair, plenty of young people get admitted who have misperceptions of medicine or grass is greener mindsets and start losing focus 20 years in, so OP would be no worse for society than them. And if you look at actuarial tables a 40 yo in good health will have a much longer life than an obese 20 yo who smokes. And nobody "retires" young in medicine anymore, so OP might have a career as long as those people in an earlier generation who retired in their 50s. A young 40 is not too old.

I apologize if I came off the wrong way. I don't believe it is too old! I am just outlining the many years involved and that s/he will have to explain 'why me' over someone else, younger.

As I said at the end, if OP wants to do it, go ahead. It's entirely possible. There is no harm at all having wiser people in the medical field. Med students and schools need as many 'yodas' in their lives as they can get.

 

[Goro]

I recommend it. Knowledge decay is a real thing. Then again, if you review, and do poorly, then you can stop the process right there, and not have to worry about spending anymore time and money.

I am wondering if I need to do post bac to prep/refresh for the MCAT or is there alternative less expensive way of doing this.

Some of my all time best student shave been in their 30s and 40s. I graduated one last year at 50. Doing a residency in Southern California right now.

For those of you who started late, as in 40+, any recommendations and advice will be deeply appreciated.[/QUOTE]

 

[Law2Doc]

... Med students and schools need as many 'yodas' in their lives as they can get.

Lol - I don't think Dr. Midlife was actually comparing older applicants to Yoda (small old and wrinkled 🙂), just emphasizing that his sage "there is no try" quote applies very well to med school. You need the mindset that this is something you are going to accomplish, not give a half hearted attempt and see what happens.

 

[AnotherLawyer]

I apologize if I came off the wrong way. I don't believe it is too old! I am just outlining the many years involved and that s/he will have to explain 'why me' over someone else, younger.

As I said at the end, if OP wants to do it, go ahead. It's entirely possible. There is no harm at all having wiser people in the medical field. Med students and schools need as many 'yodas' in their lives as they can get.

No he won't. It may improperly factor into the interviewers evaluation, but the interviewee certainly will not be asked "why you over a younger applicant?"

 

[To be MD]

No he won't. It may improperly factor into the interviewers evaluation, but the interviewee certainly will not be asked "why you over a younger applicant?"

An interviewer can't say that or else s/he could be sued. That doesn't mean it won't be addressed behind closed doors or that it won't play a factor in the admissions process. It's naive to think otherwise.

Again, I say to OP, now for the third time, go for it. My advice to him was to be sure of what he is getting into and to be able to defend that decision.
I don't know why everyone cares so much about trying to pick apart anything I say. I apologize if I offended you or anyone else by offering my reservations.

 

[AnotherLawyer]

An interviewer can't say that or else s/he could be sued. That doesn't mean it won't be addressed behind closed doors or that it won't play a factor in the admissions process. It's naive to think otherwise.

Again, I say to OP, now for the third time, go for it. My advice to him was to be sure of what he is getting into and to be able to defend that decision.
I don't know why everyone cares so much about trying to pick apart anything I say. I apologize if I offended you or anyone else by offering my reservations.

I think your advice is sound. Whether conscious or not, some interviewers will be concerned with the longevity of older applicants. Older applicants should package themselves in such a way to minimize those concerns. I only took issue with the idea that the question would arise explicitly and that he would need to answer it explicitly.

 

[esob]

It can be done but you do need to realize there will be some age bias; you need to be prepared to offset that with a special "something" that makes you stand out from the crowd. That starts with grades and MCAT. You need to be able to outperform the majority of your peers. Ideally, you will also have spent your career kicking everyone else's @@@ in whatever you line of work you performed, and if not, have at least put a ton of $$ in the bank because I can see a legitimate issue with older applicants regarding the financial feasibility of a career in medicine. It doesn't hurt to be < 12% body fat and have good vitals as well. Consider the following:


Applicant A: 43, average health, 60th percentile MCAT, 3.7 GPA, good EC's, 500 hrs patient contact, minimal retirement savings, good LOR's

Applicant B: 43, good health, 90th+ percentile MCAT, 3.9+ GPA, good EC's, several thousand hrs patient contact, multi million dollar retirement account, good LOR's, former military.


It's just my two cents but there is a viable argument that applicant A's slot might be better filled by someone younger with similar stats. Conversely, there likely won't be a "younger" alternative to applicant B, who has already demonstrated a level of success in the workplace that no traditional premed can match. In summary, if you are an applicant who presents a package for which there is no real alternative candidate, it makes for a good argument that you should have a seat.
--

 

[DrMikeP]

I personally found more age bias in MD than DO programs. Quite a few MD progs when asked about being an older applicant commented that they had accepted people age 35 and one commented the oldest ever was 45. Not a one said don't apply due to age, but look at the stats of the school and you get the picture. Most DO programs I found more interested in having older 40s applicants. One DO commented during interview that older applicants provided valuable experiences that younger applicants did not have and were often more open to rural practices. Being an older premed is a challenge itself, but if you want it badly enough to make yourself competitive then it is possible. If you practice from 50ish until 70 or even 80 you've given back as much as or more than someone who only practices until their 40s and in a small town if ur the only dr for 10-20yrs that can be invaluable. So

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[futuremdforme]

It can be done but you do need to realize there will be some age bias; you need to be prepared to offset that with a special "something" that makes you stand out from the crowd. That starts with grades and MCAT. You need to be able to outperform the majority of your peers. Ideally, you will also have spent your career kicking everyone else's @@@ in whatever you line of work you performed, and if not, have at least put a ton of $$ in the bank because I can see a legitimate issue with older applicants regarding the financial feasibility of a career in medicine. It doesn't hurt to be < 12% body fat and have good vitals as well. Consider the following:


Applicant A: 43, average health, 60th percentile MCAT, 3.7 GPA, good EC's, 500 hrs patient contact, minimal retirement savings, good LOR's

Applicant B: 43, good health, 90th+ percentile MCAT, 3.9+ GPA, good EC's, several thousand hrs patient contact, multi million dollar retirement account, good LOR's, former military.


It's just my two cents but there is a viable argument that applicant A's slot might be better filled by someone younger with similar stats. Conversely, there likely won't be a "younger" alternative to applicant B, who has already demonstrated a level of success in the workplace that no traditional premed can match. In summary, if you are an applicant who presents a package for which there is no real alternative candidate, it makes for a good argument that you should have a seat.
--

I agree with this. If you're average, why not choose average + younger (the safe choice)? The goal is to be so good they can't ignore you.

 

[Goro]

And here I was ready to respond to some of the earlier posts about how my Adcom has never once mentioned an applicant's age...and you go an beat me to it.

Our all-time record for a matriculant was 53. He's now a ER doc, I think.

I personally found more age bias in MD than DO programs. Quite a few MD progs when asked about being an older applicant commented that they had accepted people age 35 and one commented the oldest ever was 45. Not a one said don't apply due to age, but look at the stats of the school and you get the picture. Most DO programs I found more interested in having older 40s applicants. One DO commented during interview that older applicants provided valuable experiences that younger applicants did not have and were often more open to rural practices. Being an older premed is a challenge itself, but if you want it badly enough to make yourself competitive then it is possible. If you practice from 50ish until 70 or even 80 you've given back as much as or more than someone who only practices until their 40s and in a small town if ur the only dr for 10-20yrs that can be invaluable.

 

[@Hazel-rah]

There is a site called oldpremeds.org that I just heard about that has a few podcasts that discuss the types of questions being mulled over here. I found the podcasts helpful. Also, my advice is to go straight to (or call) the admission office of the school(s) where you'd think of attending and bring your transcripts and elevator speech and ask them what they think. If you aren't a current applicant, they can talk to you without reservation. Good luck!


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile

 

[CyrilFiggis]

It can be done but you do need to realize there will be some age bias; you need to be prepared to offset that with a special "something" that makes you stand out from the crowd. That starts with grades and MCAT. You need to be able to outperform the majority of your peers. Ideally, you will also have spent your career kicking everyone else's @@@ in whatever you line of work you performed, and if not, have at least put a ton of $$ in the bank because I can see a legitimate issue with older applicants regarding the financial feasibility of a career in medicine. It doesn't hurt to be < 12% body fat and have good vitals as well. Consider the following:

Applicant A: 43, average health, 60th percentile MCAT, 3.7 GPA, good EC's, 500 hrs patient contact, minimal retirement savings, good LOR's

Applicant B: 43, good health, 90th+ percentile MCAT, 3.9+ GPA, good EC's, several thousand hrs patient contact, multi million dollar retirement account, good LOR's, former military.

It's just my two cents but there is a viable argument that applicant A's slot might be better filled by someone younger with similar stats. Conversely, there likely won't be a "younger" alternative to applicant B, who has already demonstrated a level of success in the workplace that no traditional premed can match. In summary, if you are an applicant who presents a package for which there is no real alternative candidate, it makes for a good argument that you should have a seat.
--

I agree with this. If you're average, why not choose average + younger (the safe choice)? The goal is to be so good they can't ignore you.

The naiveté of your commentary is hilarious.

 

[Taurus]

Bad, bad idea. Only good idea if you plan to go into physically easy and high demand career like psychiatry and working at VA.

Had a coresident who will graduate from residency at nearly 60 and in a not so high demand field. Not good.

 

[esob]

The naiveté of your commentary is hilarious.

Not really sure who that was aimed at but if you have some alternate wisdom (and some data analytics to back it up), why not share instead of trollcasting a sardonic, passive-aggressive statement?

 

[CyrilFiggis]

Not really sure who that was aimed at but if you have some alternate wisdom (and some data analytics to back it up), why not share instead of trollcasting a sardonic, passive-aggressive statement?

Well, it was aimed at you. And I don't need data because your suppositions are just as unwarranted and your examples overly dramatic... but I've provided references where needed.

Do I disagree that there can be age bias, sure. But is that a crippling impediment that needs to be overcome? No.

What exactly does "killing it" in your career mean? If someone is hardworking and has had a life sustaining career, for what amounts to the equivalent average age of the applicants he's competing against, is that a demerit? Esp given the fact that during that time they were working, paying bills, etc they also were excelling in the classroom to have the necessary pre-reqs and MCAT scores to get accepted? For Applicant A you seem to make it out to be.

You throw out, "who has already demonstrated a level of success in the workplace that no traditional premed can match" which is a contradiction because you're talking about professional success of a college applicant, yet again diminishing any work by the first applicant. Furthermore, for some reason, you make weight and physicality an issue. This is education, not a life insurance policy. There are younger applicants, with higher BMIs or smoke, who are a higher health risk and get accepted every year.

Also, explain to me where Applicant B got his multi-million dollar retirement? Assume that he makes $70K/year, which in 1995 around the time he would have graduated was twice the median household income (https://www.census.gov/prod/2/pop/p60/p60-193.pdf). Let's assume his company matches fully up to 5% for his 401k starting Day 1 (more likely have 90 days or 6 months, but lets keep things simple). If he stays with the company for 5 years, he would have, adjusting for 5-year inflation and assuming a 10% raise, approx. $40K in his savings. But if he was an eager beaver, and invested an additional 25% he would only have around $150K among his investments going into Y2K. I could continue to belabor this hypothetical, but in order to have a multi-million dollar retirement, assuming you mean at least $2 Million, he would either need to contribute $90K/year OR $50K/year and have invested so well he beat market growth by 8x and didn't get hit by the recession. So not only is your applicant's wealth highly implausible, it still doesn't have any impact on his ability to get an interview or acceptance. Or were you trying to make the point that the burden of medical school debt at 40 is too high to overcome?

And finally, you end with "In summary, if you are an applicant who presents a package for which there is no real alternative candidate, it makes for a good argument that you should have a seat." That is the most blanket generic thing to say. OF COURSE that's true, it's true for ALL applicants, not just older ones. Ask any of the AdComs on here and they will tell you that there is a vast middle ground of applicants with similar grades, similar ECs, etc and they make up the bulk of a class (https://www.aamc.org/download/321494/data/factstablea16.pdf) . This is what secondary essays and personal statements are for, to see who you are as a person.

As an older applicant myself, I was accepted to a med school with an MCAT and cGPA below their average. I was nothing extraordinary, I don't have millions saved and I wasn't "killing" my career. n=1, but that's good enough for me.

And just a question, but what is your status? From what I've seen, you aren't in school nor have you applied, so where are you sourcing your data?

 

[jl lin]

I recommend it. Knowledge decay is a real thing. Then again, if you review, and do poorly, then you can stop the process right there, and not have to worry about spending anymore time and money.

I am wondering if I need to do post bac to prep/refresh for the MCAT or is there alternative less expensive way of doing this.

Some of my all time best student shave been in their 30s and 40s. I graduated one last year at 50. Doing a residency in Southern California right now.

For those of you who started late, as in 40+, any recommendations and advice will be deeply appreciated.

[/QUOTE]


There is definitely a decay factor, but the beauty is there in foundation and such from the original learning, if you solidly learned some percentage of something; thus the decay is a relatively quick refresh IF the substance is there in the first place. At first it may take some achive-processing, but the information is there. It's not exactly like relearning it all over again, unless your "learn" was cursory in the first place. We don't totally forget things.

 

[jl lin]

I g

CLEP is crap, but it worked for me to take be able to take upper level stuff. Each journey is different and it didn't harm my chances of getting in. Frankly, I'm glad I didn't have to take intro bio as a regular class, spend $3-5k on a full year of bio and then be able to move into upper level courses like genetics, a&p. I spent $150 in books, A MONTH OR SO STUDYING for the CLEP exam and was well on my way. Worked really well for me. Bio concepts were easy for me to negotiate if I didn't get them. Chem was a little harder and physics was brutal. Never retook any of them, retaught them to myself for the MCAT and had a choice of med school acceptances. I was just of the mindset that it was a waste to go back and take them again. It can happen! But each school was different. Check them out.

I guess it's totally an individual thing. I like taking real life, so to speak, classes. I could live w/o the commute, but I like learning that way, but I can also learn certain things online. It totally depends upon what the course is.

 

[DrMikeP]

I g

I guess it's totally an individual thing. I like taking real life, so to speak, classes. I could live w/o the commute, but I like learning that way, but I can also learn certain things online. It totally depends upon what the course is.

I enjoy attending and learning in classes myself. It helps cement my understanding of what I've read.