Pharm drug rep - good/bad for application?

[von Matterhorn]

I recently took on a job as a drug rep for a pharmaceutical company (Pfizer). I'm not a drug rep in the traditional sense where I have to weasel my way into doctor's offices and make sales pitches for my drugs, but I'm in more of a customer service role - providing information on the drugs, information on insurance coverage, etc. My daily job basically has me going from one practice to the next dealing with doctors, nurses, etc. on these issues.

I'm just wondering if this is something I should play up on my application since I'm getting a lot of exposure to the medical world. Since taking on the position, I've actually met quite a few doctors who have really given me a good view into their practice, seeing how their day is run, those kinds of things. On the other hand, a friend advised me that the pharmaceutical world is looked down upon by medical schools in the sense that pharma companies are greedy/selfish/don't portray the qualities they want in a physician.. but I'm starting to doubt my friend's credibility over anything she says, being that she's now a 3rd time re-applicant.

And before anyone screams troll (kind of a common trend I've noticed on here for new posters), I'm actually not a new member. I just decided a new name on here was necessary since my old one had too many ties to my personal email, as well as other things. Anonymity is priceless I haven't told my employer that I'm applying for medical school this summer (it's only a year long contract, anyways), so I didn't want to risk this coming up if they searched my email.

Thanks guys/gals

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[LizzyM]

I recently took on a job as a drug rep for a pharmaceutical company (Pfizer). I'm not a drug rep in the traditional sense where I have to weasel my way into doctor's offices and make sales pitches for my drugs, but I'm in more of a customer service role - providing information on the drugs, information on insurance coverage, etc. My daily job basically has me going from one practice to the next dealing with doctors, nurses, etc. on these issues.

I'm just wondering if this is something I should play up on my application since I'm getting a lot of exposure to the medical world. Since taking on the position, I've actually met quite a few doctors who have really given me a good view into their practice, seeing how their day is run, those kinds of things. On the other hand, a friend advised me that the pharmaceutical world is looked down upon by medical schools in the sense that pharma companies are greedy/selfish/don't portray the qualities they want in a physician.. but I'm starting to doubt my friend's credibility over anything she says, being that she's now a 3rd time re-applicant.

And before anyone screams troll (kind of a common trend I've noticed on here for new posters), I'm actually not a new member. I just decided a new name on here was necessary since my old one had too many ties to my personal email, as well as other things. Anonymity is priceless I haven't told my employer that I'm applying for medical school this summer (it's only a year long contract, anyways), so I didn't want to risk this coming up if they searched my email.

Thanks guys/gals

You are a drug rep in the traditional sense.... no doubt about it, they are just sugar-coating it for you. Many physicians do not look kindly on drug reps and academic physicians are in the vanguard on that. Some so oppose the gift-giving and quid pro quo of drug reps that they wear buttons proclaiming "no free lunch" or prohibit reps and their gifts from their premises.

So, while you are going to need to list this full time employment on your application (not to do so would look odd-- as if you were spending 50 hrs/wk playing video games) it won't be considered a terrific step toward med school.

Furthermore, and to add insult to injury, many firms hire drug reps for their beauty rather than their brains, so it could raise the question or whether you can succeed in medicine.

 

[von Matterhorn]

You are a drug rep in the traditional sense.... no doubt about it, they are just sugar-coating it for you. Many physicians do not look kindly on drug reps and academic physicians are in the vanguard on that. Some so oppose the gift-giving and quid pro quo of drug reps that they wear buttons proclaiming "no free lunch" or prohibit reps and their gifts from their premises.

So, while you are going to need to list this full time employment on your application (not to do so would look odd-- as if you were spending 50 hrs/wk playing video games) it won't be considered a terrific step toward med school.

Furthermore, and to add insult to injury, many firms hire drug reps for their beauty rather than their brains, so it could raise the question or whether you can succeed in medicine.

Actually, by your own admission, I'm not a drug rep in the traditional sense. I don't have expense accounts to pay off clients with lunches or gifts. I simply go to offices, make sure they're ok with the products, make sure they're up to date on samples, understand insurance stuff, etc. Almost every office I've encountered has had the same initial reaction as your post proclaims (suspicion, telling me they don't allow drug reps in their office, etc), but all of them have been very welcoming once I explained what I actually did. Am I selling? Sure, but only in the same sense that a phone customer service rep at Verizon wireless does.

And I'll take the beauty compliment, even though I certainly wasn't hired for my looks

Edit - just wanted to add this. I've always liked your responses because they're almost always well thought out and informative. Your response here just seemed silly in some regards, almost insulting. Medical schools would look down on someone in the pharma industry because they're pretty and dumb? I think that's quite a leap, personally, and actually insulting to real drug sales reps.

 

[theseeker4]

You are a drug rep in the traditional sense.... no doubt about it, they are just sugar-coating it for you. Many physicians do not look kindly on drug reps and academic physicians are in the vanguard on that. Some so oppose the gift-giving and quid pro quo of drug reps that they wear buttons proclaiming "no free lunch" or prohibit reps and their gifts from their premises.

So, while you are going to need to list this full time employment on your application (not to do so would look odd-- as if you were spending 50 hrs/wk playing video games) it won't be considered a terrific step toward med school.

Furthermore, and to add insult to injury, many firms hire drug reps for their beauty rather than their brains, so it could raise the question or whether you can succeed in medicine.

Wait, really? As an adcom, you would let the person's employment "raise the question of whether (he or she) can succeed in medicine" even though you also have their MCAT and GPA in front of you? 😕

 

[raltima07]

Subscribed. DRAMA!

 

[Midwestern Blot]

You are a drug rep in the traditional sense.... no doubt about it, they are just sugar-coating it for you. Many physicians do not look kindly on drug reps and academic physicians are in the vanguard on that. Some so oppose the gift-giving and quid pro quo of drug reps that they wear buttons proclaiming "no free lunch" or prohibit reps and their gifts from their premises.

So, while you are going to need to list this full time employment on your application (not to do so would look odd-- as if you were spending 50 hrs/wk playing video games) it won't be considered a terrific step toward med school.

Furthermore, and to add insult to injury, many firms hire drug reps for their beauty rather than their brains, so it could raise the question or whether you can succeed in medicine.

Somebody is grumpy today.

 

[raltima07]

Somebody is grumpy today.

LizzyM is just being honest. That's why we need her on here...not to sugarcoat things.

 

[LizzyM]

Wait, really? As an adcom, you would let the person's employment "raise the question of whether (he or she) can succeed in medicine" even though you also have their MCAT and GPA in front of you? 😕

Some interviews are closed file. Same assumptions one might make in a closed file about a varsity cheerleader. In fact, one pharmaceutical company was recruiting from among cheerleading squads, regardless of major. Makes you wonder. 🙄

 

[dmf2682]

Some interviews are closed file. Same assumptions one might make in a closed file about a varsity cheerleader. In fact, one pharmaceutical company was recruiting from among cheerleading squads, regardless of major. Makes you wonder. 🙄

Not to peddle semantics here, but how would you know any of these ecs or job details in a closed file interview? I'm assuming the cheerleader wouldn't wear the uniform to the interview 🙂

 

[LizzyM]

Not to peddle semantics here, but how would you know any of these ecs or job details in a closed file interview? I'm assuming the cheerleader wouldn't wear the uniform to the interview 🙂

If the person responds to a question by describing that experience, then the interviewer knows.

 

[mmmcdowe]

Actually, by your own admission, I'm not a drug rep in the traditional sense. I don't have expense accounts to pay off clients with lunches or gifts. I simply go to offices, make sure they're ok with the products, make sure they're up to date on samples, understand insurance stuff, etc. Almost every office I've encountered has had the same initial reaction as your post proclaims (suspicion, telling me they don't allow drug reps in their office, etc), but all of them have been very welcoming once I explained what I actually did. Am I selling? Sure, but only in the same sense that a phone customer service rep at Verizon wireless does.

And I'll take the beauty compliment, even though I certainly wasn't hired for my looks

Edit - just wanted to add this. I've always liked your responses because they're almost always well thought out and informative. Your response here just seemed silly in some regards, almost insulting. Medical schools would look down on someone in the pharma industry because they're pretty and dumb? I think that's quite a leap, personally, and actually insulting to real drug sales reps.

Maybe im the one reading her post wrong, but it seems to me that she said you are a sales rep in the traditional sense. Further, your offense in no ways mitigates the truth that sales reps have a reputation for being hired for looks and not brains. It doesn't make it true just because there is a stereotype, but it doesnt mean there isn't some truth either. This job will raise eyebrows.

You aren't like a costumer service person on the phone, because I call them when I need them, they don't show up and have to talk their way in because of suspicion. Further if my verizon service rep tried to sell me things out of the blue id hang up on them. They certainly dont ask me how my coverage plan is going when all i call them for is to figure out how to turn the thing on. You are there doing the same thing as the initial rep, except your sales pitch is to encourage them to keep making your company money rather than to start making you money.

 

[dmf2682]

If the person responds to a question by describing that experience, then the interviewer knows.

I will be sure to not divulge my stripper past, then.

 

[mmmcdowe]

I think people underestimate the utter hatred that many physicians have for Industry. I watched two surgeons get physically separated because punches were about to fly over an insinuation that one of the surgeons was in the pocket of a device manufacturer.

 

[el poblano]

Wait, really? As an adcom, you would let the person's employment "raise the question of whether (he or she) can succeed in medicine" even though you also have their MCAT and GPA in front of you? 😕

Wait wait wait. Before you get all high and mighty, remember LizzyM IS on an adcom. While everyone else on sdn likes to speculate about what is good/bad for an app, Lizzy is one of the few who has real experience.
I think we would be wise to understand that even if we don't like/agree with what she says, she is doing us a favor by sharing with us at all. I personally think the op should realize they are going to have a harder time at getting in and act accordingly, regardless of whether they think it's fair or not.

Sent from my HTC EVO 3D using Tapatalk

 

[LizzyM]

I will be sure to not divulge my stripper past, then.

That could hurt.... or help... it depends on who is interviewing you. 😉

 

[theseeker4]

Wait wait wait. Before you get all high and mighty, remember LizzyM IS on an adcom. While everyone else on sdn likes to speculate about what is good/bad for an app, Lizzy is one of the few who has real experience.
I think we would be wise to understand that even if we don't like/agree with what she says, she is doing us a favor by sharing with us at all. I personally think the op should realize they are going to have a harder time at getting in and act accordingly, regardless of whether they think it's fair or not.

Sent from my HTC EVO 3D using Tapatalk

I understand that fully, which is why I asked "as an adcom..." I am not "high and mighty" at all, I simply was surprised that LizzyM, being and adcom, would actually say a person's job could cast doubt on their abilities in spite of whatever else their application may say.

 

[mmmcdowe]

I understand that fully, which is why I asked "as an adcom..." I am not "high and mighty" at all, I simply was surprised that LizzyM, being and adcom, would actually say a person's job could cast doubt on their abilities in spite of whatever else their application may say.

Would you be as surprised if someone said that a past job was evidence of being successful in medical school? Its a bit foreign to think of it as a possible negative, but not without some logic.

 

[theseeker4]

Would you be as surprised if someone said that a past job was evidence of being successful in medical school? Its a bit foreign to think of it as a possible negative, but not without some logic.

I was more referring to the inference that even with a good GPA and MCAT, good LOR's and EC's, an applicant's job would be used as evidence that despite all that, the person might not be smart enough to handle med school because people are typically hired for that job based on looks instead of smarts. Sure, I can understand how there could be a bias toward certain occupations. Using broad generalizations to make assumptions about an individual is what I was surprised about.

And to be clear, I am not pretending to know enough to disagree with LizzyM, I was simply surprised by her response.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

Furthermore, and to add insult to injury, many firms hire drug reps for their beauty rather than their brains, so it could raise the question or whether you can succeed in medicine.

I think this is the most blatant stereotype I've come across of in a while. Like a little high school kid who is jealous of a good looking person. Even if he/she is a model and really beautiful it has no correlation whatsoever to their aptitude for medicine. If an adcom thinks it does, they are totally inept.

Along the same logic, student athletes are stereotypically physically strong but known to be the most intelligent one's around. I guess med schools should think twice about letting these people in too. Med schools should also think twice about lit majors, artists, teachers, basically anything other than Biochem and Bio cookie cutter premeds.

And these days, a job is a job, so be proud of getting one and do well.

 

[alerk323]

This might be a tad off topic, but the stigma many of these big pharma companies face I think are often unfair. It takes literally billions of dollars to create the life saving/helping drugs that doctors rely on. Without big pharma, medicine would just not be where it is today.

I worked at a market research company where our clients were usually big pharma companies. We would interview patients and doctors to get market research data for the express purpose of making our clients more profitable. Is this going to be looked down on? Will med schools view my application negatively in this regard?

 

[dmf2682]

I think this is the most blatant stereotype I've come across of in a while. Like a little high school kid who is jealous of a good looking person. Even if he/she is a model and really beautiful it has no correlation whatsoever to their aptitude for medicine. If an adcom thinks it does, they are totally inept.

Along the same logic, student athletes are stereotypically physically strong but known to be the most intelligent one's around. I guess med schools should think twice about letting these people in too. Med schools should also think twice about lit majors, artists, teachers, basically anything other than Biochem and Bio cookie cutter premeds.

And these days, a job is a job, so be proud of getting one and do well.

You forgot to say,

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful!

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

You forgot to say,

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful!

haha. maybe the OP should put that in his/her personal statement.

Edited to be gender neutral.

 

[dmf2682]

haha. maybe the OP should put that in her personal statement.

Do we know its a girl? I had assumed they were a boy.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

Some interviews are closed file. Same assumptions one might make in a closed file about a varsity cheerleader. In fact, one pharmaceutical company was recruiting from among cheerleading squads, regardless of major. Makes you wonder. 🙄

This is *****ic in terms of assessing ones candidacy. Irrelevant. 👎

It also doesn't make you wonder. It seems totally logical to get attractive people (Assuming cheerleaders are the most attractive, which is a huge assumption in itself.) to be the face of your company. I'm pretty sure this is Marketing 101.

And don't even get me started on how dumb marketing majors are. Definitely don't let them into med school!

 

[von Matterhorn]

Maybe im the one reading her post wrong, but it seems to me that she said you are a sales rep in the traditional sense. Further, your offense in no ways mitigates the truth that sales reps have a reputation for being hired for looks and not brains. It doesn't make it true just because there is a stereotype, but it doesnt mean there isn't some truth either. This job will raise eyebrows.

You aren't like a costumer service person on the phone, because I call them when I need them, they don't show up and have to talk their way in because of suspicion. Further if my verizon service rep tried to sell me things out of the blue id hang up on them. They certainly dont ask me how my coverage plan is going when all i call them for is to figure out how to turn the thing on. You are there doing the same thing as the initial rep, except your sales pitch is to encourage them to keep making your company money rather than to start making you money.

I think you missed my point entirely. I understand she was saying I am a sales rep in the traditional sense. She also went on to further say

" Some so oppose the gift-giving and quid pro quo of drug reps that they wear buttons proclaiming "no free lunch" or prohibit reps and their gifts from their premises."

My point specifically was that I'm not like a 'traditional sales rep'. I don't have a credit card/expense account that I'm allowed to spend on doctors like they are. I'm not allowed to bring in breakfast, take anyone out to lunch, etc. Some of you (LizzyM, particularly) are making assumptions about my job. I know what my job is, please don't try and tell ME what it is. Throughout my hiring and training, it was instilled in me many, many. many times that I'm never to speak about sales, to try and convince a physician to switch brands, etc. My job is 100% CS based. It has actually been so successful and liked in the industry that I believe Astra Zeneca just went out and hired hundreds and thousands of people to perform a very similar job function.

And I never said I was like a phone CS rep, I said I was as much of a salesman as they are. Read what I wrote:

"Am I selling? Sure, but only in the same sense that a phone customer service rep at Verizon wireless does."

I'm in indirect sales, much like any customer service person is. I put a good face to the company, and their hope is that in return doctors will turn to Pfizer products. I understand that, but that's the exact same thing as saying any customer service rep is a sales rep.

I've heard some pretty bad stories about sales reps in doctor's offices. They told me all about that when I was interviewing. MY personal experiences have been totally different. Out of the 200 offices I attend to each month, 3 of them have told me not to come back (one was insistent that I was only there to steal competitor's products..). For the most part, I've been pretty well-received. Hell, one doctor even hugged me before when I dropped off some samples (yes, it was a bit strange). A good amount of the doctors come out and chat with me whenever I stop by now. Unfortunately, it seems as if pharmaceutical companies have this really bad stigma in society. I'm not going to lie and say salesmen/women don't do some sleazy things, but when you're in sales of high-profit items, isn't that true for most professions? I mean, point out one honest car salesman/woman and I'll show you 50 who are the opposite.

Anyways, this thread has answered my question Looks like I'll have some explaining to do. I still think it's degrading of LizzyM to say pharm drug reps that are involved in sales are simply good looking airheads. I realize she's well-respected on this forum, but that doesn't give you the right to put a certain profession on blast for whatever reason. Just my $0.02.

 

[ppfizenm]

I feel the need to say that judging someone for a medical school seat based of what they do for a living or what sport they played in college or whatever other trivial little piece of information you gleam is wrong.

That being said however, I was on a date with someone the other night when I found out he works for Goldman Sachs. I won't be seeing him again.

 

[von Matterhorn]

Do we know its a girl? I had assumed they were a boy.

Yeah, I'm a guy, and I'm definitely not this 6'3" / muscular hunk LizzyM eluded to

 

[LizzyM]

Face it, people are continually making assumptions based on what you say about yourself, information you provide on your application, things you say at the interview, maybe even the videos you post on Youtube. Your home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation) are all fodder for judgments from an interviewer or adcom member. When so very few are selected, and given that no one is perfect, it is possible to gloss over one's prejudices and find something else to find fault with so that the real reason remains unspoken. This is true in job hunts and school admissions.

On the other hand, you may have the good luck of being assigned to someone who thinks more highly of you due to home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation).

Life is not fair. Know this, expect it and apply broadly. With a little luck, your application will fall into the right hands.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

Face it, people are continually making assumptions based on what you say about yourself, information you provide on your application, things you say at the interview, maybe even the videos you post on Youtube. Your home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation) are all fodder for judgments from an interviewer or adcom member. When so very few are selected, and given that no one is perfect, it is possible to gloss over one's prejudices and find something else to find fault with so that the real reason remains unspoken. This is true in job hunts and school admissions.

On the other hand, you may have the good luck of being assigned to someone who thinks more highly of you due to home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation).

Life is not fair. Know this, expect it and apply broadly. With a little luck, your application will fall into the right hands.

Now this is actually logical. Good recovery. 👍

 

[Gannador]

Now this is actually logical. Good recovery. 👍

It's exactly what she said the first time, she just led you through it more for you this time.

 

[lalalaaaaaa]

It's exactly what she said the first time, she just led you through it more for you this time.

False. This second post is a blanket statement that life isn't fair, which is generally true. In the first post LizzyM is unkind enough to allow her own biased stereotypes cut into the OPs current job. I'm sure there are some docs who might think what he is doing is great.

 

[rmnanon]

I recently took on a job as a drug rep for a pharmaceutical company (Pfizer). I'm not a drug rep in the traditional sense where I have to weasel my way into doctor's offices and make sales pitches for my drugs, but I'm in more of a customer service role - providing information on the drugs, information on insurance coverage, etc. My daily job basically has me going from one practice to the next dealing with doctors, nurses, etc. on these issues.

I'm just wondering if this is something I should play up on my application since I'm getting a lot of exposure to the medical world. Since taking on the position, I've actually met quite a few doctors who have really given me a good view into their practice, seeing how their day is run, those kinds of things. On the other hand, a friend advised me that the pharmaceutical world is looked down upon by medical schools in the sense that pharma companies are greedy/selfish/don't portray the qualities they want in a physician.. but I'm starting to doubt my friend's credibility over anything she says, being that she's now a 3rd time re-applicant.

And before anyone screams troll (kind of a common trend I've noticed on here for new posters), I'm actually not a new member. I just decided a new name on here was necessary since my old one had too many ties to my personal email, as well as other things. Anonymity is priceless I haven't told my employer that I'm applying for medical school this summer (it's only a year long contract, anyways), so I didn't want to risk this coming up if they searched my email.

Thanks guys/gals

I've worked in an office that runs rampant with drug reps. Daily lunches, weekly breakfasts, the whole nine yards. While you are being exposed to some of the practices within the medical community, you aren't and SHOULD NOT be exposed to patients (ahem...HIPAA).

I would imagine more of your exposure is related to crappy drug coverage and information like that. While it's something to discuss, I think you should try and do a lot of shadowing to get BOTH sides of the story. Now THAT would be something to talk about.

On a side note, I don't know what kind of special drug rep you are, but PLEASE don't be one of those FOS, bull-ishing types. Docs, nurses, front office, and everyone else sees right through it and it's obnoxious.

 

[von Matterhorn]

I've never been exposed to patients. I never said I was in the room with them. But, I think anyone can agree that there is a lot more to being a doctor than just seeing patients. Hell, I've been a patient for 25 years, I don't think there's much more for me to see behind the doors than what I've already experienced myself. There are other things, though, that I'm being exposed to now that I never have seen previously. I'm also learning about a lot of daily grind things that doctors have to go through, like learning about insurance, pharmacy callbacks, RX issues, etc. I, personally, think it's actually pretty good experience.

And, like I said, I'm not the kind of drug rep you're referring to. Those guys have agendas to sell sell sell to make a living. They're also given corporate credit cards to wine and dine. I get paid what I get paid, nothing influences that. Sure, I could bring in coffee and bagels, but it'd be out of my own pocket and it wouldn't earn me anything. When I walk in, my own agenda is simply to make sure they have up to date drug/insurance info, and other things that help them operate smoothly. Like I said before, I'm actually pretty warmly welcomed by the majority of my offices now. 3 have shunned me, but 1 of them honestly seemed like a bit of a loon, and the other 2 refused to even hear me out. Nothing I can do there.

 

[rmnanon]

It's good that you haven't been exposed to patients. Like I said, there are very few people associated with pharma companies that should be interacting with patients. The only ones I can think of are RDs and CDEs that help diabetics and are associated with specific companies. I have witnessed multiple drug reps ask us for names of patients and things like that so that they could try to push their drugs. It's insane.

Hey, more power to you if you're not "that kind of drug rep." I've never seen one of your kind in the clinic but it would be a fresh perspective and I wish there were more of your type.

All I can say is that I would be very specific about your "scope of practice" when you describe what you do in your PS and Activities section.

 

[ppfizenm]

Face it, people are continually making assumptions based on what you say about yourself, information you provide on your application, things you say at the interview, maybe even the videos you post on Youtube. Your home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation) are all fodder for judgments from an interviewer or adcom member. When so very few are selected, and given that no one is perfect, it is possible to gloss over one's prejudices and find something else to find fault with so that the real reason remains unspoken. This is true in job hunts and school admissions.

On the other hand, you may have the good luck of being assigned to someone who thinks more highly of you due to home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation).

Life is not fair. Know this, expect it and apply broadly. With a little luck, your application will fall into the right hands.

If your admitting you know of admissions personal who bias decisions against candidates because of their sexual orientation I really think you should report that person or people to the dean of admissions or the aamc. I'm understand this is a very polarized country we live in but this goes against admissions policies of every school I've looked into and, without having looked into it further, sounds like it is illegal.

 

[von Matterhorn]

It's good that you haven't been exposed to patients. Like I said, there are very few people associated with pharma companies that should be interacting with patients. The only ones I can think of are RDs and CDEs that help diabetics and are associated with specific companies. I have witnessed multiple drug reps ask us for names of patients and things like that so that they could try to push their drugs. It's insane.

Hey, more power to you if you're not "that kind of drug rep." I've never seen one of your kind in the clinic but it would be a fresh perspective and I wish there were more of your type.

All I can say is that I would be very specific about your "scope of practice" when you describe what you do in your PS and Activities section.

It's actually a very new program. I only started a little over three months ago. When I got hired, I was hired along with 400 other people around the US since it was taking off as a well-received program. I was told Astra Zeneca and possibly Merck were also doing the same thing after hearing such positive responses from offices.

If I had a 6 figure salary on the line, and whether I met it or not meant pushing drug sales like none other, I would be the same person as those other drug reps. There's nothing wrong with them, they're just doing the job they're paid to do. I also hate car salespeople, but at the end of the day, I recognize they're a douche for 8 hours of the day because that's generally what they need to do to get by.

 

[alerk323]

If your admitting you know of admissions personal who bias decisions against candidates because of their sexual orientation I really think you should report that person or people to the dean of admissions or the aamc. I'm understand this is a very polarized country we live in but this goes against admissions policies of every school I've looked into and, without having looked into it further, sounds like it is illegal.

I don't think she's saying she knows of specific people/instances, she's just making the general point that everyone has biases that they can't control

Has anyone taken that psychology test where it shows you pictures of faces of black and white people with either positive words (love, good, nice) or negative words (evil, greedy, bad) and you have to match up black or white faces with negative or positive words? When going through the trials where you had to match up black faces with good words, the reaction times were significantly slower for everyone in the class compared to white faces with good words. It was rather crazy and surprisingly that literally everyone was affected.

 

[el poblano]

If your admitting you know of admissions personal who bias decisions against candidates because of their sexual orientation I really think you should report that person or people to the dean of admissions or the aamc. I'm understand this is a very polarized country we live in but this goes against admissions policies of every school I've looked into and, without having looked into it further, sounds like it is illegal.

I would assume its not so cut and dry. Everyone has personal opinions and prejudices. For example, were I on an adcom and an applicant was say a Christian Scientist, I would likely say to myself, "Man, I don't think this personal will be able to give good care to patients because of his beliefs." I would never say that out loud, and sure as heck wouldn't write my opinion down, I would probably find some other reason to disqualify the applicant.
As much as it doesn't seem fair, I can only assume the same happens all the time on adcoms- people allow their personal prejudices to affect every decision they make.
On a personal note, I currently work in a clinic and can't stand drug reps with the exception of one. Were I on an adcom my experiences would shade my perception of an applicant with such a background negatively.

 

[von Matterhorn]

I don't think she's saying she knows of specific people/instances, she's just making the general point that everyone has biases that they can't control

Has anyone taken that psychology test where it shows you pictures of faces of black and white people with either positive words (love, good, nice) or negative words (evil, greedy, bad) and you have to match up black or white faces with negative or positive words? When going through the trials where you had to match up black faces with good words, the reaction times were significantly slower for everyone in the class compared to white faces with good words. It was rather crazy and surprisingly that literally everyone was affected.

I would assume its not so cut and dry. Everyone has personal opinions and prejudices. For example, were I on an adcom and an applicant was say a Christian Scientist, I would likely say to myself, "Man, I don't think this personal will be able to give good care to patients because of his beliefs." I would never say that out loud, and sure as heck wouldn't write my opinion down, I would probably find some other reason to disqualify the applicant.
As much as it doesn't seem fair, I can only assume the same happens all the time on adcoms- people allow their personal prejudices to affect every decision they make.
On a personal note, I currently work in a clinic and can't stand drug reps with the exception of one. Were I on an adcom my experiences would shade my perception of an applicant with such a background negatively.

Yes, everyone has their own personal opinions on that thing, but when you're in a professional setting like this where you're affecting people's lives, you should be able to set those kinds of things aside and do the job correctly.

I dislike the state of Wisconsin. Don't ask me why, that's an entirely different thread. I wouldn't dismiss someone if they were from La Crosse, WI, and their entire application showed devotion to that state or whatever. I would expect at least that very same from anyone sitting on an admissions board. If you can't do that, you have no right to be doing that as your career. Just my opinion.

 

[Medicinewoman85]

I don't think there is a reason to act to hostile towards LizzyM. You don't have to agree with what she says as anything you read on SDN. I don't think she was trying to degrade the OP but just stating a "misconception" that many physicians and adcoms actually feel. I think we need to remember that we are all trying to get into a professional school. Courtesy goes a long way.

 

[SoonerFromTexas]

Life is not fair. Know this, expect it and apply broadly. With a little luck, your application will fall into the right hands.

This is the truth right here. Honestly, we are pretty lucky. In the "non-doctor" job market, employers can use nearly everything to select their hire (besides race, religion, and disability).

Edit: I know that jobs and medical school are not the same thing, but that is what our fellow graduates have to face.

 

[Ilovewater]

Face it, people are continually making assumptions based on what you say about yourself, information you provide on your application, things you say at the interview, maybe even the videos you post on Youtube. Your home town, your address, your college, your sorority/fraternity, your choice of extracurricular activities (including political or religious activities and those related to your sexual orientation) are all fodder for judgments from an interviewer or adcom member. When so very few are selected, and given that no one is perfect, it is possible to gloss over one's prejudices and find something else to find fault with so that the real reason remains unspoken. This is true in job hunts and school admissions.

This is so very true. Even if people try to leave out their bias, it impossible for some people to complete ignore it. Is it unfair? Sure, but it happens, so it's best to get used to it. For instance, my friend was on the hiring committee with 3 other people for their engineer company. She said that the other 3 people on the committee didn't want to hire a perfectly qualified female applicant because she was blond and "too good looking". They equated being those characteristics with being less intelligent, so they didn't think she could handle the job. Crappy things like this happen all the time.

If you have a strong application and you apply broadly, chances are you will get in. There will be adcoms who won't care that you worked as a drug rep. Everyone has to make a living somehow.

 

[SpecterGT260]

You are a drug rep in the traditional sense.... no doubt about it, they are just sugar-coating it for you. Many physicians do not look kindly on drug reps and academic physicians are in the vanguard on that. Some so oppose the gift-giving and quid pro quo of drug reps that they wear buttons proclaiming "no free lunch" or prohibit reps and their gifts from their premises.

So, while you are going to need to list this full time employment on your application (not to do so would look odd-- as if you were spending 50 hrs/wk playing video games) it won't be considered a terrific step toward med school.

Furthermore, and to add insult to injury, many firms hire drug reps for their beauty rather than their brains, so it could raise the question or whether you can succeed in medicine.

ooooooouuuuuuuuuuccccchhhhhhhhh

 

[dreamweaver1988]

I don't think she's saying she knows of specific people/instances, she's just making the general point that everyone has biases that they can't control

Has anyone taken that psychology test where it shows you pictures of faces of black and white people with either positive words (love, good, nice) or negative words (evil, greedy, bad) and you have to match up black or white faces with negative or positive words? When going through the trials where you had to match up black faces with good words, the reaction times were significantly slower for everyone in the class compared to white faces with good words. It was rather crazy and surprisingly that literally everyone was affected.

Evolution bro

 

[ppfizenm]

This is so very true. Even if people try to leave out their bias, it impossible for some people to complete ignore it. Is it unfair? Sure, but it happens, so it's best to get used to it. For instance, my friend was on the hiring committee with 3 other people for their engineer company. She said that the other 3 people on the committee didn't want to hire a perfectly qualified female applicant because she was blond and "too good looking". They equated being those characteristics with being less intelligent, so they didn't think she could handle the job. Crappy things like this happen all the time.

If you have a strong application and you apply broadly, chances are you will get in. There will be adcoms who won't care that you worked as a drug rep. Everyone has to make a living somehow.

Best to get used to something that most likely is illegal? I am so glad we just used to those separate water fountains and bathrooms for black people.

 

[Ilovewater]

Best to get used to something that most likely is illegal? I am so glad we just used to those separate water fountains and bathrooms for black people.

None of the examples have been as extreme as segregation.

People are judgmental and ignorant. You can't fix everyone. I've been discriminated against for being Asian by some patients. So what? I moved on. It's their problem and not mine. It's not illegal that the adcom looks down on an applicant for being a drug rep. It doesn't make it any less wrong.

 

[el poblano]

Best to get used to something that most likely is illegal? I am so glad we just used to those separate water fountains and bathrooms for black people.

Illegal? Wrong maybe, bit how exactly do you plan on legislating away opinions, however wrong they are?


Sent from my HTC EVO 3D using Tapatalk

 

[AllDaWEI]

I agree with LizzyM. If the OP and others even thought about starting such a thread, it shows they realze there are prejudices. Sometimes the admissions process seems like a fantasy world, but real life still takes place!

If a stripper told she wanted to be a doctor, can you honestly say you wouldn't have any opinions what soever?

 

[dmf2682]

I agree with LizzyM. If the OP and others even thought about starting such a thread, it shows they realze there are prejudices. Sometimes the admissions process seems like a fantasy world, but real life still takes place!

If a stripper told she wanted to be a doctor, can you honestly say you wouldn't have any opinions what soever?

Or he.

 

[ppfizenm]

Illegal? Wrong maybe, bit how exactly do you plan on legislating away opinions, however wrong they are?


Sent from my HTC EVO 3D using Tapatalk

Not illegal. I said most likely b/c I wasn't entirely certain, and with today's laws it is hard to be certain. Having looked in to it a bit further I would say that yes in some states it is illegal. However there is no all encompassing federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Legislating away opinions? I couldn't care less what people thought of me. I do take issue with how I am treated based on something I have absolutely no control over however. OP could have picked a different job to work that would be looked on more favorably. The same cannot be said for sexual orientation. If someone in admissions has knowledge that another ad com member is rejecting applicants on the basis of sexual orientation they should report it. Sitting by and letting it happen is just as disgusting as the fact that it happens in the first place.