RANT HERE thread

Started by flyhi
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
DrinkWater95 said:
I’m having a wedding in April and within 1 week’s span, I had two of my bridesmaids cancel on me. Better yet, they thought it would be okay to cancel over texts! So annoying..
Click to expand...
gahhhh!! Planning a wedding is stressful enough as is! I'm June 1st and I'm about ready to flee the country and never be heard from again.


My best friend had a groomsmen flat out failed to show up to her wedding with not so much as a text. Everyone was worried, thinking he got hurt/something happened. Eventually he answered the phone with something along the lines of 'yeah sorry I didn't feel like driving the three hours to get there' :smack:



Also, I pinched a nerve pulling on my pj pants. wtf is wrong with me.
 
pp9 said:
gahhhh!! Planning a wedding is stressful enough as is! I'm June 1st and I'm about ready to flee the country and never be heard from again.


My best friend had a groomsmen flat out failed to show up to her wedding with not so much as a text. Everyone was worried, thinking he got hurt/something happened. Eventually he answered the phone with something along the lines of 'yeah sorry I didn't feel like driving the three hours to get there' :smack:



Also, I pinched a nerve pulling on my pj pants. wtf is wrong with me.
Click to expand...
That is horrible! Half of me is wondering why I’m even having a wedding. But now there are down payments made etc, so I guess I have to follow through with it lol.

I hope your pintched nerve was a fluke and you feel better now!
 
Here's my rant that last week was a rave. I did my 1 hour glucose challenge test and got the following result, copied and pasted:
GLUC TOL 1-HR GEST Result: 145 mg/dL
Interpretive Information: (1 hour after 50 g glucose challenge at 24-28 weeks of gestation)
>=180 mg/dL Potentially indicative of gestational diabetes mellitus. Confirmation requires 3-hour glucose tolerance test.

Now, like anyone who can read numbers, since 145 is <180, I took this to mean that my result was not potentially indicative of gestational DM and therefore would not require 3-hour GTT. Am I crazy for interpreting it that way? Everyone I have asked has interpeted it the same way, so I'm going with I'm not crazy.

Today, 8 DAYS LATER, I get a message on MyChart from a nurse saying my result was elevated and I need to do the 3 hour fasting GTT. I message back going, hold up a sec, but the results clearly state X and so are you sure? She replies and goes "Oh that's not the right reference range for pregnant women, for gestational diabetes its >= 130". I'm like, okay but it says GESTATIONAL right in the results interpretation section and OH YEAH ITS BEEN 8 DAYS YOU'VE LET ME THINK I'VE BEEN CLEAR WTF?! This **** would never fly in vet med...

Guys I am so freaking annoyed right now. My body threatens to pass out every time I get my blood drawn (after hydroloading and having snacks ready) and now they want me to get it drawn 4 times after fasting for 8 hours. I have had so much anxiety over this damn test and for the last week finally felt relief that it wasn't something I had to worry about and now this BS.

Ugh. Plan right now is to talk to the NP I have an appointment with on Tuesday. But I am so wighwsjfowiugjpwjgf right now.
 
KCgophervet said:
Here's my rant that last week was a rave. I did my 1 hour glucose challenge test and got the following result, copied and pasted:
GLUC TOL 1-HR GEST Result: 145 mg/dL
Interpretive Information: (1 hour after 50 g glucose challenge at 24-28 weeks of gestation)
>=180 mg/dL Potentially indicative of gestational diabetes mellitus. Confirmation requires 3-hour glucose tolerance test.

Now, like anyone who can read numbers, since 145 is <180, I took this to mean that my result was not potentially indicative of gestational DM and therefore would not require 3-hour GTT. Am I crazy for interpreting it that way? Everyone I have asked has interpeted it the same way, so I'm going with I'm not crazy.

Today, 8 DAYS LATER, I get a message on MyChart from a nurse saying my result was elevated and I need to do the 3 hour fasting GTT. I message back going, hold up a sec, but the results clearly state X and so are you sure? She replies and goes "Oh that's not the right reference range for pregnant women, for gestational diabetes its >= 130". I'm like, okay but it says GESTATIONAL right in the results interpretation section and OH YEAH ITS BEEN 8 DAYS YOU'VE LET ME THINK I'VE BEEN CLEAR WTF?! This **** would never fly in vet med...

Guys I am so freaking annoyed right now. My body threatens to pass out every time I get my blood drawn (after hydroloading and having snacks ready) and now they want me to get it drawn 4 times after fasting for 8 hours. I have had so much anxiety over this damn test and for the last week finally felt relief that it wasn't something I had to worry about and now this BS.

Ugh. Plan right now is to talk to the NP I have an appointment with on Tuesday. But I am so wighwsjfowiugjpwjgf right now.
Click to expand...
How totally frustrating!!

Mayo Clinic says less than 130 to 140 mg/dL is considered normal or a passing test, but that the reference lab may have their own range.... I also would have read it as a pass as written.

Sorry this is happening, hope you get clarity soon. I definitely remember the anxiety related to thinking I might have to do that longer test. Fasting for any amount of time it's totally not doable for me
 
DrinkWater95 said:
That is horrible! Half of me is wondering why I’m even having a wedding. But now there are down payments made etc, so I guess I have to follow through with it lol.

I hope your pintched nerve was a fluke and you feel better now!
Click to expand...
I am better now, thanks!

And we must be on the same wavelength. I want to back out and just elope but there would be so much money down the drain.
 
Read about University of Long Island trying to open a vet school
I just dont understand. IMO if new vet schools are to be opened they should be in states that dont have them. Then again theres the whole argument about new vet schools or not but anyway I digress.
 
MixedAnimals77 said:
Read about University of Long Island trying to open a vet school
I just dont understand. IMO if new vet schools are to be opened they should be in states that dont have them. Then again theres the whole argument about new vet schools or not but anyway I digress.
Click to expand...

NO MORE VET SCHOOLS! RAWR!


Even if a school opens up in a state that doesn't or hasn't had a vet school, that doesn't mean it will be cheap..... just look at Midwestern. Arizona didn't have a vet school, but Midwestern doesn't charge a different in-state vs out-of-state tuition so it makes jack all difference.

University of AZ keeps trying to open a vet school and I really hope they keep failing.
 
MixedAnimals77 said:
Read about University of Long Island trying to open a vet school
I just dont understand. IMO if new vet schools are to be opened they should be in states that dont have them. Then again theres the whole argument about new vet schools or not but anyway I digress.
Click to expand...
It's just because they know they can make $$$$
 
MixedAnimals77 said:
Read about University of Long Island trying to open a vet school
I just dont understand. IMO if new vet schools are to be opened they should be in states that dont have them. Then again theres the whole argument about new vet schools or not but anyway I digress.
Click to expand...

Did you see it on the APVMA facebook? That's why I pointed the opposition to that girl. She didn't seem to realize that these schools may not even happen
 
battie said:
Did you see it on the APVMA facebook? That's why I pointed the opposition to that girl. She didn't seem to realize that these schools may not even happen
Click to expand...

Haaaa I just realized we agree on that page all the time and I just made the connection.

I'm really smart.
 
WildZoo said:
Yeah and I have no idea what that would mean for the students who are in their 2nd or 3rd year if a school failed to get full accreditation with its first graduating class
Click to expand...
I looked into it a while back and if I remember correctly, they'd still be able to finish school and be considered as having graduated from an accredited school, the school just wouldn't be able to continue admitting students. I think that would only happen if a school was found to have some major deficiencies and didn't correct them in the time given.
 
LyraGardenia said:
I looked into it a while back and if I remember correctly, they'd still be able to finish school and be considered as having graduated from an accredited school, the school just wouldn't be able to continue admitting students. I think that would only happen if a school was found to have some major deficiencies and didn't correct them in the time given.
Click to expand...
This is my understanding as well. I also think that with MWU and LMU, they’ll be fully accredited as long as their first graduating class had a high enough NAVLE pass rate? So they’re very unlikely to not be given full accreditation unless the pass rate wasn’t high enough.
 
Caiter92 said:
This is my understanding as well. I also think that with MWU and LMU, they’ll be fully accredited as long as their first graduating class had a high enough NAVLE pass rate? So they’re very unlikely to not be given full accreditation unless the pass rate wasn’t high enough.
Click to expand...

And I don't really see their first classes being too low. I feel like there would've been red flags prior to NAVLE testing
 
Caiter92 said:
This is my understanding as well. I also think that with MWU and LMU, they’ll be fully accredited as long as their first graduating class had a high enough NAVLE pass rate? So they’re very unlikely to not be given full accreditation unless the pass rate wasn’t high enough.
Click to expand...
I know I heard Midwestern had a really high pass rate, well above the 80% they needed!
 
battie said:
Did you see it on the APVMA facebook? That's why I pointed the opposition to that girl. She didn't seem to realize that these schools may not even happen
Click to expand...
So glad I bailed on that page however long ago lol. It's toxic at times honestly. Also the fact that there are still prevets out there with the same misconceptions as prevets 6+ years ago despite the only growing body of information and resources...
 
LyraGardenia said:
I know I heard Midwestern had a really high pass rate, well above the 80% they needed!
Click to expand...

supershorty said:
Yeah, one of my best friends graduated from there and I think she'd said the pass rate was 91%.
Click to expand...

Y'all can do with those numbers what you want. But 91% is NOT good. It means in a class of 100, NINE people didn't pass the NAVLE. That's a test that in most vet schools students essentially expect to pass. In a typical school, there's maybe 1 or 2 students tops who don't pass, usually not because they're ill prepared but because they just suck at this particular testing type. If close to 10% of your class fail (after giving 4 years to weed out people for whom vet school wasn't right for them), there's something wrong with the program and/or they're admitting noncompetitive applicants and passing them through. If you've read posts from people who didn't pass the NAVLE here, it's heartwrenchingly devastating. It's not something you want to go into wondering if you'll pass. Like, you can get 35-45% of the questions WRONG on the NAVLE and still pass, so if you don't pass it, something went horribly wrong.
 
Minnerbelle said:
Y'all can do with those numbers what you want. But 91% is NOT good. It means in a class of 100, NINE people didn't pass the NAVLE. That's a test that in most vet schools students essentially expect to pass. In a typical school, there's maybe 1 or 2 students tops who don't pass, usually not because they're ill prepared but because they just suck at this particular testing type. If close to 10% of your class fail (after giving 4 years to weed out people for whom vet school wasn't right for them), there's something wrong with the program and/or they're admitting noncompetitive applicants and passing them through. If you've read posts from people who didn't pass the NAVLE here, it's heartwrenchingly devastating. It's not something you want to go into wondering if you'll pass. Like, you can get 35-45% of the questions WRONG on the NAVLE and still pass, so if you don't pass it, something went horribly wrong.
Click to expand...
I completely agree. I’m wondering, does the 91% pass rate account for the people who end up retaking it in the spring? Because if so, that’s even worse.
 
Minnerbelle said:
Y'all can do with those numbers what you want. But 91% is NOT good. It means in a class of 100, NINE people didn't pass the NAVLE. That's a test that in most vet schools students essentially expect to pass. In a typical school, there's maybe 1 or 2 students tops who don't pass, usually not because they're ill prepared but because they just suck at this particular testing type. If close to 10% of your class fail (after giving 4 years to weed out people for whom vet school wasn't right for them), there's something wrong with the program and/or they're admitting noncompetitive applicants and passing them through. If you've read posts from people who didn't pass the NAVLE here, it's heartwrenchingly devastating. It's not something you want to go into wondering if you'll pass. Like, you can get 35-45% of the questions WRONG on the NAVLE and still pass, so if you don't pass it, something went horribly wrong.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I actually thought it was more like 98%, I guess I misremembered.
 
WildZoo said:
Someone just posted in that thread that was asking about LMU that it was 93%
Click to expand...
Thanks. I figured they were probably at least above the 80% mark or we probably would have heard about it by now (since schools and the AAVMC/AVMA COE have presumably known final graduating class NAVLE results since around June) but figured I was having a hard time navigating their website or something.
 
vetmedhead said:
Thanks. I figured they were probably at least above the 80% mark or we probably would have heard about it by now (since schools and the AAVMC/AVMA COE have presumably known final graduating class NAVLE results since around June) but figured I was having a hard time navigating their website or something.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don't think the school has officially posted it anywhere. I wasn't able to find it either.
 
vetmedhead said:
Thanks. I figured they were probably at least above the 80% mark or we probably would have heard about it by now (since schools and the AAVMC/AVMA COE have presumably known final graduating class NAVLE results since around June) but figured I was having a hard time navigating their website or something.
Click to expand...
WildZoo said:
Yeah I don't think the school has officially posted it anywhere. I wasn't able to find it either.
Click to expand...
Neither was I. I checked a couple days ago with no luck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.