The Official "I Cannot Stop Lying b/c I'm Too Excited About The FUTURE" Thread

[PittMedicine]

The First Step is Admitting you have a problem:

Official Liar List: PittMedicine

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[xanthomondo]

The First Step is Admitting you have a problem:

Official Liar List: PittMedicine

what are we lying about?

 

[SeaAngel45]

lol,I don't get it??

Lying about our grades?

 

[runningmom]

Well, public humiliation is its own punishment. I guess this is the online version of being placed in the stocks.

Thanks for coming clean. In my book at least all is forgiven.

 

[kypdurron5]

The First Step is Admitting you have a problem:

Official Liar List: PittMedicine

Hrrrm… he could be talking about "laying"....so, do tell, who can't stop getting laid because they're so excited about the future? Ok, enough low-class humor.

I could actually see a valid point here. Just today I was considering how far I am willing to “stretch” the truth during an interview. I am never one to lie, but let’s face it; this is the most important event as far as our futures are concerned. Before we can realize our dreams we must first jump the hurdle of getting into medical school, which requires that we present certain life-experiences in a way so as to highlight why we will make good doctors. Do I have close friends who can’t afford proper healthcare…well, I did talk to that cashier at Walmart yesterday for a good 20 seconds… .

 

[PittMedicine]

I meant on this thread.

 

[Law2Doc]

Hrrrm… he could be talking about "laying"....so, do tell, who can't stop getting laid because they're so excited about the future? Ok, enough low-class humor.

I could actually see a valid point here. Just today I was considering how far I am willing to “stretch” the truth during an interview. I am never one to lie, but let’s face it; this is the most important event as far as our futures are concerned. Before we can realize our dreams we must first jump the hurdle of getting into medical school, which requires that we present certain life-experiences in a way so as to highlight why we will make good doctors. Do I have close friends who can’t afford proper healthcare…well, I did talk to that cashier at Walmart yesterday for a good 20 seconds… .

If you were getting laid nonstop you wouldn't be thinking past the present.


There's a difference between lying and "spin". Spin is where you talk about your actual true experiences, but cast them in the light most favorable to your cause. What was boring and tedious gets recast as interesting and thought provoking.
Lying is where you never had such an experience in the first place (boring or not) and are just making it up. Lying is what is not acceptable, and what adcoms will sniff out a mile away.

 

[kypdurron5]

If you were getting laid nonstop you wouldn't be thinking past the present.


There's a difference between lying and "spin". Spin is where you talk about your actual true experiences, but cast them in the light most favorable to your cause. What was boring and tedious gets recast as interesting and thought provoking.
Lying is where you never had such an experience in the first place (boring or not) and are just making it up. Lying is what is not acceptable, and what adcoms will sniff out a mile away.

Well that depends on how good a liar you are, how long your interviews are, how "believable" your lies are, etc. The idea that adcoms are all-knowing is a myth that has unfortunately been perpetuated too long. I must also disagree on your ethics of lying. Since "boring" and "interesting" are opposites, to switch one for the other is a lie, not a "spin." That is also misrepresentation, which has ethical implications of its own. In my view, spin would be to make a somewhat worthwhile experience seem even more worthwhile than it was. We might call this spin exaggeration. To make a boring experience seem more interesting than it actually was by highlighting only the interesting parts might be perceptual spin, but as long as you're not actually calling it "interesting" when you know it was "boring" I wouldn't see a problem with it. One could of course argue that it is misrepresentation, but again, that's a different argument. I could also say we misrepresent ourselves by wearing suits to our interviews if we usually don't wear suits. I could say I misrepresent myself by being friendly during an interview, assuming I can actually be friendly for that long . Anyway, misrepresentation is a little too broad to get hung up on, and plus we're all going to have to do it to some degree anyway.

 

[kypdurron5]

I meant on this thread.

Dude, what are you talking about?! You mean we get on the thread to say we're lying, when we're actually not, which means we actually are? Or, do you perhaps means lying on SDN as a whole...like lying about getting interviews, etc.?

 

[Law2Doc]

Well that depends on how good a liar you are, how long your interviews are, how "believable" your lies are, etc. The idea that adcoms are all-knowing is a myth that has unfortunately been perpetuated too long.

What seems like a good job of being believable at 20 may not be to someone much older, who has been around the block a few times. You get pretty good at reading people with age, particularly if your job requires it. Judges, police officers, interviewers -- it's all the same. It's an acquired skill that improves with each passing year. And this skill is helped by the fact that most liars aren't particularly good at it. And most college age folks are far worse liars than they'd like to think. When you are young you think you know more than you do. Medical school cures you of this.
I've done some job interviewing in my prior career, and you absolutely can tell the fakers.

 

[Brookstacular]

In the FUTURE, we will all drive electric hovercars with robotic drivers. It will be the Epcot universe.

Just go right on ahead and add my name to the list of dirty, rotten, liars...

 

[kypdurron5]

What seems like a good job of being believable at 20 may not be to someone much older, who has been around the block a few times. You get pretty good at reading people with age, particularly if your job requires it. Judges, police officers, interviewers -- it's all the same. It's an acquired skill that improves with each passing year. And this skill is helped by the fact that most liars aren't particularly good at it. And most college age folks are far worse liars than they'd like to think. When you are young you think you know more than you do. Medical school cures you of this.
I've done some job interviewing in my prior career, and you absolutely can tell the fakers.

Look, I completely agree with everything in that post. The only thing I'm trying to get you to admit is that it IS possible to lie and get away with it. I realize those different things which are obvious to the untrained, trained, and all-knowing...but you seem to refuse to admit the possibility that you can lie about SOMETHING and get away with it. Thus, why I said "Well that depends on how good a liar you are, how long your interviews are, how "believable" your lies are, etc." To suggest that you can't get away with saying "I volunteered Mondays, Tuesdays, and Fridays" when you actually only volunteered Mondays, Fridays, and one time on a Tuesday is ludicrous. Don't get me wrong, I KNOW that you realize this, it's just that you don't acknowledge it in any of your posts on the topic of lying (I'm referring to another thread as well where you said something about adcoms "seeing through" things). Interviews may be experienced, as are interrogators and judges...but even Jack Bauer is wrong sometimes.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

you absolutely can tell the fakers.

What about OJ?

 

[Law2Doc]

Look, I completely agree with everything in that post. The only thing I'm trying to get you to admit is that it IS possible to lie and get away with it. I realize those different things which are obvious to the untrained, trained, and all-knowing...but you seem to refuse to admit the possibility that you can lie about SOMETHING and get away with it. Thus, why I said "Well that depends on how good a liar you are, how long your interviews are, how "believable" your lies are, etc." To suggest that you can't get away with saying "I volunteered Mondays, Tuesdays, and Fridays" when you actually only volunteered Mondays, Fridays, and one time on a Tuesday is ludicrous. Don't get me wrong, I KNOW that you realize this, it's just that you don't acknowledge it in any of your posts on the topic of lying (I'm referring to another thread as well where you said something about adcoms "seeing through" things). Interviews may be experienced, as are interrogators and judges...but even Jack Bauer is wrong sometimes.

Sure adcoms aren't all-knowing. But they are usually pretty sharp. And because they do several hundred interviews a year, they get pretty good at it. Maybe you could get away with something petty, like a few extra hours of volunteering without betraying yourself, but try to lie about something big and you are pretty likely to get caught. People have "tells', "tics" and other nervous mannerisms. Others get too emphatic. Still others catch themselves in lies even within the span of a 20 minute interview And the rest are just never are as convincing as they'd like to think.

 

[butmylipshurtrealbad]

Am I the only one who is copletely confused by this thread? What is it about?

 

[Law2Doc]

What about OJ?

OJ never applied to med school.

 

[Law2Doc]

Am I the only one who is copletely confused by this thread? What is it about?

It's about 17 posts and counting...

 

[butmylipshurtrealbad]

Oh, just read the interview thread and got it.. pitt, you must feel pretty bad about your lie

 

[confused48]

The OP started the Interviews 2007 thread and indicated that he/she had two interviews at schools in VA. Subsequently (today) he/she indicated that this was a lie and removed his/her name from the schools. Now why he/she started this thread is not clear--hoping for group forgiveness perhaps?

 

[narc]

The First Step is Admitting you have a problem:

Official Liar List: PittMedicine

You really need to change the title of this thread.
"I can't stop lying because I am a worthless piece of $hit"

 

[kypdurron5]

Sure adcoms aren't all-knowing. But they are usually pretty sharp. And because they do several hundred interviews a year, they get pretty good at it. Maybe you could get away with something petty, like a few extra hours of volunteering without betraying yourself, but try to lie about something big and you are pretty likely to get caught. People have "tells', "tics" and other nervous mannerisms. Others get too emphatic. Still others catch themselves in lies even within the span of a 20 minute interview And the rest are just never are as convincing as they'd like to think.

I'll count that as a concession. I also agree, more experienced interviewers are going to be good at what they do. Still, another thing you haven't taken into account is that although adcoms interview a lot of people through the years, they never actually find out whether someone lied to them or not. It's not like they do the interview and then put the students on trial. Whether a student tells the truth, or tells a lie and gets away with it the adcoms will never know unless it's something that shows up in a background check. Even then, I've only heard of some schools doing background checks. And yes, there are still "signs" that someone is lying, but not even a polygraph is good enough to be admitted into court; I guarantee you there are many lying applicants that are good enough to be admitted into medical school >). (like the comparison? lol >). Plus, even if an adcom "thinks" someone might be lying, there is nothing they can do about it unless it's verifiable. It's not like they're going to say to the admission council "this applicant is impressive, but I think they're lying about their dead cat...I can't prove it, but I've been doing this for 35 years..." Thus, I think most adcoms take the "innocent until proven guilty" stance, or the "trust but verify" option (credit- CSI lol). There is no room for the "gut feeling" option unless it has something to do with the applicant as a whole- one suspected lie just won't cut it as far as denying an otherwise qualified applicant a position.

 

[kypdurron5]

The OP started the Interviews 2007 thread and indicated that he/she had two interviews at schools in VA. Subsequently (today) he/she indicated that this was a lie and removed his/her name from the schools. Now why he/she started this thread is not clear--hoping for group forgiveness perhaps?

There is something to be said for political correctness, but all the he/she's are really distracting

 

[Law2Doc]

Plus, even if an adcom "thinks" someone might be lying, there is nothing they can do about it unless it's verifiable. It's not like they're going to say to the admission council "this applicant is impressive, but I think they're lying about their dead cat...I can't prove it, but I've been doing this for 35 years..." Thus, I think most adcoms take the "innocent until proven guilty" stance, or the "trust but verify" option (credit- CSI lol). There is no room for the "gut feeling" option unless it has something to do with the applicant as a whole- one suspected lie just won't cut it as far as denying an otherwise qualified applicant a position.

Um, no, if an interviewer thinks you are being less than truthful, they simply give you a lower score on the interview. There is lots of room on that form for judgement calls (vague categories such as "maturity") and you only have to be a point or two shy of others to not get into that med school. If you think that the interview is a place where you get the presumption (of innocence, admission, etc), you are wrong, and approaching it incorrectly. You need to earn the spot, not just not screw it up.

 

[Severus]

I am a Victoria's Secret model. It's true.

 

[kypdurron5]

Um, no, if an interviewer thinks you are being less than truthful, they simply give you a lower score on the interview. There is lots of room on that form for judgement calls (vague categories such as "maturity") and you only have to be a point or two shy of others to not get into that med school. If you think that the interview is a place where you get the presumption (of innocence, admission, etc), you are wrong, and approaching it incorrectly. You need to earn the spot, not just not screw it up.

Lol, I love your arrogant diatribes on adcoms. You had honestly better BE an adcom if you're going to speak with as much arrogance as you do (again, not just this thread, but others). And maybe you are, but still, your response is still ignorant in that it assumes all interview processes work the same way. Who says all schools use a "point" system? Who says you have to "prove yourself" to all schools? Heck, one interviewer told me straight up that he wasn't there to pass any sort of judgement, that his job at the school was simply to present my credentials to the committee. I would never say you get a presumption of admission, but you're suggesting interviewers presume us to be lying degenerates as they search for the slightest sign of nervousness. Yeah, like EVERYONE isn't nervous when interviewing! All the characteristics used to detect "lying" are analogous with being nervous- the theory being that you shouldn't be nervous if you're telling the truth. That logic just doesn't hold true with what we're talking about because we're interviewing for our very future, hopes, and dreams. The idea that adcoms presume lying over honesty based upon some nervous characteristics is, again, ludicrous. Finally, what I've failed to mention thus far is that many schools use completely inexperienced med students for at least one of the interviews. Look, you obviously have your mind set, and so I am seriously not trying to change it...I am merely trying to help others see past your biased excerpts proclaiming adcoms to be demigods.

 

[jackieMD2007]

When I was little, I wiggled out a loose tooth.
But I told my mom that it fell out on its own.
I was trying to hustle ice-cream truck money.

Mom, I'm sorry for the lie. Maybe I'll send it to post-secret.

Jackie

 

[Law2Doc]

Lol, I love your arrogant diatribes on adcoms. You had honestly better BE an adcom if you're going to speak with as much arrogance as you do (again, not just this thread, but others). And maybe you are, but still, your response is still ignorant in that it assumes all interview processes work the same way. Who says all schools use a "point" system? Who says you have to "prove yourself" to all schools? Heck, one interviewer told me straight up that he wasn't there to pass any sort of judgement, that his job at the school was simply to present my credentials to the committee. I would never say you get a presumption of admission, but you're suggesting interviewers presume us to be lying degenerates as they search for the slightest sign of nervousness. Yeah, like EVERYONE isn't nervous when interviewing! All the characteristics used to detect "lying" are analogous with being nervous- the theory being that you shouldn't be nervous if you're telling the truth. That logic just doesn't hold true with what we're talking about because we're interviewing for our very future, hopes, and dreams. The idea that adcoms presume lying over honesty based upon some nervous characteristics is, again, ludicrous. Finally, what I've failed to mention thus far is that many schools use completely inexperienced med students for at least one of the interviews. Look, you obviously have your mind set, and so I am seriously not trying to change it...I am merely trying to help others see past your biased excerpts proclaiming adcoms to be demigods.

You seem to be exaggerating a lot of what I say, or are reading things between the lines that haven't been said. I'm just telling folks it's a bad idea to lie -- you will get caught. Nervousness and perceived lying are not the same thing. If you feel you know what's what, more power to you. I see no need to debate this further.

But at any rate, I know of quite a few schools that use point systems on interviews. I also know of schools where everyone is deemed equal as of the interview, making the interview the only game in town once you get to that level. If you don't sell yourself better than the last couple of applicants, you are SOL. I don't know what school has their interviewers not judging you but it is an exception not the norm in this process. The committee already has your paper credentials (so there is no need to have someone merely "present your credentials to them"), and the point of the interview is to get someone's take on you in real life. The interview plays a huge role in admission at most places, and is not a formality. (And those places that use student interviewers generally place value to that input accordingly.)

 

[MiesVanDerMom]

yeah I've lied on SDN before. there was a poll/thread on this before. I claimed the Irish defense. My people need to tell stories; it makes life more interesting.

 

[45408]

I've done some job interviewing in my prior career, and you absolutely can tell the fakers.

Except the ones who had you fooled.

 

[Anastasis]

Yeah you know that pic in my avatar.




<----- My totally hot boyfriend.

 

[kypdurron5]

You seem to be exaggerating a lot of what I say, or are reading things between the lines that haven't been said. I'm just telling folks it's a bad idea to lie -- you will get caught. Nervousness and perceived lying are not the same thing. If you feel you know what's what, more power to you. I see no need to debate this further.

But at any rate, I know of quite a few schools that use point systems on interviews. I also know of schools where everyone is deemed equal as of the interview, making the interview the only game in town once you get to that level. If you don't sell yourself better than the last couple of applicants, you are SOL. I don't know what school has their interviewers not judging you but it is an exception not the norm in this process. The committee already has your paper credentials (so there is no need to have someone merely "present your credentials to them"), and the point of the interview is to get someone's take on you in real life. The interview plays a huge role in admission at most places, and is not a formality. (And those places that use student interviewers generally place value to that input accordingly.)

First, exactly as TheProwler said...my whole point is that while you may "think" some people are lying, you can never know for sure. If you assume they are lying without proof than YOU are in the wrong, as would be any adcom. Plus, what you don't know about are all the people that fooled you. This idea that there is an all-knowing lie detector "6th sense" is just your ignorance and arrogance put together. I agree with you that lying is a bad idea, however, it's not because you'll get caught; it's because you're trying to a be a doctor for goodness sakes! You should have the utmost integrity, and not crossing that line now would be a good start.

 

[MiesVanDerMom]

And the pic in my avater




<---- my totally hot boyfriend




ETA: but i'm still in love with Dr. E

 

[):(]

You really need to change the title of this thread.
"I can't stop lying because I am a worthless piece of $hit"

Seriously, that deserves a

 

[kypdurron5]

ETA: but i'm still in love with Dr. E

The guy from the other thread attacking everyone with immature insults?

 

[instigata]

the guy in my avatar...he's alive

 

[kypdurron5]

the guy in my avatar...he's alive

::sigh:: Another Elvis sighting....

 

[Law2Doc]

I agree with you that lying is a bad idea, however, it's not because you'll get caught; it's because you're trying to a be a doctor for goodness sakes! You should have the utmost integrity, and not crossing that line now would be a good start.

Lying is a bad idea for both those reasons. The premise of this and unfortunately so many threads on SDN is that folks don't have the integrity not to lie. So the second barrier of defense is the likelihood they will get caught. Since we don't disagree with the underlying theme, I'm not sure why we are debating.

 

[Law2Doc]

Except the ones who had you fooled.

Older, seasoned, pathological liars might. Younger folks trying to pull a fast one -- not so much. If you ask a lot of questions you give folks enough rope to hang themselves. In a job you cannot fake, you find out pretty quickly if anyone snuck through your interview screen.
Interrogation, an aggressive form of interviewing, is a tried and true technique at getting true information. That's why the police do it, that's why we cross examine witnesses in court, that's why job and school interviewers do it. Torture would work better, but is generally discouraged in these settings (although certain forms of psychological torture have been known to be used in Wall St I- banking interviews -- see the book Liar's Poker )
All I'm saying is don't lie, both because it's unethical and also because you are likely not nearly as good at it as you think you are.

 

[63768]

All I'm saying is don't lie, both because it's unethical and also because you are likely not nearly as good at it as you think you are.

hahaha and most people don't realize that until it's too late. i think i'm sooo excited about my future that i can't take any chances and lie.

 

[notdeadyet]

All I'm saying is don't lie, both because it's unethical and also because you are likely not nearly as good at it as you think you are.

Amen to that. If you're a traditional applicant, odds are very good that you haven't been through more than a dozen high pressure interviews. The person doing the interviews has probably conducted hundreds if not thousands. They'll know your "type" if you try on a persona like a hat.

 

[):(]

.

 

[kypdurron5]

.

That is such a worthwhile comment, I'm so glad you've participated in our conversation!

 

[baylormed]

Hi kids, this is Dr. House....remember...everybody lies.

 

[SeaAngel45]

Usually I tell the truth regarding my grades and scores

However my parents lie sometimes. I have people coming up to me and asking me about my GREAT GPA (I have a 3.3). lol, it's usually embarassing to make my parents look like liars so I end up compensating for thier lies.


It's a vicious cycle.

 

[Rafa]

Lying only seems to matter if you aren't in a position of power.

 

[swifty100850]

Usually I tell the truth regarding my grades and scores

However my parents lie sometimes. I have people coming up to me and asking me about my GREAT GPA (I have a 3.3). lol, it's usually embarassing to make my parents look like liars so I end up compensating for thier lies.


It's a vicious cycle.

actually, outside of the pre-med/law world, a 3.3 is very respectable (especially in a difficult major).

 

[kypdurron5]

actually, outside of the pre-med/law world, a 3.3 is very respectable (especially in a difficult major).

There's something outside the pre-medical world?! Someone should have told me!

 

[Doctor Bagel]

Except the ones who had you fooled.

Exactly. And I think you're giving yourself a bit too much credit is you think no one gets away with lying to you in an interview or otherwise. From what I understand, people are poor judges of truthfulness. I'm not saying I advocate lying, but I'm enough of a cynic to believe that people get away with it all the time.

Here's the first article I found while googling the topic.

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040731/bob8.asp

 

[NYMC MD 2B]

Unfortunately, the reality is that many people lie on this forum, about EVERYTHING! That is the caveat when you are dealing with anonymous posting. For instance, I know for a fact that a good deal of the waitlist "movement" posted here did not take place. People lie about these things to get everyone riled up and worried. To all of you starting this miserable process, take what you read with a grain of salt

 

[CatsandCradles]

I could actually see a valid point here. Just today I was considering how far I am willing to “stretch” the truth during an interview.

That's an interesting thing you bring up. How far can we change the truth until it isn't true anymore?

I am never one to lie, but let’s face it; this is the most important event as far as our futures are concerned. Before we can realize our dreams we must first jump the hurdle of getting into medical school, which requires that we present certain life-experiences in a way so as to highlight why we will make good doctors.

So you advocate that we are not to lie, but rather present our life experiences in the best possible light....

...(cat is thinking....)

Ok I think that is reasonable ~ provide that the items and life experiences that are being presented, if they are shown to someone who knows the truth, would still be recognizeable as being true.

Another words, lets say I write an essay about my volunteer work for AAMCAS. And let us suppose I stretch the truth a bit about my volunteer work...

...Do I stretch it to the point where the volunteer director says this information is wrong? Or do I keep my hours, days, and activities confined to exactly what they are and but write them in the best possible light?

This is an interesting thread. I'm sorry I didn't see it sooner.