UCSF or Penn?

UCSF is better...

 

why won't u list the pros and cons of each school...by giving a + or a - and then I tell you which school you should go to it

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by none:
<strong>UCSF is better...</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is absurd without qualification. . .

As a CA resident and someone going to Penn, I'll try to answer this question . . .

Clearly, Philly isn't half the city that SF is -- that's not in dispute -- but it is a larger city.

FYI - Population of 5 largest cities and SF
(in 1990):

1 New York city, NY *...... 7,322,564
2 Los Angeles city, CA..... 3,485,398
3 Chicago city, IL......... 2,783,726
4 Houston city, TX......... 1,630,553
5 Philadelphia city, PA.... 1,585,577
14 San Francisco city, CA... 723,959

So. . . Philly should not be thought of as a small town, needless to say. And, of course, Philly is very close to the greatest city in the country, NYC. . .

As far as reputation and prestiege, I'd say (and some may argue) that they'll both give you an excellent education and open the same # of doors for you. Obviously, for a CA resident, SF will probably be cheaper and therein lies its tremendous appeal -- it's arguably the best public medical school in the country.

However, HUP (Penn's hospital) is a superior hospital with respect to UCSF's in a great many categories (again, which is not to say SF doesn't have a great hospital) and HUP/Penn does a LOT more research (and has a lot more NIH $$).

Of course, as has been mentioned, at Penn, you'd begin rotations in Jan. of your second year and have a great deal of your fourth year free for your 'scholarly pursuit' as they call it (or time for a second degree).

And Penn has the advantage of having the entire university under 'one roof' -- which I think is a huge advantage and allows for one to meet a great deal more people than you would at UCSF.

Of course, they're are strengths of SF over Penn, but since it seems like you're looking for the opposite, I won't keep talking.

Penn is a wonderful place and I think you'd do wonderfully at either. But each has it's separate strengths and charms.

 

I love Philly. It isn't New York but should never be compared in the first place--Philly still offers lots in terms of night life and eating--it also has the largest park system of any city in the US (world?) I have done much biking throughout the fairmount and wissahickon park and both are excellent escapes from urban life. basically, philly is a large city but still a quaint city througout, owing to its rich history.. and as far as old rumors go--west philly(Penn's neigborhood) is gorgeous as long as you don't venture too far north of market..(every city has its drawbacks)
Penn's campus and med school are integrated and this should be a great draw for any med student.. you could always tap into the undergrad body or other grads (4,000 or so) oh yeah, Penn was the first Medical school in the country, pretty cool huh. faculty and endowment are unbeatable.. I know quite a few med students and all are really happy and quite chill (one of the reasons many of them chose penn was for the relaxed nature and comraderie among students)
if you have any questions about the city or penn's campus..etc please do ask!

best,
proud quaker Biff

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Universal Coverage:
<strong>I do like that Penn med is integrated with the rest of the campus. Thanks Fly and everyone else for your thoughts. But Fly, isn't UCSF Medical Center just as good as HUP? It does look older, but by some measures, UCSF Hospital is stronger. The notorious U.S. News rankings for example have the following. I don't think it matters that HUP is ranked a big lower, because it seems would be splitting hairs to say either is obviously better. But clearly, UCSF hospital is also among the best.

1. Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, 32 points in 16 specialties

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., 27 points in 14 specialties

3. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, 26 points in 14 specialties

4. Cleveland Clinic, 23 points in 12 specialties

5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, 22 points in 14 specialties

6. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, N.C., 20 points in 12 specialties

7. Barnes?Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, 18 points in 12 specialties

7. University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, 18 points in 12 specialties

9. University of California, San Francisco Medical Center, 18 points in 11 specialties

10. Stanford University Hospital, Stanford, Calif., 17 points in 11 specialties

11. Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, 16 points in 10 specialties

12. University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, 12 points in 8 specialties

13. New York Presbyterian Hospital, 12 points in 7 specialties

14. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 11 points in 8 specialties

15. University of Chicago Hospitals, 9 points in 8 specialties

16. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center,</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh. No more US News!!!!!!!!!

Ask *ANY* residency director and ask them if UCSF is as strong a hospital as say Brigham and Women's or Columbia Presbyterian and I'm willing to bet that they'll ALL say that it's not as good a hospital (to be a medical student at).

The US News rankings are absurdly computed and are really completely useless -- just another way of selling their totally average magazine. It's certainly NOT AT ALL a measure of where you'll have the best residency or have the best medical school clinical experience. . .

For example -- take Cook County Hospital, LAC-USC Medical Center, or Boston Medical Center -- all of which are NOT attached to top-20 schools, but which are so understaffed and overburdened that you'd have an incredible amount of responsibility there as a third or fourth year (or resident). UCSF is not as cushy as say. . . New York Hospital, but the rankings do NOT equate with quality of preclinical experience. In that capacity, Columbia or Penn has many of the others totally beat.

 

i am sooo tired of people trying to claim that clinical education at school X is better than at school Y. HELLO PEOPLE!!! there are 120 accredited allopathic US medical schools......they must all have similar clinical training.

if one hospital is #5 and another is #10....you should ask yourself....WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO ME AS A MEDICAL STUDENT? does it mean anything at all? it means NOTHING!!!

just because one hospital seems clinically stronger than another, does that mean that at that stronger hospital you will get to work with all the top physicians or see all of the rare cases that come in or rotate in all of the strong specialities (if it does....then they are working you too hard!)!!! think about this!!

you will get your med degree whereever you will go so maybe your choice should be based on location (in regards to family), cost, curriculum, opportunities, fit, etc. think about your life as a medical student and not how great this hospital is compared to that hospital!!

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by rajneel1:
<strong>i am sooo tired of people trying to claim that clinical education at school X is better than at school Y. HELLO PEOPLE!!! there are 120 accredited allopathic US medical schools......they must all have similar clinical training. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whoa. I totally take issue with your statements here. That is just completely NOT true at all!!

Do you seriously believe that your clinical experience at Pikeville College School of Osteopathic Medicine (sorry Pikeville people <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ) is going to even remotely as good as it would be at Harvard, SF or Penn ??? That is just completely and utterly wrong.

The ENTIRE reason behind some schools having better reputations than others is precisely the quality of the faculty at the school that will be teaching you both clinically and pre-clinically.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>if one hospital is #5 and another is #10....you should ask yourself....WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO ME AS A MEDICAL STUDENT? does it mean anything at all? it means NOTHING!!! </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If we're talking about #5 vs. #10, I will agree with this -- were talking about slim margins of difference.

I'm sorry, but your impassioned plea declaring that it doesn't matter is just plain wrong. If all of what you say were true (and people believed it), it wouldn't matter where you went to school. Of course, we all know that this is precisely the opposite of reality!

 

Thanks for the dose of reality, Fly.

I think what Rajneel is saying is very important. It reminded me of the academic journal article someone else on SDN recommended a while back about the validity of US News comparisons. I read that article and thought its most interesting observation was that, if US news actually used the same statistical standards that the rest of the medical community uses, NONE of the differences between med schools/hospitals etc in the top 25 would have been statistically significant.

Food for thought.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by la9s:
<strong>Thanks for the dose of reality, Fly.

I think what Rajneel is saying is very important. It reminded me of the academic journal article someone else on SDN recommended a while back about the validity of US News comparisons. I read that article and thought its most interesting observation was that, if US news actually used the same statistical standards that the rest of the medical community uses, NONE of the differences between med schools/hospitals etc in the top 25 would have been statistically significant.

Food for thought.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It always strikes me as entertaining and obviously ironic when schools whom previously declared that US News & WR did not matter all of a sudden (when their rankings improve) publish the increase in 'prestige' all over their PR materials.

But then my parents are guilty of the same things. . . when I was getting into medical schools, it was like "what ranking does __ have; really?? Oh, go there! (because it's 1 point higher than school Y which I preferred)."

Stupid US News. . .

 

Just pick one.

 

U.S. News has almost gained a validity in and of itself that has nothing to do with any of the numbers it has or formulas it uses. Imagine if U.S. News just pulled rankings out of a hat, but all medical students followed them completely...they would become true very quickly.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Oski:
<strong>Just pick one.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If you have nothing important to say then don't post..damn dude...giving the Bay area a bad name ya little bizatch...

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by The Fly:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by rajneel1:
<strong>i am sooo tired of people trying to claim that clinical education at school X is better than at school Y. HELLO PEOPLE!!! there are 120 accredited allopathic US medical schools......they must all have similar clinical training. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whoa. I totally take issue with your statements here. That is just completely NOT true at all!!
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I totally take issue too. And while there is hardly any significant difference between numbers 5 and 10, experiences at each can be significantly different. Each of those schools has a list of students willing to discuss questions. Perhaps you could contact students for the schools and ask them what type of experiences they have had. The types of hospitals and what you are able to do at each may differ, even if the reputation of the hosiptals does not.

 

UCSF all the way. No doubt. Oh, and no, sorry, Columbia is NOT Harvard. Stick with UCLA. That's my take.

 

I think what Fly is trying to say is:

If you're an overachieving, stuck up, anti-social, uncool person...then go to UCSF!

However if you're da bomb..then join Fly and I at Penn next year!