Underrepresented Minorities Misconceptions

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
ahh it's the AA debate again...

I see a lot of people are saying that a poor URM and a poor non-URM should be on the same level or that AA should be based on SES...for the most part I agree. However the one thing people are forgetting is that discrimination exists and that is why AA programs are needed. Sure two people may have grown up on the same block, but who do you think is going to be followed in the grocery store? profiled by the cops? coincidently brushed over for a job opp? etc.

To those that really feel AA gives that much of an advantage, let me ask...Would you like to switch? You grow up and live in the country as a URM just for what may be a slight advantage in med school admissions.

What are the chances you would have even made it this far?

2nd everything you said. Plus, there are other benefits to AA.

Yes, black and latino docs are more likely to return to their neighborhoods to serve but also when minorities in health research = more research on issues that affect minorities (ie. see the funding disparities in sickle cell anemia research vs. cystic fibrosis). Also, when minority docs do clinical trials, minority patients are more likely to participate. A lot of people like to claim that AA is a failure but these are all huge problems which AA is actually doing something about and you can look up the stats on the AAMC website if you want. Do you really think that white people having an 8% chance of getting in to X med school as opposed to a 7% chance is more important than getting minority docs who will focus on the particular understudied issues of minority patients?

Also, I know that black and latino docs do go back to underserved neighborhoods at higher rates. I've seen those numbers. I don't know if poor white people generally do. Anyone have the stats on this?

Members don't see this ad.
 
why isn't there any outrage over rural medicine programs? legacy admissions? religious preference? residential preference?? :eek:
 
why isn't there any outrage over rural medicine programs? legacy admissions? religious preference? residential preference?? :eek:

In response,

1. I don't see anything wrong w/ schools encouraging students to go to underserved areas.
2. Because legacy admissions increase alumni donations, just the reality of the situation.
3. Not sure what I still think about this. I mean there are catholic private high schools and elementary schools and stuff, and nobody seems to have a problem with them.
4. Because state tax payers, meaning in-state residents, partially fund state medical schools.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I like the idea of AA. I'm sure there are plenty of african-american, hispanic, native-american, etc., families that are upper/middle class. However, the (dare I say it?) majority of families belonging to this subgroup of America do not. I mean, seriously, are you trying to argue that considering the nature of the inner-city environment (substandard education evidenced by deficiencies in graduation rates and proficiency scores, crime, etc.), someone that grew up in Watts and made it through college shouldn't deserve more credence than the average applicant? Call me crazy, but I think that if you came from at least a middle class family from the suburbs, you've had the deck stacked in your favor from day 1. If you can't muster a 3.6GPA, 30MCAT, you're just not trying.

I'm first-generation Indian-American (dothead variety) for anyone that cares to wonder.

In all fairness, many of the URM students who benefit from AA were not kids who grew up in Harlem or Compton. Rather, they were kids who went to the same suburban public school, drove the same kind of car, and had the same family income as their white counterparts.
 
In all fairness, many of the URM students who benefit from AA were not kids who grew up in Harlem or Compton. Rather, they were kids who went to the same suburban public school, drove the same kind of car, and had the same family income as their white counterparts.
if this is the case, then why are URM gpa/mcat averages typically lower than their white/asian counterparts? Are white/asians inherently smarter than urm's? are urm's lazy? How would you explain the disparity in scores?
 
In response,

1. I don't see anything wrong w/ schools encouraging students to go to underserved areas.
2. Because legacy admissions increase alumni donations, just the reality of the situation.
3. Not sure what I still think about this. I mean there are catholic private high schools and elementary schools and stuff, and nobody seems to have a problem with them.
4. Because state tax payers, meaning in-state residents, partially fund state medical schools.

I don't understand why people can be so cavalier about legacy admissions because it's "reality," but when it comes to facing the reality of the fact that we desperately need minority physicians, no matter what specialty they go into, that's harder to accept.

We need minority physicians. period. There is a staggering disparity of Blacks & Hispanics practicing in medicine. We desperately need minorities in research. That's the reality and that's the goal. When women were horribly underrepresented in medicine, schools did the same thing.
 
I don't understand why people can be so cavalier about legacy admissions because it's "reality," but when it comes to facing the reality of the fact that we desperately need minority physicians, no matter what specialty they go into, that's harder to accept.

We need minority physicians. period. There is a staggering disparity of Blacks & Hispanics practicing in medicine. That's the reality and that's the goal. When women were horribly underrepresented in medicine, schools did the same thing.


Well, URMs typically are more likely to go to work in underserved urban areas than their white counterparts. So it seems like in some indirect sense, AA has similar logic to rural physician programs that advantage students who want to go into rural underserved medicine.
 
I don't understand why people can be so cavalier about legacy admissions because it's "reality," but when it comes to facing the reality of the fact that we desperately need minority physicians, no matter what specialty they go into, that's harder to accept.

We need minority physicians. period. There is a staggering disparity of Blacks & Hispanics practicing in medicine. We desperately need minorities in research. That's the reality and that's the goal. When women were horribly underrepresented in medicine, schools did the same thing.

I think any unfair advantage is hypocritical and bogus, including what you have mentioned. I have a crazy idea, lets admit people based on their stats and what they have done, that is, after all, what MLK was fighting for.
 
I think any unfair advantage is hypocritical and bogus, including what you have mentioned. I have a crazy idea, lets admit people based on their stats and what they have done, that is, after all, what MLK was fighting for.

:thumbup:
 
I think any unfair advantage is hypocritical and bogus, including what you have mentioned. I have a crazy idea, lets admit people based on their stats and what they have done, that is, after all, what MLK was fighting for.
soo, you're against rural medicine programs, primary care programs, residential preference, etc.?
 
soo, you're against rural medicine programs, primary care programs, residential preference, etc.?


Residential is different, it is fair to everyone in that state. I don't know too much about the rural programs, but from my understanding it is just tuition reimbursement for those who commit to working in those areas, same with primary care.

I will say it again, I am against programs that do not admit based on merit.

Once people are admitted financial stuff can be worked out for those who need it.
 
I think any unfair advantage is hypocritical and bogus, including what you have mentioned. I have a crazy idea, lets admit people based on their stats and what they have done, that is, after all, what MLK was fighting for.


NO school accepts ANYONE based solely on stats. Med schools are here to serve the society not you and they look at the whole application which can be very subjective.

MLK wanted equality but is the typical URM coming from a broken public HS/college the same as the average Asian/White applicant? You can't start arguing for equality when the starting line isn't the same.
 
Personally, whoever thinks that URMs get into medicine solely on thier race is ignorant. Admissions committees look at the entire story of an applicant, not just skin color. Please have faith in your ad-coms, they are going to pick great and capable future physicians. Stats are not everthing.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
NO school accepts ANYONE based solely on stats. Med schools are here to serve the society not you.

MLK wanted equality but is the typical URM coming from a broken public HS and college the same as the average Asian/White applicant? You can't start arguing for equality when the starting line isn't the same.


I agree that the starting line is not the same. I did not say just on stats. I said, "stats and what they have done." Meaning their activities such as giving back to their community etc.

Yes, for the "average" minority the starting line is not fair. As I said earlier, I also grew up in these neighborhoods.

Honestly, I don't think I have the time or patience to type everything I feel about race relations, which is obviously a very complicated issue.

I will say this though. I realize that the socioeconomic problems in this country are a horrible cycle that seems to never end. I agree with you on that. But I still believe that AA has been shown not to work and sometimes does more harm than good. There are resources available for those that want them. In my opinion these issues would be better fought at the ground level i.e. improving our public schools, better law enforcement in our communities, better rehabilitation for our offenders, and more facilities available to those who have substance abuse problems.

As a white guy that has been poor for most of his life it offends me that my hard work is not as "worthy" even though I have had to fight many of the same battles that you are referring to.

Anyways, that is only a small sample of my opinion. To me it comes down to this; hard work = reward, no matter where you come from, and no matter what you look like.

EDIT: You are also putting everyone into a nice neat lines. Such as "all minorities unfair starting line," or " all whites = unfair advantage." This is simply not true.
 
NO school accepts ANYONE based solely on stats. Med schools are here to serve the society not you and they look at the whole application which can be very subjective.

MLK wanted equality but is the typical URM coming from a broken public HS/college the same as the average Asian/White applicant? You can't start arguing for equality when the starting line isn't the same.

Amen
 
Residential is different, it is fair to everyone in that state. I don't know too much about the rural programs, but from my understanding it is just tuition reimbursement for those who commit to working in those areas, same with primary care.

I will say it again, I am against programs that do not admit based on merit.

Once people are admitted financial stuff can be worked out for those who need it.
the programs I mentioned don't admit purely on merit, they admit based on the needs of certain communities and the society as a whole; their usefulness for certain communities/states is undeniable.
This is also the idea behind URM admissions. If you look at most med school mission statements, you'll see that their purpose is to produce physicians who'll serve the community/nation well; they're not there simply to reward merit.

As a white guy that has been poor for most of his life it offends me that my hard work is not as "worthy" even though I have had to fight many of the same battles that you are referring to.
disadvantaged?
 
the programs I mentioned don't admit purely on merit, they admit based on the needs of certain communities and the society as a whole; their usefulness for certain communities/states is undeniable.
This is also the idea behind URM admissions. If you look at most med school mission statements, you'll see that their purpose is to produce physicians who'll serve the community/nation well; they're not there simply to reward merit.


disadvantaged?


I don't see how the issue of residency fits into this/ how you are drawing that comparison. Residency allows all applicants from that state the same chance. As I said, I don't know too much about the other programs, but if you would like to provide me with a link or something showing how it is discriminatory towards others I would be happy to read it.
 
When will applicants realize it's not about them...I'm applying to UCLA PRIME...I will probably not get an interview because I can't speak Spanish. There is the possibility that an applicant with lower stats who can speak spanish will get admitted. I won't be upset if that seat goes to a Spanish speaker because the school has a commitment to serve the Southern CA community---something I couldn't do as well as that Spanish seeking.
 
I don't see how the issue of residency fits into this/ how you are drawing that comparison. Residency allows all applicants from that state the same chance. As I said, I don't know too much about the other programs, but if you would like to provide me with a link or something showing how it is discriminatory towards others I would be happy to read it.
the purpose of residency preference is to produce physicians who are likely to remain instate. So, some out of state people with better numbers will be turned down in favor of instate applicants.

the purpose of rural medicine programs is to produce physicians who are likely to practice in rural areas. So, some people with better numbers will be turned down, in favor of people who are committed to serving in rural communities.

the purpose of primary care programs is to produce physicians who are likely to remain in primary care. So, some people with better numbers will be turned down, in favor of people who are committed to primary care.

Suburban white/asian people are competing to serve a comparatively well served populace, so, someone with better numbers isn't likely to be turned down in favor of another suburban white/asian person, because they are probably equally likely to serve in affluent suburbs. So there's really no need to accept the person with lower numbers unless they bring something else to the table, like a willingness to serve in underserved areas, or show something else that may serve the mission of the school better than the other applicant.
 
the purpose of residency preference is to produce physicians who are likely to remain instate. So, some out of state people with better numbers will be turned down in favor of instate applicants.

the purpose of rural medicine programs is to produce physicians who are likely to practice in rural areas. So, some people with better numbers will be turned down, in favor of people who are committed to serving in rural communities.

the purpose of primary care programs is to produce physicians who are likely to remain in primary care. So, some people with better numbers will be turned down, in favor of people who are committed to primary care.

Suburban white/asian people are competing to serve a comparatively well served populace, so, someone with better numbers isn't likely to be turned down in favor of another suburban white/asian person, because they are probably equally likely to serve in affluent suburbs. So there's really no need to accept the person with lower numbers unless they bring something else to the table, like a willingness to serve in underserved areas, or show something else that may serve the mission of the school better than the other applicant.

Yea, but from my understanding, and I could be wrong, anyone can commit to serving in these areas. In other words, if a white, black, yellow, red, or green person commits to serving in a rural area after they graduate they will get the same benefits (again, from my understanding). Therefor that = fair because it is open to anyone.

As far as residency goes, I believe you are wrong that that is the reason it was developed. I believe it was developed so people from a certain geographical area would have better access to public colleges. That is why residency is also applicable for undergrad, and other grad programs. In other words it was not designed for med school purposes.

Now as far as people getting in because their family members went there, that is bogus.

I am not too sure how I feel about the religious affiliation thing. If it is a private institution they have the right to do as they please. Just as Howard University has the right to deny white applicants because they are a private institution (although I believe they still do accept some white applicants).
 
So, since we live in a trailer park, and live in poverty will I get special consideration when applying to medical school?

I had to attend one of the worst high schools my city had to offer. I live in a "disadvantaged" area and will almost certainly practice medicine as a PCP in such an area.

Perhaps I'm the only poor (financially) white person in the country. I'm sure there is no need for a white family practice doctor anywhere at all.

Dam, if only I had known that minorities are the only people that can be poor and offered sub-par educations....

Perhaps if I tell the admissions board that I didn't know that being white meant I automatically was well educated and wealthy I will get some special treatment!! Really, had I known I would have certainly went to a better school, and lived in something other than a trailer park...
 
So, since we live in a trailer park, and live in poverty will I get special consideration when applying to medical school?

I had to attend one of the worst high schools my city had to offer. I live in a "disadvantaged" area and will almost certainly practice medicine as a PCP in such an area.

Perhaps I'm the only poor (financially) white person in the country. I'm sure there is no need for a white family practice doctor anywhere at all.

Dam, if only I had known that minorities are the only people that can be poor and offered sub-par educations....

Perhaps if I tell the admissions board that I didn't know that being white meant I automatically was well educated and wealthy I will get some special treatment!! Really, had I known I would have certainly went to a better school, and lived in something other than a trailer park...

When you were born, you got this thing called 'white privilege'. It's pretty nice from what people tell me.
 
So, since we live in a trailer park, and live in poverty will I get special consideration when applying to medical school?

I had to attend one of the worst high schools my city had to offer. I live in a "disadvantaged" area and will almost certainly practice medicine as a PCP in such an area.

Perhaps I'm the only poor (financially) white person in the country. I'm sure there is no need for a white family practice doctor anywhere at all.

Dam, if only I had known that minorities are the only people that can be poor and offered sub-par educations....

Perhaps if I tell the admissions board that I didn't know that being white meant I automatically was well educated and wealthy I will get some special treatment!! Really, had I known I would have certainly went to a better school, and lived in something other than a trailer park...

if you indicate on your application that you were socioeconomically/educationally disadvantaged, you'd get special consideration. And there are programs that emphasize primary care, so if you planned on going into primary care, you'd get special consideration applying to those places.
 
When you were born, you got this thing called 'white privilege'. It's pretty nice from what people tell me.

So I actually am wealthy and had a good education? Why did nobody tell me this before. I most certainly have not felt privileged thus far in my life.
 
So, since we live in a trailer park, and live in poverty will I get special consideration when applying to medical school?

I had to attend one of the worst high schools my city had to offer. I live in a "disadvantaged" area and will almost certainly practice medicine as a PCP in such an area.

Perhaps I'm the only poor (financially) white person in the country. I'm sure there is no need for a white family practice doctor anywhere at all.

Dam, if only I had known that minorities are the only people that can be poor and offered sub-par educations....

Perhaps if I tell the admissions board that I didn't know that being white meant I automatically was well educated and wealthy I will get some special treatment!! Really, had I known I would have certainly went to a better school, and lived in something other than a trailer park...

Seems like you're confusing "Disadvantaged" status with URM.

What I find funny is that a majority of the people that have such a strong opinion against URM's are the people that question their own chances of getting accepted, which translates to being insecure.

Because when it comes down to it, why compare yourself to others, as it only results in bringing you down? If you have a 4.0 and 45T, I can assure you wouldn't give two sihts about a URM. But let's say someone has borderline stats 3.5, 29(made it up), they are the ones so quick to call foul play...it's ridiculous and old. Worry about yourself.
 
if you indicate on your application that you were socioeconomically/educationally disadvantaged, you'd get special consideration. And there are programs that emphasize primary care, so if you planned on going into primary care, you'd get special consideration applying to those places.

I hate to disagree, but my wife did just this, and it didn't mean a thing. Her stats were slightly under average for admitted students, yet...2 interviews is all she was offered. At the one school she was initially waitlisted at she inquired as to the reason. She thought perhaps her PS, or one of her LOR's was bad. She was simply told that her stats just weren't good enough. Yeah, that special consideration for being poor and white worked wonders.

Anyway, I don't want special consideration. I've worked hard to get acceptable stats. :) But, for what it's worth, my wife also grew up poor with a pretty crappy education. She was actually hoping that being from such a poor background might help her a little--it didn't seem to.
 
this is my take.

i would rather be a white dude in this society with the "disadvantage" applying to med school than a black dude with this "advantage."

to be clear i am neither
 
Seems like you're confusing "Disadvantaged" status with URM.

What I find funny is that a majority of the people that have such a strong opinion against URM's are the people that question their own chances of getting accepted, which translates to being insecure.

Because when it comes down to it, why compare yourself to others, as it only results in bringing you down? If you have a 4.0 and 45T, I can assure you wouldn't give two sihts about a URM. But let's say someone has borderline stats 3.5, 29(made it up), they are the ones so quick to call foul play...it's ridiculous and old. Worry about yourself.

I'm not confusing them. They are two separate things. One of which I believe gets special consideration, one which doesn't. Really I think the current way is flawed.

But, being UR stems from what? Being disadvantaged? So sure, they are separate things, but connected. If you are a minority you are UR because so many minorities are disadvantaged--poor, bad education, leading to UR in the medical field. The thing is, is that not all are disadvantaged. Just grouping everyone into a category like that based on skin color is wrong.

Oh, and I don't have a strong opinion against URM's. I have a strong opinion against the current way the system handles them.
 
this is my take.

i would rather be a white dude in this society with the "disadvantage" applying to med school than a black dude with this "advantage."

to be clear i am neither

I think it would be best if we could get to a place where neither of those things is associated with a skin color.

Anyway, in one of the organic labs that I teach one of the students I respect the most happens to be black. One of the ones I respect the least happens to be black.

One is from a poor family and went to a high school that is just crap. He busts his ass every day, he stays late and asks me questions, and really tries to understand the material and appreciate the education. The other is pretty wealthy I'm assuming. I've heard him say that he went to one of the private schools here and he drives a new Lexus. He acts like everything has been given to him in life--just like some of the wealthy white kids I've taught.

Anyway, this student didn't bother turning in a post lab, so he got the grade he deserved--a zero. He called me an ******* for giving him a zero, and actually told me I wasn't allowed to give him a zero, because he is black, and on the basketball team. I laughed--and gave him a zero.

These are two totally different types of people, but both given URM status by schools. Perhaps not the best example, but really...we can't find a better way to give extra treatment to these kids based on something other than their skin?
 
this is my take.

i would rather be a white dude in this society with the "disadvantage" applying to med school than a black dude with this "advantage."

to be clear i am neither

LOL that was cold.

[youtube]ZI9OYMRwN1Q[/youtube]
 
this is my take.

i would rather be a white dude in this society with the "disadvantage" applying to med school than a black dude with this "advantage."

agreed
 
I'm not confusing them. They are two separate things. One of which I believe gets special consideration, one which doesn't. Really I think the current way is flawed.

But, being UR stems from what? Being disadvantaged? So sure, they are separate things, but connected. If you are a minority you are UR because so many minorities are disadvantaged--poor, bad education, leading to UR in the medical field. The thing is, is that not all are disadvantaged. Just grouping everyone into a category like that based on skin color is wrong.

Oh, and I don't have a strong opinion against URM's. I have a strong opinion against the current way the system handles them.

I agree with this to some degree, but the goal of the URM system isn't really social justice or reparations. The goal is to increase the amount of minority physicians, because they are more likely to serve in minority communities. Even wealthy urm applicants (which are probably the minority) are more likely than their white/asian counterparts, to serve minority communities.
 
I'm not confusing them. They are two separate things. One of which I believe gets special consideration, one which doesn't. Really I think the current way is flawed.

But, being UR stems from what? Being disadvantaged? So sure, they are separate things, but connected. If you are a minority you are UR because so many minorities are disadvantaged--poor, bad education, leading to UR in the medical field. The thing is, is that not all are disadvantaged. Just grouping everyone into a category like that based on skin color is wrong.

Oh, and I don't have a strong opinion against URM's. I have a strong opinion against the current way the system handles them.

What in the world are you talking about?!

Disadvantaged: independent of race, related SOLELY to SES

URM: Related to racial background, completely unrelated to SES

just so you are clear, cause this post lost me...
 
I agree with this to some degree, but the goal of the URM system isn't really social justice or reparations. The goal is to increase the amount of minority physicians, because they are more likely to serve in minority communities. Even wealthy urm applicants (which are probably the minority) are more likely than their white/asian counterparts, to serve minority communities.

I can appreciate that. I suppose since I have lived in minority communities for pretty much all of my life, I plan on practicing in one. But perhaps it would help break racial barriers to offer further incentives to PCP's regardless of skin color if they would practice in such communities? Just a thought.
 
What in the world are you talking about?!

Disadvantaged: independent of race, related SOLELY to SES

URM: Related to racial background, completely unrelated to SES

just so you are clear, cause this post lost me...

Then read it again. I wasn't trying to define what each is, just how they are connected in relation to the medical field.
 
I'm not confusing them. They are two separate things. One of which I believe gets special consideration, one which doesn't. Really I think the current way is flawed.

But, being UR stems from what? Being disadvantaged? So sure, they are separate things, but connected. If you are a minority you are UR because so many minorities are disadvantaged--poor, bad education, leading to UR in the medical field. The thing is, is that not all are disadvantaged. Just grouping everyone into a category like that based on skin color is wrong.

Oh, and I don't have a strong opinion against URM's. I have a strong opinion against the current way the system handles them.

Not all URMs are considered disadvantaged. that's why there are two separate areas on AMCAS to enter such data. URM=+(in terms of perceived admissions boost), Disadvantaged=+, URM and Disadvantaged=++

I defined them for you cause I did not feel you understood completely...but maybe you do, still not sure :confused:
 
Seems like you're confusing "Disadvantaged" status with URM.

What I find funny is that a majority of the people that have such a strong opinion against URM's are the people that question their own chances of getting accepted, which translates to being insecure.

Because when it comes down to it, why compare yourself to others, as it only results in bringing you down? If you have a 4.0 and 45T, I can assure you wouldn't give two sihts about a URM. But let's say someone has borderline stats 3.5, 29(made it up), they are the ones so quick to call foul play...it's ridiculous and old. Worry about yourself.

I am not questioning my chances of getting in, I am simply giving an opinion (I know you were not talking directly to me, but still).

I find it kind of ironic that you are telling us not to compare ourselves to others when that is what this is all about.
 
I am not questioning my chances of getting in, I am simply giving an opinion (I know you were not talking directly to me, but still).

I find it kind of ironic that you are telling us not to compare ourselves to others when that is what this is all about.

I say that because why does it really matter if an applicant is a URM? As long as you worry about yourself(not you directly) and make sure you're application is up to par, then what business is it of yours as to what happens to the URM?
 
Just to change gears for a minute here...

I agree with people who say that we need a better representation of society at large in our medical school classes.

However, it seems that AA has not done much to improve this situation. Like I said earlier, I think that if we address problems that are prevalent in our minority communities at "ground level," something may get done about this.

For instance, better public schools, better law enforcement, drug prevention, drug abuse treatment, violence prevention, re-entry programs for convicts, etc. It seems to me that this is where the effort should be concentrated. If a better jobs are done of these things I don't think that AA will be necessary. Why do we keep focusing on something that has not worked?(at least as well as "we" thought it would).
 
No one is going to fight you on this. Of course magical overnight socioeconomic racial parity would be the ideal situation but that's just not happening. Everyone wants "better public schools, better law enforcement, drug prevention, drug abuse treatment, violence prevention, re-entry programs for convicts, etc." In the meantime, we still need minority docs.

Also, everyone says that AA has not worked and that is simply not true. Even though URM's are still underrepresented they are still way more represented than they were before. Without AA, there would be even less minority physicians, less research on issues that affect minorities, less docs in the inner cities, etc.

The progress has obviously been minimal if we still use the phrase "URM," and are still actively seeking such individuals. Also, by the way, I am kind of curious as to what health issues are specific to minorities except for cycle cell. I guess you could argue that obesity and other similar public health issues affect minorities more, however those issues affect poor white people as well. It's not like there is a group of evil white doctors in a room somewhere saying, " I would reasearch this, but it would help minorities, so I don't think I will."

Anyways, I guess I feel that it is time for a new approach. Race relations has changed a lot in this country since AA first cam about. Out with the old and in with the new, whatever that may be.
 
I'm tired of this diversity stuff just to fill a checkmark in a box. "Blacks? Check. Hispanics. Check? Asians? Check. Whites? Check. Ok We reach diversity requirements!"

I think PEOPLE from those poor communities all do slightly worse with the MCAT and class. It isn't a race thing, it just so happens, unfortunately, that many of the poorest and toughest communities have largely minority populations.

I really think schools should accept the strongest/best students possible for THEIR school regardless of race and/or ethnicity. How does one fix this? Offer support in undergraduate for the people that aren't privileged. That's every race. The people who can't afford MCAT classes, who left gang infested neighborhoods and whatever else. Even out the playing field a bit. That being said, it IS a slippery slope. Not too long ago there was a concern about females in higher education. They started programs, adjusted curriculum, gave scholarships and did little things like remove recess from schools. The result? Yes, more females went to college and further but MANY males were left out of the support they needed to successfully complete their education.

You have to adjust education towards each unique person and give EVERYONE the same opportunities.
 
I'm not sure if you're really being serious but I'll answer that: genetic diseases.

Who said anything about evil white doctors? You're setting up a straw man to knock down. People just tend to research the diseases that affect them. Hence, the people doing the research need to be diverse in order to ensure that those people care enough about these disease to devote entire lifetimes of research to them.

Look up well-researched funding disparities for sickle cell anemia (which affects people of African descent) and cystic fibrosis (which affects mostly Caucasian people). Both diseases are genetic, make the lives of children very difficult and painful, and significantly decrease the lifespans of patients. Even though there are more white total in this country, there are more people who suffer from sickle cell anemia than cystic fibrosis. Which disease do you think gets more funding?

Edited: Here, I got you a paper. Tell me if you can't get to it: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/117/5/1763

Edited again: If you don't want to read the paper, this blog post is based partially on the stats in the paper and summarizes many of the main points: http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2009/...ren-now-were-letting-young-adults-suffer.html


Yes, and in my post I asked for you to name some public health issues that are specific to minorities besides cycle cell. Did I not?

EDIT: Not that I don't agree with your point that Cycle Cell deserves more funding, because it obviously does.
 
I'm tired of this diversity stuff just to fill a checkmark in a box. "Blacks? Check. Hispanics. Check? Asians? Check. Whites? Check. Ok We reach diversity requirements!"

I think PEOPLE from those poor communities all do slightly worse with the MCAT and class. It isn't a race thing, it just so happens, unfortunately, that many of the poorest and toughest communities have largely minority populations.

I really think schools should accept the strongest/best students possible for THEIR school regardless of race and/or ethnicity. How does one fix this? Offer support in undergraduate for the people that aren't privileged. That's every race. The people who can't afford MCAT classes, who left gang infested neighborhoods and whatever else. Even out the playing field a bit. That being said, it IS a slippery slope. Not too long ago there was a concern about females in higher education. They started programs, adjusted curriculum, gave scholarships and did little things like remove recess from schools. The result? Yes, more females went to college and further but MANY males were left out of the support they needed to successfully complete their education.

You have to adjust education towards each unique person and give EVERYONE the same opportunities.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you on the fact that we should have equal opportunities for everyone regarding education. But, with the current situation of public schools in underserved areas, that ideal situation you're describing is a long way off. I think you should look at this like a disease; you can't stop treating it while you look for a cure, if you do it just gets worse.
 
I'm tired of this diversity stuff just to fill a checkmark in a box. "Blacks? Check. Hispanics. Check? Asians? Check. Whites? Check. Ok We reach diversity requirements!"

I think PEOPLE from those poor communities all do slightly worse with the MCAT and class. It isn't a race thing, it just so happens, unfortunately, that many of the poorest and toughest communities have largely minority populations.

I really think schools should accept the strongest/best students possible for THEIR school regardless of race and/or ethnicity. How does one fix this? Offer support in undergraduate for the people that aren't privileged. That's every race. The people who can't afford MCAT classes, who left gang infested neighborhoods and whatever else. Even out the playing field a bit. That being said, it IS a slippery slope. Not too long ago there was a concern about females in higher education. They started programs, adjusted curriculum, gave scholarships and did little things like remove recess from schools. The result? Yes, more females went to college and further but MANY males were left out of the support they needed to successfully complete their education.

You have to adjust education towards each unique person and give EVERYONE the same opportunities.

Well said. I would even take it a step further though. College is too late to start to help people from these neighborhoods. So many have been "weeded" out already. I would even argue that that is why the minorities that do make it to college are usually not the ones from the toughest neighborhoods. You are also right that it is a fine line. There are now 140 females for every 100 males enrolled in college and that number is expanding.

To me, helping people once they are already in college is like giving housing assistance to someone who already has a house with others across the street living in a tent.
 
The progress has obviously been minimal if we still use the phrase "URM," and are still actively seeking such individuals. Also, by the way, I am kind of curious as to what health issues are specific to minorities except for cycle cell. I guess you could argue that obesity and other similar public health issues affect minorities more, however those issues affect poor white people as well. It's not like there is a group of evil white doctors in a room somewhere saying, " I would reasearch this, but it would help minorities, so I don't think I will."

Anyways, I guess I feel that it is time for a new approach. Race relations has changed a lot in this country since AA first cam about. Out with the old and in with the new, whatever that may be.
Kinda tangentially related,

http://health.usnews.com/usnews/hea...k-americans-still-wary-of-clinical-trials.htm

Academic medical centers need also to build relationships that engender trust with the community, even including community members in designing research studies.
Finally, Powe said, patients tend to trust physicians of the same race. "One big issue is that there are not enough minority physicians, so that's a societal remedy we all have to think about," Powe said.
Some 12 percent of the U.S. population is black, but only 4 percent of physicians are black.
 
Top