what's the oldest med school?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Bachelor of Medicine and Doctor of Medicine degrees ARE THE EXACT SAME
Click to expand...
Wait a minute. I have nothin' but love for Penn.

Really Penn. I luv ya. 😉

But how is a Bachelor's the same as a Doctorate?

Was the BM degree only a four year undergrad degree?

I'm not trying to steal Penn's thunder (I don't go to Penn or Columbia). I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this mystery. 😉
 
That's a good question.

Instead of going through a long complicated history of medicines and degrees.

YES, MB (bachelor of medicine) is a four year undergraduate degree (as it is today). However, today, so is the MD. Yes, it is a doctorate, but your years in medical schools are still consider undergraduate MEDICAL education. That's why residency is referred to as Graduate medical education (GME). Go to Mt. Sinai's website and they will refer to their MD program as an Undergraduate program.

So, one is a doctorate, while another is a bachelor, but they are still product of 4 years of undergraduate medical education.

This British and its commonwealth (but not canada) still use this system, and they give their graduates the MBBCh/MBBS. It gets a litttle more complicated on how the system works if you break it down by countries.

Basically, the MD in the US and the MBBS is the basic requirement needed to enter the profession. They are exactly the same.

To complicate matters further, they do give out MDs in Britain. I am not sure of the requirement but I think it has something to do w/ more research (or schooling?) after they get their MBBS. Maybe their MD is equivalent to our MSCE.

Just remember: DO from England is VERY DIFFERENT from DO from USA.

To LUBDUBB

The argument can go either day as to whether it was founded 1740 or 1749. Ben Franklin delievered his speech on the need for a "Publick Academy of Philadelphia" in 1749. The people who supported this idea decided to use a certain building as their school. The construction of this building started back in 1740 when George Whitefield wanted to build a great lecture hall for the "instruction of poor students."
http://www.archives.upenn.edu/histy/genlhistory/brief.html
 
YES, MB (bachelor of medicine) is a four year undergraduate degree (as it is today). However, today, so is the MD. Yes, it is a doctorate, but your years in medical schools are still consider undergraduate MEDICAL education.
Click to expand...

Ouch. That really hurt your argument. I was really with you up until now. But after I read that, though, I'd say that Columbia is the first medical school.

I had thought that Penn's degree was a *graduate* degree. Even though today's MD is considered part of an undergraduate *medical* education, it's not considered part of an undergraduate education. The *medical* qualifier shows that it's a graduate program.

There are a lot of podunk schools (no offense to them) who offer an undergrad bachelor's in medicine. That doesn't make them a "medical school". Although I'm sure schools like Clarion University would love to say that they have a "Medical School". :laugh:

Penn being the first University is impressive enough! 😉 Penn having the first undergrad bachelor's in medicine is impressive too! 😉

But now that I've read all of the facts, I'd say that the Columbia argument is more valid.

But then again, what do I know? :laugh:
 
I'm going with columbia on this one. Sorry penn stater's. 😉
 
Sigh

Oh well

I guess those graduates from PennMed with a Bachelor of Medicine were quacks pretending to be doctors. I guess those graduates from Columbia who got the Bachelor of Medicine degree are quacks too.

PLEASE REMEMBER: the current medical education system is vastly different from the medical education system of the 1750s.

A Bachelor of Medicine from a US school TODAY is completely different from a Bachelor of Medicine from a British school AND is different from the Bachelor of Medicine that Penn (and Columbia) gave out in 1760s (remember, we were under British rule).

A Bacehlor of Medicine does not qualify anyone to do anything. An MD is the entry level degree. Same goes for MBBS today in England. Same goes for the Bachelor of Medicine degrees from PENN/Columbia back then in 1760s.

OK - I'm through arguing this concept. If you still believe Columbia is the first medical school, so be it. I am tired (and sleepy, and dreary, and weary) of trying to explain the medical education system of the 1760s and having people respond "but Columbia gave out the first MD".

You can use any arguments/word play/hocus pokus/hand waving all you want to say that Columbia is the first medical school, but history and its reference books will always list Penn as the first medical school in the country.
 
Originally posted by scootad.
I'll go w/ the sentiment: who gives a $hit.
Click to expand...
:laugh: I change my vote to scootad's. :laugh:
 
UPENN's twisting of semantics to make it sound like they had the first med school requires about as much linguistic gymnastics as Clinton used when describing what the definition of "is" is.

😱
 
UPENN's twisting of semantics to make it sound like they had the first med school requires about as much linguistic gymnastics as Clinton used when describing what the definition of "is" is.

😱
Click to expand...
Between this statement and the one by group theory:

"(remember, we were under British rule)."

I just thought of when Arlen Specter invoked Scottish law as his reasoning on whether or not to impeach Prez Clinton. The Press had a field day with that!

:laugh:
 
A Bacehlor of Medicine does not qualify anyone to do anything.
Click to expand...

But by that logic (analyzing what the degree can qualify one to do), then Doc Jones from the Wild West who owned a barbershop and taught his apprentice how to suture a wound had the first "medical school".

Or to go back further, Miss Elizabeth Charles from the Mayflower who taught her apprentices on how to deliver a baby or how to care for an arm with gangrene conducted the first "medical school" in the U.S.. 😕
 
Originally posted by Bonds756
In the movie Unbreakable, Penn was called Franklin University (yet the football stadium that Bruce Willis worked at was called Franklin Field as it is in actuality). They definitely have an obsession was Ben Franklin at Penn- statues of him everywhere. Parents even come and take their pictures next to these staues for some reason, but it is a safe bet that Penn will always be called Penn.
Click to expand...

seriously...there is like an overflow of Franklin paraphanelia at the bookstore. LOL, I've also been stopped on Locust Walk when some random visitor/prospective student's parents asks to take a pic of them sitting next to the statue of BF on the bench near the compass.

I remember when they were shooting Unbreakable, and everything was blocked off-- but of course they shot it at the time after finals when everyone moves out 🙄 i remember sitting in the car outside my dorm and not moving for literally two hours
 
group_theory is right, and has been since this post started.

Penn is now and always has been the first American medical school. The difference between an MD and the MBBS is semantics.

I would argue, however, that Hopkins was the first modern medical school, since:

1. It was the first school to require a bachelor of science degree for matriculation.

2. It was the first school to put universities and hospitals together. Prior to this, medical education was a series of lectures alone.

3. It was the model used by the Flexner Report in 1910; the standard on which all other modern medical schools are based.

4. From day one, Hopkins has matriculated no fewer than five female students per class (including the illustrious Gertrude Stein).

Hopkins was an experiment in medical education that happened to work; as such, I designate it as the first "modern medical school."

Any thoughts?

-doepug
 
Grouptheory,

thanks for the article i appreciate the info 🙂

.......but you gotta go with what the tee shirts say - 1740

P.S. I'm in the math-phys library right now...it would be odd if you were like sitting next to me right now, lol

Take care
 
I don't see why this is such a contentious issue. UPenn was the first med school in America and JHU was the first med school to offer a modern medical education/degree.
 
I am amazed this is still open to interpretation.
How bout you type in "nation's first medical school" into google and find dozens and dozens of articles in a row about Penn, none on Columbia.
And I like the 1740 on the t-shirts better too, Group.
 
Everybody in here needs to sit the hell down, and enjoy the sun.

Why are you all arguing about this and either backing up your own school or discrediting a school you hate? The original question is about which school is first, not which is first and therefore most important, great, or educational.

UCSD is opened for what 30 years (I never and dont attend this undergrad or med school btw). They are now tops in research and producing capable physicians. At the rate they are going, they will be #1 in 30 years, if they do keep it up.

But what does #1 mean? Age? USNews ranking? (do you truly believe Caltech is the best university in the US as USNews claimed a couple of years ago? plus, their methodology of medical school is based on medical research, not educational contributions and talents (so they are technically not ranking medical "schools").

Bottom line, none of these schools are better than the other. They all possess their own unique strenghts and medical students. Besides, this thread is asking for facts (age of medical schools), not your opinions about greatness. So no need to argue.

btw, my medical school is the best.
 
Group theory,

I think it's so funny that even Philadelphians don't know about Penn versus Penn state. Oh well, as long as the company/school who's accepting you after you graduate knows, then that's all that counts. 😉

How bout you type in "nation's first medical school" into google and find dozens and dozens of articles in a row about Penn, none on Columbia.
Click to expand...
To be fair, probably 99% of those articles were written by Penn grads! 😉

Originally posted by yaoming
Everybody in here needs to sit the hell down, and enjoy the sun.
Click to expand...
There's a sun outside?

btw, my medical school is the best.
Click to expand...
:laugh:
 
I can't believe that the MB vs. MD question could cause so many people so much of a problem, is there no end to the naivety of the average American?

U Penn certainly has the oldest medical school. The reason why the MD degree is now ubiquitous in the US is because medical education in America was effectively modelled on continental medical education. This was cemented by the Flexner report, which held up German medical education (as interpreted by Johns Hopkins) as the exemplar. (In the UK, Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, the MD degree is a post-graduate qualification; it is granted to a physician or surgeon who conducts research and submits a dissertation. Essentially it is similar to a PhD, though somewhat less rigorous.)
 
ok, can someone explain these:

how is medical school considered undergraduate if it grants "Doctorate" of Medicine?

so a practicing european doctor is an "MB?" then what's the point of getting MD there, and why is it less rigorous than PhD considering that the MDs there must have MB+PhD knowledge? why would anyone there not do PhD instead of MD after MB?

so a practicing european doctor went to high school, then got MB, then residency, then practices? since they learn so little, how are they qualified to treat all these various diseases known on earth today?

-someone ignorant about the international system
 
As in Europe, medical school in the US is undergraduate training.

Graduate medical education (GME) is synonymous with residency. Someone with an MB/BCh is fully qualified to "treat all these various diseases." Their training is equivalent to American medical training, except that European physicians haven't acquired a liberal arts education.

Hope this helps,
doepug
 
I don't think that it is fair to say that European doctors have had less education than US doctors; in fact they will quite often have more years of training under their belt than their US peers.

In the US you train in medical school for 4 years. In the UK, for example, you'll train for at least 5 years (normally 6 years). Often Americans will point out that they gain a "liberal arts" education before undertaking their MD; it is true that the US system enforces an admirable ideal, however this certainly doesn't equate to extra training. As for post-graduate experience - it generally takes far longer to train in your chosen specialty in the UK than it does in the US................The result is a more highly experienced physician or surgeon.
 
Upon introductions, I quickly state my station as a University of Pennsylvania student. If my companion in conversation is confused and even goes so far as to mention Penn state, I immediately lecture them on the difference and arrange a tour of our fine campus. In the end I've got their f***n attention and RESPECT!! Worked too hard and spent too much to sacrifice my dignity, haha. Nobody likes being ambiguous.

in fun,
biffer
 
Originally posted by Spinola
I don't think that it is fair to say that European doctors have had less education than US doctors; in fact they will quite often have more years of training under their belt than their US peers.

In the US you train in medical school for 4 years. In the UK, for example, you'll train for at least 5 years (normally 6 years). Often Americans will point out that they gain a "liberal arts" education before undertaking their MD; it is true that the US system enforces an admirable ideal, however this certainly doesn't equate to extra training. As for post-graduate experience - it generally takes far longer to train in your chosen specialty in the UK than it does in the US................The result is a more highly experienced physician or surgeon.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree.

While American medical school lasts four years, all aspiring physicians are required to take a prescribed set of courses in college (calculus, general and organic chemistry, biology, physics). I contend that this is equivalent to the beginning of medical training in European systems, thereby making the length of American undergraduate medical training equivalent to other systems.

You mentioned that post-graduate training is longer in the UK; I find this statement highly suspect. Can you provide an example?

American physicians have undergone medical education and pre-medical coursework equivalent to that of our European colleagues. I contend that American physicians are, however, more educated than our European peers due to four years of college that are missing from European systems. It is regrettable that so many professionals missed out on a liberal arts education.

Cheers,
doepug
 
Perhaps you don't realise that there is a discrepancy between the level of schooling in the UK and in the US. The stipulated relevant pre-med training in the US would not match up to the first term in a top UK medical school, let alone the first year.

As regards the liberal arts education; is there any evidence that this confers any advantage?

And finally, I cannot think of ANY specialty in which a US physician/surgeon trains in for a longer period than the UK equivalent.
 
Originally posted by yaoming
ok, can someone explain these:

so a practicing european doctor went to high school, then got MB, then residency, then practices? since they learn so little, how are they qualified to treat all these various diseases known on earth today?

-someone ignorant about the international system
Click to expand...

to simplify:

american = 4 yrs med school
non american (in general commonwealth nations) = 6/5 yrs med school

hence one could argue that doctors from non american med schools actually learn more about medicine than their american counterparts since, despite the prereq of a degree by american med schools, that degree may or may not pertain directly to medicine.
 
spinola,

how about some specifics? How long is the residency period for a family practice, internal med, surgeon, etc in the UK?
 
In the US you train in medical school for 4 years. In the UK, for example, you'll train for at least 5 years (normally 6 years). Often Americans will point out that they gain a "liberal arts" education before undertaking their MD;
Click to expand...
Spinola - Are European doctors going straight to medical school out of high school?!

The "liberal arts" education that the vast majority of med students take in the U.S. is what doepug described below....and it's not exactly liberal arts, it's a *lot* of chemistry, biochemstry, biology....most med students weren't "English Literature" majors in undergrad. 😉 By the time they hit graduate school (medical school), most had an extensive educational background in the hard sciences...

Plus, you're forgetting that during those 4 years of additional University training, most pre-med majors are doing volunteer work in hospitals, labs, etc. 😎

Originally posted by doepug
While American medical school lasts four years, all aspiring physicians are required to take a prescribed set of courses in college (calculus, general and organic chemistry, biology, physics).

American physicians have undergone medical education and pre-medical coursework equivalent to that of our European colleagues. I contend that American physicians are, however, more educated than our European peers due to four years of college that are missing from European systems.
Click to expand...
I'd agree.
 
Look up the data on post-graduate training yourselves. The internet is a wonderful resource.

Most of the experience gained by pre-meds at college in the US in the hard sciences and in "soft skills" (by volunteering etc.) is gained whilst at high school in the UK.

The fact is that one spends a greater amount of time training in medicine in the UK than in the US.

This seems to have exposed many insecurities; what would happen if we contemplated the lengthy training of our Teutonic brethren?
 
Originally posted by Spinola
I don't think that it is fair to say that European doctors have had less education than US doctors; in fact they will quite often have more years of training under their belt than their US peers.

In the US you train in medical school for 4 years. In the UK, for example, you'll train for at least 5 years (normally 6 years). Often Americans will point out that they gain a "liberal arts" education before undertaking their MD; it is true that the US system enforces an admirable ideal, however this certainly doesn't equate to extra training. As for post-graduate experience - it generally takes far longer to train in your chosen specialty in the UK than it does in the US................The result is a more highly experienced physician or surgeon.
Click to expand...

My Indian, Pakistani, and Somali MPH classmates (most of whom have a medical degree from their own country, which at least for India is based upon the British system as far as I can tell) don't seem to see it this way. They've all told me that I should be extremely happy as I've just been accepted into the best medical training system in the world. But I'll go back and correct them for Spinola.
 
Most of the experience gained by pre-meds at college in the US in the hard sciences and in "soft skills" (by volunteering etc.) is gained whilst at high school in the UK.
Click to expand...
American students also gain such experience whilst in high school in the US. It's very competitive and for those who want to go into medicine, they start young as far as getting such experience.

But it sounds like students in the UK have an undergrad degree for their medical degree; whereas students in the US gain extra years of education and experience since the US medical degree is *after* the undegrad degree ...in other words, the US medical degree is a grad degree.

I didn't realize that UK students received such a short education. I always thought that the UK had a better educational system than that? 😕
 
True, the UK education system isn't perfect, but even so it's not as bad as the US.......................

The American MD degree is effectively an undergraduate degree, so stop kidding yourselves. The fact remains that in the UK people spend more years at medical school and in training than in the US.

(I can think of many better ways to argue your case, and yet you keep repeating the same inane waffle..............)
 
Originally posted by Spinola
True, the UK education system isn't perfect, but even so it's not as bad as the US.......................

The American MD degree is effectively an undergraduate degree, so stop kidding yourselves. The fact remains that in the UK people spend more years at medical school and in training than in the US.

(I can think of many better ways to argue your case, and yet you keep repeating the same inane waffle..............)
Click to expand...

Perhaps due to the American education system I just can't do the math, but I'm missing something here, Spinola. Perhaps you can correct me where my math is wrong.

American System (Canadian, too?)
Graduate from high school at ~age 18
Go to a university or college for undergrad education until ~age 22 (4 years)
Go to medical school for the doctoral-level MD, ~age 26 (4 years)
Enter residency....we'll skip this for now, as nobody seems to want to touch graduate medical education.
To me it looks like it take about 8 years past high school (~ age 26) to get an MD and enter graduate medical education.


British System
Graduate from high school at ~ age 18
Go to university/medical school to get MB at ~age 23-24 (5-6 years)
Enter graduate medical education
To me it looks like it take about 5-6 years (~ age 23-24)to enter graduate medical education in the UK.

8 years > 5-6 years.

What did I miss? Feel free to correct me on the age at which UK students graduate from secondary school.
 
Originally posted by Spinola


The American MD degree is effectively an undergraduate degree, so stop kidding yourselves.
Click to expand...

Perhaps part of the confusion is that when most Americans talk about graduate degree, we mean post-baachelors-level degree. In the medical world, the term is a little different. Yes, the MD is an undergraduate medical degree. But it's still a doctoral-level (graduate) degree, just like the PhD is. You can't get one unless you already have a university-level bachelor's degree (well, usually 90 credits, but this is usually very close anyway).
 
What did you miss? The detail; ergo the logic.

In the UK you spend about 6 years learning subjects relevant to the practice of medicine and surgery. In the US, you do up to 4 years of what you want (with some pre-requisite subjects thrown in) and then you do a 4 year medical degree. Whilst it's true that the average US medical graduate will be older than the average UK medical graduate, this doesn't mean that they've been taught more "medicine". Then we move on to post-graduate medical education, where the number of years training in the UK exceeds that in the US...............
 
Spinola, I don't think you've really answered any of the arguments presented. Essentially, you have resorted to repeating yourself and making unfounded comments. American pre-medical coursework is absolutely equivalent to what beginning medical students encounter in the UK.

My view is this: length of medical training is equal, but Americans have the advantage of a college education which is sorely lacking in European systems.

You still haven't given us a single example of discrepancies in post-graduate training. The internet is a wonderful resource, but it's your argument to defend.

doepug
 
Originally posted by doepug
Spinola, I don't think you've really answered any of the arguments presented. Essentially, you have resorted to repeating yourself and making unfounded comments. American pre-medical coursework is absolutely equivalent to what beginning medical students encounter in the UK.

My view is this: length of medical training is equal, but Americans have the advantage of a college education which is sorely lacking in European systems.

You still haven't given us a single example of discrepancies in post-graduate training. The internet is a wonderful resource, but it's your argument to defend.

doepug
Click to expand...

American chauvinism is deeply entrenched; evidently a point needs to be re-stated to have any hope of getting through.

So you want an example of the discrepancy of post-graduate training in the two countries? Here we go-

Ophthalmology training in the US: 4 years post-graduate plus fellowship, if desired.

Ophthalmology training in the UK: 7.5 years post-graduate plus fellowship, if desired.

No prizes for guessing where I'd rather train.
 
Originally posted by Spinola
American chauvinism is deeply entrenched; evidently a point needs to be re-stated to have any hope of getting through.

So you want an example of the discrepancy of post-graduate training in the two countries? Here we go-

Ophthalmology training in the US: 4 years post-graduate plus fellowship, if desired.

Ophthalmology training in the UK: 7.5 years post-graduate plus fellowship, if desired.

No prizes for guessing where I'd rather train.
Click to expand...

Proof that UK medical graduates require more time in graduate medical education because of their shorter, and therefore inferior, premedical and undergraduate medical education.
 
for original poster:

the consensus among academia is that Harvard, UPenn, and U of Michigan (~1810-1850) the 3 oldest medical schools that started it all, and these 3 schools helped spawn new style of med schools such as Johns Hopkins(~1890), IMHO. BTW these 4 schools today have the highest % of graduates in academia in the USA.
 
Originally posted by Adcadet
Proof that UK medical graduates require more time in graduate medical education because of their shorter, and therefore inferior, premedical and undergraduate medical education.
Click to expand...

We've established that the main difference between the two systems is that in the US a "liberal arts" education is gained before going off to do an inordinately short medical degree. Let's get one thing straight; post-graduate medical education is something entirely separate from a cup-cakes "liberal arts" education, so it's *****ic to try equating them. Take it as proof that one trains for longer in medicine and surgery in the UK than in the US.

P.S. Your signature implies that you have learnt to enjoy debating.
 
Length of education and quality of education is vastly different between the US and UK systems. One system goes for liberal arts, while another aims for a specific field. In the US, a liberal arts education is stressed in high school and undergraduate college. In the UK, you must pick a field starting in high school, and continue it in college. The luxury of remaining undecided in your early 20s about your career path is not there. Someone once told me that a UK college chemistry graduate is equivalent to a US graduate with a master degree in chemistry in terms of knowledge base. However, the liberal arts education in the US forces us to be more well-rounded, to understand a little about how our world and our society functions. Alistair Cook, a long time venerable reporter for the BBC, wrote an interesting article about the lack of a liberal arts education in the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/letter_from_america/1905095.stm I hope you take the time to read it. It is quite interesting.

Turning back to which medical education system is better. Both system covers exactly the same material. The UK system does it in 5, the US does it in 4. Here is an example of the courses required for a MBBS at King?s College Undergraduate School of Medicine
http://137.73.36.125/ugp2003/FMPro?....html&-token=&-recid=120&-lay=layout #1&-find
Year 1:
Cells & molecules, Practice of medicine, Professional skills, Systems of the body, Special study modules
Year 2:
Cells & molecules, Practice of medicine, Professional skills, Systems of the body, Special study modules
Year 3:
General medicine, Surgery , Pathology , Clinical pharmacology & therapeutics , Psychiatry, Orthopedics, Neurology, Emergency medicine and trauma, Obstetrics & gynecology, Pediatrics, Health care of the elderly & palliative care
Year 4:
Same as Year 3
Year 5:
Vocationally oriented, focusing on skills training, the practical management of patients and diagnostic reasoning.

This is an example of courses in the US: University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine
http://www.med.upenn.edu/admiss/curriculum.html
Year 1:
Genetics, Embryology, Histology, Gross Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Immunology, Pharmacology, Microbiology, Epidemiology and Biostatics (2 years), Technology of Medicine (2 years)
Year 2:
Pathological Processes and Clinical Response, Brain/Behavior, Dermatology, Reproduction, Endocrine and Orthopedics, Fluid Balance and Homeostasis, Cardiology, Pulmonary, GI/nutrition, Renal, differential diagnosis and antimicrobials
Year 3:
Core Clerkship
Year 4:
Electives, Selective and Scholarly pursuits

When it is all said and done, med school provides the basic to started GME. The UK and US systems both cover the same material. The US just jam pack it into 4 years while the UK system has the luxury of an additional year or two. However, note that schools like St. George?s Hospital Medical School (not the one in the Caribbean) are starting to offer 4 year MBBS as a graduate entry program for those w/ undergraduate bachelors in other disciplines. http://www.sghms.ac.uk/Courses/gep.htm
 
Finally we have an effective response. Not one person had mentioned intensity of training.

The English school system does focus on a narrow range of topics quite early; I think that it really shows, too - have any of you visited a UK site equivalent to SDN? UK SDN equivalents have a much higher proportion of semi-literate postings.

P.S. We shouldn't forget that the Scottish high school system isn't as narrow as the English.
P.P.S. It is possible to gain a BA in a non-medical subject (e.g. theology) whilst studying medicine at Cambridge.
 
Originally posted by Spinola

The English school system does focus on a narrow range of topics quite early; I think that it really shows, too - have any of you visited a UK site equivalent to SDN? UK SDN equivalents have a much higher proportion of semi-literate postings.
Click to expand...

So why are you here?
 
Both of my uncles have medical degrees from Cambridge. If those cheeky wankers are any indication of the success of British education, than god save us all. Besides that potentially meaningless anecdote, what one misses with foregoing a liberal arts education is a greater ability to think outside the box, solve problems in a creative manner, and innovate to a higher degree. While I have a great deal of respect for the european systems of education, a cursory look at the geographical distribution of biomedical advances will reinforce my point.

Hope that Helps

P 'Pseudo-Intellectual' ShankOut
 
Originally posted by Adcadet
Yes, the MD is an undergraduate medical degree. But it's still a doctoral-level (graduate) degree, just like the PhD is. You can't get one unless you already have a university-level bachelor's degree (well, usually 90 credits, but this is usually very close anyway).
Click to expand...

Exactly!

People are getting wrapped up into semantics. For instance, a person could have an undergrad degree in chemistry and a PhD in molecular biology.

If you want to call that molecular biology degree an undergraduate *molecular biology* degree; go right ahead (people will look at you funny since you'll sound *really* anal retentive), because it's still a graduate degree.

Just like someone who gets an undergrad degree in biology and then goes on to obtain a medical degree (MD) from an allopathic school:

Go ahead and say that their Medical Degree is part of an undergraduate *medical* education, again, if you don't mind the strange looks that people will give you because no one refers to a graduate degree as an "undergrate education"... because an MD is still a graduate degree which requires at least a four year undergrad degree.

No prizes for guessing where I'd rather train.
Click to expand...
I think the question is not where *you* would rather train, but where the people in the world (who can afford it) go when they need dire and/or emergency medical care....to the United States! The proof is in the pudding. People are knocking down our doors to get to our MD's. 😉
 
Originally posted by Lady MD

I think the question is not where *you* would rather train, but where the people in the world (who can afford it) go when they need dire and/or emergency medical care....to the United States! The proof is in the pudding. People are knocking down our doors to get to our MD's. 😉
Click to expand...

Perhaps Spinola is here at SDN, a predominantly American (though with some Canadian representation) forum, for the same reason patients come to the US.
 
Originally posted by Adcadet
Perhaps Spinola is here at SDN, a predominantly American (though with some Canadian representation) forum, for the same reason patients come to the US.
Click to expand...

Medical care? My you have a way with words. Perhaps it's the liberal arts education shining through?

The UK also gets its share of complex medical cases flown in from abroad. However, the high profile cases come from poor countries; perhaps this highlights the fundamental difference between the medical systems in the UK and the US. Both work as effectively as each other, but only one is egalitarian.
 
Originally posted by Spinola
Medical care? My you have a way with words. Perhaps it's the liberal arts education shining through?

The UK also gets its share of complex medical cases flown in from abroad. However, the high profile cases come from poor countries; perhaps this highlights the fundamental difference between the medical systems in the UK and the US. Both work as effectively as each other, but only one is egalitarian.
Click to expand...

Apparently I have to be less subtle with Spinola. OK, here goes the remedial version. And they say the Brits lack a liberal arts education!


perhaps Spinola is here at SDN for the same reason people come to the US for medical care: because we have the best medical training system in the world.
 
Originally posted by Spinola
Medical care? My you have a way with words. Perhaps it's the liberal arts education shining through?

The UK also gets its share of complex medical cases flown in from abroad. However, the high profile cases come from poor countries; perhaps this highlights the fundamental difference between the medical systems in the UK and the US. Both work as effectively as each other, but only one is egalitarian.
Click to expand...

People with the means and any knowledge and desire to save their lives come here for major medical procedures. Spend a day or two in the bullet proof cardiac wing of the Cleveland Clinic and you will be amazed how many Princes, Kings, Presidents, Celebrities, etc go there when their life is on the line. No UK equivalent, plain and simple.
 
Originally posted by chef
for original poster:

the consensus among academia is that Harvard, UPenn, and U of Michigan (~1810-1850) the 3 oldest medical schools that started it all, and these 3 schools helped spawn new style of med schools such as Johns Hopkins(~1890), IMHO. BTW these 4 schools today have the highest % of graduates in academia in the USA.
Click to expand...

In fairness to the runner up, you left Columbia off the list. And I am pretty sure that Jefferson and Drexel (formerly MCP, formerly Hahnemann, formerly Woman's College, formerly Pennsylvania, formerly Allegheny, formerly Homeopathic College, etc) are the two schools that have graduated the most physicians due to their long history and their huge class size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hommefatale
What Really Matters in a Med School App?
Replies
20
Views
2K
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
K
Fulbright ETA vs Med School
Replies
1
Views
712
Real_Eyes
Real_Eyes
tinyhandsbob
What are the procedural skills that are formally assessed for medical school graduation?
Replies
1
Views
282
Goro
Goro
J
Oldest coursework accepted ?!
Replies
10
Views
861
Goro
Goro
carson16666
How much to have saved before med school?
Replies
4
Views
493
carson16666
carson16666
Top