Whats the point of undergrad?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

VolibearMain

Membership Revoked
Removed
7+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
325
Reaction score
218
What is it?
Im sitting here studying on a Saturday night wondering what was the point of 4 years of learning random facts that have nothing to do with my career. Sure some of it helps for med school, mainly the cell biology part (I took the minimum requirement/prereqs) but still. Why cant we start earlier, straight out of highschool?

I dont see why we cant have kids take AP chem , ap physics, ap bio, and bum rush organic chem during the summer, hell even have a 5 year MD program, where year 1 is touching up on the prereqs.
 
As far as becoming a doctor, there isn't really much of a point in it other than to discourage as many people as possible from following through with the process. The only class that helped me at all (in a very small way) for the preclinical years of medical school was biology. I agree it would be better if there was a 5 year program that commences after high school (most countries have some variety of this).
 
You're going to be thrown the "you're not mature enough yet" argument by the pro-US model...

I sort of get the argument but for so many people undergrad is just burning you out, or it even ruins peoples chances of getting in. I had a friend be offered the 8 year brown straight out of highschool program. Their parents suggested going to undergrad first so incase they change their mind they have a degree to fall back on. Well undergrad ****s up most peoples gpas, and happened to this unfortunate person who is completing an SMP to get what he had before.
 
What is it?
Im sitting here studying on a Saturday night wondering what was the point of 4 years of learning random facts that have nothing to do with my career. Sure some of it helps for med school, mainly the cell biology part (I took the minimum requirement/prereqs) but still. Why cant we start earlier, straight out of highschool?

I dont see why we cant have kids take AP chem , ap physics, ap bio, and bum rush organic chem during the summer, hell even have a 5 year MD program, where year 1 is touching up on the prereqs.

There are BS/MD programs through which high school student can compete their UG in 6, 7, or 8 years with (conditional) guaranteed admission into med school.

Also, I know in countries such as England students do go into medicine straight out of high school but I believe these schools have high dropout rates (can't cite sources though, just what I know).

I believe undergrad serves two main purposes in preparing a student for med school - (1) Many high school students don't know what they want to do with their life, and without a mature sense of decision making that is gained through a combination of simply growing up (brain development) and life experiences (think the "Why medicine" question).
(2) Undergrad serves as a sort of giant weed out experience (think orgo I) for those who may want to pursue medicine, but can't [or haven't demonstrated that they can] survive the rigors of med school.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There are BS/MD programs through which high school student can compete their UG in 6, 7, or 8 years with (conditional) guaranteed admission into med school.

Also, I know in countries such as England students do go into medicine straight out of high school but I believe these schools have high dropout rates (can't cite sources though, just what I know).

I believe undergrad serves two main purposes in preparing a student for med school - (1) Many high school students don't know what they want to do with their life, and without a mature sense of decision making that is gained through a combination of simply growing up (brain development) and life experiences (think the "Why medicine" question).
(2) Undergrad serves as a sort of giant weed out experience (think orgo I) for those who may want to pursue medicine, but can't [or haven't demonstrated that they can] survive the rigors of med school.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I do remember lots of people who dropped out of premed now that you mentioned it but most of those folks werent very good at that path from the beginning. IMO if someone can go nail the prereqs in highschool and do maybe a 1 or 2 year SMP directly out of highschool- then go to med school, it will cut their loses, and be more efficient. They may actually learn more material that will ease the burden in med school as well as help them along the way (and save some time)

As far as the europe / england thing, its pretty common everywhere outside the US and Canada to start your 5 year MD out of highschool. Almost all of the EU, African nations, Asia, and some south american countries follow this.
 
What is it?
Im sitting here studying on a Saturday night wondering what was the point of 4 years of learning random facts that have nothing to do with my career. Sure some of it helps for med school, mainly the cell biology part (I took the minimum requirement/prereqs) but still. Why cant we start earlier, straight out of highschool?

I dont see why we cant have kids take AP chem , ap physics, ap bio, and bum rush organic chem during the summer, hell even have a 5 year MD program, where year 1 is touching up on the prereqs.
It's to learn how to learn, experience new ideas and expose yourself to all sorts of new and different people, and grow up from the child you were when you left high school.

It's not about preparing you for med school material. The coursework I give to my students in 1-2 weeks covers an entire semester of material I took as a UG student.

if someone is going to burn out from UG, then they'd absolutely get killed by med school.

And UG is also about learning the competencies that are now required of both medical students and residents, like communication skills and teamwork. Scientific knowledge is only 1/6th of these. The other 5/6ths are humanistic domains.
 
What is it?
Im sitting here studying on a Saturday night wondering what was the point of 4 years of learning random facts that have nothing to do with my career. Sure some of it helps for med school, mainly the cell biology part (I took the minimum requirement/prereqs) but still. Why cant we start earlier, straight out of highschool?

I dont see why we cant have kids take AP chem , ap physics, ap bio, and bum rush organic chem during the summer, hell even have a 5 year MD program, where year 1 is touching up on the prereqs.
People will say:
  • To develop maturity
  • To become more well-rounded
  • To find your passion
  • To pursue non-medical interests
  • To learn the basic sciences
This is all codswallop. Absolute codswallop. It's all about the $$$ and propping up a broken system. Tell yourself whatever you need to in order to get through it, but never pretend that you aren't being taken advantage of.
 
Maturity. Becoming a well-rounded individual. Exploring other career paths before making an informed decision to pursue medicine.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
That can be done in 3 years. Undergrad as a whole is not useless. But I think med/dental school can do it the way some pharmacy school do it... 2-3 years of prereqs, then med school... I know some schools have in their website 90-credit hour; however, a baccalaureate degree has become a de facto requirement now.

I don't think med school directly from high school is a good idea either...

Med school curriculum can easily be covered in also 3 years. The whole system is outdated.
 
Last edited:
People will say:
  • To develop maturity
  • To become more well-rounded
  • To find your passion
  • To pursue non-medical interests
  • To learn the basic sciences
This is all codswallop. Absolute codswallop. It's all about the $$$ and propping up a broken system. Tell yourself whatever you need to in order to get through it, but never pretend that you aren't being taken advantage of.

Totally agreed man. Almost every other country in the world does it straight out of high school and their doctors seem to be doing fine.
 
People will say:
  • To develop maturity
  • To become more well-rounded
  • To find your passion
  • To pursue non-medical interests
  • To learn the basic sciences
This is all codswallop. Absolute codswallop. It's all about the $$$ and propping up a broken system. Tell yourself whatever you need to in order to get through it, but never pretend that you aren't being taken advantage of.

None of those arguments make sense in the first place. No other career requires you to spend 4 years of expensive college learning about something just to gain admission, and a lot of those jobs are just as critical if not more than a physician.
 
If you go to Europe (and UK), Australia and NZ some of their schools offer the 6-7 year models.
Butttt apples to oranges here. their residency training years are also far longer. Bit of a trade-off. Very roughly, you still end up an attending at the same age group (ish). Some have also changed to the US 4 year model.

Anecdotally. It helped having science (particularly relevant pre-reqs) done before med school. Which was touched on above.
You still have to learn biochem again in med school, but instead of a full semester, it's like..here's 2-3 weeks. have fun. It's much easier to keep up with if it's review rather than something you're learning for the very first time. After that, in med school you learn what goes wrong in the biochem whatever cycle and diseases coming from that.

Long story short. you can't learn about what goes wrong in the human body without knowing what the normal is.
Physiology, biochem, genetics/cell bio are all touched on in med school preclinical years, but at breakneck speed.
Physics - I hate physics with a passion - but it is relevant to say cardiac or pulmonary physiology. It helps to have some understanding.
Will you need the details of physics the way you did in undergrad, no, but it helps to have had some familiarity.

those with non-science backgrounds tend to struggle a bit more in the beginning, in order to catch up to those with hard sciences.
they catch up eventually, but a few come out a bit traumatized. regardless everyone is a doctor at the finish line.

Also. undergrad teaches you how to approach journal articles.
how to do research. depending on what sort of doctor you wish to be, with the more academic or competitive fields, you'll doing research the rest of your life. It helps if you've done it before. Or at least know how to do some basic statistics. Again, there's less time to be taught this.

You probably could getaway with 3 years of undergrad in theory.
However, it's still better to get a bachelors in case something goes wrong later. at least you have a degree, something to show for it to help you look at doing something else. Further training in most other things, require having something other than a high school diploma. it's not entirely meaningless. Students on those 6-7 year degrees in Europe etc, if they drop out or realize that they dont' want medical school after all (after having to decide straight out of high school), they end up with nothing. they don't have anything to show for the 3-4 years they did put in. There's no degree unless you finish 6-7 years. Very generally speaking.

If you hate undergrad, it's okay.
not like you'll have to do it forever. there is an end.

Or you could move to a country with direct entry from high school 😛
 
If you go to Europe (and UK), Australia and NZ some of their schools offer the 6-7 year models.
Butttt apples to oranges here. their residency training years are also far longer. Bit of a trade-off. Very roughly, you still end up an attending at the same age group (ish). Some have also changed to the US 4 year model.

Also. undergrad teaches you how to approach journal articles.
how to do research. depending on what sort of doctor you wish to be, with the more academic or competitive fields, you'll doing research the rest of your life. It helps if you've done it before. Or at least know how to do some basic statistics. Again, there's less time to be taught this.

You probably could getaway with 3 years of undergrad in theory.


Or you could move to a country with direct entry from high school 😛

its too long for me to read man but I did catch this. The only thing I learned in undergrad was how to talk to shy girls and make a bomb long island iced tea. I also learned how to make crystal meth in organic. I probably learned some other things that I dont remember.
I graduated in 3 years, I highly recommend it!
 
The answer, as usual, is $$$. "Higher education" is a multi-billion dollar industry and everyone and their uncle is lining up to collect their share as long as the federal government is handing out checks to poorly informed kids who have no concept of money, much less debt. Half of the crap you learn in college is completely irrelevant or just even just flat out wrong, and don't get me started on all those pointless majors (most of them) which have no real world application or marketability.
 
The answer, as usual, is $$$. "Higher education" is a multi-billion dollar industry and everyone and their uncle is lining up to collect their share as long as the federal government is handing out checks to poorly informed kids who have no concept of money, much less debt. Half of the crap you learn in college is completely irrelevant or just even just flat out wrong, and don't get me started on all those pointless majors (most of them) which have no real world application or marketability.

unfortunately even for the majors that do teach something relevant, its still loaded with garbage. Im an undergrad engineer, so are my friends, only the electrical and comp engs learned something that was relevant
 
I feel like you guys could join some of the threads with med students saying the preclinical yrs of med school are useless. 'Why doesnt everyone just buy kaplan or Uworld and do 2 yrs of med school'.

Anyway going to stop responding, seeing as its apparently a vent thread about how much undergrad sucks. Which you can do. Does it change anything? No. But if it makes you feel better...have at.
 
I feel like you guys could join some of the threads with med students saying the preclinical yrs of med school are useless. 'Why doesnt everyone just buy kaplan or Uworld and do 2 yrs of med school'.

/QUOTE]

You know, you might just be onto something. Almost every med student I know doesn't go to class anyway, we can just home deliver bodies and start a few online med schools
 
Education broadens your horizon and enriches your life. Some of it may not seem practical, but in US society a liberal arts education will socially advance you. Sure, it shouldn't be mandatory. But it allows one to, say, speak with clarity about politics. Figure out what the hell our economy is doing. Relate to a patient.

There's a lot of whining on here. Life isn't fair. Our country and society aren't fair. And they never will be. Undergrad on many levels is a massive money-generating industry... but these are the rules of engagement. If you don't like it, start a superpac or move to canada.
 
I mean, to those who go through undergrad premed the whole time then go to medical school I'm sure they would be just fine going directly to Med school. They'd even be competent clinicians I'm sure.

I'd still make the argument that college, if used correctly, can absolutely make you a better overall Doctor though. Virchow said something along the lines of politics is just medicine on a grand scale - given how much docs are being asked to promote public health, inform policy aimed at expanding access to the poor, etc, I think getting the basics of how to think about issues (which is easily obtained being in college) is extremely helpful. For engineers especially I'm surprised to see people say undergrad didn't matter - in my class in Med school 3 former engineers have patented devices they thought of after seeing the clinical need. Sure you don't need both backgrounds, but it sure helps.

But beyond even that, many premeds, none of whom would be on this forum to be able to argue this, used college as a time to figure out what they want in life and decided to focus on other pursuits. I'd argue they'd say it was definitely worth the cost given they decided to forgo medicine. Are we going to reform secondary education as well so that people know they don't want to do medicine right out of high school?

I could go on and on about other aspects of this, but having seen the British system (ps some med schools there are now requiring you take at least a year off to get a masters so you'll be more well rounded) up close for an extended period and also the American system up close for an extended period, I'd take this one.

Sure it could be improved, sure the expense makes no sense, but reforming I t in an evidenced-based way rather than just scrapping things haphazardly because "bankers just want all the money!!!" or without realizing there is benefit to the system as it is seems just as foolish as suggesting it's perfect.
 
Last edited:
It exists so you can start early with life-long soul crushing debt for bankers to profiteer off of your ignorance. Also it allows for administrators to pay themselves half a million a year for sitting around a table for half an hour once a month with other overpaid buffoons, trying to come up with an idea that will raise a nonsense number on an unreliable website by 5 points. This will allow them to bring in more suckers who will pay 6 figures for an "education" that remains largely useless despite the beautiful new building constructed last year.
 
Physician training everywhere in the world except for the United States has medical school direct after high school. The utility of undergrad is questionable.
 
In order to get to the bottom of this, you have to start with the beginning of public education. In Grades 1-5 fundamentals are taught, in middle school nothing is taught, and in high school we start learning abstract concepts to springboard us to various careers. In college, many are still struggling with aforementioned abstract concepts like moles/intro-calc while those who are learning organic chemistry and Calc2+ are considered "advanced". This means that mass needs 4 years to finish learning the basics and move on to introduce some truly advanced concepts.

Therefore, the first thing that needs to be done is beef up the standards for struggling K12 so then university standards can be raised. Then, pre-med would only need to be two years with the MCAT included. Then for 3rd/4th year of UG students can start USMLE 1 material and med-ed start ups, etc. can come to the plate with more efficient options than what we have currently. Students will also be concurrently applying during this year and successful passage of the USMLE Step 1 will allow medical school matriculation (1 year saved so far). Medical school can then start right where we need it which is the hospital. That can be divided into an integrated 18 month 6-mo. didactic/12-mo.clinical model that where we learn basics of clinical management (CK material) in theory and practice. Then from what is February-August after the first 18 mos., students should first take their CK, and then spend 5 months on electives while interviewing (two years saved). Then internship should commence right where M3 would start so now PGY3 is attending at 26, PGY8 means attending at 31.
 
its too long for me to read man but I did catch this. The only thing I learned in undergrad was how to talk to shy girls and make a bomb long island iced tea. I also learned how to make crystal meth in organic. I probably learned some other things that I dont remember.
I graduated in 3 years, I highly recommend it!

Then you did it wrong.
 
Wow! I haven't seen so much victimization whining in one thread since the last time I ventured into the SPF.
I don't think that's fair-- none of us are victims. Many of us are in the top percentiles of grades, scores, research, and clinical performance. We've learned, mastered, and smashed through every needless obstacle that's been thrown in front of us. Some of us just refrain from guzzling the Kool-Aid and retain a degree of self-awareness.
 
I learned how to think systematically in graduate school. I can not say the same about undergrad. I do think I gained a better understanding about the world around me through undergrad, but maybe that was just a part of growing older.
 
Undergrad is required before medical school because otherwise you'd have a bunch of 22 year old ***** socially incompetent American MD's running around killing people and likely regretting the decision to ever go into medicine.

Undergrad is tough, and a money suck (also not always the case), but I explored topics I was genuinely interested in like history, economics, physics, all of which you receive NONE of in med school. Med schools want well-rounded, intellectual, problem solvers; not kreb cycle robots.

Also the whole pre-req thing, sure you're never going to use most of physics or gen chem in practice, hell you're probably not going to use most of M1 in actual practice, but the point is to make sure possessed the capacity to understand those concepts. By learning and applying the concepts it took to get that A in physics you're showing med schools that you're capable of the thought process and problem solving required of tomorrow's doctors.

It's a weed-out process. In any incoming freshman undergrad class anywhere between 25-50% of those children want to be doctors and consider themselves possibly pre-med. How else do you separate out the pretenders?
 
My understanding is that the undergrad requirement wasn't implemented as a standardized thing, so there's actually no "point" to it at all. It happened organically. Doctors in the US make good money. Lots of people applied to medical school. Then, people who already had degrees started realizing they should've gone to medical school. They start applying, and naturally they beat out the other applicants who don't have other degrees. Then it became standard for everyone to apply to have another degree already otherwise you just can't compete for the limited number of seats. Now we're stuck backward rationalizing for why applicants with other degrees are better than applicants without other degrees.
 
Education broadens your horizon and enriches your life. Some of it may not seem practical, but in US society a liberal arts education will socially advance you. Sure, it shouldn't be mandatory. But it allows one to, say, speak with clarity about politics. Figure out what the hell our economy is doing. Relate to a patient.

There's a lot of whining on here. Life isn't fair. Our country and society aren't fair. And they never will be. Undergrad on many levels is a massive money-generating industry... but these are the rules of engagement. If you don't like it, start a superpac or move to canada.

Man I love this, student debt is at almost 2 trillion yet we still have people who desperately defend the status quo. You can't even come up with a concrete reason, "enriches your life" lol
 
The US follows the Greek tradition of higher education, in which a scholar is thought to be well-rounded and has studied not just science, but also the humanities. Greek leads into Latin, and you can see by anatomical terminology as well as by much of the older disciplines in medicine that the early modern physicians were well-versed in a classics based education. That tradition has simply carried forward and, in the US, physicians are usually not considered to be one dimensional technicians, but as intellectuals in addition to physicians. Undergrad also serves as a proving ground for "playing with the big dogs."
 
I sort of get the argument but for so many people undergrad is just burning you out, or it even ruins peoples chances of getting in. I had a friend be offered the 8 year brown straight out of highschool program. Their parents suggested going to undergrad first so incase they change their mind they have a degree to fall back on. Well undergrad ****s up most peoples gpas, and happened to this unfortunate person who is completing an SMP to get what he had before.

If one actually gets burnt out during UG they have no business attending medical school unless their UG is teaching at the medical school level, in which case medical school should be easy.

Totally agreed man. Almost every other country in the world does it straight out of high school and their doctors seem to be doing fine.

Anecdotally I disagree. I recently did a rotation in which the hospital employed a large number of European docs. It blew my mind the kind of mistakes they were making and some of the stuff they were saying. Same goes for many of the FMGs I've encountered. Yes, there are great ones who are just as good or better than US grads, but when a 4th year med student is teaching multiple residents how to do a DRE, there's a problem with their education...

Not saying all physicians from other countries are lacking so much in their education, but several of the ones I met made mistakes in their own field of expertise which I knew not to make as a 4th year med student.

My understanding is that the undergrad requirement wasn't implemented as a standardized thing, so there's actually no "point" to it at all. It happened organically. Doctors in the US make good money. Lots of people applied to medical school. Then, people who already had degrees started realizing they should've gone to medical school. They start applying, and naturally they beat out the other applicants who don't have other degrees. Then it became standard for everyone to apply to have another degree already otherwise you just can't compete for the limited number of seats. Now we're stuck backward rationalizing for why applicants with other degrees are better than applicants without other degrees.

This is how most fields in the U.S. are today. No one will ever convince me that an entry-level sales position requires a 4 year bachelor's degree, but I know a ton of business majors who ended up in sales positions and a requirement for their job was a business degree. 80 years ago graduating high school was an accomplishment and going to college was exceptional. Today, graduating college isn't even a real accomplishment and is expected of anyone hoping to pursue any sort of white-collar job. Educational/degree inflation is real. We now require less actual learning to earn a higher degree and expect everyone to have it. Until someone addresses the low educational standards or the ridiculous over-saturation of college degrees nothing is going to change.
 
What is it?
Im sitting here studying on a Saturday night wondering what was the point of 4 years of learning random facts that have nothing to do with my career. Sure some of it helps for med school, mainly the cell biology part (I took the minimum requirement/prereqs) but still. Why cant we start earlier, straight out of highschool?

I dont see why we cant have kids take AP chem , ap physics, ap bio, and bum rush organic chem during the summer, hell even have a 5 year MD program, where year 1 is touching up on the prereqs.

First, in high school, one is totally not mature enough to tackle medicine. Medicine is not just "book knowledge." It's the permission that another human being gives to us to divulge their most innermost secrets in confidence, to touch and alter their body (either medically or surgically), and to provide the support that only one who has both the knowledge and experience to do so can provide.

Second, Do you want to be an educated person or an uneducated person? A real physician not only understands what to do but entirely understands why he's doing it. You can't understand why you're giving someone a medication without understanding the reasons for doing so is right or not for that patient, its effects, side effects, things to watch for while giving the patient the medication, its method of action in the body, its pharmacokinetics/dynamics. You can't understand that unless you have a basic understanding of both organic and inorganic chemistry, which is not taught in medical school. You're expected to know that stuff out of the door day one starting med school.

How can you be taught the details of where things can go wrong in glycolysis or the Krebs cycle without knowing first what they are and how they work in biology?

How can you understand the physiology of how the nervous system or cardiovascular system works without knowing basic electromagnetism, fluid dynamics, and kinetics that one learns in physics?

You can't become a doctor without knowing at least the basics, which is what one learns in undergrad. If you think undergrad is too in-depth, you have no idea how in-depth biology, chemistry, and physics itself can go unless you get a PhD in one of these fields. What you learn in undergrad as a prerequisite is exactly what you need to know to do well in med school and become a proper physician.

Third, a real physician is not a "flesh mechanic." You need to have an understanding of how the world really works, which one learns a lot about in undergrad (both in-class and out of class by living on your own for the first time). One needs to have not just book knowledge, but people skills, because being a physician is about treating human beings when they are truly sick and doing what you can to keep them healthy in the face of challenges I shouldn't even begin to enumerate here because it would be out of the scope of answering the OP.

A physician also has an understanding and expertise of things outside of the field of medicine. If all you do is medicine in your life and that's how you define yourself and have nothing else to rely on outside of medicine, you will A) burn yourself out quickly, B) lose what it means to be a human being, and C) not be all you can be. A physician isn't just a "doctor", he/she is a scientist, a scholar, a teacher, a therapist, a mentor, an artist, a professional—a paragon of what humanity can be when one strives to help their fellow humans.

In short, OP, your time in high school and undergrad is invaluable in your quest to become a physician.
 
If one actually gets burnt out during UG they have no business attending medical school unless their UG is teaching at the medical school level, in which case medical school should be easy.



Anecdotally I disagree. I recently did a rotation in which the hospital employed a large number of European docs. It blew my mind the kind of mistakes they were making and some of the stuff they were saying. Same goes for many of the FMGs I've encountered. Yes, there are great ones who are just as good or better than US grads, but when a 4th year med student is teaching multiple residents how to do a DRE, there's a problem with their education...

Not saying all physicians from other countries are lacking so much in their education, but several of the ones I met made mistakes in their own field of expertise which I knew not to make as a 4th year med student.



This is how most fields in the U.S. are today. No one will ever convince me that an entry-level sales position requires a 4 year bachelor's degree, but I know a ton of business majors who ended up in sales positions and a requirement for their job was a business degree. 80 years ago graduating high school was an accomplishment and going to college was exceptional. Today, graduating college isn't even a real accomplishment and is expected of anyone hoping to pursue any sort of white-collar job. Educational/degree inflation is real. We now require less actual learning to earn a higher degree and expect everyone to have it. Until someone addresses the low educational standards or the ridiculous over-saturation of college degrees nothing is going to change.
This seems absurd that an m3-m4 is picking out mistakes from doctors who have completed residencies. I am unsure of how you can say that the FMGs were making more mistakes compared to their US counterparts either. They have completed residencies and licensing exams as any other doctor would have.

This peer reviewed journal article says the exact opposite of what you are claiming. You sure it wasnt unconscious bias coloring your view of their practice.

Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study | The BMJ

Here is another study for surgeons which indicates no difference.
Comparing International and United States Undergraduate Medical Education and Surgical Outcomes Using a Refined Balance Matching Methodology. - PubMed - NCBI
 
Last edited:
This seems absurd that an m3-m4 is picking out mistakes from doctors who have completed residencies. I am unsure of how you can say that the FMGs were making more mistakes compared to their US counterparts either. They have completed residencies and licensing exams as any other doctor would have.

This peer reviewed journal article says the exact opposite of what you are claiming. You sure it wasnt unconscious bias coloring your view of their practice.

Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study | The BMJ

Here is another study for surgeons which indicates no difference.
Comparing International and United States Undergraduate Medical Education and Surgical Outcomes Using a Refined Balance Matching Methodology. - PubMed - NCBI

What ever the people talk about above , developing maturity etc is hogwash. There are plenty of immature medical students who will make incompetent doctors. Children in foreign countries arent babied like our American students to be taught they are special snowflakes and still drink mommy's booby milk at age 18.
I side with the people saying its a bureaucratic development, and honestly if maturity is an issue it makes more sense to drag out residencies longer rather than a ununiform undergrad system where everyone is subject to the schools difficulty level. ( A student studying at UC Berkeley who gets into med school will probably be more resilient and mature than a student studying at some small private college in a random 1 horse town)
 
This seems absurd that an m3-m4 is picking out mistakes from doctors who have completed residencies. I am unsure of how you can say that the FMGs were making more mistakes compared to their US counterparts either. They have completed residencies and licensing exams as any other doctor would have.

This peer reviewed journal article says the exact opposite of what you are claiming. You sure it wasnt unconscious bias coloring your view of their practice.

Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study | The BMJ

Here is another study for surgeons which indicates no difference.
Comparing International and United States Undergraduate Medical Education and Surgical Outcomes Using a Refined Balance Matching Methodology. - PubMed - NCBI

It was in the ER, and while it was mostly other docs noticing the mistakes and mentioning it, I was picking up on some of them as well. For example, I think any competent 4th year would know that Kayexelate isn't first line treatment for someone with chest pain, an arrhythmia, and potassium of 7.5. Pretty sure that doc isn't going to be around much longer based on some conversations I heard.

I was also referring to FMG residents though. Over the course of 2 weeks I taught 2 FMGs and an IMG how to perform a DRE and watched them miss things on films that should have been obvious to a pre-med (multiple rib fractures, femoral neck fx, etc). It wasn't unconscious bias, it was incredible obvious things that they were missing. I'm not saying that there aren't U.S. residents that suck or that I'm a particularly stellar M4 (I'm not), but as I said, anecdotally I've found the FMGs and IMGs I've worked with have gaping holes in their education that are basic for most US students.

What ever the people talk about above , developing maturity etc is hogwash. There are plenty of immature medical students who will make incompetent doctors. Children in foreign countries arent babied like our American students to be taught they are special snowflakes and still drink mommy's booby milk at age 18.
I side with the people saying its a bureaucratic development, and honestly if maturity is an issue it makes more sense to drag out residencies longer rather than a ununiform undergrad system where everyone is subject to the schools difficulty level. ( A student studying at UC Berkeley who gets into med school will probably be more resilient and mature than a student studying at some small private college in a random 1 horse town)

The maturity issue has nothing to do with the educational system and everything to do with those students experiencing life without their parents. As you said, plenty of kids are "still drinking mommy's booby milk at age 18", and having those kids go straight to a med school curriculum is a terrible idea. I agree that a lot of it is bureaucratic and that we could make significant changes to the system to cut down on time and expenses, but having 18 year olds go straight into a medical school curriculum is not one of them. If you think it is, just look at the attrition rates of the 6-year programs that already exist in the U.S. (over 20%) compared the attrition rates of normal 4 year programs (just over 2%).
 
Practicing medicine takes some maturity and you cant graduate people too early.

Europe takes people straight from high school and stretches med school + residency into a longer training. America graduates MD from residency at the same age, but we cram medicine and fit in a useless degree in the same time-frame.

The only final difference is that US med students and residents suffer more during their formative years and become life-long misers.
 
What ever the people talk about above , developing maturity etc is hogwash. There are plenty of immature medical students who will make incompetent doctors. Children in foreign countries arent babied like our American students to be taught they are special snowflakes and still drink mommy's booby milk at age 18.
I side with the people saying its a bureaucratic development, and honestly if maturity is an issue it makes more sense to drag out residencies longer rather than a ununiform undergrad system where everyone is subject to the schools difficulty level. ( A student studying at UC Berkeley who gets into med school will probably be more resilient and mature than a student studying at some small private college in a random 1 horse town)

And this folks, is why we need college.

This is one of the reasons why I'd like a year of employment experience (and not at your dad's company, store or practice, either) to be a med school requirement.

The immaturity of today's youth is a reflection on parenting, and less UG education, except for those schools that seek to cocoon students and prolong their childhood with "safe spaces" and "trigger word warnings".
 
Practicing medicine takes some maturity and you cant graduate people too early.

Europe takes people straight from high school and stretches med school + residency into a longer training. America graduates MD from residency at the same age, but we cram medicine and fit in a useless degree in the same time-frame.

The only final difference is that US med students and residents suffer more during their formative years and become life-long misers.

I strongly believe, and I think you may agree based on what you said and I interpreted, in a longer clinical based curriculum and cutting out the crap. Organic doesnt need to be in depth, neither does physics, and we certainly dont need to learn about coniferous trees to become doctors.
So- if we do copy the European model and modify it a bit, I think, no harm done.
Students in high school who express and extreme interest in the medical field (done with all the higher AP science courses), and enrolled in an orgO class at a local college, should be given a chance to enter a 1 or 2 year SMP and then decide if they want to go to medical school or not. Im betting you the answer will be yes, because typically the people who change their mind in undergrad itself are the students who werent hard workers in high school to begin with.
Just an anecdotal example, all of my friends (about 10 of them) were extremely hard workers in high school. They stayed up till 1 or 2 am almost every day to excel at sports, clubs, ap classes, SAT prep etc. 7/10 went to UC Berkeley and they are MS1's now at UCSF, Stanford, UCLA, U Chicago, U Irvine. For them, they could've skipped the useless biology undergrad, done some kind of SMP straight out of highschool and saved some years and some money.
Regarding maturity, the kid who got into Stanford actually went to USC, and he was babied like a puppy there. Got easy A's, not too hard to work up a good MCAT score with a year off, and got in, and to be honest he would be the worlds worst doctor, He still makes fun of every single person, size, shape, race, gender etc, and thinks hes the popular kid in high school- so the admissions process is not very effective at weeding out immature students anyway.
Another case- at my school, I had a kid I met 20 seconds ago, tell a group of us playing cards that he hates African Americans (OUT OF THE BLUE). The admissions standards is pretty ineffective, but thats another story
 
Anecdotally I disagree. I recently did a rotation in which the hospital employed a large number of European docs. It blew my mind the kind of mistakes they were making and some of the stuff they were saying. Same goes for many of the FMGs I've encountered. Yes, there are great ones who are just as good or better than US grads, but when a 4th year med student is teaching multiple residents how to do a DRE, there's a problem with their education...

This seems a bit xenophobic, possibly a touch of American exceptionalism.

Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study | The BMJ

Foreign grads have better outcomes.
 
This seems a bit xenophobic, possibly a touch of American exceptionalism.

Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study | The BMJ

Foreign grads have better outcomes.

As I said multiple times, my comment was anecdotal based on my own personal experience in which I've encountered some pretty terrible students/residents. I'm sure this is probably not the norm for FMGs, but it has been my experience. Also, I'd recommend finding a different article if you're going to try and make that argument as the comment section for the one you posted is filled with physicians who are tearing its methodology and conclusion apart (this includes the IMGs commenting on it).

I should add I've got nothing against FMGs or them coming to the U.S. to practice so long as they continue to be held to the same standards as U.S. physicians. To me, you seem to be picking a single point from my post and taking it out of context to make your argument.
 
Last edited:
As I said multiple times, my comment was anecdotal based on my own personal experience in which I've encountered some pretty terrible students/residents. I'm sure this is probably not the norm for FMGs, but it has been my experience. Also, I'd recommend finding a different article if you're going to try and make that argument as the comment section for the one you posted is filled with physicians who are tearing its methodology and conclusion apart (this includes the IMGs commenting on it).

I should add I've got nothing against FMGs or them coming to the U.S. to practice so long as they continue to be held to the same standards as U.S. physicians. To me, you seem to be picking a single point from my post and taking it out of context to make your argument.
You and I have a very different definition of "tearing apart" its methodology. The article is a reasonable article, but more importantly, it is infinitely more informative compared to a a single rotation spent with a handful of of FMG residents. You also fail to mention that the criticism leveled by FMG ends with " In the end, we do not believe in assigning people in buckets based on gender, religion, race, nationality, ethnicity, caste or creed. " The exact opposite point of what your initial comment made. Your intial comment did come off as xenophobic with american exceptionalism. I am unsure how it could not considering you used an experience with a handful of residents you had, and extrapolated that to the education/competency of all FMGs.
 
You and I have a very different definition of "tearing apart" its methodology. The article is a reasonable article, but more importantly, it is infinitely more informative compared to a a single rotation spent with a handful of of FMG residents. You also fail to mention that the criticism leveled by FMG ends with " In the end, we do not believe in assigning people in buckets based on gender, religion, race, nationality, ethnicity, caste or creed. " The exact opposite point of what your initial comment made. Your intial comment did come off as xenophobic with american exceptionalism. I am unsure how it could not considering you used an experience with a handful of residents you had, and extrapolated that to the education/competency of all FMGs.

There are more comments than just that one you've chosen to cherry-pick, but if that's the only one you read that's fine I guess. Maybe "tearing apart" was harsh, but pretty much every comment seems to poke some pretty decent sized holes into the validity of how this article is being interpreted. So if someone wants to make that argument based solely on this article, they've got a pretty weak argument as a whole.

It also wasn't a single rotation in terms of my experience with FMG residents, it was just the most recent and definitely most egregious. I already said my opinion was based on personal experience and that it likely doesn't reflect the entire field multiple times, including in the post that keeps getting brought back up which is something you and kablemach seem to be choosing to ignore. Context matters and I'm not sure why it's being ignored here. I also said I'm sure that plenty (probably most) FMGs don't display the same levels of ineptitude that the ones I have encountered have and that plenty of US grads do display those problems. However, given FMG residents who come here may admittedly have a shorter UG and medical school experience, I would not be surprised to find their skills to be inferior to their US counterparts at least until they gain more years of experience. After all, plenty of people are arguing that they make up for having less years of medical school by having more years of residency.
 
Last edited:
I strongly believe, and I think you may agree based on what you said and I interpreted, in a longer clinical based curriculum and cutting out the crap. Organic doesnt need to be in depth, neither does physics, and we certainly dont need to learn about coniferous trees to become doctors.
So- if we do copy the European model and modify it a bit, I think, no harm done.
Students in high school who express and extreme interest in the medical field (done with all the higher AP science courses), and enrolled in an orgO class at a local college, should be given a chance to enter a 1 or 2 year SMP and then decide if they want to go to medical school or not. Im betting you the answer will be yes, because typically the people who change their mind in undergrad itself are the students who werent hard workers in high school to begin with.
Just an anecdotal example, all of my friends (about 10 of them) were extremely hard workers in high school. They stayed up till 1 or 2 am almost every day to excel at sports, clubs, ap classes, SAT prep etc. 7/10 went to UC Berkeley and they are MS1's now at UCSF, Stanford, UCLA, U Chicago, U Irvine. For them, they could've skipped the useless biology undergrad, done some kind of SMP straight out of highschool and saved some years and some money.
Regarding maturity, the kid who got into Stanford actually went to USC, and he was babied like a puppy there. Got easy A's, not too hard to work up a good MCAT score with a year off, and got in, and to be honest he would be the worlds worst doctor, He still makes fun of every single person, size, shape, race, gender etc, and thinks hes the popular kid in high school- so the admissions process is not very effective at weeding out immature students anyway.
Another case- at my school, I had a kid I met 20 seconds ago, tell a group of us playing cards that he hates African Americans (OUT OF THE BLUE). The admissions standards is pretty ineffective, but thats another story

This isn't even near the majority of individuals who enter medical school. Staying up until 1 or 2 am in high school for studying? Yeah this is typical SDN behavior.

There are a large amount of individuals who aren't ready for medical school during undergrad but that doesn't rule them out for it. I'd bet the majority of people here claiming undergrad isn't valuable probably had doctor parents and grew up in medical household. Hell both of my parents are doctors but I wouldn't personally give up my undergraduate experience. There more than just the end goal of having an MD slapped to your name as others have pointed out. All of you are in such a rush to grow up it's sad.
 
Top