Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

medway12

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About medway12

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

405 profile views
  1. Given that all accepted Canadian med student look like models, it'd probably give you a boost. But seriously... it doesn't sound like a high impact activity. How would your modelling experience enhance or contribute to the med school environment? If you need money, go for it but I see no value in writing it down on an application other than to say "I do stuff with my free time", which doesn't hold much value for anything anyways.
  2. Don't count on it. Miracles don't happen on CARS, I've tried lol. When people do this, they seem to think that all of their other answers will be correct and that they'll get 50% correct on the one they guessed. In reality, you probably scored 125-127 on the passages you actually answered and then 120-123 on the one you guessed. So expect a low score. But if you do get a 125+, let it be a pleasant surprise.
  3. I think coming from a non-science or traditional premed program helps you stand out (given that you meet GPA and MCAT requirements). A business, music, philosophy, or art graduate going into medicine sounds more intriguing than a science student doing the same. You will make the interviewers more curious yourself more memorable at the interviews if you speak to your non-science background and activities. Just a thought.
  4. Orthopedic surgeons are always jacked with huge triceps and forearms. Maybe it's because they use heavier tools like drill machines, etc. and do procedures that require strength like fixing a dislocated joint without surgery.
  5. Honestly, the best pre-med or pre-professional program is Business/Commerce. Think about it, many schools have dropped prerequisites all together and you could take science courses on the side to prep for MCAT. Now unless you're at a top school (Ivey, Queen's, etc) that have a notorious curve, it is relatively easier to maintain a 3.7+ and with hard work, a 3.8 is more possible than in a program like Life Science. And best of all, if med doesn't work out, you have an employable degree. All you have to do is network a little and start in a $45-50K job a few months after graduation. That is way better than ending with sub-standard GPA in a science program and not having many options left.
  6. On the upside, the GPA remained at 3.84. It typically goes up .1-.2 each year. I'm guessing it maxed out at this point. I reason that as long as the GPA stays at or below 3.84 and they take up to 6 people with sub 3.5 GPAs, people with a low GPA have a shot as long as they have a very high CARS and Casper.
  7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1761168/ Objectives To test the hypothesis that, on average, male surgeons are taller and better looking than male physicians, and to compare both sets of doctors with film stars who play doctors on screen. Design Comparative study. Setting Typical university hospital in Spain, located in Barcelona and not in a sleepy backwater. Participants Random sample of 12 surgeons and 12 physicians plus 4 external controls (film stars who play doctors), matched by age (50s) and sex (all male). Interventions An independent committee (all female) evaluated the “good looking score” (range 1-7). Main outcome measures Height (cm) and points on the good looking score. Results Surgeons were significantly taller than physicians (mean height 179.4 v 172.6 cm; P=0.01). Controls had significantly higher good looking scores than surgeons (mean score 5.96 v 4.39; difference between means 1.57, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 2.45; P=0.013) and physicians (5.96 v 3.65; 2.31, 1.58 to 3.04; P=0.003). Surgeons had significantly higher good looking scores than physicians (4.39 v 3.65; 0.74; 0.25 to 1.23; P=0.010). Conclusions Male surgeons are taller and better looking than physicians, but film stars who play doctors on screen are better looking than both these groups of doctors. Whether these phenotypic differences are genetic or environmental is unclear. Abstract Objectives To test the hypothesis that, on average, male surgeons are taller and better looking than male physicians, and to compare both sets of doctors with film stars who play doctors on screen. Design Comparative study. Setting Typical university hospital in Spain, located in Barcelona and not in a sleepy backwater. Participants Random sample of 12 surgeons and 12 physicians plus 4 external controls (film stars who play doctors), matched by age (50s) and sex (all male). Interventions An independent committee (all female) evaluated the “good looking score” (range 1-7). Main outcome measures Height (cm) and points on the good looking score. Results Surgeons were significantly taller than physicians (mean height 179.4 v 172.6 cm; P=0.01). Controls had significantly higher good looking scores than surgeons (mean score 5.96 v 4.39; difference between means 1.57, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 2.45; P=0.013) and physicians (5.96 v 3.65; 2.31, 1.58 to 3.04; P=0.003). Surgeons had significantly higher good looking scores than physicians (4.39 v 3.65; 0.74; 0.25 to 1.23; P=0.010). Conclusions Male surgeons are taller and better looking than physicians, but film stars who play doctors on screen are better looking than both these groups of doctors. Whether these phenotypic differences are genetic or environmental is unclear. Abstract Objectives To test the hypothesis that, on average, male surgeons are taller and better looking than male physicians, and to compare both sets of doctors with film stars who play doctors on screen. Design Comparative study. Setting Typical university hospital in Spain, located in Barcelona and not in a sleepy backwater. Participants Random sample of 12 surgeons and 12 physicians plus 4 external controls (film stars who play doctors), matched by age (50s) and sex (all male). Interventions An independent committee (all female) evaluated the “good looking score” (range 1-7). Main outcome measures Height (cm) and points on the good looking score. Results Surgeons were significantly taller than physicians (mean height 179.4 v 172.6 cm; P=0.01). Controls had significantly higher good looking scores than surgeons (mean score 5.96 v 4.39; difference between means 1.57, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 2.45; P=0.013) and physicians (5.96 v 3.65; 2.31, 1.58 to 3.04; P=0.003). Surgeons had significantly higher good looking scores than physicians (4.39 v 3.65; 0.74; 0.25 to 1.23; P=0.010). Conclusions Male surgeons are taller and better looking than physicians, but film stars who play doctors on screen are better looking than both these groups of doctors. Whether these phenotypic differences are genetic or environmental is unclear. ----- Personally, I've noticed that male surgeons do look more masculine and more "attractive" than their counterparts. Maybe it's the aura that comes with the job or maybe it's objectively true as this study suggests.
  8. An immediate bright side I see is that your debt is ONLY $5K. I have over $25K just from undergrad.... thank you business school. On a more serious note: Don't give up on life. There is always a solution. Remember that your efforts have paid off based on the fact that you ultimately got into graduate school. It seems to me that it didn't end up being what you thought it would be and you became bored. More research and 1 on 1 discussion with students prior to pursuing it would have helped. But that's in the past. I suggest holding off more university education until you have really figured out what you need to do. Keep the receptionist job and take your time to think through options. And don't keep to yourself. Talk to others - friends, family, etc. You are already rock bottom so sharing your issue with others will only help you. While you are working, continue to improve your resume, network with grads from your undergrad school, and keep applying to better/higher paying jobs. If you don't get one right away, you still have a job at the end of the day. Ultimately, whether it is months or a year later, you will find a better job if you keep doing the things I mentioned. Another thing I suggest is pursuing a technical certification or diploma (college level). That is not to discourage you from university courses but I mean that from a practical standpoint. There are certificates/diplomas that will significantly improve your odds of landing a solid office job when combined with your degree. Examples include something in HR, project management, or business analysis. All in all, it can only go uphill from here. Once you are in a job that is stable and pays a decent ($45K+) salary, you can go back to the drawing board and consider other career options. You need that safety net to feel safe. It's like Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Go build that safety net and then think about other more risky career moves (like going back to school full time) if that is still up your alley. Good luck. You can do it. There are people in life (and on this forum) in seemingly much more difficult circumstances (e.g. a person who completed a second degree and didn't get into med, an unmatched IMG who spent $100Ks, unemployed and trained neurosurgeon, a PhD working in a data entry job, the list goes on). Count your blessings and move forward. It will get better.
  9. I wrote only CARS in June and I noticed it's becoming more common. I did it because Mac was my only option (no science background) and it seemed most logical to me (as rmorelan pointed out). It didn't seem that odd to the people at the test centre either when I told them I will be leaving in the first 1.5 hours. The only problem is that it's very difficult to improve on something like CARS - most people are either great at it (easy 130+) or not (stuck around 124-126). Practice certainly helps but if you're not a natural, you will plateau around 126. And although you don't have to worry about fatigue from the first section, it really doesn't help. CARS is all about your natural reading comprehension ability and due to the limited timing, you go mostly with your gut/first instinct (forget any strategies you learned). Anyhow, I was in the same boat as you but did not get the score that I needed (But I will keep trying again and again). Good luck!
  10. I think it has to do with the motivation people have to go into medicine. In careers where the prime motivation is in fact money, like in investment banking, corporate law, or private equity, then you will see these professionals show their money by buying expensive cars and properties - because that is ultimately part of the end result they want to see out of their career. Medicine is different because: 1. Money is not usually the prime motivation (stability and a good living is another thing). 2. Relatively speaking, you actually don't make "big bucks" as a Family MD compared to equally successful people in finance or law. A VP in investment banking (with a bachelors degree and 4-5 years prior work experience) can make ~$180, 000 base salary and up to ~$100,000 bonus. You can make even more in private equity or as a partner at a corporate law firm. The ceiling here is unlimited because it's private sector and they don't have to pay any overhead. The only MD specialities with salaries that could potentially exceed their counterparts in finance or law are orthopedic, cardiothoracic, or neurosurgeons. And these specialties make up a very small percentage of the total MD population.
  11. If you GPA is < 3.0 after three years, it's reasonable to consider a second undergrad. But before you do that, you need to really find out what caused you to get poor grades in your first degree and fix it. You should try some summer, evening, or online courses first and see if you can get 80-85s straight. If you can, it may be a sign that you can pull it off in a second degree. You could be going from sub 3.0 to a 3.9 in a new degree in just 2.5-3 years when you can begin applying again to schools that look at only 2-3 best years like Western, Queen's, Ottawa, and U of T (I believe).
  12. Because she was talking about GPA. She said 75% is the minimum but that is not competitive (already knew that). But then she said it's because the GPA keep going up each year. That's true and worrisome. A few years ago it was ~3.82 and now it's ~3.85 and goes up .1 each year. That's big. I really wish they would go back to weighing Casper more and put less emphasis on GPA, like Calgary (20%). Calgary even deducts one year and considered graduate degree grades. So, it wouldn't be too unusual for Mac to ease up a bit like they have before. That's my rant, for what it's worth.
  13. For those who wrote the MCAT on June 18, what are your thoughts? Did you feel that you performed above, on, or below your expectation? Was time an issue for you? What prep did you use for each section and did you find it adequate? I wrote only CARS and it went as I expected for the most part except I ended up with 20-30 seconds to answer to last two questions. I read the questions and made very rough guesses based on my first instincts. So while they were not completely random guesses, they lacked analysis and critical thinking. I used official AAMC practice exam, CARS Q-pack vol. 1 and 2, and OG questions. And as a side note - the first three passages were easy but then the difficulty went up considerably on passages 4-5. It was hard to decipher these passages and they each took away more than 10 min. I don't know if everyone who writes on a particular date gets the exact same questions but if that's true, I'm also interested in hearing what you thought of the CARS passages you encountered. - medway12
  14. Partly but on the clinical side. In theory, a MBA might help a physician become the chief of his or her department or take on management role at partner organizations concurrently with their practice. E.g. I know a few physicians who work in FM/IM and also serve as VPs and executives for government health agencies, such as the Ministry of Health.
×
×
  • Create New...