Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

Coldery

Members
  • Content Count

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Coldery

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

909 profile views
  1. From my previous application, I believe it was continuous. It wouldn't make sense to score it on a discrete scale either.
  2. The guy has been pretty rude/arrogant at certain parts of the thread, just read it in its entirety. Nothing about him screams of "physician material" from what he has said here. Of course everyone has a chance to mature and that's probably what he has going for him right now. I'm sure there could have been a more mature way to respond to criticism as realistic as it may come. It's a line I would expect from my 8 year-old brother but, even then, I'm sure he would know better. If it was a joke (which probably isn't totally the case) then he still certainly has some work to do with trivializing others' perspectives and slight delusion. The guy he was responding to didn't say anything inflammatory either.
  3. They simply take your raw GPA (no rounding) and use it in their calculations. The cutoff is 85% for OOP applicants to receive a full file review so I'm not sure if you would be eligible right now. Their website seems to imply that the rural evaluation is done only if you get a full file review (???). Either way, you should call the adcom's office to enquire about whether the same rule applies to them too. I believe I've read of some NMP med students with lower GPA's than what you would find at the other sites but I'm not too sure about how far it goes.
  4. I never contended physician billing as a whole. I was only referring to the unequal billing of different physician specialties. The average Albertan ophthalmologist bills $1,250,000/year ($800k/year average across Canada) in a relatively "lifestyle", PGY-5 specialty. If something is done to equalize unusually high billing specialties (by cutting billings down to a more reasonable level), more money could be diverted into programs that direly need it, namely FM (cite nationwide FP shortage). If you run the numbers, curbing just the optho $/year to average specialty $/year (after accounting for higher overhead costs) while reallocating all of the extra funds to FM, you'd be giving family docs a $5.7k/year raise nationwide. (Source 1, Source 2) Quite substantial considering that it is only one, albeit very high paying, specialty. With CaRMS booking FM vacancies year by year, making FM more desirable in any way possible will likely be a good step in the right direction. Whether things are done so simply is another question (lobbying and other politics).
  5. It does seem like physician salaries account for a pretty sizable portion of total healthcare spending in Ontario/nationwide though. It apparently accounts for about 10% of total provincial spending in Ontario (as a proportion of all spending made by the provincial government). If you do the math, it works out similarly all across Canada too. Something will have to give way eventually and the unusually high billing specialties should be the first one's to sustain it. Treatments have evolved but the billing codes haven't. This is also coming from someone whose close relative(s) benefit from this pretty significantly.
  6. I have talked to UBC FOM phone line about it this past cycle and at least one of them (possibly a second several years before) advised against it unless it continued into your undergrad degree (the conversation is still pretty fresh in my mind). OMSAS allows any activity above the age of 16 for their application so their system is definitely different but what I said did come from the horse's mouth. I think it'd be best if OP called them about this one to clarify. I myself did end up omitting several high school activities because of it but my awards section was filled pretty much entirely with high school stuff (and I got in) so I think it's more a matter of perception then an actual hard fast rule. The UBC blog has something about it from 2014 that you could use as reference though: "There is no time limit on how far back activities and awards can go, but please keep in mind that we are interested in your most significant experiences. Generally speaking, for most applicants these significant activities take place after high school, but if one or more of your most important accomplishments occurred in high school feel free to include them on the application." So the advisor may have just been hyperbolizing but, of course, use your best judgment.
  7. Generally, I would only use high school activities if there is some sort of continuity into university. Otherwise, only do it if your NAQ section is looking really scant.
  8. If you talking strictly on the basis of commitment to this single volunteer group, understand too that people have their own lives and obligations. They may have other commitment(s) where they are already demonstrating the effort that you speak of for those that weren't interviewed or accepted. If you are talking about a situation where they demonstrate an outright lack of care or negligence then that would be different. Otherwise, you'd have to get the full view before coming to a conclusion.
  9. I don't believe that technological progress is the main point of contention. I'm sure that technology will inevitably eclipse human beings in most possible faculties excluding those that require human ingenuity and creativity (?). The main argument is whether you can get human beings to personally accept handing over their ultimate fate to a non-sentient robot. From day one, the mass majority of us are inculcated with a certain sense of trust towards other humans having been raised by them and entrusting them with any concern we had about ourselves, regardless of the effectiveness of their help. By moving from a system with which we are all familiar to one that disregards it, we effectively relinquish: 1. Any sort of accountability that we used to have for others mistakes: A robot can't "pay"/feel any sort of true remorse for mistakes it makes. It's a robot. 2. Human-human interaction: One of the most vital characteristics of a good clinician is being able to show the other person that you actually care so they know that they aren't in this alone. This won't be the case with a robot doctor unless you: a) develop a robot that is indistinguishable from a human being (pass the Turing test) and b) don't let the patient know that their doctor is a robot => Ethical issues There are very few, if any, technologies that are used in the mainstream which are fully operated by robots (no human control at all) that hold the balance of life and death. Airplanes, self-driving cars, and mass rail transit cars all still have human operators. Whether we will accept human-unaided AI tech for these parts of our life within the next several decades is somewhat unlikely. Second half of the 21st century or into the 22nd century? Maybe. Science fiction loves to speculate about the future of everything we currently take for granted, a primary reason for its appeal. Whether things pan out the way they've speculated is another issue. Leonardo Da Vinci's blueprint for self-propelled flying contraptions weren't perfect predictions but there definitely were similarities. The only thing we can truly bet on is the inevitability of change. As for how this applies to the medical field, as most people have already said, it's unlikely that we are fully replaced by robots in the near future but AI as another check on diagnosis is most definitely a possibility.
  10. "UBC students do not need to email us a new request to access their transcripts electronically; we will use the request we have on file. We accept paper UBC transcripts as well." I'm not from UBC but it doesn't look like you'll have to do anything here.
  11. Wow, Dr Walker's leaving.... The end of an era... ;(
  12. When do you think the backpack colour will be made known?
  13. Oooo free ipad.. Sounds nice
  14. Have people started applying for LOCs already? I was under the impression that we'd need our proof of enrolment (that we'll get after registering in the courses later this summer) to apply for it. On another note, from what I've seen, it seems like CIBC has the best LOC in terms of gross amounts. CIBC offering (up to) $350k, BMO $325k, TD $300k, RBC $275k, Scotia: Unknown. What do you all think?
×
×
  • Create New...