bored Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Since you're just making claims of nonsense I'll make some too. I think you're just grumpy because some people who have a greater depth to them than just a science person will potentially do better than you. Funny how I never really heard complaints from non-science people about the science sections of the MCAT. Now they change it up a bit and science people get nasally. What's funny is most of the actual med students posting in this thread or those who are already done seem to agree with these changes. I'd trust their judgement over the premed wannabe whose life just got a bit more difficult because they'll now have to study something they've tried to avoid Lol it won't affect me. I already took my mcat. Im just lettn you guys know that's how large organizations work.. People are always trying to justify their jobs and trying to justify the fundingz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Lol it won't affect me. I already took my mcat. Im just lettn you guys know that's how large organizations work.. People are always trying to justify their jobs and trying to justify the fundingz. I've worked in companies with 20K+ employees, managed upwards of 100 under me. Tha ms for the tip tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bored Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I've worked in companies with 20K+ employees, managed upwards of 100 under me. Tha ms for the tip tho I forgot that part lol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I forgot that part lol.. But you're right tho and nowhere does that happen more than in publicaly funded organizations. Gov't, Education (*cough* professors), etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Hood Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 They say in their introduction materials that taking sociology and psychology courses would be suitable prep - only the first year ones would be required, just like mostly you need first year chemistry and first year physics. Organic is still only there so they continue to recommend you take the second year courses in that and a 1/2 year of biochem. Kind of shifts the focus from oh take any humanities courses for your possible prereqs to something more specific now And where can you fit them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 And where can you fit them? Fit them in? I guess I am confused by the question - every program has some elective spots (even engineering gets at least two and those programs are the worst ). Point I guess is now there will be incentive to actually focus those a bit more. Considering the MCAT is mostly for the US it means now there are a few more restrictions on things - those schools often want to see calculus and a full year of english as well. Or are you referring to something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OttawaURookie Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 There is real value when your degree is based around doing good research, organizing your ideas, analyzing, taking out the right ideas from a source, etc Beyond that you do learn a bit of everything, psychology, sociology, criminology, gives you a great perspective in a lot of key areas. In fact, it makes a ton of sense that students of the social sciences would make good doctors when you consider the clinical approach of med schools. As people have mentioned you are dealing with the pathology... The process of writing essays and reports prepares you for this....for essays you have to do good research, you have to get the right sources, you have to organize those sources, organize your thoughts, you have to make a good thesis, you have to back up your thesis with good research, you have to show the other side and why it's wrong, you have to make conclusions, you have to stay focused on the specific question you are addressing. In the end, both set of students will remember and understand the specific things that are taught, but I bet you the good social science student will organize things better in their head and probably understand the "bigger" picture a lot easier and as a result will handle patients much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverwhale9 Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Fit them in? I guess I am confused by the question - every program has some elective spots (even engineering gets at least two and those programs are the worst ). Point I guess is now there will be incentive to actually focus those a bit more. Considering the MCAT is mostly for the US it means now there are a few more restrictions on things - those schools often want to see calculus and a full year of english as well. Or are you referring to something else? Yeah I kind of agree with Robin Hood - as long as you can manage these sections by taking a prep course, then I'm all for the changes. Being in engineering, I got 1 non-technical elective, and it was in first year (I took anthropology - very interesting course). I got through the science sections of the MCAT by studying from a prep course textbook. But as more outside knowledge gets added to the MCAT, it makes it harder for those of us in more structured programs to learn the info. I had to study my butt off to learn bio and orgo with no background in them. So if I also had to learn sociology or psychology stuff, it would have been tough. Anyways, I'm glad I am done the MCAT, I can see it being tough for prep courses to deal with the changes for the first year or two, and I relied on prep course textbooks completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerkstore Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 And where can you fit them? How the heck am I going to fit 4 biochem and 4 orgo, physics, bio, and some calc into the York Kinesiology program! That thing is air tight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerkstore Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Since you're just making claims of nonsense I'll make some too. I think you're just grumpy because some people who have a greater depth to them than just a science person will potentially do better than you. Funny how I never really heard complaints from non-science people about the science sections of the MCAT. Now they change it up a bit and science people get nasally. What's funny is most of the actual med students posting in this thread or those who are already done seem to agree with these changes. I'd trust their judgement over the premed wannabe whose life just got a bit more difficult because they'll now have to study something they've tried to avoid It's because we have no people skills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Hood Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Fit them in? I guess I am confused by the question - every program has some elective spots (even engineering gets at least two and those programs are the worst ). Point I guess is now there will be incentive to actually focus those a bit more. Considering the MCAT is mostly for the US it means now there are a few more restrictions on things - those schools often want to see calculus and a full year of english as well. Or are you referring to something else? Yes I was referring to that. Electives is not something that really exists at UdeM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyGPAsucks Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 its good that they removed the WS. that was too subjective and unpredictable for a standardized test. other than this i think the new mcat changes are a step in the wrong direction. let me explain the new social sciences section. it is simply a section that involves sociology and psychology. which means that to ace it will simply involve studying for it the same way one might study for the biology passages - concept memorization. the only reason they added this section is because of a distorted view of the world in which misconception builds on misconception. Misconception #1 - people who like science are A) losers who don't care about people and C) have no social skills. this is perpetuated mostly by the mainstream media, like in TV and movies, and is totally untrue. the "arrogant science geek" stereotype we see in shows like the Big Bang Theory comes to mind. Misconception #2 - people who like humanities are social, nice, empathetic people who love people. i don't know how exactly this stereotype originated, but my guess is that it is because most people who enroll in these programs just do so as an excuse to party and have fun for 4 years, then end up working at starbucks. Misconception #3 - social, nice, empathetic people make "better" doctors. how so? nobody can answer this question, there is no research to support it, its just the newest "fad" in medicine. its no different than the bloodletting, vitamin C megadosing, health food, radical mastectomy, etc. fads of the past. Combining these 3 misconceptions leads us to the faulty worldview that nice doctors are better doctors, humanities majors are nice people, science majors are jerks, so therefore more humanities majors should be doctors. whats sad about this situation is that they are basing their new mcat on misconceptions and lies. I agree with a lot of what you said. Glad the writing sample is getting axed, but I'm not so sure about the additions. But if you're upset about science stereotypes, it's probably not a good idea to perpetuate arts/humanities stereotypes ("...excuse to party and have fun for 4 years, then end up working at starbucks.") If someone wants to take Peace and Conflict studies with a minor in tap dancing, all the power to them. Not to mention, if they apply to med schools it won't be held against them and they have a better chance at getting good marks. Honestly, if I could redo things, instead of going into the biomedical sciences because it seemed like the correct "premed" thing to do, I would've enrolled in psychology, sociology, or maybe anthropology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlare500 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Misconception #3 - social, nice, empathetic people make "better" doctors. how so? nobody can answer this question, there is no research to support it, its just the newest "fad" in medicine. its no different than the bloodletting, vitamin C megadosing, health food, radical mastectomy, etc. fads of the past. Just to touch on this point quickly, a lot of medicine is dependent on patient compliance. You can prescribe all the meds you want to a patient but if they don't listen to you then that prescription's not gonna do a thing. Therefore it's important to be able to connect with your patient, gain their respect, and work with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1234 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Misconception #3 - social, nice, empathetic people make "better" doctors. how so? nobody can answer this question, there is no research to support it, its just the newest "fad" in medicine. its no different than the bloodletting, vitamin C megadosing, health food, radical mastectomy, etc. fads of the past. Do your research again. There are countless pieces of evidence to suggest that the construct of "physician-patient relationship" plays a central role in patient care and positive outcomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Yes I was referring to that. Electives is not something that really exists at UdeM. yeah there are always some programs where putting all that is tough - for sure any professional program that just basically is built on the believe it is the end goal (usually things like nursing, engineering etc). The price of having a solid backup plan from those degrees is all the extra leg work you have to do get courses fit in. Of course other programs can be the same. Only unfortunate answer is to find some way to do it in off time/summer or on your own etc. Can be very annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlare500 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 A doctor's job is done as soon as he writes the prescription. If the patient chooses to defy the doctor, that was the patient's choice, and they deserve to suffer the consequences for it. You bring up an excellent point here. In the same way that smokers cause their own lung and heart disease, non-compliant patients are also responsible for their own deaths and therefore deserve to die. You make a very logical argument, make sure you do the same during the MMIs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 You bring up an excellent point here. In the same way that smokers cause their own lung and heart disease, non-compliant patients are also responsible for their own deaths and therefore deserve to die. You make a very logical argument, make sure you do the same during the MMIs. I'm sure you didn't mean it the way it came out but you will agree that nobody deserves to die, non-compliant or otherwise, although those non-compliant way well contribute to their own deaths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 A doctor's job is done as soon as he writes the prescription. If the patient chooses to defy the doctor, that was the patient's choice, and they deserve to suffer the consequences for it. Valid point, but I think the doctor has a responsibility to (within reason) explore why the patient is non-complaint. Perhaps they don't fully understand the severity of their condition and the consequences of not taking the prescribed treatment; or perhaps they are experiencing depression or distress that causes them to forgo treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mm88 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 I'm sure you didn't mean it the way it came out but you will agree that nobody deserves to die, non-compliant or otherwise, although those non-compliant way well contribute to their own deaths. Uh f_d.... I believe he was trying to be sarcastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlare500 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Uh f_d.... I believe he was trying to be sarcastic. Me? Never! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 What do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stimmer Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 A doctor's job is done as soon as he writes the prescription. If the patient chooses to defy the doctor, that was the patient's choice, and they deserve to suffer the consequences for it. A physicians role is not to simply diagnose diseases but to treat patients (unlike what shows such as House would say). The job a doctor, by nature, involves a humanistic element. If you only want to be concerned with the disease and not the treatment of it and how to best apply this to the patient get a PhD in a basic science field. One of your roles as a doctor is to gather and synthesize the medical information available and present it to your patients. You act as a conduit for this information and attempt to use your trusted role in society to convince your patients follow your course of treatment FOR THEIR BENEFIT (much like the origional role of journalists). Students from the ocial sciences through their degree are constantly exposted to the perspective of not only the disease but how this affects the individual and society. This type of thinking is what the medical associations are attempting to promote and is reflected in this change to the MCAT. Even if you chose to not believe this, trust me when I say maintaining patient contant beyond the presciption is critical for family physician and for everyone else as it can lead to deaths and malpractice suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLengr Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 A doctor's job is done as soon as he writes the prescription. If the patient chooses to defy the doctor, that was the patient's choice, and they deserve to suffer the consequences for it. Troooooooll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medigeek Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 Thanks for writing the only useful reply to my post in this topic. The doctor does not get paid by the hour. He gets paid for procedures - piecework. Thus a doctor's job is to A) do as many procedures as possible while not getting sued/losing license. Connecting with patients, and trying extra hard to make sure they comply with your demands does not achieve either of these two goals, thus are not part of a doctor's job. You will find most doctors (even those who care quite a bit about more money) actually want to heal the patient with a strong effort and change around their lifestyle/habits,etc. to ensure their problem is fixed. This cannot be achieved by throwing a prescription at the patient and running out the door... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 You will find most doctors (even those who care quite a bit about more money) actually want to heal the patient with a strong effort and change around their lifestyle/habits,etc. to ensure their problem is fixed. This cannot be achieved by throwing a prescription at the patient and running out the door... +1 Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.