How necessary is orgo once you are in medical school

[citrus]

I am not talking about orgo as a pre-req. I mean, once you are in medical school (in Canada) is it a big disadvantage if you have never taken orgo in undergrad? or is the MCAT orgo knowledge enough?

[proton]

If you know that a ketone is not something you find on a piano, you should be ok.

[rmorelan]

I am not talking about orgo as a pre-req. I mean, once you are in medical school (in Canada) is it a big disadvantage if you have never taken orgo in undergrad? or is the MCAT orgo knowledge enough?

 

I haven't really used organic chemistry for anything at all in medical school. It just isn't something that comes up.

 

Maybe if you take the USMLE there may be some more ways it could help but even that is more biochem (which we do use a little bit).

[thebouque]

Orgo is all right for your general knowledge but is useless for med school. So is calculus, physics etc

[rmorelan]

Orgo is all right for your general knowledge but is useless for med school. So is calculus, physics etc

 

Most physics I guess - I mean that will reappear for some specialties I suppose.

 

You would be surprised how useless a lot of premed degree subjects are for medical school

[A-Stark]

I haven't really used organic chemistry for anything at all in medical school. It just isn't something that comes up.

 

Maybe if you take the USMLE there may be some more ways it could help but even that is more biochem (which we do use a little bit).

 

I don't remember much organic on Step 1. Lots of path and micro though.

 

I do think it comes up here and there, though, such as when anesthetist asks why glycopyrrolate doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier. Now that I know why, just that I remember the guess-what-I'm-thinking bit of trivia.

[Skylerate2]

Most physics I guess - I mean that will reappear for some specialties I suppose.

 

You would be surprised how useless a lot of premed degree subjects are for medical school

 

Which begs the question as to why they are required in the first place.

[futureGP]

never really seen a legit orgo reaction in any of the lectures so far

 

it's only good so far for pharmacology but nobody in medicine seems to put much emphasis on why one drug crosses BBB or not or how each drug works...

 

still, basic sciences are necessary, though we tend to take it for granted since a lot of the concepts from theories in basic sciences apply in the clinical sciences

e.g. can't understand genetics of diseases, pathophysiology without an understanding of basic principles of molecular biology/genetics.

 

e.g. can't understand cardiovascular physiology (blood pressure, heart rate, effects of vasoconstriction on pressure etc) or respiratory physiology (relationship between pressure and volume) without understanding fluid mechanics + ideal gas model

 

e.g. likewise having an understanding of organic chemistry helps you with electrolyte balance in the body and their effects (pH, acid-base, their effects on hemoglobin), pharmacology of drugs (BBB, solubility of drugs based on organic groups -- alkoxy vs. hydroxyl groups, hydrophobicity/hydrophilicity)

 

e.g. understanding of inorganic chemistry to understand cancer biology, effects of radiation therapy on cells, etc.

 

i think the knowledge we gain from basic science courses do help us in subtle ways to help us understand biomedical sciences/clinical sciences

[rmorelan]

I don't remember much organic on Step 1. Lots of path and micro though.

 

I do think it comes up here and there, though, such as when anesthetist asks why glycopyrrolate doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier. Now that I know why, just that I remember the guess-what-I'm-thinking bit of trivia.

 

ha - never seen asked a question like that needing organic chem - haven't been for physics though. Seem like everyone has their pet questions.

[rmorelan]

Which begs the question as to why they are required in the first place.

 

Just to show you are capable of learning and maybe in some cases interest. I mean that is why they aren't that picky about what the degree is in.

[Intrepid86]

Nothing that's done in undergrad is necessary for medical school. Seriously, people could go directly from high school to medical school, and there probably wouldn't be a drastic change in quality at the end.

[schmitty]

Nothing that's done in undergrad is necessary for medical school. Seriously, people could go directly from high school to medical school, and there probably wouldn't be a drastic change in quality at the end.

 

I disagree, as I think you would have a lot more people in medicine for the wrong reasons.

 

The reasons for requiring all of these subjects is, as stated above, not the subject matter itself, but it is proof that you are capable of learning dense, detailed material and applying it (in the UG sense, on tests that get marked) at a later time. This is essentially the MCAT reasoning too - in med school, you wil have to learn an enormous amount of material and be able to draw upon that breadth of knowledge at any given time to solve a problem. In essence, it is testing your ability to learn and apply, the material itself is (almost) irrelevant.

 

That said, some of the topics may come up - in rads for e.g., (especially rad oncology) that physics knowledge may come in handy - especially if you do research!

[medigeek]

I haven't really used organic chemistry for anything at all in medical school. It just isn't something that comes up.

 

Maybe if you take the USMLE there may be some more ways it could help but even that is more biochem (which we do use a little bit).

 

how much biochem is even done in canadian med schools?

[Intrepid86]

I disagree, as I think you would have a lot more people in medicine for the wrong reasons.

 

The reasons for requiring all of these subjects is, as stated above, not the subject matter itself, but it is proof that you are capable of learning dense, detailed material and applying it (in the UG sense, on tests that get marked) at a later time. This is essentially the MCAT reasoning too - in med school, you wil have to learn an enormous amount of material and be able to draw upon that breadth of knowledge at any given time to solve a problem. In essence, it is testing your ability to learn and apply, the material itself is (almost) irrelevant.

 

That said, some of the topics may come up - in rads for e.g., (especially rad oncology) that physics knowledge may come in handy - especially if you do research!

 

I'm not sure how implementing the change would make you think more people would go into medicine for the wrong reasons. Those personal reasons wouldn't change. Secondly, most of the requirements for medical school are from 1st year, which itself is mostly a review of senior high school science. Top students at their respective secondary schools usually repeat the same in undergrad, and it's these same people who also do well in orgo etc because their good habits are already formed. Doing undergrad is just another layer of selection, which would likely turn up the same students.

 

We can talk about learning and applying material, but it's ultimately a subjective and abstract thing. I'm in my 3rd year of med school, I know something about this. There are people here who made the grade that went through undergrad, crammed, didn't learn much or change anything about themselves. But they've proved they can play the game. It's just assumed high grades = good learner. The powers-that-be want students to do a "rigorous" undergrad science program because they believe it provides a "better foundation" for medical schools studies, despite it being taught from scratch anyways once you get here. The real reason for spending 4 years is for greater maturity (the public generally isn't comfortable being treated by teenage looking/sounding doctors), but from an intellectual standpoint, the extra time isn't necessary.

 

Lastly, continuing with our hypothetical scenario, tests like the MCAT can be moved up to become selection criteria from high school to med schools. Of course, a new process would have to be made, since there are lots of high schools, and not a whole lot of standardization. I'm just saying it could be done. The best candidates can still be selected.

[rmorelan]

And that's exactly how they do it in France! A much better system.

 

Except under those systems final year grades at all high schools are highly standardized, and you are pushed for what you are going to do "with the rest of your life" very early. The medical school stream is 6 years long and of course not everyone makes it.

 

Is it worth for two extra years for both the school to be sure you are good student and you really want medicine? I guess that is the debate

[rmorelan]

That's true but I'm pretty sure most of use trads figured out we wanted to do medicine sometime in high school already. And we can compare/contrast this to CEJEP in Quebec.

 

I would say most THINK they want it - it isn't just the GPA in university that causes many to switch to other fields Perhaps it is laser clear for a "gunner" but I have seen people flip all over the place during their training.

 

I wonder what the overall statistic is of people starting down this path actually apply in the end (and why they did or didn't etc).

[schmitty]

I'm not sure how implementing the change would make you think more people would go into medicine for the wrong reasons. Those personal reasons wouldn't change. Secondly, most of the requirements for medical school are from 1st year, which itself is mostly a review of senior high school science. Top students at their respective secondary schools usually repeat the same in undergrad, and it's these same people who also do well in orgo etc because their good habits are already formed. Doing undergrad is just another layer of selection, which would likely turn up the same students.

 

We can talk about learning and applying material, but it's ultimately a subjective and abstract thing. I'm in my 3rd year of med school, I know something about this. There are people here who made the grade that went through undergrad, crammed, didn't learn much or change anything about themselves. But they've proved they can play the game. It's just assumed high grades = good learner. The powers-that-be want students to do a "rigorous" undergrad science program because they believe it provides a "better foundation" for medical schools studies, despite it being taught from scratch anyways once you get here. The real reason for spending 4 years is for greater maturity (the public generally isn't comfortable being treated by teenage looking/sounding doctors), but from an intellectual standpoint, the extra time isn't necessary.

 

Lastly, continuing with our hypothetical scenario, tests like the MCAT can be moved up to become selection criteria from high school to med schools. Of course, a new process would have to be made, since there are lots of high schools, and not a whole lot of standardization. I'm just saying it could be done. The best candidates can still be selected.

 

I agree it is not perfect. However, I do really think a LOT of people would enter medical school and not really know what being a doctor is all about and if it is right for them. I did my UG at U of T - as you may know, approximatley everybody and their cat has prospects for med school in 1st and 2nd year like sci. Shoot ahead to senior years or graduate school and the number of those med hopefuls has been reduced drastically.

 

I, for one, am a non-trad (28 now and working full-time) and I had no clue what I wanted to be when I graduated. I got a scholarship at U of T for an astrophysics program and engineering at waterloo, but ultimately chose Engineering Science at U of T because it was practical (have a job in 4 years + PEY!) and prestigious. I hated it...switched out, thought about dentistry very seriously, then academics (professor), etc...It was quite long until I decided to seriously focus on pursuing medicine.

 

Obviously I realize this is just one anecdote, but I have gone through school with a LOT of med hopefuls who have given up, and most because they realized they won't want to be a doctor (one girl in my lab got into medical school at U of T in 4th year, but turned it down because she realized it was her doctor dad that was just pressuring her and she really wanted to be a prof).

[AtomSmasher19]

If you can't do well in orgo, you could NEVER become a doctor. Might as well throw in the towel and apply to the caribbean if you can't manage at least a 95 in orgo. Actually, forget the caribbean, and apply to Micky D's. I'd go as far as to say that you have failed in life if you don't get a 95 in orgo, so you might as well pick up a spatula and get flipping.

 

Just kidding. Nothing you learn in undergrad will help you with anything, including medical school.

[medigeek]

And that's exactly how they do it in France! A much better system.

 

No it wouldn't be a better system here because we have private high schools where you can essentially "buy" your grades. You also have many schools which are MUCH easier than others vs. schools which are much harder.

 

Just imagine how many families of some nationality from the continent of asia and how many rich families would pay big money to get their grades 90s. Then we'd have a system where a third of students fail through med school, essentially wasted money.

[medigeek]

I agree it is not perfect. However, I do really think a LOT of people would enter medical school and not really know what being a doctor is all about and if it is right for them. I did my UG at U of T - as you may know, approximatley everybody and their cat has prospects for med school in 1st and 2nd year like sci. Shoot ahead to senior years or graduate school and the number of those med hopefuls has been reduced drastically.

 

I, for one, am a non-trad (28 now and working full-time) and I had no clue what I wanted to be when I graduated. I got a scholarship at U of T for an astrophysics program and engineering at waterloo, but ultimately chose Engineering Science at U of T because it was practical (have a job in 4 years + PEY!) and prestigious. I hated it...switched out, thought about dentistry very seriously, then academics (professor), etc...It was quite long until I decided to seriously focus on pursuing medicine.

 

Obviously I realize this is just one anecdote, but I have gone through school with a LOT of med hopefuls who have given up, and most because they realized they won't want to be a doctor (one girl in my lab got into medical school at U of T in 4th year, but turned it down because she realized it was her doctor dad that was just pressuring her and she really wanted to be a prof).

 

 

Well when you have a 2.5 in 3rd year, there really isn't much hope for you. Realistically, you're done. Some will go to the carribean, but I figure a good number are wise enough to know that medicine is out of the picture and unrealistic. That's the primary reason...

 

And as for that girl, that's likely foolish in the longrun. Why? Because becoming a prof is something she will achieve after yearsss and years of struggling to pay her bills (probably in her mid 40s) and living in a ghetto apartment with no money to really do much. That is the LIKELY difference, in this job market for someone pursuing grad school/research in science vs. becoming a doctor in which case there was some general interest that she pursued it and not something she hated).

[schmitty]

And as for that girl, that's likely foolish in the longrun. Why? Because becoming a prof is something she will achieve after yearsss and years of struggling to pay her bills (probably in her mid 40s) and living in a ghetto apartment with no money to really do much. That is the LIKELY difference, in this job market for someone pursuing grad school/research in science vs. becoming a doctor in which case there was some general interest that she pursued it and not something she hated).

 

 

That is definitely not the case...I know it is a hard road (I am in academics at the moment) it is doable. Also, did you miss the part about her dad being a doctor? That means financial support. But also, PhDs at U of T in science get paid quite well indeed - around $29000 tax free plus any TAing on top of that at over $42/hr plus you can work if you want elsewhere. Also, we pay postdocs usually between $40K-$52K, which is plenty to live off. I have seen many many people go on to become assistant profs - the main downside, much like medicine, if that you almost always have to move around for each major step. I agree it is not a sure thing, that's for sure. But if you search hard enough and are willing to move far enough, you will find a position somewhere.

 

Also, there are some huge benefits of being a prof over a med doc. The biggest in my eyes is freedom. My prof doesn't answer to anybody (hasn't for 30 years), he travels constantly for work and pleasure, he comes (or doesn't) whenever he wants, he consults for companies all over the world on university time, he can take paid years of leave (sabbatical) every 7 years if he wants, etc, etc. Don't get me wrong, I had to choose and I chose MD, but I can definitely see the pluses of being a prof. Perhaps I can be both someday and have a little bit of both worlds.

[medigeek]

That is definitely not the case...I know it is a hard road (I am in academics at the moment) it is doable. Also, did you miss the part about her dad being a doctor? That means financial support. But also, PhDs at U of T in science get paid quite well indeed - around $29000 tax free plus any TAing on top of that at over $42/hr plus you can work if you want elsewhere. Also, we pay postdocs usually between $40K-$52K, which is plenty to live off. I have seen many many people go on to become assistant profs - the main downside, much like medicine, if that you almost always have to move around for each major step. I agree it is not a sure thing, that's for sure. But if you search hard enough and are willing to move far enough, you will find a position somewhere.

 

Also, there are some huge benefits of being a prof over a med doc. The biggest in my eyes is freedom. My prof doesn't answer to anybody (hasn't for 30 years), he travels constantly for work and pleasure, he comes (or doesn't) whenever he wants, he consults for companies all over the world on university time, he can take paid years of leave (sabbatical) every 7 years if he wants, etc, etc. Don't get me wrong, I had to choose and I chose MD, but I can definitely see the pluses of being a prof. Perhaps I can be both someday and have a little bit of both worlds.

 

29k tax free money + 10k for TAing.. that's under 40k. That is indeed difficult to live off of in toronto and quality of life will be low.

Also you can't use a single university to represent academics, UofT may have it as the best case but there's a lot of variance among other universities.

 

In the end, you're going to leave high school at 18 and by the time you're done your phd and possible 2 post docs (where you're working long hours for small pay), you'll have made 30-45k/year all through your 20s and 30s.

 

And you do realize becoming an assistant prof has become more rare right? And that there's no guarantee you'll get renure?

 

You cannot assume you'll become a prof for sure and it's a rather long and risky road if you're going to be making crap money for 15+ years.

[medigeek]

Yeah but how long did it take him to get there? Combine BSc + MSc + PhD that's 10 years + more postdoc time. And after 10 years you're not guaranteed to become a professor so it could all go down the drain.

 

10 years is actually ideal time, more likely is 12 years.. throw in 6 years of post doc (2 post docs). That's 18 years of post secondary.

[schmitty]

10 years is actually ideal time, more likely is 12 years.. throw in 6 years of post doc (2 post docs). That's 18 years of post secondary.

 

VERY few people do 6 years of post-doc in the sciences. In fact, many profs won't take you on if you have 3+ years of postdoc experience. That is when you move on to a research associate or look for an assistant profship.

[schmitty]

29k tax free money + 10k for TAing.. that's under 40k. That is indeed difficult to live off of in toronto and quality of life will be low.

Also you can't use a single university to represent academics, UofT may have it as the best case but there's a lot of variance among other universities.

 

In the end, you're going to leave high school at 18 and by the time you're done your phd and possible 2 post docs (where you're working long hours for small pay), you'll have made 30-45k/year all through your 20s and 30s.

 

And you do realize becoming an assistant prof has become more rare right? And that there's no guarantee you'll get renure?

 

You cannot assume you'll become a prof for sure and it's a rather long and risky road if you're going to be making crap money for 15+ years.

 

 

(side note, I did my MSc at U of T, made around 40-45K tax free through TAing, job, scholarship, which is a lot more money than you think. I even managed to pay off a lot of debt during this time and lived quite comfortably in downtown TO)

 

Of course it's not guaranteed, but if that's what you want it's worth it to many many people. And I know ass. professorships are hard to get, I work with these people everyday. However, it is definitely doable and there are lots of backups. I have been in my particular lab for around 5 years now and 3 of the PhDs have gotten professor positions after doing a post-doc (one after a research associate stint). Many others decided not to go the postdoc route and have become hugely successful in many other fields such as management consulting (big money), scientific managers at very large corps (like nestle, for e.g.), cushy governmet jobs, etc. it's not like academics is prof or bust. You have to want to be a prof, just like you have to really want to be an MD - the money and practicality of having a stable job is not enough.