19 years of age and younger being admitted?!

[purple&proud]

I definitely think that older applicants should not be considered any more "experienced". I have been a year or two younger than my peers since grade 5 and nobody ever would even think that I'm younger. If I got into medical school in my 3rd year I would be 19 when accepted and I don't think that I would be at any disadvantage. I moved numerous times, living in Europe, faced many challenges in life and I feel that I have 100 times more life experience than almost all of my older friends. Just because someone is 30 with a PhD does not mean they will be a better doctor because I don't think that any of their publications or research will be very useful when treating a patient. I see that most people do research/masters etc only because they could not get into medical school while in undergrad, usually because of their lower gpa.

[ikillreid]

I, too, feel as though a PhD should not be used as a crutch.

 

If it has truly provided the kind of life experience you feel so aptly and automatically qualifies them to be physicians, then this should be reflected in their CASPer answers and their interview. Of course it sucks to see others labour for so long and not achieve their goals, but that happens.

 

And just as food for thought, I think it's an interesting comparison to consider a 3rd year undergrad student who has labored for their medical school goal for perhaps >5 years, vs. a PhD student who maybe decided they were interested in medical school during the last year or two of their program. After all, a PhD isn't necessarily the most efficient method of improving an application (e.g. compared to doing a second undergrad, even), so I partly assume many PhD students may never have been as committed until recently in their life (and therefore, even less automatically more deserving).