Canadian/american Premed System Setup For Burnout

[Falling]

I grew up so much during undergrad (my first undergrad). Met lots of people, was engaged in very time consuming hobbies, took a bunch of random classes I thought were cool.

[older]

There seem to be a polarization of opinions. Let's not forget that the topic was not the undergrad degree per se (surely it cannot be that stressful when millions of people go through it and enjoy it) but the value of doing it in the specific context of the US/Canadian premed system.

 

In the fiirst post, OP stated:

"Is it just me but doesn't it feel like the American and Canadian "premed" system is setup to burnout young physicians? Right now it takes the average Canadian 2.5 attempts to get into medical school including a 3-4 year degree. Most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad. On top of that..."

 

If a future medic says that "most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad", there is a reason to take it seriously.

But why would the most feel burned out? Not  by the degree requirements, but by the necessity to get through it -  not only with top marks (that's not good enough), but also beating all the competition along the way.  It is the pressure to get ahead of others, and constant worry about getting in that makes the whole undergrad experience undesirable. While some people thrive on cut-throat competition, others do not.  Not sure whether the best competitors make best doctors.

[thsc]

There seem to be a polarization of opinions. Let's not forget that the topic was not the undergrad degree per se (surely it cannot be that stressful when millions of people go through it and enjoy it) but the value of doing it in the specific context of the US/Canadian premed system.

 

In the fiirst post, OP stated:

"Is it just me but doesn't it feel like the American and Canadian "premed" system is setup to burnout young physicians? Right now it takes the average Canadian 2.5 attempts to get into medical school including a 3-4 year degree. Most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad. On top of that..."

 

If a future medic says that "most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad", there is a reason to take it seriously.

But why would the most feel burned out? Not  by the degree requirements, but by the necessity to get through it -  not only with top marks (that's not good enough), but also beating all the competition along the way.  It is the pressure to get ahead of others, and constant worry about getting in that makes the whole undergrad experience undesirable. While some people thrive on cut-throat competition, others do not.  Not sure whether the best competitors make best doctors.

Well put. 

[Jaybird]

There seem to be a polarization of opinions. Let's not forget that the topic was not the undergrad degree per se (surely it cannot be that stressful when millions of people go through it and enjoy it) but the value of doing it in the specific context of the US/Canadian premed system.

 

In the fiirst post, OP stated:

"Is it just me but doesn't it feel like the American and Canadian "premed" system is setup to burnout young physicians? Right now it takes the average Canadian 2.5 attempts to get into medical school including a 3-4 year degree. Most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad. On top of that..."

 

If a future medic says that "most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad", there is a reason to take it seriously.

But why would the most feel burned out? Not  by the degree requirements, but by the necessity to get through it -  not only with top marks (that's not good enough), but also beating all the competition along the way.  It is the pressure to get ahead of others, and constant worry about getting in that makes the whole undergrad experience undesirable. While some people thrive on cut-throat competition, others do not.  Not sure whether the best competitors make best doctors.

 

Any limited good will be competed for. If you want to take away the competitiveness of medicine, you're doing it by either massively increasing supply and swamping the market, or massively reducing the payoff of medicine and promoting mediocrity. Neither is a good option. I reiterate what I've said already - if you think not being able to deal with stress is not something you should be penalized for, you need a reality check. Anything worth doing is difficult.

[sprite]

Ontario schools do have "quotas". That both UofT and Queen's don't does not change the fact that the vast, vast majority of students at either are from Ontario too. 

 

As for rural areas, compensation is already somewhat higher, and there generally is much more income potential for community-based family docs and specialists in small communities. However, most people prefer to live closer to friends and family, and understandably that applies just as much to those from Toronto as it does to those from Fredericton. So, no, it is not a stereotype that people from Toronto are unlikely to choose to practice in rural Newfoundland. Lots of IMGs end up there, though, with varying results. 

 

Oh, and please stop telling us about what people from Halifax want to do. Many if not most Nova Scotians have family and connections in rural and/or smaller areas of the province, and have otherwise spent time all over. Simply put, other areas of the country are not the same as the GTA, and these kinds of arguments seem to assume a kind of uniform cultural subtext that doesn't really exist. 

 

Calling this discrimination is simple hyperbole. As I said previously, med school (and residency) spots are funded to suit provincial health human resources objectives. They do not and will not reflect the aspirations of applicants across the country let alone in other provinces. 

 

 

Are there really "tons" of "extremely" qualified applicants who get rejected? That certainly seems to figure in the conventional wisdom, but I'd argue that you need some actual evidence to that effect. That it is more competitive is undoubtedly the case, but then there are also 700-800 med school spots in Ontario. The Maritimes have 120 for a population of about 2 million, along with a handful at MUN for NB and PEI applicants. 

Tears.

 

And you should take your own advice and stop telling us what people from Ontario want to do. As far as you know I want to practice in Alert, Nunavut. 

[ralk]

There seem to be a polarization of opinions. Let's not forget that the topic was not the undergrad degree per se (surely it cannot be that stressful when millions of people go through it and enjoy it) but the value of doing it in the specific context of the US/Canadian premed system.

 

In the fiirst post, OP stated:

"Is it just me but doesn't it feel like the American and Canadian "premed" system is setup to burnout young physicians? Right now it takes the average Canadian 2.5 attempts to get into medical school including a 3-4 year degree. Most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad. On top of that..."

 

If a future medic says that "most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad", there is a reason to take it seriously.

But why would the most feel burned out? Not  by the degree requirements, but by the necessity to get through it -  not only with top marks (that's not good enough), but also beating all the competition along the way.  It is the pressure to get ahead of others, and constant worry about getting in that makes the whole undergrad experience undesirable. While some people thrive on cut-throat competition, others do not.  Not sure whether the best competitors make best doctors.

 

older, you've repeated the same argument multiple times, yet haven't responded to the criticism many posters have presented against that argument. Others have presented more nuanced opinions, but your position can be invalidated by the following:

 

1) Just because one person says they're burnt out and that many people they know are burnt out doesn't necessarily mean the majority of pre-meds are burnt out. It's an anecdote, not data.

 

2) Even if the majority of pre-meds are under significant pressure, that doesn't necessarily mean they're under higher pressure than other in comparable situations (pre-law, potential graduate students). It also doesn't mean they're under higher pressure than those at other points along the process, including those in med school, residency, or practicing as physicians.

 

3) Even if undergrad was the most stressful point along the process and more stressful than others in comparable positions, it doesn't necessarily mean eliminating undergrad as a requirement would eliminate that stress.

 

You keep presenting undergrad as a stressful time, one that is uniquely stressful, and one that if eliminated would decrease stress through the process as assumed truths. You've provided virtually no data to support those positions, and largely ignored criticisms that point out ways in which those assumptions may not be true. I admire your persistence on this topic, but saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true. I am fully in support of potential solutions that could help reduce stress within the medical education framework, including before medical school itself, but your evidence and arguments don't support your conclusion that removing undergraduate requirements for med school entry would achieve that result.

[A-Stark]

Tears.

 

And you should take your own advice and stop telling us what people from Ontario want to do. As far as you know I want to practice in Alert, Nunavut. 

 

Your "sympathy" is neither requested or required. And perhaps you do want to work on the tip of Ellesmere Island. How many people from the GTA want to work in Owen Sound let alone Kenora? 

 

Of course, some people come to places like Newfoundland for a family med residency, and end up doing locums in Goose Bay. 

 

ETA: There was never any time at any point in undergrad which compared to the stress of actual practice. Pre-clerkship was by and large not too bad. Clerkship was busy - the first time you experience getting called in the middle of the night is something of a wakeup call. CaRMS is very stressful - far more so than simply applying to med school. 

 

In residency, intern floor call was stressful, as things tend to be when you get pages every two minutes (or simultaneously!) and you feel out of your depth. Codes are very stressful early on - especially once you have to run them. Chest compressions are amongst the most exhausting things you will ever do. Later on "tombstones" on an EKG are stressful - particularly when they're no better after TNK is given. Struggling to keep a patient with a bowel perf alive through an OR can be pretty stressful when you're resorting to intermittent boluses of epi on top of the infusions. 

 

(Although, generally speaking, I find most of these things more exhilarating than anything else. And it's a different story as staff when you really are the "most responsible physician" involved.)

 

You have to be able to deal with stress in medicine and cope effectively. I don't know that undergrad really prepares anyone for that kind of stress. But experience and maturity help. 

[older]

older, you've repeated the same argument multiple times, yet haven't responded to the criticism many posters have presented against that argument. Others have presented more nuanced opinions, but your position can be invalidated by the following:

 

1) Just because one person says they're burnt out and that many people they know are burnt out doesn't necessarily mean the majority of pre-meds are burnt out. It's an anecdote, not data.

 

2) Even if the majority of pre-meds are under significant pressure, that doesn't necessarily mean they're under higher pressure than other in comparable situations (pre-law, potential graduate students). It also doesn't mean they're under higher pressure than those at other points along the process, including those in med school, residency, or practicing as physicians.

 

3) Even if undergrad was the most stressful point along the process and more stressful than others in comparable positions, it doesn't necessarily mean eliminating undergrad as a requirement would eliminate that stress.

 

You keep presenting undergrad as a stressful time, one that is uniquely stressful, and one that if eliminated would decrease stress through the process as assumed truths. You've provided virtually no data to support those positions, and largely ignored criticisms that point out ways in which those assumptions may not be true. I admire your persistence on this topic, but saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true. I am fully in support of potential solutions that could help reduce stress within the medical education framework, including before medical school itself, but your evidence and arguments don't support your conclusion that removing undergraduate requirements for med school entry would achieve that result.

 

 

I did not initiate the post, which, the way it reads, is about more than just one person.   I have no data about  "burnout rates" or other evidence, just a concern that arose when I read the post and subsequent answers and opinions. 

 

I don't think the point was to gather evidence to prove something one way or another,  it is largely about how people feel about it, not who is "right'. Different opinions are interesting.

 

 I am not saying that removing undergraduate requirements for med school entry would solve anything, although pointing out at how other med education systems work (UK, France and most of Europe) might lead to such conclusion. Doing undergrad degree before medicine may be beneficiary in many ways, but personally  I would probably vote for optional, not mandatory. UK system has it both ways, 5/6 yrs after high school or 4 yrs after undergrad.

 

Inevitable competitiveness in admission process can be dealt with in many ways, and competition for fractions of GPA percentage may be, arguably, not the best way.

 

That's just an opinion, not an insistence that Canadian system should be reformed.

[older]

Tears.

 

And you should take your own advice and stop telling us what people from Ontario want to do. As far as you know I want to practice in Alert, Nunavut. 

 

Wow. What happened to politeness and respect for different opinions.

[ralk]

I did not initiate the post, which, the way it reads, is about more than just one person.   I have no data about  "burnout rates" or other evidence, just a concern that arose when I read the post and subsequent answers and opinions. 

 

I don't think the point was to gather evidence to prove something one way or another,  it is largely about how people feel about it, not who is "right'. Different opinions are interesting.

 

 I am not saying that removing undergraduate requirements for med school entry would solve anything, although pointing out at how other med education systems work (UK, France and most of Europe) might lead to such conclusion. Doing undergrad degree before medicine may be beneficiary in many ways, but personally  I would probably vote for optional, not mandatory. UK system has it both ways, 5/6 yrs after high school or 4 yrs after undergrad.

 

Inevitable competitiveness in admission process can be dealt with in many ways, and competition for fractions of GPA percentage may be, arguably, not the best way.

 

That's just an opinion, not an insistence that Canadian system should be reformed.

 

Differing opinions are interesting. But you haven't simply presented an opinion, you've actively challenge others' opinions. And that's a good thing! Having different opinions isn't just interesting, it's an opportunity to see if those opinions can hold up to scrutiny - and to your credit, you've attempted to do that for others.

 

Where I'm objecting, is that you haven't challenged your own opinions, and have side-stepped challenges others have put to you. This response continues that imbalance - where you challenge others' opinions but avoid challenges to your own - by hiding behind the age-old cop-out of "it's just my opinion". You (and most others) could have a say in how our system is organized, whether it's now or at some point in the future. It's important to bright opposing viewpoints into the discussion, but it's hardly a discussion if everyone just says what they think without considering what others are saying - and which viewpoints might be more or less correct.

[NLengr]

One thing that nobody has really addressed is: Are the burnt out pre meds getting admission to med school and being trained to become doctors? Maybe, due to stress or some other confounding factor, they aren't being admitted. If that's the case, why should the medical training system change to accommodate them if they will never train to become physicians?

 

The real question that would need to be looked at is: Do physicians, med students or residents have a degree of burn out directly attributable their undergrad training that causes an impact on some significant outcome (royal college pass rates, LMCC pass rates, suicide, depression, patient morbidity etc.)?

 

We know many trainees and staff will have burn out. But I feel that's likely due to medical training itself or practice demands, not due to undergrad stress from 5-10 years ago.

 

Honestly, stress as a resident, or better yet a staff, is much much worse than what 99.99% of people will experience as an undergrad. If you can't learn to deal with stress in undergrad, you are going to have a hell of a time if you get into medicine. Perhaps it's better we weed those people out early before the system and themselves invest hundreds of thousands of dollars into their training.

[older]

Differing opinions are interesting. But you haven't simply presented an opinion, you've actively challenge others' opinions. And that's a good thing! Having different opinions isn't just interesting, it's an opportunity to see if those opinions can hold up to scrutiny - and to your credit, you've attempted to do that for others.

 

Where I'm objecting, is that you haven't challenged your own opinions, and have side-stepped challenges others have put to you. This response continues that imbalance - where you challenge others' opinions but avoid challenges to your own - by hiding behind the age-old cop-out of "it's just my opinion". You (and most others) could have a say in how our system is organized, whether it's now or at some point in the future. It's important to bright opposing viewpoints into the discussion, but it's hardly a discussion if everyone just says what they think without considering what others are saying - and which viewpoints might be more or less correct.

 

I don't think anything was side-stepped.  Can you be more specific about what was not answered?

 

If you mean your 3 points above, here it is.

 

1.“Just because one person says they're burnt out and that many people they know are burnt out doesn't necessarily mean the majority of pre-meds are burnt out. It's an anecdote, not data”.

 

Answer: Agree. No data or evidence (if such exist) were quoted to support OP's  statement that " Most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad". It could be "many" rather than "most”, but statistics are not necessary  to discuss the issue that really exist. If you have any doubts, read posts on other threads  from people constantly freaking out about their GPA and their chances .

 

2) “Even if the majority of pre-meds are under significant pressure, that doesn't necessarily mean they're under higher pressure than other in comparable situations (pre-law, potential graduate students). It also doesn't mean they're under higher pressure than those at other points along the process, including those in med school, residency, or practicing as physicians”.

 

 Answer: Nobody on this forum (including me), disagrees that med school, residency, or practicing as physician is a high-stress environment. That’s the nature of the profession. The issue here is whether adding four (allegedly) stressful years is beneficial or not, justified or not.

 

US/Canada, and maybe few other countries, are unique in requiring a degree as a prerequisite to med and legal professions. In the Old World they are post-secondary, not post-degree. As for graduate degree, this is not comparable –you already study for your chosen profession.  

 

3. “Even if undergrad was the most stressful point along the process and more stressful than others in comparable positions, it doesn't necessarily mean eliminating undergrad as a requirement would eliminate that stress”.

 

Answer: Agree, eliminating undergrad would only move the stress point (let’s call it “med school admission stress ”)  back to secondary school.  But there’s an important difference.

 

You graduate from high school at 18. You get to med school, and you study what you love. But let’s assume that despite your hard work, you failed to get in. You can apply again next year. You can do retakes. You can take gap year for work or volunteering. The point is, you are 18! Even if it takes 3 attempts to get in, you are still only 21. Plenty of time to re-think and change your mind as well. Not to mention that you can take another degree program and apply to med school as  a graduate – if you so choose.

 

But if you are required to take undergrad, you are 22 by the time you  have your first chance at  med school. Some earlier post stated that  it takes an average 2.5 attempts to get to Canadian med school – so if you succeed at 3^rd attempt, you are 25 years old  when you start,  most likely still carrying undergrad debt. During these 3 years, you do a 5^th year, get your masters or a 2^nd degree, all of it just to increase your chances for admission.  And if you still don’t get in? You are 25 and all you have is a degree that (for many) is not what they wanted.

 

Aside of your 3 questions, the earlier posts discussed whether undergrad degree is indeed  a waste. There were many good points: science degree will give you an advantage in the 1^st year of med school, and an edge in research. Business degree will help you in carrying doctor’s business; computer degree will help  you computerize hospital’s or your own information systems.  By the same token, librarian degree will help you make a better use of resources, ballet degree will give you better understanding how human body works etc etc .  Nothing you learn is useless, it is amazing  how many skills and knowledge you thought you’d  never use, but you actually do.

 

But is it  a good reason to require an undergraduate degree as a prerequisite for  med profession? Personally I don’t think so.  As somebody rightly pointed out, it is not contributing to make a person better doctor. If you want to be a doctor, you should not be required to waste 4 years beforehand, unless it is your choice to pursue a degree for reasons of your own.

 

Another point repeated more than once was that 18 does not exemplify maturity, and it is too young age to enter medical profession. An undergrad degree as a mandatory path to maturity? Give me a break. By all means, if you don’t feel mature enough, do your undergrad first. But that should be your choice. Some people at 18 are mature enough and focused enough  to decide what profession they are interested in, whilst others are not – that’s why it is better to have a choice about when to enter medical training.

 

Med students do not treat patients at 18. They have several years of training before they do - enough time to mature.   I am repeating  myself from an earlier post, but it is a fact that the length of medical  training is more or less the same  regardless whether one takes 6-year program after high school or goes through undergrad, and that's all that matters.  

 

Bottom line: In my opinion, the system would be better without undergrad requirement.  But those who say the current system is good have their arguments too, and it is OK to disagree.

 

Sorry about this too long post, just trying to answer ralk’s challenge .

   

[ralk]

I don't think anything was side-stepped.  Can you be more specific about what was not answered?

 

If you mean your 3 points above, here it is.

 

1.“Just because one person says they're burnt out and that many people they know are burnt out doesn't necessarily mean the majority of pre-meds are burnt out. It's an anecdote, not data”.

 

Answer: Agree. No data or evidence (if such exist) were quoted to support OP's  statement that " Most of us already feel burned out half way through our undergrad". It could be "many" rather than "most”, but statistics are not necessary  to discuss the issue that really exist. If you have any doubts, read posts on other threads  from people constantly freaking out about their GPA and their chances .

 

2) “Even if the majority of pre-meds are under significant pressure, that doesn't necessarily mean they're under higher pressure than other in comparable situations (pre-law, potential graduate students). It also doesn't mean they're under higher pressure than those at other points along the process, including those in med school, residency, or practicing as physicians”.

 

 Answer: Nobody on this forum (including me), disagrees that med school, residency, or practicing as physician is a high-stress environment. That’s the nature of the profession. The issue here is whether adding four (allegedly) stressful years is beneficial or not, justified or not.

 

US/Canada, and maybe few other countries, are unique in requiring a degree as a prerequisite to med and legal professions. In the Old World they are post-secondary, not post-degree. As for graduate degree, this is not comparable –you already study for your chosen profession.  

 

3. “Even if undergrad was the most stressful point along the process and more stressful than others in comparable positions, it doesn't necessarily mean eliminating undergrad as a requirement would eliminate that stress”.

 

Answer: Agree, eliminating undergrad would only move the stress point (let’s call it “med school admission stress ”)  back to secondary school.  But there’s an important difference.

 

You graduate from high school at 18. You get to med school, and you study what you love. But let’s assume that despite your hard work, you failed to get in. You can apply again next year. You can do retakes. You can take gap year for work or volunteering. The point is, you are 18! Even if it takes 3 attempts to get in, you are still only 21. Plenty of time to re-think and change your mind as well. Not to mention that you can take another degree program and apply to med school as  a graduate – if you so choose.

 

But if you are required to take undergrad, you are 22 by the time you  have your first chance at  med school. Some earlier post stated that  it takes an average 2.5 attempts to get to Canadian med school – so if you succeed at 3^rd attempt, you are 25 years old  when you start,  most likely still carrying undergrad debt. During these 3 years, you do a 5^th year, get your masters or a 2^nd degree, all of it just to increase your chances for admission.  And if you still don’t get in? You are 25 and all you have is a degree that (for many) is not what they wanted.

 

Aside of your 3 questions, the earlier posts discussed whether undergrad degree is indeed  a waste. There were many good points: science degree will give you an advantage in the 1^st year of med school, and an edge in research. Business degree will help you in carrying doctor’s business; computer degree will help  you computerize hospital’s or your own information systems.  By the same token, librarian degree will help you make a better use of resources, ballet degree will give you better understanding how human body works etc etc .  Nothing you learn is useless, it is amazing  how many skills and knowledge you thought you’d  never use, but you actually do.

 

But is it  a good reason to require an undergraduate degree as a prerequisite for  med profession? Personally I don’t think so.  As somebody rightly pointed out, it is not contributing to make a person better doctor. If you want to be a doctor, you should not be required to waste 4 years beforehand, unless it is your choice to pursue a degree for reasons of your own.

 

Another point repeated more than once was that 18 does not exemplify maturity, and it is too young age to enter medical profession. An undergrad degree as a mandatory path to maturity? Give me a break. By all means, if you don’t feel mature enough, do your undergrad first. But that should be your choice. Some people at 18 are mature enough and focused enough  to decide what profession they are interested in, whilst others are not – that’s why it is better to have a choice about when to enter medical training.

 

Med students do not treat patients at 18. They have several years of training before they do - enough time to mature.   I am repeating  myself from an earlier post, but it is a fact that the length of medical  training is more or less the same  regardless whether one takes 6-year program after high school or goes through undergrad, and that's all that matters.  

 

Bottom line: In my opinion, the system would be better without undergrad requirement.  But those who say the current system is good have their arguments too, and it is OK to disagree.

 

Sorry about this too long post, just trying to answer ralk’s challenge .

   

 

You hadn't really responded to many of the criticisms of your position before this post. I'm glad you finally did - it allows the discussion to progress rather than simply tread water.

 

So let's go through the points.

 

1) The plural of anecdote is not data. I'm not saying I disagree with the statement that undergrad can be stressful for many people, but it's an assumption that could be entirely wrong. As several posters have pointed out in this thread, they felt their undergrad was a relatively low-stress time. Those are anecdotes too, in the opposite direction. Point is, you've stated that undergrad is a stressful time (without qualification) or a stressful period for most students without evidence for either of those statements, and on those grounds I objected. Saying many (rather than most) students find undergrad to be a stressful time is a much more nuanced position, arguably a more defensible, and not one you made before this post.

 

2) If four years of undergraduate education were removed from the medical school process, they don't disappear. They get shifted to other time periods. In the UK system, they get shifted to medical school and residency - as you yourself admit later on in your post. Even if we didn't add all of those four years to time spent in medical school or residency, they'd become years spent working. If time in med school, residency, or practicing is as stressful as undergrad - or as some have argued, it's more stressful - then overall burnout won't change, it'll simply happen at a different point in the process. Someone experiencing burnout after three years of undergrad will likely also experience burnout after three years of medical school if they got in directly after high school, because the level of stress isn't significantly different between those two scenarios. And while there are some significant problems that arise when you burn out in undergrad, there are just as many problems when you burn out in medical school.

 

3) Your response to this point and most of what follows go off track from the original discussion: that the current system may be needlessly stressful and that eliminating mandatory undergraduate years before medical school would help reduce that stress.

 

What your response to this point and the paragraphs that follow get at is that there are reasons to consider eliminating the undergrad requirement apart from a potential reduction in stress. On that front I agree in some ways and disagree in others, but it's not relevant. Whether or not having mandatory undergrad education before med school is an overall good thing or an overall bad thing (or, as I'd argue, a mixed blessing), it's a completely separate discussion to whether making a change on that front would help stress through the medical education process. Admitting high school students directly to medical school might do nothing to reduce stress but still be a great idea due to other considerations. Likewise, admitting high school students directly to medical school might substantially reduce stress but still be a terrible idea due to other considerations.

 

There are many arguments for or against mandatory undergraduate education before medical school, but the specific argument you advanced - and the only one that's relevant to this thread - was that removing it would reduce stress. And on that point, what you've presented does not support that conclusion, by your own admission.

 

I would love to go further into whether removing undergrad as a requirement is a good idea on the whole - as a person who got into medical school at the age of 25 and who finished undergrad with a degree I didn't particularly want, I have more than a few objections to some of the points you've raised, as well as more than a few points where I think we'd agree. However, this thread has already been pulled on enough tangents not relevant to the main discussion. For that reason, I will keep those comments to myself for now.

[No1Dr.Ozfan]

as a 19 year old living in my parents basement, i definitely think that i'm ready for med school and being a doctor. my mom says i'm VERY mature.

[rupchatt]

People in UK get into med straight from high school. That is way easier that getting into med in canada. In Canada one has to take almost 40 university level courses (3-4 years of undergrad), maintain a solid gpa (3.9-4). They also need to ace the MCAT, have significant level of volunteer work (much more than brits), some often have research under their belt (publications), PHDs, Masters and significant work experience, they also have a lot more stress during the whole application process because its so long. An average Canadian applicant to med school is ten times more competitive, has 10 times more experience and puts 10 times more work than an avg british applicant from high school. Comparing the maturity of a 17 year old applicant to uni grads, masters and phd grad is ridiculous. The biggest proof that UK system is easier is that UK schools advertise to Canadians for spots. Canadians who get rejected by canadian medschools go to UK as a back up. UK grads dont come to Canada because they cant get admission. 

[JohnGrisham]

i never understand the whining without constructive criticism in threads like this.

As for this"

The biggest proof that UK system is easier is that UK schools advertise to Canadians for spots. Canadians who get rejected by canadian medschools go to UK as a back up. UK grads dont come to Canada because they cant get admission. "

Yah, that is completely wrong and a broad generalization. Let us know when the good schools like Oxford and the likes are begging for Canadians to fill their seats. Its the carribean schools, australian schools and other international schools with "international programs" (read: americans and canadians) to fill up seats for that mucho dinero. Not a slight against peers who are abroad, its a risky endeavour and if you make it through I hope they match.

[rupchatt]

i never understand the whining without constructive criticism in threads like this.

 

As for this"

 

The biggest proof that UK system is easier is that UK schools advertise to Canadians for spots. Canadians who get rejected by canadian medschools go to UK as a back up. UK grads dont come to Canada because they cant get admission. "

 

Yah, that is completely wrong and a broad generalization. Let us know when the good schools like Oxford and the likes are begging for Canadians to fill their seats. Its the carribean schools, australian schools and other international schools with "international programs" (read: americans and canadians) to fill up seats for that mucho dinero. Not a slight against peers who are abroad, its a risky endeavour and if you make it through I hope they match.

SGUL in uk and st andrews in scotland take canadians who are rejected. This is only one school i know. There is also Newcastle and other schools that happily accept canadians.

[JohnGrisham]

St andrews specifically has a Canadian program hence it falls into the category of the other schools I mentioned.

 

I'm not sure about sgul, this came up "As of 2008 St George's Medical School accepted around 100 graduates, 175 undergraduates and 10 students from overseas." So that isn't too significant. However a cursorary Google search hinted they started a Canadian program recently.

 

At least in the UK you can get your FM residency and come back to Canada. So I don't have qualms with them having Canadian programs too much, its the other places that don't have residency program spots for internationals that are more so of an annoying cash grab.

[rupchatt]

yeaa but are you sure uk doctors can come back? how long does it take assuming residency and medschool

[JohnGrisham]

yeaa but are you sure uk doctors can come back? how long does it take assuming residency and medschool

 

A UK medical graduate, regardless of their country of citizneship, is gauranteed foundation years and pretty much the path to become a GP. A GP from a commonwealth country, has no problem coming back to Canada and practicing as a licensed physician. No problem, compared to the rest of the FMGs. 

 

Thats why I always say, if you are going abroad (outside of canada/USA), may as well try to get into a UK school if your stats are good enough, since at the moment they dont have a residency problem or discrimate based on citizenship. The same can't be said for australia, ireland etc. 

 

This is with the caveat that you want to do FM. That is the only one where their is reciprocity amongst commonwealth countries. AFAIK

[rupchatt]

Thats pretty cool but it will take 4+5 years to be a GP in UK. So thats still like 9 years of study vs 4+2 in Canada. Also, some UK programs are 6 years so its almost 10 years of education to be a GP. I feel thats expensive and time consuming. What do you say?

[JohnGrisham]

Beggars cant be choosers once you leave Canada, that's what i say lol. Safer to have a gauranteed option than gamble in the other foreign places hah. 

[older]

 The biggest proof that UK system is easier is that UK schools advertise to Canadians for spots. Canadians who get rejected by canadian medschools go to UK as a back up. UK grads dont come to Canada because they cant get admission. 

 

This is getting ridiculous. You really think that UK med schools "advertise" in Canada because they cannot fill spots in UK?. Let me assure you that they take international students for one and only one reason (the same reason as Canada): for money. The tuition for international students  is over 30,000 pounds for clinical years, whereas "home" students  (UK and EU)  pay from 3,500 pounds (old system) to 9,000 pounds max.  And that's only for 4 years. NHS fully pays for the last 2 years (including intercalating year). Not to mention that few pay as they go, because student financing is excellent and loans are not predatory, like here. Scottish universities are still free for home students, including medicine

 

Internationals will pay over 150,000 pounds for med degree in UK. Of course universities are salivating for that money, and hence government had to limit places for international students in UK med schools to 7%. The quota significantly increased competition.

 

As for Canadian "rejects" going to UK to study medicine it is just as ridiculous statement. If Canadians go to UK, they go straight from high school. Maybe there are some exceptions, but generally who would want to do 4 yr undergard here and then enter UK program  with 18-years old, paying international fees. Most GEM (post-graduate med programs)  in UK are not offered  to international students.  Canadian and US "rejects"  go mostly to Carribbean schools , some to Eastern Europe. UK is just too expensive and too competitive.  The numbers were cited earlier in this thread.

 

Of course UK students don't come to Canada for med education, why would they? They have excellent education at home, free or at a reasonable cost. And admission process does not  involve this  4-year insane competition for fractions of GPA.

[older]

SGUL in uk and st andrews in scotland take canadians who are rejected. This is only one school i know. There is also Newcastle and other schools that happily accept canadians.

 

Both SGUL and St Andrews offer 6 -yrs program for international high school graduates, not for Canadian "rejects" (never heard of any Canadian applying to medicine in Canada straight from high school  and thus being rejected) . SGUL's  4-yrs graduate entry program does not take Canadians or any internationals for that matter.

 

SGUL's   6-yr "INTO"  program is essentially geared to US students as it is associated with US universities for clinicals, and prepares for USMLE. But it is increasingly popular among Canadians too, because you can be admitted straight from high school,  have your med  degree in 6 yrs, and open door to US internships. And no need for undergrad.  More and more people don't want to go through the circus here. The only thing is, how to get 150,000 pounds to finance this (especially with the current exchange rate, ha ha).

[rmorelan]

Both SGUL and St Andrews offer 6 -yrs program for international high school graduates, not for Canadian "rejects" (never heard of any Canadian applying to medicine in Canada straight from high school  and thus being rejected) . SGUL's  4-yrs graduate entry program does not take Canadians or any internationals for that matter.

 

SGUL's   6-yr "INTO"  program is essentially geared to US students as it is associated with US universities for clinicals, and prepares for USMLE. But it is increasingly popular among Canadians too, because you can be admitted straight from high school,  have your med  degree in 6 yrs, and open door to US internships. And no need for undergrad.  More and more people don't want to go through the circus here. The only thing is, how to get 150,000 pounds to finance this (especially with the current exchange rate, ha ha).

 

oh the 150000 pounds. Small detail

 

So that route would save you I suppose 2 years?