<p>
[quote]
Yes, they have a joint admissions process/committee, but that process includes the caveat that you must qualify for both. When they discuss the needs of the program, they're referring to the needs of the PhD program, just like every PhD program has "needs." While a person that qualifies for the PhD program may get an edge in the Md admissions (just like any hook - and MD programs do like hooks far more than other grad programs do), you STILL have to meet the qualifications of the MD program.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, but the key word there is "qualify" - which is a tremendously loaded word, you must agree. The truth is, as we all know, most applicants who 'qualify' for a program will get rejected. For example, consider the case of undergraduate admissions. Harvard has freely admitted that the vast majority of rejectees to Harvard College are 'qualified' for the program in the sense that they would have almost certainly have successfully graduated if they had been admitted. But so what? At the end of the day, they were not admitted. </p>
<p>To 'qualify' for something generally only means that the program is confident that you have met the minimum standards necessary and that you will most likely complete the program successfully. But we all know that you have to do a lot better than simply 'qualify' for a program to get admitted to it. </p>
<p>Nobody is denying that the MD/PhD program is competitive. My point is that it is competitive in a different way, and using different metrics. Some people who would have gotten admitted to the MD/PhD program would not have gotten admitted to the regular MD program.</p>