national academy of future physicians and medical scientists award of excellence

Applying to College
1

<p>Is this common ?
or Did a lot of people get this award ?</p>

2

<p>I just went to their website, I’m assuming the ‘award of excellence’ you got has to do with this (I’m not giving a link as it’s a commercial site, so just google your title to get to the website):</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Which has this standard:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>And costs this:</p>

<p>

</p>

3

<p>My son received a mailing from the National Academy of Future Physicians. It is in trash can. I do not appreciate having to explain to my hard-working teen that a for-profit entity wants to recognize him – at a cost of about $1000-$2000.</p>

4

<p>I don’t think a lot of these criticisms are very fair. I received the National Academy of Future Physicians’ invitation, and I did a bit of investigating. I confirmed with a few people that it was not a scam and that they are offering quite a line up and other networking opportunities after the Congress is over. </p>

<p>I know the price tag of $1000 seems like a lot, but there are ways to fundraise for it. I found 5 people on Go Fund Me(fundraising website) who are in the same situation as I am. I also called the Academy and found out that they have this thing called Talent Scout that helps students fundraise and cut the cost of attendance. I’m excited to meet Jack Andraka and all the other cool scientists and medical school deans that will be there.</p>

5

<p>

</p>

<p>What is unfair about citing directly from the website? What is unfair about quoting the facts? What is unfair about having a different opinion than yours?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Please show me where ANYONE here said that it was a scam.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I rest my case. If a hefty price tag and the opportunity to ‘fundraise’ doesn’t spell boondoggle, I don’t know what does, this is a tried and true commercial strategy. Sure do it if you like, that is a choice each individual makes, but that doesn’t mean thinking things like this are overblown promises meant to suck in naive consumers isn’t ‘fair’.</p>

<p>Funny how members defending programs like this or NSHSS are usually first time members.</p>

6

<p>There’s nothing wrong with citing the facts. We can definitely agree to disagree. I just think I’m going to get a lot out of this conference since I will be in the room with some of our generation’s best and brightest scientists and doctors. I see this as a great opportunity to network with intelligent future doctors and scientists. </p>

<p>The fact that other students like myself are setting up fundraising accounts shows me that this is going to be something very special and worthwhile.</p>

7

<p>The fact that other students are setting up fundraising accounts shows only that they can’t afford to go on their own dime. And who would be crazy enough to give money to some kid who wants to go to a pricey conference? My extra dough goes to actual good causes.</p>

<p>It does indeed become tiresome to see representatives of these organizations popping onto CC to do marketing. You’d think they’d have the good sense to establish a presence over the long-term so there’d be some credibility to their breathless posts…</p>

8

<p>

</p>

<p>CC actually did this with one not-to-be-named ‘academic recognition’ organization, but they continued to use sock puppets to try and promote and justify their program.</p>

9

<p>

</p>

<p>The fact that other students are setting up fundraising accounts shows me that other students are setting up fundraising accounts. And nothing more. </p>

<p>It doesn’t show me “that this is going to be something special and worthwhile.” You can spend a lot of money on something that turns out to be a huge waste; just ask almost anybody who owns a time-share condo in Florida.</p>

<p>It doesn’t show me that you “will be in the room with some of our generation’s best and brightest scientists and doctors.” I’m not sure whether you mean leading scientists and physicians working right now, or leading high-school students who will be scientists and physicians in the next decades, but in either case, I’m dubious. I suspect the real leaders in medical science and medicine will be working at their research, and I suspect that the leading science students will be pursuing their own interests, rather than dropping a grand or two on this honor.</p>

<p>And, yeah, isn’t it interesting how these for-profit enterprises that will bestow an honor that you have to pay for always generate the same kind of discussion? They always seem to have a defender on College Confidential who has single-digit postage, and whose posts always relate only to the value of the purported honor.</p>

10

<p>You get to be in the room with other HS students who are willing to drop $1000-2000 who feel it will be an honor to be in the same room as you. Wow.</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>??</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No one here has said that, it sounds like you’re posting from a script.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Again, customizing your response to the current discussion would help with credibility.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s a very strong assertion. Data please.</p>

12

<p>staris: Have you read some of the assertion of past shills for these “honors” organizations and their posts on CC? Your post does not veer from that in the slightest. Frankly your cut and paste assertions (from a question on a Yahoo page asking if this org is a scam) cement your shill status. </p>

<p>For other readers, I just did a google on the founder of National Academy of Future Physicians. Richard Rossi, who also is the founder for ten for-profit youth leadership organizations, of which National Academy of Future Physicians seems to be one of the newer ones.</p>

<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NYLF[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NYLF&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>BTW: The $56M of revenue for the for-profit company which oversees these NFP “Leadership orgs” in 2006 included $18M in compensation. So buyer beware</p>

13

<p>Anybody else think that staris1223 seems exceptionally knowledgeable–maybe even suspiciously knowledgeable–about an organization from which he or she “received a letter…yesterday”?</p>

<p>Not to mention, uncommonly devoted to defending it?</p>

<p>Well, maybe not all that knowledgeable:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No, it isn’t. Not even according to its own web site.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.futuredocs.com/about-us/for-profit-vs-non-profit/[/url]”>http://www.futuredocs.com/about-us/for-profit-vs-non-profit/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Caveat emptor, indeed.</p>