<p>It is odd that US medical schools have such picky and inflexible criteria for admission, when the US imports 7,000 graduates a year from foreign medical schools. Obviously they are trained in quite different ways, but seem to do just as well in practice as US graduates.</p>
<p>Wow, do you think that’s a little over-the-top, blossom? No one suggested that this is some major tragedy. (Nor did anyone suggest that there are as many as 20 American kids a year trying to apply to American medical school with Oxbridge BAs – it’s a much less consequential problem than that.) It’s just that . . . I know a bunch of people on medical school admissions committees, and I can pretty much guarantee that none of them wants to be implementing a system that would a priori exclude a kid who was able to get admission to Cambridge to read Natural Sciences and was interested in doing that. In fact, based on the complaints I hear from them about medical students – too cautious, too focused on credentials vs. actual knowledge, no real understanding of science – I think they would be enthusiastic about that sort of kid.</p>
<p>Conflating this problem (American kid with foreign bachelor’s degree other than Canadian) with very different issues (foreign kids who may not want to practice here, no matter where their degrees come from, American kids who go to marginal foreign medical schools) is a rhetorical device, not an argument. Same goes with comparing it with the real structural problems in the U.S. medical system. But . . . that said, does it not occur to you that a population of doctors whose entire education has emphasized playing by the book do things like doing hip replacements for 90-year-olds and tube-feeding the clinically dead? Or that the U.S. medical system could use a few more people with actual experience of functioning medical care delivery systems that are not ours?</p>
<p>In any event, as I understand it, kids who go to the rather not-American Universite du Quebec a Montreal – which is, um, not quite Cambridge – are not affected by these rules, whether or not they are U.S. residents or citizens. So it’s not like the system follows your logic, either.</p>
<p>Blossom implies that all the staff at these institutions are graduates of US med schools. That is simply untrue. </p>
<p>I started with Mayo. I found the link to researchers. First person listed alphabetically is a graduate of an INDIAN medical school. 2 JORDAN. 3 MEXICO. 4,5,6: US med schools. 7 COLOMBIA; That finishes the letter A. So, yes, out of the first seven researcher-physicans listed on Mayo’s roster, 4 went to FOREIGN medical schools. </p>
<p>Moving to the letter B: 1: Bosnia and Herzegovnia; 2,3: US; 4 Canada; 5,6,7: US ; 8: US, but no MD, PhD only; 9: Croatia; 10: US MD, PhD The Netherlands; 11,12:US; 13 US, PhD only; 14,15,16:US; 17 US (PhD only); 18:US (MD only); 19: Quebec, CA; 20:US (PhD only). That doesn’t even get me through Ba, but still, 4 out of 20 went to FOREIGN medical schools…and one of those with a US MD has a foreign PhD.</p>
<p>I didn’t do a comprehensive check, but this guy, who is mighty important at Sloan Kettering, went to med school in Spain. <a href=“http://www.mskcc.org/research/lab/jose-baselga[/url]”>http://www.mskcc.org/research/lab/jose-baselga</a></p>
<p>My point is that you shouldn’t assume that the advanced treatment for diseases available to patients in the US is the product SOLELY of how wonderful US medical schools are. LOTS of the top specialists at any of these places–and an even higher percentage of those who did research-- are in fact grads of FOREIGN medical schools. </p>
<p>We are quite willing to “import” outstanding foreign medical talent. I don’t see why it is so important to only let grads of US colleges into US med schools.</p>
<p>JHS, do you have evidence that other countries, such as the UK, have more flexible or intellectual means of selecting people for medical training? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But this system already exists. There are many bright American kids at good schools, talented at science, who could not get into med school because they took some risks in college, didn’t assiduously protect their GPAs, didn’t do shadowing or volunteering, realized too late that they wanted to be doctors etc. etc. They are also a priori excluded by the American system. It has nothing to do with a provincial lack of appreciation for the intellectual caliber of Oxbridge or foreign universities in general. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not odd at all because there are way fewer seats in medical schools than applicants. Maybe we need more medical schools. Probably we’ll just get more PAs and nurse practitioners.</p>
<p>So many responses to make after my long post. </p>
<h1>66- I was referring to undergrads in general from elsewhere, those choosing medicine will likely stay in their own countries.</h1>
<h1>68- No, HS is not where you have a huge variety of diverse courses available. Nor should one’s interests be fixed by age 18, which is what can happen when required to start a medical program then. College level courses are at a different level than HS courses, so much more can be done in less time.</h1>
<h1>70 bravo.</h1>
<h1>73- US schools do not want/need the “best, most interesting” students. The majority of physicians trained need to be available to the general public, not choosing a research/academic position. The “best” medical student-physician is one with the ability to learn large amounts of material in a relatively short time frame and apply that knowledge to treating patients. It does not take a gifted level IQ to do this- very bright will do. Being interesting, having opportunities beyond the usual does not make one any better at being a physician. It is a professional, trade school. It is not for basic science research- those are PhD programs.</h1>
<h1>76- another bravo.</h1>
<h1>81- Not at all odd. Add the fact that US medical schools do not have enough places to train all the physicians we can use. It costs our society a lot more than is charged to the medical students to educate them. It is a bonus that we can take those educated elsewhere. Residency is where a lot more learning goes on, the foreign grads may know medicine but need to learn how to treat American patients as well. There are cultural components to health. The US can afford to be “picky” as there is a surplus of students who would make excellent physicians. An old joke- What do you call the person who graduated last in his (her) medical school class? Doctor.</h1>
<h1>84- there are too few places for all of the people who would make great physicians just as there are too few places in all of the best colleges for students who could do well in them. Reality- there is a competition in life for resources, education being one of them. Everyone’s life path is influenced by choices made, from birth on. btw- we (both physicians) used to tell people our gifted son was too smart to become a physician. I’m sure many physicians and other health professionals understand this comment.</h1>
<p>This goes back to the OP’s son. He may want the cultural experience of college in Britain but there is a trade off. He then foregoes the American college experience. He also will not have the advantages US students have in the American medical school application process. He needs to decide his priorities. No matter what he decides he will have experiences that shape his future. There are many good paths for utilizing one’s abilities and contributing to society.</p>
<p>expatDad obtained his MD in Canada, eh? But he also trained in London, England and in Boston, MA. I know that he became a stronger, better physician as a result of his varied training.</p>
<p>IIRC, when I was in college, Canada’s McMaster University was just implementing a medical school model in which at least some candidates might not have top marks, but brought other highly desirable attributes which would make them good physicians. I recall the model being belittled at the time, but McMaster’s program is now very highly regarded.</p>
<p>I have no knowledge of U.S. medical school admission criteria but, if there are no schools in the U.S. which might have program comparable to McMaster’s, it’s a shame. Personally, assuming an adequate baseline, I’d be inclined to choose the more thoughtful doctor over the smarter doctor.</p>
<p>
Tho’ our thoughts typically diverge, I’d echo wis75’s comments above re: post #68. One typically doesn’t have the breadth of opportunity to explore diverse interests in high school – too many fundamentals to cover. And I wouldn’t want
a 17 or 18-year-old to be done exploring – particularly boys, who tend to mature later. I wasn’t even done exploring after my first couple of degrees, but I had to get out & make a living. And then I went back to get another degree. :)</p>
<p>Medical school admissions do value characteristics other than merely academic ability. In addition to strong academics and test-taking ability, applicants are expected to have extensive clinical experience (so they know what the heck they’re getting into, esp w/r/t to how US healthcare works), extensive community service (as a demonstration of their altruism and commitment to be of service to their fellow man), evidence of leadership ability, demonstrated teaching ability (because a large part of what doctors do is educate their patients), strong written and interpersonal communication skills. Lastly, medical schools are looking for diversity of all kinds. Depending on the specific mission of the individual med school, published research or proof of a commitment to practice primary care medicine in rural or other medically underserved communities will also be important.</p>
<p>Academics are just a starting point. There’s a saying among those going thru the admission process: your GPA +MCAT get your application looked at, but it’s your extracurriculars that get you invited to interview.</p>
<p>My father, retired, was also a doctor at the Mayo Clinic for almost 30 years. His father was also a doctor, a country GP. My father told me he’d never get into medical school today. He was a late bloomer with mediocre college grades. He went to Korea and did a master’s on the GI Bill afterwards to prove his fitness for med school. There were no minorities and one woman in his med school class. Competition is much, much, much harder now, he says. It’s a game. Medicine has become a tournament profession and you need to play the game to get a ticket in. You decide whether it’s worth it to play. I agree that there are many other ways to lead a life of value and achievement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or at least the ability to give the appearance of the altruism required to get into a high paying profession.</p>
<p>For the record…my mom had a hip replaced when she was 90 and I shall be forever grateful to the surgeon who battled Medicare and his hospital to do it. She was in excruciating pain and the surgery stopped it. She lived another 6 years. But for the surgery, she would have spent those 6 years in a wheelchair and would have needed assistance in doing the most basic of things like going to the toilet herself. She also would have been doped up to limit the pain, causing mental confusion. </p>
<p>Not every doctor who recommends surgery for someone 90 is just trying to rip off the system. He almost danced the jig when my mom kept her appointment for a 5 year follow up. He said it would make it easier for him to get approval for surgery on other old people who were in PAIN and were otherwise in good health.</p>
<p>Yep, we can have American medical doctors who go through this program [FlexMed</a> - Medical Education - Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai](<a href=“http://icahn.mssm.edu/education/medical-education/programs/flexmed]FlexMed”>FlexMed Early Admission | Icahn School of Medicine)</p>
<p>but not ones who studied abroad.</p>