- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LSU NOLA Med School Entrance Requirements
Posted on 3/9/25 at 3:16 am to MMauler
Posted on 3/9/25 at 3:16 am to MMauler
quote:
This is where state law shouldcome into effect. Questions like this should not be allowed in the interview process. Whether or not you “respect their gender identity,“ should have nothing to do with how you treat them nor should it have anything to do with whether or not you’re admitted into medical school.
If you think that doctors should be able to push their personal beliefs on whether or not they treat a patient, then you go against the oath doctors have to fulfill as their requirements to practice.
I can hate who someone is, but as a physician I am expertes to try and save their life. The questions are not meant to have you justify their lifestyle choice or personal identity views. They are meant to identify that you will put those aside and provide healthcare (this doesn’t mean things like gender affirming care) to help treat the patient to your best ability.
I was asked actual inappropriate questions in my medical school interview that had absolutely nothing to do with anything related to me as a potential physician but simply attack questions based on my ethnicity. In those cases, that interviewer was in the wrong. If I assume that is why I was accepted or rejected though, there are numerous reasons that could have been the outcome.
2
Posted on 3/9/25 at 4:52 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
It's a terrible system and a terrible way of choosing who gets into medical school.
I’m a doctor.
Recently I learned that 15% of med students quit.
That is really high.
I figured it was 3%.
I’m not sure what selection criteria would result in less quitters.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 5:43 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
The questions are not meant to have you justify their lifestyle choice or personal identity views. They are meant to identify that you will put those aside and provide healthcar
No, they’re not. And that’s the problem. When you’re looking at a mentally disturbed freak who thinks he’s menstruating, you treat him as a man. You do not “respect his gender identity“ in treating him as a physician. I’ve seen enough from the AMA (and I personally know people who teach in medical schools) to know that this is a “gotcha question“ to make sure they’re getting the right ideological candidates into med school.
As another poster has mentioned, for those students who are sane and don’t subscribe to this demented and deranged political ideology, they feel they have to lie and tell the leftist scum on these admissions committees, what they want to hear just to get into med school.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 7:17 am to IAHTiger
Did he get an interview? Never mind read he did
This post was edited on 3/9/25 at 7:19 am
Posted on 3/9/25 at 8:35 am to Geauxgurt
quote:I assume you knew those numbers were easily high enough to be statistically significant, so you were just throwing shite against the wall hoping some would stick?
First off, how many AA’s are getting into these programs? It’s easy to have significant shifts in those numbers based on low sample size vs the larger sample size for whites, Asians; etc. It doesn’t mean it’s right, but details matter.
Nonetheless, after taking a few minutes to look this up for you, here are the facts:
There was a total of ~201,501 Med School applicants during the four years in question. According to the AAMC, here's the estimated breakdown:
White: 50–55% of applicants = ~100,750–110,825 total applicants
Asian: 20–25% of applicants = ~40,300–50,375 total applicants
Black: 8–10% of applicants = ~16,120–20,150 total applicants
Hispanic: 8–10% of applicants = ~16,120–20,150 total applicants
Other: 5–7% of applicants = ~10,475–14,705 total applicants
quote:That is a reasonable question, and the direction I'd prefer the conversation to go. Those could comprise real differences in the applicant pool. I've watched future applicants taking practice MCATs and boost their scores dramatically in the process. Do you have information demonstrating Blacks or Hispanics access those resources less frequently?
Should only kids that can afford tutors, not having to work to survive in college, paying to take MCAT classes to improve their scores, having more free time to volunteer and be involved in student organizations be who we allow to become doctors?
Topics like this leave me torn. I'm aware anecdotes such as my very positive personal experiences with Black students and physicians, or limited experiences with Hispanics, over a long career can mislead (They fall into the motte and bailey precept which was otherwise misapplied earlier in the thread). That said, if system skews are requisite for bringing in the type folks I've come across in my personal experience, I'm all in. But a balance must be struck so that our med school class valedictorian, who was Black, or others I know or I've worked with and are excellent are not instead assumed to be DEI hires! That's neither fair, nor acceptable.
It's why IMO we have to discuss this stuff honestly. We need to address and explain the basis of affirmative acceptance when it exists, including the societal benefit, and limitations. Destraction, deception, or duplicity such as your opening statement "Statistics are easy to misinterpret when they are oversimplified," have less than "no value;" they are highly counterproductive. It's the beef I have with some of Cubbies' posts in this thread as well.
If you hold variance with conclusions based on truths, do not deny the truths. Address the conclusions.
This post was edited on 3/9/25 at 8:56 am
Posted on 3/9/25 at 9:27 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
If you think that doctors should be able to push their personal beliefs on whether or not they treat a patient, then you go against the oath doctors have to fulfill as their requirements to practice.
It was a politically based question designed to sniff out someone with traditional values on gender. Don’t play stupid.
If the questions was slanted the other way, you would lose your mind that it was allowed as a means of disqualifying someone from medical school.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 9:30 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
I understand the spirit of the question.
So you’ve changed your position from me lying about it to it was a great question and should’ve been asked.
Unsurprising.
Tiger Doc would like a word with you about mottes and baileys.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 9:36 am to the808bass
quote:Correct.
It was a politically based question designed to sniff out someone with traditional values on gender. Don’t play stupid.
quote:Assuming all claimed is accurate, after the applicant said he'd treat the underlying disease without regard to lifestyle, that should have been it. Further pursuit of political POV is where the shark was jumped, and IMO. the Hippocratic Oath breached.
They started pressing him asking him to say the magic words of something along the lines of “treating them while respecting their gender identity.”
Posted on 3/9/25 at 10:17 am to the808bass
quote:
So you’ve changed your position from me lying about it to it was a great question and should’ve been asked.
Oh no I definitely don’t believe it happened.
“Yeah I would have gotten in if I didn’t stay true to my morals!” I mean c’mon man
Posted on 3/9/25 at 10:39 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
It's why IMO we have to discuss this stuff honestly. We need to address and explain the basis of affirmative acceptance when it exists, including the societal benefit, and limitations. Destraction, deception, or duplicity such as your opening statement "Statistics are easy to misinterpret when they are oversimplified," have less than "no value;" they are highly counterproductive. It's the beef I have with some of Cubbies' posts in this thread as well.
My comments in no way are counterproductive. It does not state that your statistics are false. They simply state that looking at top surface level of statistics is not adequate to make those decisions. It takes actual work to look through as many factors as possible to determine what are really the driving forces, which may be good or bad.
I have no doubt there are some minorities that get in the y may be considered less or even undeserving. My point was that there are a lot of factors that can drive whether a student is better than another. Many admission boards look beyond those things and try to look at factors.
Laziness is trying to state that any kid not getting in with high scores must be because of DEI. The OP ignores that numerous white kids got in the NOLA med with lower scores than his nephew, so what is his argument there? If you are telling me no white males with lower scores got in, then maybe he has an argument, but he doesn’t.
I simply hate accusations that are based on incomplete statistics or data. My experiences are similar to yours. The AA physicians I have worked with are top notch. That doesn’t mean that DEI unfairness isn’t happening, but it is anecdotal evidence in my experience that MAYBE it is not.
The problem, though, is for specific groups to automatically default to I didn’t get it because of some nefarious reason.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 10:46 am to the808bass
quote:
If the questions was slanted the other way, you would lose your mind that it was allowed as a means of disqualifying someone from medical school.
No I wouldn’t. I may not agree with the question, but rather than be critical of it, you are simply saying unless the kid said he loved trans people and would do whatever they want, he is evil.
The point of those types of questions is to test if an applicant can handle instances where the patient may have strong issues they run counter to and how that would affect their treatment of the patient.
I have issues with lots of people, but I would still treat them to heal them in what I am qualified to do if I were a physician. If I have issues with say a transgender (I don’t believe in that garbage myself), my practice would never be involved in aspects of transition, so they would be coming to me for reasons unrelated to it. Perhaps it would peripherally be related, but let’s say as a cardiologist, I would treat their cardiovascular issues and not really be forced to go against my beliefs.
Now, probably that is a spot where an 18 year old won’t have developed that nuance yet, which means he likely wasn’t ready for that type of program.
If it’s only for 8 spots, then why do you assume he automatically qualified when there are thousands of applicants likely applying. No, you believe it most definitely was that one question and his response that is the only reason he was not accepted.
This post was edited on 3/9/25 at 10:47 am
Posted on 3/9/25 at 11:17 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
“Yeah I would have gotten in if I didn’t stay true to my morals!” I mean c’mon man
So you don't believe that its happening at all, or just not in this situation?
Posted on 3/9/25 at 11:24 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
“Yeah I would have gotten in if I didn’t stay true to my morals!”
He didn’t say that. He’s a balanced, mature, driven kid. It’s the program’s loss in not admitting him. Not his loss in not getting in. That’s your own prog interpretation of it to make your conscience feel better.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 11:25 am to HagaDaga
quote:
So you don't believe that its happening at all, or just not in this situation?
He’s a progressive. So he can’t admit any negatives to woke culture.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 11:27 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
If it’s only for 8 spots, then why do you assume he automatically qualified when there are thousands of applicants likely applying. No, you believe it most definitely was that one question and his response that is the only reason he was not accepted.
What are you talking about? You obviously don’t know. There’s 120-130 slots. His stats and resume easily put him in the top 10% of applicants.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 12:19 pm to IAHTiger
As mentioned before, MCAT scores aren’t the only thing that matters when it comes to medical school.
What were his extracurricular activities that showed he was interested in medicine? Did he volunteer, work on projects, or do any other activities that matched the medical curriculum during his undergraduate degree? How did he prep and do on his interviews? Did he early accept anywhere else? Where else did he apply?
Also, it’s not over yet. He might be waitlisted right now while other students who were accepted to make their decisions. I think it’s usually around May when everything is finalized.
What were his extracurricular activities that showed he was interested in medicine? Did he volunteer, work on projects, or do any other activities that matched the medical curriculum during his undergraduate degree? How did he prep and do on his interviews? Did he early accept anywhere else? Where else did he apply?
Also, it’s not over yet. He might be waitlisted right now while other students who were accepted to make their decisions. I think it’s usually around May when everything is finalized.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 12:21 pm to Geauxgurt
quote:Negative. Assuming the depiction is accurate, your excuse ridden explanation is total BS.
The point of those types of questions is to test if an applicant can handle instances where the patient may have strong issues they run counter to and how that would affect their treatment of the patient.
Assuming things occurred as described, the point of the question was to see if the applicant was willing to think for himself (in which case he'd be rejected), or whether he'd shirk science and do as he was told (in which case he'd remain acceptable).
The inquiry was "If we tell you to tell your patients to get their kids vaccinated NOW! IMMEDIATELY! Under an EUA, will you do it?"
In essence it's no question at all. It's a test of command compliance.
Even if science doesn't justify it, if a consensus of folks calling themselves scientists say "do it," then you WILL do it.
Even if science doesn't justify it, if a consensus of folks calling themselves scientists say "6ft of social distancing," then you WILL support it.
Even if science doesn't justify it, if the CDC says "Shutdown the schools," then you WILL repeat the demand.
Even if science doesn't justify it, if a consensus of folks calling themselves scientists say "there are 351 genders," then you WILL agree with the assertion.
The question/questioner's purpose is to assess an applicant's ability to be supportively duplicitous, which is antithetical to the Hippocratic Oath.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 12:31 pm to Geauxgurt
quote:That, by the way, is exactly what the applicant said, excepting the "I have issues with lots of people" part.
I have issues with lots of people, but I would still treat them to heal them in what I am qualified to do if I were a physician.
This post was edited on 3/9/25 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 3/9/25 at 12:31 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
What do you know about the people who WERE accepted? What are their MCAT scores? What are all their grades?
I would say that your head is in the sand but I think you know better. Dishonesty to make a point is common on the left
Posted on 3/9/25 at 12:39 pm to HagaDaga
quote:
So you don't believe that its happening at all, or just not in this situation?
All I'm saying is I have alot more first hand knowledge about what happens in med school interviews than random TD posters' second and third hand info. That is all.
Page 11 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News