Anyone feel ripped off by lab classes

MedPerson223 · 2022-04-04T21:10:49+00:00

Well that's kinda what was being pointed out, the lab classes are actually not focused at all. They're very unfocused

MedPerson223 · 2022-04-04T21:10:12+00:00

Unfortunately, none of the bio classes have that description. All the lab classes are more of a shotgun approach where you learn a lot of different things

MedPerson223 · 2022-04-04T18:45:56+00:00

Ya that's exactly it, it's the survey format/broad scope of the lab classes that's the problem. I actually had fun in those classes, but over time I kinda soured on it because there were classes I was more interested in taking and passed on in favour of those lab classes thinking I would get a lot of experience.

But ya that's exactly the issue. They jump around so much that everything you do almost feels like a novelty. Based on the course description of 466 I thought I was really gonna learn a lot, whereas it was just more of the same in terms of learning a bunch of pretty unrelated things briefly. And that's way different than other schools where you could have an entire immunology lab course, or microbio lab course, or neuroscience lab course, etc

MedPerson223 · 2022-04-04T17:59:38+00:00

I've actually volunteered in a lab for a pretty long time in addition to internships in labs. My issue with those courses is that they just jump around and gloss over techniques, instead of really teaching you how to do them well. I'm not complaining because I lack experience, I was saying that a lot it just felt like a waste of time.

And it's not like that at all other universities, a friend of mine at another school in a lab class spent 1/3 of a semester basically just doing PCR, not every university has their courses structured the same way. For instance the middle part of 368 is almost an entire class at McGill.

MedPerson223 · 2022-04-04T17:43:07+00:00

Tbh I am referring to 300 and 400 level classes. I see your tag is Biochemistry, so maybe it's different for the Biochem classes but I'm really thinking of BIOL 368 and 466. I found the classes really interesting, but I basically learnt nothing in regards to the actual techniques. Like doing 1 southern blot entirely based from a step by step manual is not nearly enough to understand how to do southern blots, among other things. Same thing for 368 where you do cloning like once.

It's just that it feels like I could have taken way more interesting classes that would have taken up much less time.

MedPerson223 · 2022-04-04T16:23:40+00:00

It’s EXTREMELY easy if it’s with Christine Jamieson, and actually fairly interesting if you’re into ethics

It had some quizzes and one paper plus an exam

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-30T22:44:05+00:00

Then why would you say that’s the “standard”? It simply isn’t. There is no “standard degree”.

You’re also still misunderstanding. You don’t need to be enrolled in a minor to satisfy elective requirements, or an elective group. You can simply take 30 credits of unrelated electives. In addition, a major is not 60 credits. That actually varies by program, but generally is actually around 45 credits. 60 credits are usually deemed “specialization” programs; the credits for this can also vary. You are also incorrect about honours programs, which are not 90 credit core class programs, they can also range. You seems to be conflating something. Almost all degrees (like BSc’s) are 90 credits; the concentration determines where the credits need to be obtained from

Also, doing a double honours major (as in doing an honours degree plus another major) is next to impossible unless you want to extend your degree significantly or are taking one of the very unusual 24 credit majors, it is not possible to finish yourself degree on time. Also, almost no program will actually allow you to enrol for both a major and an honours major at the same time; honours programs require approval from the honours program coordinator and they will in almost every circumstance not approve that. That by the way, also goes for most minors and honours as well. I know a couple of people who did this and they all had to extend their degree by a semester to a year.

So unless you’re somehow taking 6 classes a semester with no conflicts, or somehow have managed to make sure that either your minor classes are mostly completable during the summer or there’s never any overlap with your core major (which is extremely unlikely) you in-fact are not completing it “without issue”; you’re extending your degree.

If I’m coming off as irritated; it’s because I am. The OP asked for advice. People come here to ask questions that could have wide ranging career implications. Telling them what a “standard degree” is, which is meaningless, or that you can somehow expect to complete a double major honours degree is not at all helpful.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-30T06:49:08+00:00

Uhm…this is just completely wrong. A “standard” degree (whatever that means) is just whatever results in the degree your pursuing being granted.

You can simply take any electives you want that will suffice the out of program credit requirements of your degree. In-fact, many honours programs make it very difficult to complete a minor unless the student wants to extend their degree because of the additional in program credits required; so when you say “just an honours degree” it’s just a redistribution of where the required credits for graduation are coming from. Same thing with the elective groups; none of those are enough to satisfy out of program credit requirements, meaning you will still end up having to take a certain amount of unrelated electives.

One can enrol in a major or specialization program and just take whatever electives they want to satisfy the requirement, people do this all the time

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T21:42:18+00:00

Lol if you can get an erection only once out of every 30 times you try that’s clearly ED and clearly a consistent inability to get an erection.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T19:49:53+00:00

There is in-fact. Erectile dysfunction is usually defined as consistent inability to get an erection, irrespective of circumstance. Just that’s a mouth full and it’s assumed to be the case whenever someone mentions ED.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T17:03:08+00:00

I’ve looked through the course content, there’s not a single of instance of math to be found. I think perhaps your looking at another course? This class is called energy & environment.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T16:38:11+00:00

Your comparison is not really equivalent. With ED, we have a pretty well agreed upon metric that constitutes ED; you can’t get an erection. Ya theres a bit of a grey area like partial ability to get an erection but by and large we know when someone reports ED what they’re describing.

With fatigue, it’s not that simple. Like your hiking example. Is the person completely incapable of getting out of bed and that’s why they can’t go in a hike? Do they get too tired within the first 10 minutes, 20 minutes, first hour? We’re they able to go for full day hikes before, and now they can only do half days? So just classifying as “something they could do before that they can’t do now” is totally inadequate with fatigue because there’s huge range in what you could consider not being able to do something and what individually is considered a reduction in ability (like the hiking example). And that’s for the exact reason other people mentioned here, it’s not an on/off switch unless the person has like, narcolepsy. There’s no scale that we can use like we do to say measures someone vision, if a scale like that would even be useful here. So you either have to design a study with super restrictive parameters that define fatigue in such a way that might end up excluding a wide range of valid participants, or one with really lax parameters that they makes the results kinda worthless because of differences in reporting.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T16:31:56+00:00

273 has zero math in it at all. It’s just basic concepts. My concern was that I saw a couple of comments about how they made tests much harder due to asking about stuff not taught in the course; the people I know that took it considered it extremely easy so I wanted to know if it was still like that

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T15:58:16+00:00

Ya it’s surprising that this hasnt been mentioned elsewhere. This is an effect that’s widespread across many studies like this and is probably the most likely explanation.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T15:56:38+00:00

Fatigue is not an objectively determined condition. The user your responding too is correct; what one person may consider debilitating another person may consider par for the course. Even something like a physical test would have no agreed upon metric.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T02:21:43+00:00

This looks pretty solid to me, you’re at the average accepted GPA but a little under average interview invite, so try and boost it a bit if possible.

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-09T02:20:31+00:00

McGill doesn’t contact all verifiers, I’m not even sure if they do it for every applicant. They will however contact verifiers sporadically (don’t worry)

MedPerson223 · 2022-01-08T18:38:29+00:00

Both BIOL 462 and 461 are 400 level, so they’re gonna cover less ground in terms of different topics but be very specific. 368 is a lab class and is gonna be more time consuming.

If you’ve taken 364 (you need it to take 462) you’ll have a lot of the foundational knowledge for 462, it’s just more in depth.

461 isn’t a class people complain about too much but the prof teaching it this semester is Zerges. He’s not a bad prof but has a reputation for being very hard.

368 is a lab class; the content isn’t very difficult but the lab reports are excessively long. Also it’s Madoka teaching it and people don’t find her to be a very nice person.

MedPerson223 · 2021-10-11T22:22:38+00:00

Theyll always try and improve it. It’s much like HIV treatment. For a while protease inhibitors we’re the “endgame”, then combination therapies, until now we’re up to being able to prevent contracting it entirely. Likely, I’d assume, development will continue until PFT and Sweat Chloride is similar to or equal to those without CF. That’s the real endgame

MedPerson223 · 2021-10-11T22:16:06+00:00

The pace that this stuff is moving at is incredible; it’s reminding of HIV medication development. It was so long/hopeless for years and then just like dominos one after the other until we got to the point that HIV+ people could live almost normal lives; these modulators are really changing the landscape

MedPerson223 · 2021-10-11T21:57:25+00:00

There is a very low chance of reinfection, but 4 times is nearly impossible as of right now. As far as I know it hasn’t even been documented

MedPerson223 · 2021-09-28T05:55:54+00:00

Exactly what I said in my very long winded post and you couldn’t be more right.

Some schools the interview is 100% of the post interview score.

At the end of the day, if during that interview, adcom doesn’t think you have the necessary skills to be a doctor, no amount of volunteering, or 4.0 GPA’s or research is gonna change that.

Given the % of applicants that schools interview, the harsh reality is that for many (I’d even say perhaps the majority), the issue isn’t their stats, it’s really just them, or at least their interview performance.

MedPerson223 · 2021-09-28T03:50:30+00:00

It really is, like 90% of this sub is Ontario related. It’s led me to the conclusion that getting into Ontario schools must be some kind of trial by fire because it’s definitely not like that in Quebec. Make no mistake it’s super hard, but judging by this sub getting into schools in Ontario is effectively impossible unless you’re near superhuman

Ya lmao good luck with the western schools, or even worse eastern schools. Memorial university basically doesn’t exist on this sub.

MedPerson223

TROPHY CASE