Slashdot Mirror


Should Organic Chemistry Be a Premed Requirement?

1-quack-4-malpractice writes "For the second time, the Wall Street Journal health blog has questioned whether premed students should be forced to suffer through organic chemistry. Dozens of doctors weighed in with comments, and many of them seem to think that the wry subject is an almost useless rite of passage. Wired Science points out that there are not enough doctors who do research in addition to seeing patients, and they are the ones who benefit most from a thorough grounding in basic sciences like organic chemistry."

5 of 567 comments (clear)

  1. of course by scapermoya · · Score: 4, Informative

    As a pre-med undergrad at UC Berkeley, I think it needs to be taught. I have been through a year of it (including labs) as part of my requirements, both for my major (molecular cell biology) and for med school. It was one of the hardest subjects I have ever taken. The kid next to me during the final for the second semester of it didn't write a single thing in three hours. I just heard him flip, flip flip.

    It isn't about the course content. To be an effective doctor you don't need to remember how to synthesize carbonyls. Find me a clinical physician who can take me through the steps of glycolysis. Organic chemistry is a gauntlet. It's an incredibly difficult subject that doesn't smile kindly on rote memorization. Rather, a complete understanding and application of knowledge, often in seemingly-unfamiliar settings, is required to excel in the course. Yeah, some people made hundreds of flash cards, and some of them probably did well. But the longitudinal thinking that one has to go through to really shine in ochem is also needed in medicine.

    Also, especially at Cal, classes like ochem are needed to pare down the pre-med pool. The merits of "weeding" kids out can be discussed, but there's no doubt that ochem is good at that.

    --
    Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun the frumious Bandersnatch.
  2. biochemistry is more useful by myc · · Score: 3, Informative

    IAABP (I am a biology professor).

    IMHO O-chem as it is taught by most chemistry departments is completely useless for pre-med students. There ought to be a lower level biochemistry course in its stead as a pre-req for pre-meds. Most MDs will NEVER have to worry about organic synthesis and crap like that; they WILL need to worry about metabolic pathways and enzymatic reactions.

    --
    NO CARRIER
    1. Re:biochemistry is more useful by rangek · · Score: 3, Informative

      IAACP (I am a chemistry professor).

      IMO, you need organic chemistry to understand biochemistry. Now, extensive synthesis and all of that "crap"? No. But a one semester "intro to organic" followed by at least two semesters of biochem is what should be required. You can't build a pyramid starting at the top. You need a foundation.

  3. Re:Classic problem. by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nothing is funnier than the truth. During my undergraduate career I worked for the Chemistry department and it was my job to watch some of these hopeless pre-med students suffer through o-chem lab. Needless to say, I feel a lot better knowing that a good share of the more inept ones got filtered out so early on in the game.

    See, I think these people are asking the wrong question. The question isn't whether pre-meds should suffer through orgo - the question is whether chemistry majors should have to suffer the whiny, grade-grubbing pre-meds who slow the class down and turn it into a brainless, memorization-based weed-out class.

    My degree's in chemistry, and the classes got a lot more fun and interesting once the pre-meds got shunted off into the "lite" track of classes like P-chem. We could have actual discussions about concepts for a change.

  4. Re:costs by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem with PAs and NPS (at least, from what I see as an outsider) is that the barriers to entry are still quite high, but not with a correspondingly high "payoff."

    Doctors make obscene amounts of money, while those working below them seem to have a hard time just scraping by...

    A popular perception, but let's see what the Bureau of Labor Statistics says. Mean Annual earnings:
    Family Physician: $137,119
    Physician Assistant: $74,980
    Registered Nurse: $57,280

    Sure, the doctor makes more than the PA or RN, but not "obscene amounts" more, and arguably well within a range corresponding to a higher level of responsibility. I'll also argue that even the lowest wage on that list is hardly "scraping by".

    To head off a possible counter-point, a surgeon makes significantly more on average ($282,504 with >1 yr experience) but also has a massively higher level of responsibility and liability. When PA's and nurses have similar responsibility and especially similar liability to physicians, then they should get similar pay. Until then, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison.

    --
    P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.