Biomedicine or Science?

[pi]

There are no hot chicks in biomed.

I know a hot chick in BioMed (2nd year though)

Calm down Paul

AFAIK, at UoM their B. Sci can pick the exact same units/electives as B. Bio.  The only really thing that separates you from a Biomed student is 'prestige' that goes with the degree.

What prestige?

+1, the only "prestige" I can see is that it has a higher ATAR req, but as a I said above, I'd defs take UoM science over biomed.

[abeybaby]

simply, its much easier to maintain a higher GPA in science than in biomed. I picked biomed in the end because i felt like it was a bit of a 'waste' of my atar to not pick it, but yeah, its easier to maintain your GPA in science

[Bhootnike]

But wouldnt biomed be a better choice if one is determined to do med ?

[Starlight]

But wouldnt biomed be a better choice if one is determined to do med ?

I posted this on another thread but:

As stonecold once mentioned--> 'One advantage of biomed is that you get to learn a lot more broadly in biomed than science.  Our 2nd year core subjects cover 8 topics. These are obviously not in as much detail as the individual subjects but you get to learn a lot of the foundations and this will most likely come in useful later.  If you really enjoy biology, then you will like biomed.  If you don't then it is tough because you are forced to learn lots of different aspects of biology, some of which many people do not enjoy.  Still, nearly everything we have covered this year seemed relevant to medicine and I am sick of hearing the whinging and complaining, mostly from people who have NFI and 'think' that they want to study medicine.'

These are my arguments for science instead of biomed though:

a) There's more stability in choosing a backup option whilst fulfilling the MD prerequisites.

b) You are probably more likely to get a higher gpa in the bSC as you can solely choose whatever subjects you like, as opposed to having ones assigned to you in biomed (my sister received only 3 or so H1s in her 3 years of biomed and i've received 3 H1s atm in science) 

[Bhootnike]

But wouldnt biomed be a better choice if one is determined to do med ?

I posted this on another thread but:

As stonecold once mentioned--> 'One advantage of biomed is that you get to learn a lot more broadly in biomed than science.  Our 2nd year core subjects cover 8 topics. These are obviously not in as much detail as the individual subjects but you get to learn a lot of the foundations and this will most likely come in useful later.  If you really enjoy biology, then you will like biomed.  If you don't then it is tough because you are forced to learn lots of different aspects of biology, some of which many people do not enjoy.  Still, nearly everything we have covered this year seemed relevant to medicine and I am sick of hearing the whinging and complaining, mostly from people who have NFI and 'think' that they want to study medicine.'

These are my arguments for science instead of biomed though:

a) There's more stability in choosing a backup option whilst fulfilling the MD prerequisites.

b) You are probably more likely to get a higher gpa in the bSC as you can solely choose whatever subjects you like, as opposed to having ones assigned to you in biomed (my sister received only 3 or so H1s in her 3 years of biomed and i've received 3 H1s atm in science)

fair enough, i always had the impression biomed would give better foundations for med haha!
oops

thanks for the info!

[Slumdawg]

There are no hot chicks in biomed.

I know a hot chick in BioMed (2nd year though)

Who?

And biomed is better than science if your final goal is med, you'll be trained up better and pushed harder. I've met enough people from both degrees to see the huge difference. The mentality and approach to study is far more relaxed in most of the science students I've met. If you want the higher GPA though, science will definitely allow you to do so. The biomed subjects are like the science ones but on speed. When comparing what we cover in biomed in comparison to certain science subjects in some cases we have half the time to learn the same content.. Also in second year because there's two double subjects that blend together a large number of different disciplines it's much harder to keep up - this is very similar to the structure of how preclinical med is taught from what I've heard.. In comparison science students do everything in different subjects which definitely makes it easier to keep on track but obviously doesn't replicate med and biomed where the different areas are merged..

[Tomw2]

And biomed is better than science if your final goal is med, you'll be trained up better and pushed harder. I've met enough people from both degrees to see the huge difference. The mentality and approach to study is far more relaxed in most of the science students I've met.

As far as performance and perceived difficulty go there's no tangible differences amongst either the MD or DDS students in terms of those who did biomed or science. I would certainly agree that the biomed curriculum is more challenging for most people, but in terms of any actual measurable advantage this confers once you're in med - completely nebulous at best. It's a great course and it produces excellent graduates, but there's little to say it prepares a person for med better than any of a number of other degrees.

Also in second year because there's two double subjects that blend together a large number of different disciplines it's much harder to keep up - this is very similar to the structure of how preclinical med is taught from what I've heard..

To a limited extent yes, but the level of horizontal integration in med (and to a lesser extent dent) is far greater and the comparison in terms of curriculum delivery stops there. Again, I'm not convinced this gives biomed students any particular advantage, nor the science students a disadvantage.

I still maintain the "preferred pathway" rhetoric is just marketing and little more.

[Russ]

It's marketing, sure, but I agree with them. Anecdotally, which is the only observations we have, the repetition of Biomed content in the MD due to its broad base and core subjects seems to make Biomed better preparation. I mean, everyone finds it hard but I don't think you can completely discount the above.

[golden]

I am giving just a potential point here:

Because biomedicine has a higher focus on human systems, it may offer a slight help with medicine in the future as it will be focused eg. on human systems, and this 'help' may not be content per se but it's more of the past sort of thing, that you're more used to dealing with it. In terms of getting into medicine I don't think there is much difference at all. If anything from what I've heard and as been already suggested Science may get you a higher GPA, which may be better for you if you are concerned primarily about that. From an overall perspective, it shouldn't really matter.

Edited...

[Belgarion]

hmm a lot to think about, but still can't decide whether to do biomed or sci

[Tomw2]

Anecdotally, which is the only observations we have, the repetition of Biomed content in the MD due to its broad base and core subjects seems to make Biomed better preparation. I mean, everyone finds it hard but I don't think you can completely discount the above.

You're right, one cannot discount it outright, but I certainly question the tangibility of the as yet unproven advantage and to what degree it should factor into the decision of an aspiring med/dent student choosing between biomed & sci. Personally, as a DDS student and in my frequent association with the MD students, I'm not convinced it confers any significant advantage. Maybe slight familiarity in the very early stages, but little more.

Admittedly it's problematic to make generalisations either way, as different students tend to get different things out of the same degrees.

Anecdotally, the overwhelming consensus of people who are in graduate medical and dental degrees is that the disciplines or curricula of prior degree make virtually zero difference overall. A cursory glance at forums such as PagingDr would convince most of that. Also, it appears very little biomed content is actually repeated in either MD or DDS - rather, its not repeated in a way that those from biomed are at a distinct advantage to anyone else - as the medical science taught is done so in a completely different context, degree of detail and manner.

What we do see and hear is that those who did better on the prerequisite subjects and recall the anat/phys/biochem content upon starting find the first 3-6months slightly to moderately less stressful than those who did poorer or are less confident in those areas. After that, it's virtually a level playing field whether you're a Bachelor of Music grad or Biomed grad.

it may offer a slight help with medicine in the future as it will be focused eg. on human systems, and this 'help' may not be content per se but it's more of the past sort of thing, that you're more used to dealing with it.

Yeah, that's a fair assumption. I'd say that seems to be the case for many biomed students in the first 3-6 months of the MD course, but the advantage this basic familiarity confers after this seems to be minimal.

Personally I'd do biomed if I was completely and utterly uninterested in anything other than what is offered in the biomed degree and if flexibility of in major/minor/elective choice was not something I cared about.

[bridger]

There really isn't that much of a difference in the end.
I actually don't think that wanting to do med is a good reason to choose one over the other... they're both as useful as each other.
The biggest reason to choose Biomed over Science would actually be if you wanted to explore more research based fields post bachelors degree. Yes, these options are still available in Science, but I feel like if you're in Science you really have to know you want to do research so that you know the exact path you will take. The structure of the Biomed degree seems to keep options open a bit more and is more focused on biological sciences early in the degree.
The biggest turn-off of Biomed for me would be the constant banter about academics/getting into med/upcoming GAMSAT/results etc etc etc. There is definitely a more relaxed attitude among Science students (yes on average we don't perform academically as well as Biomed kids, but the average is irrelevant when you consider yourself as an individual).
Personally, I wouldn't factor the ''easier to maintain a better GPA in science'' argument into your choice. Ok, maybe it's a bit (emphasis on a bit) easier in the first couple years, but if you work hard at uni you will get results no matter what degree you're doing. There is a lot of complaining among third years Biomeds I know about Science kids having it easier. It's over exaggerated as third year is essentially the same and counts half of GPA. The first two years count the other half, and when you take into account the commonalities in breadth options and elective options, the difference in difficulty comes down to a handful of subjects. In other words, it isn't that much of a difference, and just work hard if you want a nice GPA.
Choose either if your eventual goal is Med. It will make no difference. However, if you would like to consider other options aswell, it may be best to research what each of them offers individually.

[Russ]

You're right, one cannot discount it outright, but I certainly question the tangibility of the as yet unproven advantage and to what degree it should factor into the decision of an aspiring med/dent student choosing between biomed & sci. Personally, as a DDS student and in my frequent association with the MD students, I'm not convinced it confers any significant advantage. Maybe slight familiarity in the very early stages, but little more.

-shrug-
All I'm saying is based on my experience that's the case. My friend who did science and graduated alongside me said she wished she'd chosen biomed earlier this year (she chose not to) so take from that what you will. Just looking at the biomedicine course, it's streamlined and built in a way that the science course isn't and I think it does make the first preclinical year easier than a counterpart from a BSc, assuming other things are equal.

as the medical science taught is done so in a completely different context, degree of detail and manner.

The only difference I've noticed in the vast majority of the lectures is that you now actually need to know the numbers on the screen (55% of X at 5 years, occur at X weeks after event etc.). I've had at least one lecture delivered with the same slides and the same manner as last year.

The structure of the Biomed degree seems to keep options open a bit more and is more focused on biological sciences early in the degree.

Yeah I like this. Back when I was choosing my course I could have done science but biomedicine was more interesting. During VCE I could have done a couple of subjects that would have been easier to do well in (bio, physics, spesh come to mind) and increased my ENTER by a couple of points but I took my niche history subjects and enjoyed it more. Same deal with biomedicine, it presented things I wouldn't have gotten in science and gave me things I particularly wanted out of it. Journey not the destination and all that.