Med school age question.

I was just wondering if being 22 when applying would cause any issues?
I know there is no upper age limit, but I realize that med schools take into account how long you can practise afterwards.

May be a stupid question but anything that won't count against me can do nothing but bring hope!

Also it might be worth asking, what is the age limit before you must stop being a doctor?
Or the average age doctors retire?

We currently have several access students all of them 35+ in our cohort so it can't make much difference being 22. Although there has been mention of the fact that they may find it harder to get into competitive specialities later on due to their age, although this wouldn't apply for someone of 22 I don't think.

Well considering the amount of money it costs to train someone in a speciality and that if it takes them 7 years to qualify plus almost 10 years to specialize they will have about 5 - 10 years actually working fully qualified in that specialism then I think it is entirely fair .... why waste monet when someone else would do exactly the same job but for much longer therefore saving a lot of money?? and it isn't the same because most women eventually return to the job once they have had children they don't just pack up and waste all their training.

Well considering the amount of money it costs to train someone in a speciality and that if it takes them 7 years to qualify plus almost 10 years to specialize they will have about 5 - 10 years actually working fully qualified in that specialism then I think it is entirely fair .... why waste monet when someone else would do exactly the same job but for much longer therefore saving a lot of money?? and it isn't the same because most women eventually return to the job once they have had children they don't just pack up and waste all their training.

in actual fact, there a much larger proportion of school leaver medics who go on to leave the medical profession prematurely, when compared to grad medics.

therefore your argument (if you'd 'ave caredto fink about it) is the reverse - that older applicants should 'ave more priority than younger applicants.

needlesstosay,no one is going to support your argument, including you.

Well considering the amount of money it costs to train someone in a speciality and that if it takes them 7 years to qualify plus almost 10 years to specialize they will have about 5 - 10 years actually working fully qualified in that specialism then I think it is entirely fair .... why waste monet when someone else would do exactly the same job but for much longer therefore saving a lot of money?? and it isn't the same because most women eventually return to the job once they have had children they don't just pack up and waste all their training.

Your maths is shocking! So someone enters aged 22, qualifies age 28, works for 10 years to become a consultant...that makes them 38, giving them (65-38) years as a consultant, I.e. 27!! I think thats a wise investment, no?

Plus, they'll let people up to age 40 or even 45 start medical school these days. My flatmate is 31 and he's a second year! Doesnt mean he's a liability to the NHS or anything!

I (assume) he's just using that as an example why it isn't as worthwhile training someone who is a lot older ie 30's/40's as he did previously state that being 22 shouldn't be a problem for the OP but goes on to mention people who are older than this doing it (in his post 35+) that may have trouble later going into specialisms due to their age.. In these calculations he is referring to the older 30's/40's applicants, not the OP. With calculations for someone of about forty, his values generally add up. 40+7+10+(5~10)= about 65.

Your example simply proves his point that yes, someone of 22 would be better value compared to people ages 35+ or older studying as they would be active much longer.

They are not graduates therfore your arguement about more school leavers than graduates dropping out doesn't apply and if you had read my first post it isn't me that had said this about them finding it harder it is what they have been warned by careers tutors and such like. I was merely saying that I agree with the reasoning behind it.

They are not graduates therfore your arguement about more school leavers than graduates dropping out doesn't apply and if you had read my first post it isn't me that had said this about them finding it harder it is what they have been warned by careers tutors and such like. I was merely saying that I agree with the reasoning behind it.

Thanks for your help.

I am wondering what kind of career change you could make if you were already a doctor. I suppose trust wouldn't be an issue.