This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Biomed harder than medicine?

A lot of my biomed friends believe that we do more work than the medics. The medics do far fewer essays, have shorter exams, less essays in their exams and less coursework. The content of stuff we learn from is identical (share similar handouts), however when they do clinicals we do practicals. Some of the medics agree that they do less work but what do you lot think?

Reply 1

Steeeeevo

15

bleeper

A lot of my biomed friends believe that we do more work than the medics. The medics do far fewer essays, have shorter exams, less essays in their exams and less coursework. The content of stuff we learn from is identical (share similar handouts), however when they do clinicals we do practicals. Some of the medics agree that they do less work but what do you lot think?

A lot of people feel that medicine isn’t that hard of a subject, the reason it has such high requirements is apparently more to do with demand for the course rather than the actual difficulty of it. Personally as I have no experience of doing medicine I cant put in my own personal opinions, but from what I've heard from people who do have experience of the course and people who one way or another know you might just be right.

Reply 2

tokay

Some dude down at imperial was going on about how the medics had it easy..........he was retaking the year however.
All the med schools i had a look at went on about the high intensity of it and how difficult it was although from what i've heard that might not be true, ill tell in a year.

Reply 3

pkonline

8

It's all relatively subjective and dependent on which university you are at, as well as teaching style - eg some med school rely on self-taught problem based learning, therefore have few organised lectures and tutorials, which may seem like less hard work on the face of it, altho obv more independent work.

Reply 4

Helenia

20

We don't have "biomedical sciences" at Cambridge as a separate course, the nearest comparison is Biological NatSci. Given that our course is quite academic and less vocational than many anyway, I think that we're on a roughly similar playing field. First year NatSci is harder than medicine in terms of contact time, but then this reverses in 2nd year. We too have fewer (not less!) essays in exams and we do have MCQs and/or short answer papers, which not all the BioNatSci subjects do, and I've heard quite a lot of bitching about this. There is, however, a reason for this - in Medicine there is a certain basic level of knowledge you MUST have of all the subject areas, which is what is tested by MCQs etc. For the Biologists though, it's possible to revise certain topics heavily and skip others entirely, because you know there will be a choice of essay questions so you don't have to be able to answer on everything. Interestingly (and amusingly for me) when one of the 2nd year NatSci Pathology papers was changed this year from an essay paper to a negatively marked MCQ paper like the medics have (they have essays too, but previously NatSci students had two essay papers and medics only one; now they're the same) the NatSci students were NOT happy bunnies. Much bitching about how unfair the system was. The medics kept smugly silent :wink:

In general, I think they're fairly similar in terms of difficulty and workload.

Reply 5

bleeper

OP

11

Some dude down at imperial was going on about how the medics had it easy..........he was retaking the year however.
All the med schools i had a look at went on about the high intensity of it and how difficult it was although from what i've heard that might not be true, ill tell in a year.

Was this guy a medic?

We don't have "biomedical sciences" at Cambridge as a separate course, the nearest comparison is Biological NatSci. Given that our course is quite academic and less vocational than many anyway, I think that we're on a roughly similar playing field. First year NatSci is harder than medicine in terms of contact time, but then this reverses in 2nd year. We too have fewer (not less!) essays in exams and we do have MCQs and/or short answer papers, which not all the BioNatSci subjects do, and I've heard quite a lot of bitching about this. There is, however, a reason for this - in Medicine there is a certain basic level of knowledge you MUST have of all the subject areas, which is what is tested by MCQs etc. For the Biologists though, it's possible to revise certain topics heavily and skip others entirely, because you know there will be a choice of essay questions so you don't have to be able to answer on everything. Interestingly (and amusingly for me) when one of the 2nd year NatSci Pathology papers was changed this year from an essay paper to a negatively marked MCQ paper like the medics have (they have essays too, but previously NatSci students had two essay papers and medics only one; now they're the same) the NatSci students were NOT happy bunnies. Much bitching about how unfair the system was. The medics kept smugly silent

In general, I think they're fairly similar in terms of difficulty and workload.

lol. It's just a bit unfair that the biomeds get a lot of stick especially from people who know nothing about the course and just slag it of as being easy when some of the medics would be lucky to do well in the course.

Reply 6

pkonline

8

Even though there are similarities in content between medicine and biomed, the stance is different - even during you preclinical years, where you concentrate on learning basic sciences, you still have one eye on the "clinical" significance, and therefore there will be a difference in emphasis of certain elements.

Reply 7

Fluffy

15

Hmmm - biomed = a degree in preclinical medicine :wink:

Reply 8

Fluffy

15

You could argue, that the medics are less spoon fed? Not having anything timetabled is not the same as not having any work... A lot of modern medicine teaching is about motivation and SDL - much like it will be when you graduate and are in practice. Medicine has a different skill set to biomed sci - taking out the biomed sci courses which solely act to filter people on to medicine (i.e. the non-accredited ones), then biomed sci is really teaching people to be MLSOs and lab workers (also taking out of the equation those who go into research) - not diagnosticians...

Just because you're not being told exactly what you need to know by a lecturer doesn't mean you don't need to know it, or indeed are not learning it...

IMHO, it's much easier to have to learn something because you have an essay due in on it, than to have to cover the same material without that 'motivating' factor of it costing you marks in your degree if you don't do it...

Reply 9

Srathmore

11

tokay

Some dude down at imperial was going on about how the medics had it easy..........he was retaking the year however.
All the med schools i had a look at went on about the high intensity of it and how difficult it was although from what i've heard that might not be true, ill tell in a year.

See you there!!!

Reply 10

Blates as

1

Fluffy

Medicine has a different skill set to biomed sci - taking out the biomed sci courses which solely act to filter people on to medicine (i.e. the non-accredited ones),...

I don't think all non-accredited biomed sci courses have the aim to merely just filter their graduates onto medical courses. The biomed sci course at manchester is non-accredited (because they chose not to be) and aims to give a rigorous scientific research-themed training in the basic medical sciences. The course has up to 12 hours of lab time per week in the first two years and two intensive 4 week lab and research training courses in the final two years. Most students also get the chance to gain Home Office in-vivo licences. The clear aim at Manchester is to get it's students into postgraduate research and this is drummed into students from the beginning - at the end of the first year all biomed sci students are actively encouraged to transfer to more specific life science courses, for example pharmacology or neuroscience.

The director of the biomed sci course at Manchester was asked by the medical school to alter the biomed sci degree content to make it possible for the transfer of students at the end of the first year and final year to medicine, he refused because he didn't want to comprimse the research bias on the course.

Bit of a lengthy post but I like to stick up for biomed sci students - many are branded with the 'wannabe medics' and 'failed medics' brush and in the majority of cases that is not the truth.

Reply 11

Fluffy

15

Not being funny, but thanks to 6th form career advisors, a lot of biomedical scientists ARE failed medics, who are doing Biomedical Sciences as they've been told that this will represent their best chance of getting onto a medicine degree.

Unfortunately really, as the reality is that it doesn't - you end up with UCAS forms from a really homogenous bunch of graduate applicatants, and nothing really stands out. Now, having a 'pure' degree in anatomy, neuroscience etc...

Most non-accredited biomedical sciences degrees are filters into medical schools - you only have to look at how many are attached to medicial schools with 'reserved' places for their own biomedical science students and slightly lower entry exam requirements...

My choice to use of the word acredited was to stick up for people doing biomedical science because they wanted to (i.e. the right reasons) and not meerly as a filter into medical school...

I'm surprised by Manchesters stance though - if they're offering a real biomedical science degree (i.e. for biomedical sciences sake), not going for accrediation seems daft.

Oh - one of my best friends here at BL is a Manchester Biomedical Sciences graduate - her view of the course is very much different to yours :wink:

Reply 12

idiopathic

15

The main difference is that (preclinical) medicine focusses on a lot on anatomy and physiology, clinical relevance, plus there's psychological/social modules, while biomedicine is a lot more biochemistry and cell biology with less anatomy and no psychology/sociology. I do also agree that biomeds have more essays.

Reply 13

tokay

That i will srathmore

Reply 14

Blates as

1

Fluffy

Oh - one of my best friends here at BL is a Manchester Biomedical Sciences graduate - her view of the course is very much different to yours :wink:

back at ya! My impression of the Manchester Biomedical Sciences course has been garnered from one of my housemates - a current Manchester Biomedical sciences student.

The reason why Manchester shied away from accreditation was to keep the research bias but also to maintain the flexibility of the course. Biomedical science students at manchester study a set of core subjects in their first year (in common with all life science courses) and then in the second year a wide range of modules can be studied from various subject groupings allowing for some 'specialisation'. They have a completely free reign of choice in their third year. Accreditation would have meant the loss of this flexibility as certain subjects would need to be studied throughtout the course, as well as specific lab skills - something not all biomed students are interested in.

As for the majority of biomeds at manchester being failed medics and biomedical science being purely a filter for medicine; for 2006 entry only six people out of 350 manchester life science students, applied for medicine. Only two of these six were biomeds (out of 80). Interestingly, the four students that ended up with medicine offers were two anatomists, a pharmacologist and a microbiologist - the two biomeds were rejected. Apparently biomedical science, of the 2005 graduates, had a higher proportion of students going onto masters and PhDs than any of the other life sciences.

I don't know why I've got a bee in my bonnet over this and I realise I am only using Manchester as an example, the story elsewhere is probably not the same...

Reply 15

Fluffy

15

Hey - I never said Manchester's course was a filter - AFAIK it's one of the good ones. I was talking more of the likes of QMUL/BL, where 16 students [from a total intake of just 40] are guarenteed places on the GEP without having to compete with the rest of the country...

Reply 16

Blates as

1

Fluffy

Hey - I never said Manchester's course was a filter - AFAIK it's one of the good ones. I was talking more of the likes of QMUL/BL, where 16 students [from a total intake of just 40] are guarenteed places on the GEP without having to compete with the rest of the country...

I see what you mean; It does seem a shame that people will study a subject purely to study another one. People at Manchester do genuinely seem to have an interest in science and enjoy their course. I suppose its the same as in Bradford with the clinical sciences programme... people studying it purely in the hope of getting into leeds and then being left on a course they don't want to do with a very bitter taste in their mouth..

Reply 17

Helenia

20

I have a degree in "Biological and Biomedical Sciences" now :wink:

Well, strictly speaking, it's "Natural Sciences: Biological and Biomedical Sciences" but who cares? :wink:

Reply 18

bananamoon

bleeper

A lot of my biomed friends believe that we do more work than the medics. The medics do far fewer essays, have shorter exams, less essays in their exams and less coursework. The content of stuff we learn from is identical (share similar handouts), however when they do clinicals we do practicals. Some of the medics agree that they do less work but what do you lot think?

Hey, i think biomed and medicine are equal because: although medics have roughly one essay (ssm) to hand in a year (compared to 18 things I as a 3rd year biomedical student had to hand in e.g. essays/lab reports) they have a harder exam most of the time. the pass mark is higher (in some cases) and the overall quantity is larger. they dont have continual assessment that would help pass the year, it all comes down to the final exam..

Reply 19

Sarky

18

I couldn't do biomed. I'm rubbish at lab work and i'm not good at science in the level of detail they're expected to know.

Biomed harder than medicine?

Related discussions

Articles for you