The Student Room Group

what to firm for biomed (King's or Bristol)

I've gotten offers from King's (AAA including A for bio and chem ), Bristol (AAA including A for chem), Warwick AAB (including A for Bio )
I think I will pick warwick as my insurance as it's my lowest offer but I'm having trouble picking between King's and Bristol.
King's is ranked really high in the QS rankings but is lower than Bristol in some of the other rankings like the guardian, complete uni guide
I like the King's course because of the flexibility with the common year 1 and I'm now leaning more towards pharmacology. According to QS , King's is 20th in the world for pharmacology.
But I feel that as a uni I would prefer Bristol because it'll be less expensive than london and also I feel like it's easier to adjust and make friends when you're living on campus.
I can't visit the campus because I'm an international student .

tldr : same offer AAA for both so which is the better uni for biomed
All are great universities. From a Biology and Life Sciences perspective, King's has a strong reputation both nationally and internationally and more so than Bristol and Warwick. However, London is not a cheap place to live and whilst my initial thoughts would be to go for the place that has the "strongest reputation", cost-of-living is also something that needs to be factored in whether it's with regards to accommodation costs, to socialising, etc.

Even if you chose Bristol you wouldn't really be at a disadvantage in terms of career prospects or going onto further study etc.

Quick Reply