<p>UCLAri, just because the data is incomplete doesn’t mean we should say “well we can’t conclude anything from this data” and abandon it. There can still be analysis and discussion based on incomplete data. Maybe the conclusions we draw from it are ultimately wrong, but seeing as how this is a casual online forum, I don’t think many will care. Besides, all of science is based on theories built from a certain amount of data and logic. We don’t have complete data for everything, so we debate based on what we do have.</p>
<p>In any case, when you compare Berkeley (~63-65) with another institution with a similar student body like Cornell (~78) or Northwestern (~80), a good theory would be that Berkeley is not a good place to go for pre-med as Cornell or Northwestern. Sure, it’s possible that Berkeley is producing all these students who got into Med school but are just not reporting their data, or that a disproportionate amount of Cornell students who are rejected do not report their data, but such a skew doesn’t make much sense logically. In this case we may simply invoke Occam’s razor and say that since we don’t have good reason to believe such skews in data exist, to simply build our theory without such extraneous assumptions.</p>