On the other hand, what you also get (in Japan) is one of the best medical systems in the world.

+Alan Light That would appear to be "in spite of", rather than "due to":

... chairman and president had received money from the parents of applicants whose entrance exam scores were padded ... They allegedly raised the exam results of ... in the hope that the parents would make donations to the school

I would have a hard time accepting that bribery is a way to improve the quality of the candidates.

Maybe so, but my parents were very impressed by medical care in Japan compared to care in the U.S.

Just thinking - a doctor I knew, the sort of guy who was reading at a high level by age 3 - told me that he went into medical school thinking it was a good choice for intelligent people and found out it was really just about memorizing stuff. Considering the Japanese penchant for thoroughness and attention to detail, that in itself may explain the better medical care.

That doesn't explain why the Universities are actively excluding females.

I didn't say it did. Just speculating on reasons why Japan does such a good job of medical care, despite what appear to be some serious problems with their medical schools. Perhaps having the highest achievers in medical school is not as important as we think.

I suspect they still get high achievers, the problem highlighted by the article, is that they only accept male high achievers.

Perhaps that is good enough for their purposes. And besides, I know it's not politically correct these days, but a people who are concerned about their future would be encouraging their smartest women to have more children. Perhaps they think a medical career would get in the way of that.

Coming from the Government, I would accept that was the motivation. This is at the University Level.

If a nation were attempting a Eugenics program such as that (breeding for intelligence), I would find it ... distasteful (for lack of a better word). Though having said that, Japan has been active in eugenics until only very recently.

It's a social thing as much as a governmental thing.

Eugenics got a bad name because some idiots thought they should kill people, but there's nothing wrong with encouraging people to make good choices. It certainly beats the dysgenics program that we have been pushing hard for the last 50 years, and wondering why we aren't seeing any improvements despite all the money and effort we pour into "helping" the poor.

I agree, there is nothing wrong with encouraging people to make good choices. There is a massive problem with forcing people to make good choices.

An example of encouragement would be an advertisement on television extolling the benefits of being a stay-at-home-mother. An example of force would be rejecting entry into post-secondaries because you think you will benefit from them being a stay-at-home-mother.