Why so complacent in the high drop out rate?

I had an interview recently at a renowned lab here in India. I admired her work and simply couldn't wait to talk to the PI, tour the lab and telling her that I am a big fan. After the interview, the PI told me about how they are little frugal about lab supplies (and the practice apparently served them well), the 11-12 hour commitment to the lab and their high drop-out rate. All of this was to signify how science-y they are probably. However, I found these practices very uncomfortable. Especially her complacency about the drop-out rate. Indian scientists seem to find a merit in the high drop-out rate from their lab. It is like a badge of honor. Why do you have to assume the reason for them leaving is because you are demanding and/or the student is incompetent? That is stupid.

There are numerous reasons a student can quit working with someone. It doesn't necessarily have to be something wrong about the student!  Why do you have to showcase it like a crown? It doesn't look like it is worth showing off.

This, by no means, implies that the lab needs to "lower their standard" by keeping bad professionals in the lab (bad professionals? or untrained students? - will rant about that in another post). What annoys me is flaunting how people just leave their lab because "not everyone can take it". In fact, a system like this ensures that students in the lab have zero work life balance. You are not really training them to be a professional. You are training them to be a bonded laborer.

I did not get selected for the position. I had decided to not join anyway. Instead, few months later, I joined my current lab at RCB. I like it here. Our guide indulges in a lot of discussion. I have never seen her brag about how we are so exclusive. She does proudly talk about our institute that it has the infrastructure required to do good science. But nothing like that autofellatio.

I am still a fan of her work, not as a student anymore.