American Thinker du jour - Doctor Edition
-
QUOTE
This means that most of what medical students learn early in medical school will be obsolete before they graduate, the same for residents from the beginning to the end of their residency program. This is why physicians learn on the job, gaining wisdom from their observations and experiences, and changing their practices accordingly.
UNQUOTETHe first part of the statement I disagree with. The second makes sense, and is common in pretty much any job.
-
@taiwan_girl said in American Thinker du jour - Doctor Edition:
QUOTE
This means that most of what medical students learn early in medical school will be obsolete before they graduate, the same for residents from the beginning to the end of their residency program. This is why physicians learn on the job, gaining wisdom from their observations and experiences, and changing their practices accordingly.
UNQUOTETHe first part of the statement I disagree with. The second makes sense, and is common in pretty much any job.
That's right. The 'early' part of medical school is learning two things: the anatomy and physiology (including pharmacology) of the human body and the vocabulary used to describe it.
I graduated from med school 45 years ago (shut up) and I still understand these concepts. They are by no means obsolete.
-
Here's the point he's trying to make...The explosion of medical knowledge can render some laws that restrict a physician's practice, obsolete almost before the ink is dry.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion.
-
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Doctor Edition:
Here's the point he's trying to make...The explosion of medical knowledge can render some laws that restrict a physician's practice, obsolete almost before the ink is dry.
Is he really advocating GP's running wild and just prescribing stuff outside of FDA approval?
Because I'm pretty sure that will end up with some bad things happening, followed by lawsuits and much recrimination, and a large amount of I told you so-ing.
And not to denigrate GP's in any way, but are they the ones we want making the call? It's ok saying the technology is changing really quickly - are all GP's really expected be fully up-to-speed on this stuff?
-
Docs prescribe stuff all the time, that may not necessarily be approved for the condition they are trying to treat.
That's between the patient and the physician. Liability (first, do no harm) should rein in the quacks most of the time.
-
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Doctor Edition:
Here's the point he's trying to make...The explosion of medical knowledge can render some laws that restrict a physician's practice, obsolete almost before the ink is dry.
Sure. but what's the alternative?
-
That's the question, isn't it?
How much should a physician's practice be restricted in an information explosion?
