Medicine / Misc / Say what?

This is med school – we can read, but we can’t count!

Have you ever been frustrated by a lecturer who simply reads his/her lecture notes instead of actually… you know… lecturing?

Well, sometimes it’s worse when they don’t read the notes off!


Finally, the take home message!

Will you remember these three things?

Be wise



and Moralise!



3 thoughts on “This is med school – we can read, but we can’t count!

  1. Is there evidence of the benefit of circumcision? (I don’t know about what disease the lecture mentioned above was?) The Dutch Medical Association has recently release a position paper in which they state that parents should be strongly discouraged from it if their children don’t have a medical indication. They’d even like to ban circumcision altogether but they’re afraid people will start doing it illegally, leading to even more complications.

    That’s why I’m rather curious as to why a lecturer would suggest it as a correct preventative action :). (Personally, I don’t know enough about the risk/benefits of circumcision, what I do know is that the kosher way of slaughtering animals was recently restricted and that it’s rather scary how the debate instantaneously moved to circumcision.)

    By the way, our lecturers can also be VERY boring… Some people do great research, are terrific doctors – but can’t teach. Unfortunately.

  2. Okay, so I was wanting to look up journal articles blah blah etc etc… But then I realised, that if I kept to that plan, you’d probably never get an answer! So here’s the “This is what they told us in class and I am too lazy to verify it on Medline” version.

    Right, so this is South Africa. We have a major problem with HIV here.

    So, even thought the lecture was mainly about sexually transmitted bacterial disease, ultimately, everything comes back to HIV.

    The reasoning behind the circumcision thing is that a circumcised male has less risk of spreading and/or contracting HIV. Because the foreskin tears easily. Blood spreads HIV.

    Thus, no foreskin makes it harder to spread or get HIV.

  3. Wow, that’s really interesting. Over here, there’s mainly a debate regarding the hygienic aspects. It’s hypothesized that it’s harder to keep that region clean when the foreskin is still intact -> more risk of accumulation of pathogens (like human papilloma virus etc) -> more risk of STDs and several kinds of cancers. So there’s been a lot of disagreement, most people that are against circumcision say that it’s not that hard to keep it clean etc. etc. Also, the evidence for that particular hypothesis isn’t that strong.

    So it’s very interesting to read this entirely different reasoning behind the use of circumcision. Thanks 🙂 (will probably look it up, but I think I’m too lazy as well :P)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s