I don't hate law school, I actually enjoy the study of the law...I hate the people, the self-satisfaction, and the arrogance of it all.I don't fit in with the crowd of geeks-gone-gradschool when they start talking about all of their accomplishments and think a Saturday night at the bar should consist of conversation about how much better they are than each other. P.S. my school is T3/4, so I can only imagine how much worse this gets up the ladder. No thanks, have a nice life. I have wanted to be a lawyer since I was 12, but now, one year into it, I would gladly cut my losses and run.But...in line with everyone else, I have assigned my soul to the Devil to the tune of nearly $100K so, yes, I will stay...and hate every minute
Well, human stem cells have been injected into mice and now sheep. Such research blurs biological divisions between species that couldn't until now be breached. Drawing ethical boundaries that no research appears to have crossed yet, the National Academies recommend a prohibition on mixing human stem cells with embryos from monkeys and other primates. But even that policy recommendation isn't tough enough for some researchers. "The boundary is going to push further into larger animals," New York Medical College professor Stuart Newman said. "That's just asking for trouble." Newman and anti-biotechnology activist Jeremy Rifkin have been tracking this issue for the last decade and were behind a rather creative assault on both interspecies mixing and the government's policy of patenting individual human genes and other living matter.Years ago, the two applied for a patent for what they called a "humanzee," a hypothetical -- but very possible -- creation that was half human and chimp. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office finally denied their application this year, ruling that the proposed invention was too human: Constitutional prohibitions against slavery prevent the patenting of people. Newman and Rifkin were delighted, since they never intended to create the creature and instead wanted to use their application to protest what they see as science and commerce turning people into commodities. And that's a point, Newman warns, that stem scientists are edging closer to every day: "Once you are on the slope, you tend to move down it."Scientists are going too far in creating mixed human-animal organisms, a Scottish organization is warning. he Scottish Council on Human Bioethics, a professional group based in Edinburgh, has published a report on the ethical implications of the practice in the journal Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics. The report is online at www.schb.org.uk. Human-dog hybrids."crossing the human species barrier is a procedure that has always fascinated humanity," oted the report, made public Tuesday and written in light of draft legislation on human embryology being prepared by the U.K. Department of Health, to be published this summer. Ancient Greek mythology speaks of monsters such as the Minotaur — a man with a bull's head — and centaurs, mixtures of humans and horses. But creatures of this nature may not remain confined to mythology for long, as scientists have begun tentatively creating mixed organisms. An array of experiments have produced animals with some human cells, for instance. Such procedures "mix human and animal biological elements to such an extent that it questions the very concept of being entirely human," the report said. This raises "grave and complex ethical difficulties."Some ethicists worry that the experiments might force society to make confounding decisions on whether, say, a human-chimp mix would have human rights. Other concerns are that such a creature could suffer from being outcast as a "monster," from having a chimp as its biological father or mother, or from unusual health problems. Some inter-species mixtures are powerful research tools, the report said. This "became clear about a decade ago in a series of dramatic experiments in which small sections of brains from developing quails were taken and transplanted into the developing brains of chickens. The resulting chickens exhibited vocal trills and head bobs unique to quails, proving that the transplanted parts of the brain contained the neural circuitry for quail calls. It also offered astonishing proof that complex behaviours could be transferred across species." Later research has spawned human-animal creations, the report said. These usually die at the embryonic stage, but often survive if the mixtures involve only a few cells or genes transferred from one species to another.The council cited the following examples:In 2003, scientists at Cambridge University, U.K. conducted experiments involving fusing the nucleus of a human cell into frog eggs. The stated aim was to produce rejuvenated "master cells" that could be grown into replacement tissues for treating disease. It was not clear whether fertilization took place, but "some kind of development was initiated,” the report said. In 2005, U.K. scientists transplanted a human chromosome into mouse embryos. The newly born mice carried copies of the chromosome and were able to pass it on to their own young. The company Advanced Cell Technologies was reported, in 1999, to have created the first human embryo clone by inserting a human cell nucleus into a cow’s egg stripped of chromosomes. The result was an embryo that developed and divided for 12 days before being destroyed. Panayiotis Zavos, the operator of a U.S. fertility laboratory, reported in 2003 that he had created around 200 cow-human hybrid embryos that lived for about two weeks and grew to several hundred cells in size, beyond the stage at which cells showed the first signs of developing into tissues and organs.In 2003, Hui Zhen Sheng of Shanghai Second Medical University, China, announced that rabbit-human embryos had been created by fusing human cells with rabbit eggs stripped of their chromosomes. The embryos developed to the approximately 100-cell stage that forms after about four days of development. The council made 16 recommendations, including that it should be illegal to mix animal and human sperm and eggs, or to create an embryo containing cells consisting of both human and animal chromosomes. "The fertilisation of animal eggs with human sperm should not continue to be legal in the U.K. for research purposes," said Calum MacKellar, the council's director of research. "Most people are not aware that these kinds of experiments have been taking place in the U.K. and find it deeply offensive. Parliament should follow France and Germany and prohibit the creation of animal-human hybrid embryos." In a report published in 2004, the President's Council on Bioethics in the United States also advocated prohibiting the creation of animal-human embryos by uniting human and animal eggs and sperm. A draft law introduced in U.S. Congress by Senator Samuel Brownback (R-Kan.) would outlaw the creation of human-animal mixtures. A 2005 report from the U.K. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee takes a more liberal stance, saying such embryos could be legal for research purposes if they are destroyed within 14 days. "While there is revulsion in some quarters that such creations appear to blur the distinction between animals and humans, it could be argued that they are less human than, and therefore pose fewer ethical problems for research than fully human embryos," the committee wrote.http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2000/nov/26/genetics.theobserver
Quote from: Morgan on May 14, 2007, 04:57:39 AM[...] It is practically impossible to get residency spots in the highly competitive specialties like Radiology, Orthopedics and Dermatology being an IMG, US or non-US one. You end up as a general family practice physician or internal medicine resident, specialties which pay much less than the highly sought-after specialties such as Surgery, Anesthesiology, Obstetrics/gynecology, etc. Equally important, almost all training slots filled by IMGs are in teaching hospitals in large urban areas that have traditionally served large numbers of minorities, uninsured, and low-income patients. It is a bit easier for US-IMGs compared to non-US IMGs. The latter, for example, who usually are on J-1 Visas (with 80% of these physicians actually staying in the US) are compelled to practice in designated rural or inner city physician shortage areas in order to have the "2-year return" requirement for J-1 visa waived. Both the initial training location and the subsequent service locations of IMGs frequently put them in minority communities where other doctors are scarce. In essence IMGs provide primary care to poor and underserved populations, with many inner-city hospitals in the U.S. relying almost exclusively on IMGs to provide services to America's poor.Honey, I've been a dirty stinky Indian all my life and I can tell ya it's not like that ... several friends of mine (poor, stinky Indian b i t c h e s, if you like!) have been able to get some pretty damn good residencies in the US.A very dear friend of mine just recently began Rheumatology fellowship at a quite good hospital after having finished the 3-year Internal Medicine residency. It'll take 3 years for the fellowship to be completed and my friend is looking at some $200,000 per annum - not bad at all for someone who lived all the time in a city like Calcutta or Bombay!
[...] It is practically impossible to get residency spots in the highly competitive specialties like Radiology, Orthopedics and Dermatology being an IMG, US or non-US one. You end up as a general family practice physician or internal medicine resident, specialties which pay much less than the highly sought-after specialties such as Surgery, Anesthesiology, Obstetrics/gynecology, etc. Equally important, almost all training slots filled by IMGs are in teaching hospitals in large urban areas that have traditionally served large numbers of minorities, uninsured, and low-income patients. It is a bit easier for US-IMGs compared to non-US IMGs. The latter, for example, who usually are on J-1 Visas (with 80% of these physicians actually staying in the US) are compelled to practice in designated rural or inner city physician shortage areas in order to have the "2-year return" requirement for J-1 visa waived. Both the initial training location and the subsequent service locations of IMGs frequently put them in minority communities where other doctors are scarce. In essence IMGs provide primary care to poor and underserved populations, with many inner-city hospitals in the U.S. relying almost exclusively on IMGs to provide services to America's poor.
In computing, bootstrapping refers to a process where a simple system activates another more complicated system that serves the same purpose. It is a solution to the Chicken-and-egg problem of starting a certain system without the system already functioning. The term is most often applied to the process of starting up a computer, in which a mechanism is needed to execute the software program that is responsible for executing software programs (the Operating System). The term "bootstrapping" alludes to a German legend about Baron Münchhausen, who claimed to have been able to lift himself out of a swamp by pulling himself up by his own hair. In later versions of the legend, he used his own boot straps to pull himself out of the sea which gave rise to the term bootstrapping. The term is believed to have entered computer jargon during the early 1950s by way of Heinlein's short story "By His Bootstraps" first published in 1941. Bootstrapping was shortened to booting, or the process of starting up any computer, which is the most common meaning for non-technical computer users. The verb "boot" is similarly derived.
To all people posting here: medicine is a very hard field to work in. You even risk your own health sometimes (surgeons are constantly in danger of contracting deadly diseases via blood) not to mention the extremely long hours many doctors put. I had the opportunity to go about it some years back and I let go .. it's just not worth it when you think about the kind of people you'd be dealing with ... Doctors witness death and suffering on a daily basis and their work takes a toll on their private lives. Shift work is often necessary. Junior doctors frequently work weekends, holidays, and nights.
[...] it has more to do with power, power over life and death of another human being...
Quote from: Tacoma on July 23, 2008, 06:25:07 PM[...] it has more to do with power, power over life and death of another human being...I am not quite sure what do you mean by that... while it has been argued that doctors murder more than any other professional group, their partners, relatives, patients or victims in service of the state or an ideology (with the power over life or death likely attracting them to the profession in the first place), it should not be forgotten that all doctors have less power over life and death than we believe and they like us to think.The trouble with medicine in the modern Western world is that there is so little doctors can do. Miracle cures are as rare today as in biblical times. Most conditions presented to GPs in their surgeries are long-term, chronic complaints for which modern medicine offers no cure and not much in the way of treatment. Talk to any GP and you will hear a tale of frustration at the prospect of another packed surgery with patients who cannot be helped except with liberal doses of TLC (tender loving care), backed perhaps by a harmless prescription to make them feel their complaint is a genuine problem. It is difficult for doctors. They enter the profession with high expectations of healing the sick and curing disease, and they discover that reality is crueller. The major causes of ill health - diseases such as diphtheria, typhoid and polio - have long since been defeated by improved living conditions, vaccination and antibiotics. For modern ailments - failing hearts, stiffened joints, old age - there is little to offer. Did Harold Shipman, a man who liked to control those around him, become progressively angered by his failure to alter the course of his patients' lives - to the point where he felt it simpler to dispatch them? We cannot know. But we do know that the syringe of morphine he carried in his bag gave him the power over life and death that he otherwise lacked. Dr. Mathew Lukwiya was at the opposite end of the spectrum. He was one of the top graduates of his generation at the University of Makerere in Kampala, but instead of emigrating to South Africa, like many of his colleagues, where a life of relative ease and wealth would have awaited him, he chose to put his talents to work where they mattered, in the war-torn province of northern Uganda where he was born. Why does a doctor make such a choice? There are many reasons, of course -- but one may be the prospect of making a real difference. To serve a population facing extreme privation and poverty after years of war is to know real power. The simplest remedies -- cheap antibiotics, basic surgery -- can have the most dramatic effects. A doctor there can save lives on a major scale. Making a difference is what most doctors want to do but, in the West, find difficult to achieve. Frank Huyler, the doctor-turned-author, is frank about this. He chose to work in emergency medicine, an unpopular specialty, because "it reminds you of the elemental forces we often don't see in the developed world". Even so, he told a reporter: "Most of what we do in the ER are really small moments, not life and death. Only some of the time does that happen and only some of the time can we do anything about it. A lot of the time, people who are going to die are going to die no matter what we do." So there we are. Killing people is simple. Curing them is more difficult. Caring, not curing, is what medicine is mostly about. But for some doctors, discovering their powerlessness can be a source of unhappiness.Enter Radovan Karadzic: was Karadzic merely a doctor who ran a genocide, or did his profession as a doctor play a significant part in his genocidal role?
Freak is the best, Freak is the best! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!I don't like calling you Freak, I'd rather call you Normal Nice Guy.
[...] it should not be forgotten that all doctors have less power over life and death than we believe and they like us to think.The trouble with medicine in the modern Western world is that there is so little doctors can do. Miracle cures are as rare today as in biblical times. Most conditions presented to GPs in their surgeries are long-term, chronic complaints for which modern medicine offers no cure and not much in the way of treatment. Talk to any GP and you will hear a tale of frustration at the prospect of another packed surgery with patients who cannot be helped except with liberal doses of TLC (tender loving care), backed perhaps by a harmless prescription to make them feel their complaint is a genuine problem. It is difficult for doctors. They enter the profession with high expectations of healing the sick and curing disease, and they discover that reality is crueller. The major causes of ill health - diseases such as diphtheria, typhoid and polio - have long since been defeated by improved living conditions, vaccination and antibiotics. For modern ailments - failing hearts, stiffened joints, old age - there is little to offer. [...]
Discussion
Resources
