So I can easily say that I'll probably feel like this guy in a matter of days. Medical school officially starts tomorrow at 8:30 in the AM. Yes, there is overwhelming fear. After not studying for an entire year, I have no idea if I will be able to fall back into the groove of all nighters and hundreds of pages of reading in one sitting. But somehow I will have to, regardless of what I think. On the plus side, I will be able to study the human body...finally...after wanting to ever since I saw my first live dissection. Strange? Yes. I know most people's first response to seeing a body cut open is to vomit into their hands. Though something about knowing how it all works inside is intriguing. So many parts have to work together one hundred percent of the time so we can stay alive. But now I'm just rambling. Point is:

Medical School = Scary = Exciting


Fin.


Image found here

This current week has been dominated by medical school orientation here in Chicago; enter one straight week of the awkward ritual of making friends, standing around, long pauses, and feigning interest in a variety of topics. I don't know when I started to hate icebreakers. Maybe when I realized that despite the fact they were so corny, they worked really well. It's like a bad joke that never get old.

This summation of this experience will be a 'booze cruise' that I believe will embody every sense of the phrase. The only problem will be the number of professors on the boat at the same time. I've learned that the smell of whiskey doesn't leave the breath, skin, or clothes quicky. Nothing like talking to someone four times your age while they estimate the number of Manhattans that have made you so sociable and confident in your educational choices.

Note: I would have included a picture with this post, but when you search for "medical school" and "humor" in google, nothing funny comes back. I think its an omen.

This guy is the new director of development at Grinnell College. This guy will be in charge of managing our gifts and grants. Grinnell, as people may or may not know, has one of the worst fund raising track records in the business. And now this guy is in charge of fixing that. Those lines around his mouth suggest smiling isn't his strong suit.

Quindlen, A. (2007, August 6) How Much Jail Time? Newsweek

Link here

I'm not sure if Ms. Quindlen is nearly as clever as she comes off in this Op Ed piece. As a starting point, she takes a youtube video that asks pro-life protesters what the penalties for abortion should be if it is one day illegal. As these protesters struggle to come up with an answer, if any, the video maker's point is silently proven, that how can something be illegal with no penalty for committing the crime?

I'll give it to the video, it certainly leaves the protesters looking bad. But in terms of earth shattering arguments, the video is nothing more than the beginning of what could be a tit for tat argument with anecdotal one-liners between pro and anti abortion groups. Honestly, I think that the pro-life movement is more interested in abortion clinics closing their doors rather than seeing every woman who gets one suffer through some sort of penalty. But that's for another post; my real issue is with this Newsweek article.

For starters, the title, "How much jail time?" Makes an assumption that the penalty would indeed be jail time. It's something the video doesn't do, simply asking "what should the penalty be?" This error is compounded as it sets the tone for the interviews during the article. The president of Planned Parenthood of greater Iowa, after being lobbed the softball, "what are these crazy pro-lifers thinking with jail time" states, "they never connect the dots." Oh, of course.

Then there are multiple examples of when pro-choicers asked political candidates "how much jail time should women who get abortions serve?" This is like asking presidential candidates, "how many Iraqis would you kill during your four years?"

The article ends citing a debate where George Bush senior was asked the same abortion question, and dodged it lamely. In terms of a closing argument, it really contradicts the rest of the article. It first shows that Republican candidates asked that question can still win elections, despite what the president of Planned Parenthood of greater Iowa suggests. Second, it shows that this question is nothing new. It was asked 20 years ago and has been sporadically since then to no fanfare.

I'll give her this, her arguments regarding the most recent abortion decision are cogent. She makes a very good point that the Supreme Court seems to imply that they are saving women from themselves. I especially like her line about "ignoring or infantilizing women, turning them into "victims" of their own free will." So maybe she should have stuck to writing an article about that instead of digging through the recesses of youtube to find fodder for newsweek.

Well, I've learned a valuable lesson about blogs; they are not all created equal. So I've switched to blogger from geocities. You can still see what's left of the geocities one here, though i've moved the majority of the posts to this new blog.













Image found here

Berenson, A. (2007, July 29) Sending Back the Doctor's Bill. The New York Times

Link here

For any of you premeds, or med students out there, the nytimes has been doing an interesting report on doctor's salaries in the US and problems with our healthcare system.

Being a current medical student, I have to say that all the talk about what a doctor should be payed can be terrifying at times. Lots of news articles compare American doctors to their European peers, and show that doctors make significantly less elsewhere; around 60 to 120 thousand a year.

I understand that going into medicine shouldn't be bout the money, and I like to think that my reason lie on the altruistic side. But a steady decline in my potential salary certainly detracts from the lure of medicine.

Beyond college, medicine demands 4 years of basic medical training, then anywhere from 2 to 6 more years in residencies and fellowships following medical school. A surgeon can spend 8 to 10 years post college training to practice. And as they should, after all, they do cut people open. Medical school is not cheap, and can plunge students into 120,000 dollars of debt; even more if they attend a private medical school. residents and fellows get payed 30 to 40 thousand dollars a year. Needless to say, training to be a doctor is not glamorous, nor is it lucrative. I'll have a 30 year mortgage by the time I'm 26 with no consistent form of income until I'm at least 30.

So the question is, financially, why in the hell would I become a doctor? Well, I know that at some point in time, I'll be able to pay off my debt, and afford owning a home, supporting a family, and putting kids through college. But if the median salary for a doctor keeps dropping, will I want to be in a profession that demands lifelong training, but little stability?

Sooner or later potential doctors will become frustrated that their college peers who were econ majors are making six figures without any graduate education, and realize that they could do the same. Anyone who is smart enough to be a doctor is certainly smart enough to be a banker, or stock broker.

I think that the healthcare system has serious problems, but this idea that "the doctors can afford to pay for it" is crap. Working for the AMA, I heard the phrase "what's a couple hundred dollars to a doctor" when they would raise membership dues, or charge for some continuing education activity. And I feel like that's the attitude that everyone has. Doctors can afford it because they make a lot of money, right? Do your doctor a favor, the next time you are in the office, ask what they pay in malpractice insurance, ask how much med school debt they still carry, and notice how they are only 35, but have gray hair and bags under their eyes. Then tell them that they are selfish for wanting a good salary.

Reuters. (2007, August 7) Apple Unveils Redesigned iMac Desktop. The New York Times

Link here

It's not the article that bugs me, its the fact that a new design is released, yet there is no picture of the new design. Oh, but thanks for that great description "slim" and "aluminum" because that really gives me a great mental image.

There's something about PhDs that really, really bugs me. Not the older ones, but the people that graduated recently. They step into their new classrooms with this air about them that their work has contributed to the tomes of eternity, and they will always be remembered for their outstanding achievements.

But guess what. No one actually cares about your dissertation concerning the basket weaving practices of ancient Mesopotamians, or the proliferation of split infinitives in the writing of [obscure author] from the 17th century. These are the same people that hike to Tintern Abbey carrying a copy of Wordsworth's poem in hope of feeling 'deep' for a few minutes.

In my opinion, the sooner they realize this, the better they become at teaching. It limits those tangential "you know what really bugs me" lectures during class. And anyone who has stepped foot inside a college classroom knows what I mean. The "I hate when people capitalize the headings of their papers" or "start a sentence with the word 'but'" lectures. Or even worse, the "[insert PhD's discipline] can explain the universe" speech.

I realize the irony in my worthless ranting about the worthless rants of PhDs, but for now I'm going to pretend my opinion is socially validated.

Carl, T. (2007, August 4) Colorful but a Murky Past, Corruption Claims Haunt Tijuana's Mayor. The Chicago Tribune


This politician proves that tact and eloquence have nothing to do with running for office just as much as George W. Bush. Only Jorge Hank Rhon does it way better. A "self-proclaimed billionaire" who is above corruption because he is "too rich to be corrupt" drinks "tequila mixed with bear bile and steeped with the penises of tigers, lions and dogs."

Forget mud slinging political speeches, or coercion through the ever growing threat of terrorism, I want a man who might has well be named Juan Q. Moneymaker reassuring me that he is so manly that you could create a race of equally manly men from just one of his ribs. Terrorism is no match for a guy who claims that "'women' were his favorite animals."

Povoledo, E. (2007, August 2) Getty Agrees to Return 40 Antiquities to Italy. The New York Times

Link here


Italy. For centuries it had been a hodge podge of territories occupying the same piece of land in Europe. Not until 1861 was the country unified, and judging by the rivalries between each city, the unification wasn't universally loved. Now the Italian culture ministry is laying claim to pieces of art from the Getty calling foul in how they were attained over 40 years ago, citing that these pieces are essential to "Italian heritage."

I smell bull.

Why exactly the 40 some pieces of art in the Getty have magically become important now is beyond me. But because they are essential to Italian heritage? Come on. Italy is a country bursting at the seams with artifacts from Greece, Rome, and the Renaissance to name a few pivotal points in history. Rome, Florence, Pompeii, Siena, and Venice are living, functioning pieces of history and culture. So I'm hard pressed to believe that these 40 pieces mean anything.

But what would make a little more sense is that this is nothing but a power move by the Italians to lay claim to priceless art for free. Arrest some art dealers, make a list of demands to a museum and threaten an embargo on the trade of art unless these pieces are "returned" to their rightful owner, the Italian. This is, of course, because all Italians have a stong sense of unity about their country and their heritage? Right. Ask a Florentine to sit down in a bar after a football match with a Milan fan and I'm sure you'll see this "unity" in full swing.

Didn't the US do this to Cuba to try to get what we wanted? Demands, embargoes, arrests? This is crazy. Perhaps the trade of antiquities and art needs to be more closely monitored. Maybe Italy should have the right to lay claim over "their" art. I'm not pretending to be an expert on the import and export of art. But to resort to such guerilla tactics for what will register as a fart on the Italian cultural page is out of line. What would the world be like if every museum closed its doors to the outside world and demanded that certain pieces were returned from abroad?
One thing would be true, American museums would be really, really lame.