Medics AREN'T Nat Scis!
I repeat, medics aren't nat scis! This post is not against all medics, but it is a reminder to medics who are so arrogant that they think they are 'more' than nat scis or they can be more than nat scis!
I have encountered many medics who have got no scientific passion at all. All they care about is to scoop scientific knowledge for their own businesses. "You actually like pathology practicals?" Imagine a medic saying this. Pathology is the study of disease. If a medic is not interested in pathology, I wonder what he wants to study. Well, of course there are many other subjects in the medical course. But I doubt this kind of medics will have any interest in the other subjects. This year, I am taking two SIMILAR subjects as the medics : Pathology and Pharmacology. Note that I use the word 'similar' because we are indeed not totally the same.
For pathology, we do share the same lectures for the first two thirds of the course. However, I noticed that our attitude towards the practicals are totally different. Guess what? A demonstrator even told me that the medics weren't handling well when we were doing the parasitology practicals. In other words, the medics were scared of worms. This did not come from me, a demonstrator told me that. Most medics don't like histology too. I can tell you I love the slides under the microscope and although I don't love the worms, I am not scared... Therefore, we are different.
Pharmacology, we have different lectures and labs altogether. THANK GOD! For our practicals, we have got a mini project for us to learn to design experiments, the aim of learning to be a nat sci. Medics obviously are not doing that, because they are NOT nat scis. I don't actually know what they do in labs. It is not surprising if they are just memorising which drug does what and what are the doses stated in the manual. Of course not! Cambridge will try to teach them proper pharmacology, but I doubt these arrogant medics can really appreciate science if they have got this unappreciative attitude.
Well, if any of you wonder what infuriated me. The answer is arrogant medics and this statement by a Cambridge medic (you know who) from The Cambridge Student (a student newspaper):
"A lot of medics apply to Cambridge for the prestige and the big fat crest on their degrees. But they are completely unaware that for the first 3 years they are nothing more than glorified NatScis."
Well, this person might just meant that medics in Cambridge aren't good enough. But, without realising(benefit of the doubt), there is a condescending tone towards Nat Scis in his statement.
Of course, there are many medics who are actually true nat scis by having the right attitude towards science. Unlike some medics who think they know more or at least know as much compared to nat scis just because they learnt biochemistry or physiology for a few months. I would say what really distinguishes a nat sci from a medic is the attitude towards science. A true nat sci has got the desire to discover new knowledge (Discover new drugs, new viruses, reasons for disease development... so that medics can learn them to help patients).
Therefore, medics are not nat scis even though they did similar subjects as nat scis. Hence, medics are not superior compared to nat scis. Give some respect to the people who have been working behind the scene for the advancement of medical sciences.
posted by Wei Shen @ 8:31 AM
2 comments
