 |
| Are You Experienced? - Jimi Hendrix (1967) |
Apr 7, 2013
So if I suck at sex I won't get this?
Apr 4, 2013
Gender Discrepancies (I/II)
Did you know women and men are actually quite similar? We really are. If we were all raised in a society that interacted with the two genders in the exact same way, we'd probably end up like some gender-neutralized weird race of alien a la Star Trek: The Next Generation. We'd still have the two separate sexes, but we probably wouldn't have this weird, polarized, gender dichotomy. The terms tomboys and janegirls, for example, would no longer make sense and be cast aside like the frivolous trash they are.
Yesterday, in our community groups (which is basically a quarter of our class plus one practicing physician from the surrounding area), we were asked to talk about American health care. We were asked vague questions by our community leader and what ensued was kind of hilarious and also pretty depressing.
On a side note: I talked entirely way too much, which is unfortunate because I hate people who act the way I acted yesterday in class. I will have to implement a more stringent foot-in-mouth policy for any future large discussion groups. I am also a crazy liberal. I need to stop telling people I'm a moderate since I clearly believe that taxes are necessary and the government should govern our personal liberties as little as possible (but I still think we should all have access to affordable health care because it should be a personal liberty).
There were a lot of nuances in our overall debate--this is to be expected since if we could formulate a clear solution to the health care problem in an hour and a half, than our government, as crappy as it is, would already be enacting such solutions as policies nationwide. But in the end, clumping all the nuances together and then defenestrating them because who actually gives a **** about nuances?--there were only two general positions a person could have: you believe Universal Health Care should be guaranteed for everyone or you believe that Health Care should be payed for by individuals in some way outside of paying taxes.
Good points can be made for either side, but as you recall, I threw all those nuances out the window, and it seemed for the most part that the most avid supporters of the opposing sides were also of opposing genders. Universal health care is somehow more appealing to more women than it is to men.
Although clarifying point: my sample size was quite small (n=48) and it wasn't as if no men liked the idea of universal health care. Some favored it. Also, not everyone talked so the real sample size is closer to around 20. So I might just be making up a ton of crap, in which case, I'm sorry if the following is just super offensive.
I am trying to figure out why that is. Last year when I went to the American Medical Women's Association's National Conference in Miami, the keynote speaker kept commenting on how women are dearly needed in the medical field because women are natural healers and we just care more. It was pretty inspiring but it seemed kind of hurtful to the small amount of dudes I knew who are actually pretty loving people. But now that I think about it, do I actually know any guys who are selfless? Or are they just decent human beings who have yet to have their selflessness tested? How selfless are they, really? Because I don't think caring is quite enough. I care a lot about things but don't actually do anything about it because I am selfish. I really care about making sure people understand that America's oppressed groups aren't all good to go now that we've slapped band-aids--Title IX and Affirmative Action--on the gaping wound that is injustice. But all I actually do is update my status on Facebook, maybe including a link to a blog article or a recent study.
But when I think about selflessness more, I realize a better question may be: do I know anyone who is selfless?
Not many.
Well, that's depressing, seeing as I am in Medical School. But I guess everyone isn't being "selfish" per se, just too busy studying so that they can one day be selfless. <<>> This seems too nuanced. I will stop ruminating.
If we just assume women care more, why is that so? Is it because we have the capacity to become mothers? Because men have the capacity to become fathers, which I have been assured can also be a full time job. Both of my parents were full time Surgeons, and I am sure they both cared about me equally, but I saw my mom much more than I saw my dad, so can we assume my mother was more selfless than my father? I think that is a far argument. Although we will never know for sure because my dad may have thought that by working longer hours, he would be able to give us more opportunities with the money he'd make, and to him, that would seem like a more valuable pursuit than teaching us how to tie our shoes. My dad may have been selfless. Conversely, my mother may have spent more time with us to show the world that she was not only capable of being a woman and a surgeon, but also a loving mother. My mom may have been selfish.
But either way, actions speak louder than words, and I saw my mom more than I saw my dad, even though they had similar jobs. I think this behavior must be socialized, because my mom didn't actually need to spend so much time with us. We could have just had babysitters who stayed at our house longer.
Now that I've dragged you through my own internal thought process, let me actually tell you facts: female physicians make $17,000-a-year less than male physicians, on average, for doing the exact same amount of work. This number has been normalized, so any arguments that male physicians tend to work longer hours (as was the case for my parents) or that male and female physicians choose to enter different specialties or practice in different locations (as was not the case for my parents) does not at all affect the statistic that women make $17,000 a year less than men for doing the exact same work. Discrimination, of course, plays a role in this inequality, but another interesting point that the researchers brought up was that some of the blame actually falls on women: women will stop negotiating their wages with their employers at a lower rate than their male counterparts. You could see this as women having a lower innate self-worth (which is true in society overall but may not apply to physicians) or you could see this as women willing to do more "caring" for less economic compensation. That sounds a lot like selflessness to me.
Yesterday, in our community groups (which is basically a quarter of our class plus one practicing physician from the surrounding area), we were asked to talk about American health care. We were asked vague questions by our community leader and what ensued was kind of hilarious and also pretty depressing.
On a side note: I talked entirely way too much, which is unfortunate because I hate people who act the way I acted yesterday in class. I will have to implement a more stringent foot-in-mouth policy for any future large discussion groups. I am also a crazy liberal. I need to stop telling people I'm a moderate since I clearly believe that taxes are necessary and the government should govern our personal liberties as little as possible (but I still think we should all have access to affordable health care because it should be a personal liberty).
There were a lot of nuances in our overall debate--this is to be expected since if we could formulate a clear solution to the health care problem in an hour and a half, than our government, as crappy as it is, would already be enacting such solutions as policies nationwide. But in the end, clumping all the nuances together and then defenestrating them because who actually gives a **** about nuances?--there were only two general positions a person could have: you believe Universal Health Care should be guaranteed for everyone or you believe that Health Care should be payed for by individuals in some way outside of paying taxes.
Good points can be made for either side, but as you recall, I threw all those nuances out the window, and it seemed for the most part that the most avid supporters of the opposing sides were also of opposing genders. Universal health care is somehow more appealing to more women than it is to men.
Although clarifying point: my sample size was quite small (n=48) and it wasn't as if no men liked the idea of universal health care. Some favored it. Also, not everyone talked so the real sample size is closer to around 20. So I might just be making up a ton of crap, in which case, I'm sorry if the following is just super offensive.
I am trying to figure out why that is. Last year when I went to the American Medical Women's Association's National Conference in Miami, the keynote speaker kept commenting on how women are dearly needed in the medical field because women are natural healers and we just care more. It was pretty inspiring but it seemed kind of hurtful to the small amount of dudes I knew who are actually pretty loving people. But now that I think about it, do I actually know any guys who are selfless? Or are they just decent human beings who have yet to have their selflessness tested? How selfless are they, really? Because I don't think caring is quite enough. I care a lot about things but don't actually do anything about it because I am selfish. I really care about making sure people understand that America's oppressed groups aren't all good to go now that we've slapped band-aids--Title IX and Affirmative Action--on the gaping wound that is injustice. But all I actually do is update my status on Facebook, maybe including a link to a blog article or a recent study.
But when I think about selflessness more, I realize a better question may be: do I know anyone who is selfless?
Not many.
Well, that's depressing, seeing as I am in Medical School. But I guess everyone isn't being "selfish" per se, just too busy studying so that they can one day be selfless. <<>> This seems too nuanced. I will stop ruminating.
If we just assume women care more, why is that so? Is it because we have the capacity to become mothers? Because men have the capacity to become fathers, which I have been assured can also be a full time job. Both of my parents were full time Surgeons, and I am sure they both cared about me equally, but I saw my mom much more than I saw my dad, so can we assume my mother was more selfless than my father? I think that is a far argument. Although we will never know for sure because my dad may have thought that by working longer hours, he would be able to give us more opportunities with the money he'd make, and to him, that would seem like a more valuable pursuit than teaching us how to tie our shoes. My dad may have been selfless. Conversely, my mother may have spent more time with us to show the world that she was not only capable of being a woman and a surgeon, but also a loving mother. My mom may have been selfish.
But either way, actions speak louder than words, and I saw my mom more than I saw my dad, even though they had similar jobs. I think this behavior must be socialized, because my mom didn't actually need to spend so much time with us. We could have just had babysitters who stayed at our house longer.
Now that I've dragged you through my own internal thought process, let me actually tell you facts: female physicians make $17,000-a-year less than male physicians, on average, for doing the exact same amount of work. This number has been normalized, so any arguments that male physicians tend to work longer hours (as was the case for my parents) or that male and female physicians choose to enter different specialties or practice in different locations (as was not the case for my parents) does not at all affect the statistic that women make $17,000 a year less than men for doing the exact same work. Discrimination, of course, plays a role in this inequality, but another interesting point that the researchers brought up was that some of the blame actually falls on women: women will stop negotiating their wages with their employers at a lower rate than their male counterparts. You could see this as women having a lower innate self-worth (which is true in society overall but may not apply to physicians) or you could see this as women willing to do more "caring" for less economic compensation. That sounds a lot like selflessness to me.
Mar 27, 2013
NBME: Behavioral Science
Our National Board of Medical Examiners Behavioral Science subject exam is in two-and-a-half hours. I am haphazardly reading through all our notes as quickly as possible. Our Clinical Neuroscience professor composed a powerpoint with 1,326 slides. It is a fun romp through various topics, both interesting and trite. Although some things are just entirely unexpected:
Well we were talking about Freud.
Mar 21, 2013
.... Shelf!
Surprise! I have a giant subject exam next Wednesday! I'm terrified! Hence the exclamation points!
I'm terrified because it will be worth 20% of my final grade in my favorite class: Clinical Neuroscience. I had a feeling I'd like psychiatry even when I came to medical school, but it was never something I thought I'd seriously like.
I came in with a pledge to make medicine easier to understand for my patients. I fully believe I will have to see a lot of patients, but I want to make every single one of them feel in control of their health--by giving them the information and the support they need to make their own decisions.
This is why my final research project in college involved looking at the ways doctors communicate with their patients.
And psychiatry, I realize, sets itself up as the specialty that requires communication over everything else. Even with primary care--let's say family medicine, which is still my first love--you talk with the patient, and most of the time, talking is all you need. But you still approach a patient in primary care as an algorithm. History fills in some information, labs and tests fills in the rest. You shake it up, and you come up with a diagnosis. Or several diagnoses.
Psychiatry at the very start basically says: the only way you're going to get anything done is communication. There is no back up plan. You can't be that doctor who is really smart but also really distant--really bad at talking to people. I guess what I like most about psychiatry is that it really emphasizes medicine as an art form.
Regardless, I am now considering a double residency because hey--I'm young. But what I really want to do is qualify for an Honors Elective in Child Psychiatry. That was the most ... electrifying part of this course for me. Many of my friends, I realized, had these conditions. Most memorably, my best friend in elementary school had selective mutism. Which I always thought was interesting as a little kid, but now I understand it and I find it even more interesting.
Anyway, to qualify for the Honors elective I need an A in clinical neuroscience. And right now, without any extra credit, I have an 85%. SO FAR AND YET SO CLOSE. So, the next 6 days of my life will probably be panic, panic, panic.
Adding pain to misery, 50-55% of the exam is on "Central and Peripheral Nervous System" which is incredibly vague. Fortunately, the vagueness was removed by the course director who basically explained this chunk of questions as focusing on... you could easily guess it... my least favorite and, I am not exaggerating this when I say, my most personally antagonizing part of medical education... Neuroanatomy!
Trials and tribulations, right?
Here's to a weekend of staring at brains!
Mar 7, 2013
Full Circle
I still suck at board review tuesdays, but I seem to have developed a pattern of writing in every eight days, so expect me to write about something, I suppose, next Friday.
Although the real reason I haven't had anything to write about concerning boards is because I haven't studied. At all. For over a week. For over eight days.
I'm freaking out, but instead of doing something about it (namely, study) I seem incapable of doing anything productive.
I mean I'm studying for school, but school grades don't matter. Hah!
Eventually I'll probably get out of this slump. I can't imagine cramming for the boards. That sounds like a hell no one deserves, no matter how undisciplined, dumb, currently care free, or beautiful* that person may be.
Speaking of actual school, I'm excited for class tomorrow because our hit-or-miss pathology class will be hopefully educating the idiots in my class about what diabetes is. And honestly, I could learn some more about type 2 diabetes too. I'm sick of how much stuff we know about diabetes that isn't mine. I've been skimming tomorrow morning's notes for fun.... Wrong word... curiosity. Looks like a genetic component for type 1 diabetes has been proven in white people. Which is great for me, a curious, half-white person of child-bearing age who really wants to know if my genes are defective or if I'm just unlucky. I want, nay, need to get sequenced. Besides the diabetes I am literally perfect**.
Fortunately there is at least one amazing thing about the lecture notes for tomorrow:
DAMN! I'm watching television (I was not kidding, I am a failure) and I just heard Lucy Liu say the word "neutrophil." Apparently she's an ex-doctor on the television show Elementary. I approve. And I am feeling pretty lucky. Maybe I will study tomorrow.
*I needed a pick-me-up.
**I still needed a pick-me-up.
Although the real reason I haven't had anything to write about concerning boards is because I haven't studied. At all. For over a week. For over eight days.
I'm freaking out, but instead of doing something about it (namely, study) I seem incapable of doing anything productive.
I mean I'm studying for school, but school grades don't matter. Hah!
Eventually I'll probably get out of this slump. I can't imagine cramming for the boards. That sounds like a hell no one deserves, no matter how undisciplined, dumb, currently care free, or beautiful* that person may be.
Speaking of actual school, I'm excited for class tomorrow because our hit-or-miss pathology class will be hopefully educating the idiots in my class about what diabetes is. And honestly, I could learn some more about type 2 diabetes too. I'm sick of how much stuff we know about diabetes that isn't mine. I've been skimming tomorrow morning's notes for fun.... Wrong word... curiosity. Looks like a genetic component for type 1 diabetes has been proven in white people. Which is great for me, a curious, half-white person of child-bearing age who really wants to know if my genes are defective or if I'm just unlucky. I want, nay, need to get sequenced. Besides the diabetes I am literally perfect**.
Fortunately there is at least one amazing thing about the lecture notes for tomorrow:
Borg Picard in a diabetes lecture?!
DAMN! I'm watching television (I was not kidding, I am a failure) and I just heard Lucy Liu say the word "neutrophil." Apparently she's an ex-doctor on the television show Elementary. I approve. And I am feeling pretty lucky. Maybe I will study tomorrow.
*I needed a pick-me-up.
**I still needed a pick-me-up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)