Autopsy article in New York Times

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

doctah jp

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hmm. If that was "balanced" then what would an article favouring autopsies read like? :)

Okay I better go eat something before I say anything more that is stupid.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Well, it's relatively balanced in how they describe the autopsy and the procedure. They made it a point to describe it carefully, and how the body can still be viewed. Many articles may have focused on gory detail and how brutal parts of it can be. And there was a lot in there about how autopsies can teach us quite a bit.
 
I liked it too. Thanks :thumbup:

(i kinda lost my attention span from page 4 on so i kinda breezed through the last 3 pages but i'll have to read it again to fully appreciate it).
 
yaah said:
Well, it's relatively balanced in how they describe the autopsy and the procedure. They made it a point to describe it carefully, and how the body can still be viewed. Many articles may have focused on gory detail and how brutal parts of it can be. And there was a lot in there about how autopsies can teach us quite a bit.
I agree. I was just wondering what the "extreme positive" end of the spectrum would be. I suppose CSI with its glamour and hype would count as mindless positivity :)
 
yaah said:
The key to reading articles on NYT.com is "single page view".
Negatory, professor. Single page view means that everything is on a single page. I would see the seemingly endless number of paragraphs and become overwhelmed (I always hated those long passages on the verbal section of the SATs or MCATs). Plus, nothing annoys more than looking at that bar on the right (the name I can't recall now) and seeing a thin bar signifying to me that I'm not even close to finishing reading what I'm reading.
 
Well, vive le difference. Nothing annoys me more when reading things online than having to click to go onto page two of an article.
 
yaah said:
Well, it's relatively balanced in how they describe the autopsy and the procedure. They made it a point to describe it carefully, and how the body can still be viewed. Many articles may have focused on gory detail and how brutal parts of it can be. And there was a lot in there about how autopsies can teach us quite a bit.

That is a great article! It really illustrates to the public how autopsy is essential in the whole scheme of things. I still don't know if I would want an autopsy done on my mother, since I've seen and participated in the whole process. I think I would get flash images of her being chopped up. I knew about Baylor and Mt. Sinai, but I didn't know that Dartmouth had a big autopsy volume. What other big name programs have big autopsy numbers and place a large emphasis on autopsy?
 
Tidal said:
That is a great article! It really illustrates to the public how autopsy is essential in the whole scheme of things. I still don't know if I would want an autopsy done on my mother, since I've seen and participated in the whole process. I think I would get flash images of her being chopped up. I knew about Baylor and Mt. Sinai, but I didn't know that Dartmouth had a big autopsy volume.
Drs. Schiller and Lundberg make really good points and are extremely insightful. The guy who wrote this article really did his research. This is the kind of press pathology really needs. I think the article kinda gives it away though where the "HIV Brain lesion" autopsy was performed at. So much for HIPPA.
 
Zoloft said:
I think the article kinda gives it away though where the "HIV Brain lesion" autopsy was performed at. So much for HIPPA.
I didn't manage to make that connection. I haven't been well-HIPAA'ed, but what are the implications of having a location attached to the autopsy? :confused:
 
Top