this book seems pretty skimpy to me. is it really enough to go through this book (and FA) together? brs or the lippincott seems so much more complete....
this book seems pretty skimpy to me. is it really enough to go through this book (and FA) together? brs or the lippincott seems so much more complete....
I didn't like this book too much. As you said it is pretty skimpy. I read all of BRS which was pretty good but not the greatest. I felt BRS's clinical correlations throughout the book were rather weak but it wasn't nearly as hard to get through as Lippincott. After reading BRS I read selected sections in HY which I found somewhat useful as a last minute (last week) review. So basically I think HY as the primary source (especially if you are weak in biochem) isn't enough. It's really a quick review book if you have a good background in the subject. All in all I'd say BRS is the way to go. This is just my personal opinion and there isn't a great consensus out there in what to study when it comes to biochem. Lastly I'll say that I didn't get a whole lot of biochem on step I which I took in June. What does everyone else think?
I concur with Dukes: My Step 1 had literally only a couple "straight" biochemistry questions (like irreversible steps in a pathway); the rest was more pathology based. I only used FA and Lippincott's (Lippincott's is pretty long, but that was what I used when I first began studying about 5 weeks before).
I thought that the Kaplan notes in Biochem were the best thing I saw/used, with the Lippencott book a close second. I used larger, more comprehensive books for biochem because I was especially weak in this area and ended up having it be one of my stronger scoring areas.
I highly recommend that you sniff around for a used copy of the Kaplan notes. I think they were excellent.