First Aid 2006 Errata

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

missbonnie

floating
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
778
Reaction score
1
Hey, I dont think one has been started yet so..here it goes.
A bunch of emails have been going around my class with the First Aid 2006 errata..there are tons, and even missing pages!!!

I've copied & pasted what I can find so far, and obviously, use at your own risk but most are obvious... and 2 attachments of 2 PDF files of missing pages - one for micro (Rickettsia) & Cardio drugs.,

age#--correction

72--it should read "Kubler-Ross Dying Stages" (not grief stages)

161--Micro - Most common cause of bacterial meningitis in adults 18-60 is Strep pneumo. N meningitidis is still the most common for 6 - 18 yr olds (from uptodate)

187--the complement cascade show C4b2*b* as classic C3 convertase and C4b2*b as classic C5 convertase. It should be C4b2_*a*_ = classic C3 convertase and C4b2_*a*_3b = classic C5 convertase

208--St. John's Wort is an inducer of CYP (3A4), not an inhibitor. (checked JAMA)

221--EDV and ESV are swapped in the pressure-volume relationship in the cardiovascular section

221--the PV-curve shows what happens with an increase in afterload AND contractility. So put a little "[up-arrow] contractility" next to "[up-arrow] afterload"

259--In "Other hypothalamic/pituitary drugs" GH is somatoTROPIN. Octreotide is the analogue of somatostatin.

274--Barrett's esophagus is replacement of nonkeratinized squamous epithelium with INTESTINAL columnar epithelium in the distal esophagus (not gastric)

275--"Usually squamous cell carcinoma" Actually, squamous cell CA and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus currently have almost equal incidence due to a rapid rise in adenocarcinoma rates in recent decades (from UpToDate, Qbank)

283--Pirenzepine causes TACHYcardia, not bradycardia as a toxicity (from micromedex)

295--Wilm's tumor is a mutation on 11p (not 11q) (according to BRS and emedicine and Miglet) (for both WT1 and WT2)

310--Imatinib (Gleevec) is NOT an antibody or myclonal. But it is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

322--Pemphigus vulgaris = intraEPIDERMAL bullae

344--cavernous sinus syndrome should include opthalmoplegia, opthalmic and MAXILLARY sensory loss

345--swap SR with IO at the top, and IR with SO at the bottom

346--pupillary light reflex sends signal via CN2 not CN3

353--Syringomyelia is from damage to crossing SPINOTHALAMIC TRACT FIBERS in the anterior white commissure.

368--the mechanism of ethosuxamide blocks thalamic Ca+2 channels, NOT thalamic Ca+1

385--#5) SLE - in DIFFUSE PROLIFERATIVE form you get wire-loop abnormality with subendothelial immune complex deposits

Color img 48B--is actually a pilocytic astrocytoma, not a glioblastoma (those are Rosenthal fibers)

Color img 104--Sarcoidosis does NOT have caseation

they're the
area immediately posterior to the central sulcus.

pg 346: Pupillary light reflex -> light in either retina sends a signal
via
CN II (NOT III). the pupils contract bilaterally (consensual reflex)
via CN
III (= solid lines)

pg352- diagram on left: F, which is supposed to be pilocytic
astroctoma, is
usually in the posterior fossa but they drew it in the frontal lobe.

pg353- the spinal cord section diagram for syringomelia- corticospinal
should be spinothalamic

pg 357- herniation syndromes- the uncus is mislabelled.

Differences In the definition of cleft lip on page 117 and 124. What
it
says on page 124 is correct and page 117 should read "failure of fusion
of
the maxillary and medial nasal processes leading to cleft lip."

pg 149 it states that Loa Loa (nematode) is transmitted by the deerfly.
this is incorrect. it is transmitted by the bite of a mango fly,
Chrysops.

Pg 63 – Second chart should be disease vs. exposure, not disease vs. test [Annie Garment]

Pg 87 – Pyruvate Kinase is shown as reversible in the diagram. It’s
irreversible. [From Mike Su and Christian Song]

Pg 97 – Liver, Fasting State: Amino acids can indeed enter the TCA cycle directly (after deamination) but this is not true for glycerol or lactate. Glycerol enters the glycolytic pathway by being metabolized to Dihydroxyacetone Phosphate (DHAP) while lactate enters the pathway by being metabolized to pyruvate. Therefore, the arrows should be changed accordingly.

Pg 118 – Under the heading "Embryologic Derivatives", surface ectoderm is said
to give rise to the "epithelial linings". This is mostly incorrect. The ectodermal germ layer gives rise to the *sensory* epithelium of the ear, nose, and eye. Epithelial linings of the gut, UG tract, and respiratory tract are derived from the *endodermal* germ layer. [DT Jacobs]

Pg 140 – “Salmonella has an animal reservoir.” Not true of Salmonella Typhi, the strain the causes Typhoid fever! (i.e. it’s only in humans).

Pg 141 – E. Coli O157:H7 is a subtype of EHEC, not EIEC.

Pg 154 – The process explained is called “Phenotypic Masking” not “Phenotypic Mixing”, which is a different process. I verified this with a research paper which describes the process in the journal of Evolution. [from James Toussaint]

Pg 166 (Chart) – Amoxicillin/Ampicillin can be used for E. Coli, as it says on the very next page.

Pg 302 – Follicular Lymphoma: “bcl-2 is involved in apoptosis.” Okay, technically this isn’t an actual mistake, but at the very least it’s HIGHLY misleading. It should really say “bcl-2 is involved in INHIBITION of apoptosis.” It’s important to realize that this isn’t a matter of underexpression of a pro-apoptotic gene, but rather overexpression of an anti-apoptotic gene.

Pg 319 – Osteomalacia/rickets. Vitamin D deficiency causes a DECREASE in serum phosphate (due to increased renal excretion, which, in turn, is due to increased PTH).

Pg 324 – Temporal Arteritis affects medium and LARGE arteries

Pg 325 – Cox-2 inhibitors: the IMPORTANT toxicity is an increased risk of thrombosis (stroke or MI).

Pg 326 – Etanercept: Mechanism – inhibits BOTH TNF-ά AND TNF-β

Pg 404, Testicular non-germ cell tumors, Leydig cell: "androgen producing leads to gynecomastia in men, precocious puberty in boys." While it is true that Leydig cell tumors are androgen-secreting (at least initially) and it is also true that later in life
they can lead to gynecomastia, it is incorrect to say that these two facts are
related to each other. Not only does this not make any sense, but it turns out
that adults with leydig cell tumors actually have DECREASED levels of androgens.

Pg 485 – ALL is Acute LymphoBLASTIC Leukemia, not “lymphocytic” leukemia

Members don't see this ad.
 
gc1983 said:
does anyone have the list of errors..the links on the first page doesnt work and their official site only has three errors on it ..

thanks.
Are there any more errors? any one got the full list to please e-mail them to me..or PM me.
 
I can't tell you how suprised I am by this new edition. And, the other problem is that it is horribly wrong.

Has anyone tried Step-Up? I used it for some of my classes last year and it was awesome (much better than First-Aid). I bought this new edition of First-Aid, but I think I will continue to use Step-Up.

I would recommend it to anyone.

mh
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Their website only shows the missing pages... is there a thread anywhere with the errata on the pages that were printed?
 
Hi guys.

I don't wish to hijack this great thread. It sounds like FA 2006 is more trouble than it's worth. I will likely use FA 2005 to study.

Is there a similar thread on FA 2005 errors anywhere (NB: I did try search function for this topic, as well as google search with limited results).

Thanks in advance.

dc
 
Hi guys.

I don't wish to hijack this great thread. It sounds like FA 2006 is more trouble than it's worth. I will likely use FA 2005 to study.

Is there a similar thread on FA 2005 errors anywhere (NB: I did try search function for this topic, as well as google search with limited results).

Thanks in advance.

dc

2005's errors are pretty similar.

Your best bet is to use FA along with other sources. Most of these errors are pretty minor anyway.
 
Hi guys.

I don't wish to hijack this great thread. It sounds like FA 2006 is more trouble than it's worth. I will likely use FA 2005 to study.

Is there a similar thread on FA 2005 errors anywhere (NB: I did try search function for this topic, as well as google search with limited results).

Thanks in advance.

dc


Here you go:
First Aid 2005 Errata and here

See, 2006 isn't worse, just more of the same. Don't have blind faith, it's not very scientific. Expect errata in every book you study. The benefits of First Aid outweigh the risks.
 
I can't tell you how suprised I am by this new edition. And, the other problem is that it is horribly wrong.

Has anyone tried Step-Up? I used it for some of my classes last year and it was awesome (much better than First-Aid). I bought this new edition of First-Aid, but I think I will continue to use Step-Up.

I would recommend it to anyone.

mh

Can you elaborate on why you think the new edition is crap? It's hard to steer away from First Aid considering that people with very high score on this forum swears by it.
 
i have an old version of FA 2004 and step up first edition, do u think these two are worth while, i just get them from someone and i never touch it until now. i just don;t want to buy new editions if the things are riddle with mistakes as u said.
 
So is it the consensus that we should buy FA 2007 and not use FA 2006 if we already have it? I'm expecting FA 2007 to have many errors as well, and is it really going to impact your score that much if you use FA 2006?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
So is it the consensus that we should buy FA 2007 and not use FA 2006 if we already have it? I'm expecting FA 2007 to have many errors as well, and is it really going to impact your score that much if you use FA 2006?

There are errors in both books. Even errors in 2007 that were correct in 2006!

I have noticed that 2007 has more information than 2006. Almost all of the major topics are the same, but 2007 tends to inculde extra little tid bits.

You will be fine with 2006, but if you are anal, you might want 2007 so you aren't thinking, "Maybe I should be using 2007" when you are trying to study.
 
There are errors in both books. Even errors in 2007 that were correct in 2006!

I have noticed that 2007 has more information than 2006. Almost all of the major topics are the same, but 2007 tends to inculde extra little tid bits.

You will be fine with 2006, but if you are anal, you might want 2007 so you aren't thinking, "Maybe I should be using 2007" when you are trying to study.

Thanks Automan,

I'd say I'm as anal as the average med student should be :), but I just cant see FA 2006 really affecting my score all that much, as opposed to FA 2007. That being said, for now I plan to still use FA 2006, but who knows in the next few weeks... we'll see :confused:
 
I am planning on sticking with my FA 2006. Unless you're so anal as to be able to know both books so completely cold as to know minute differences, the 2006 should do just fine. It is an OUTLINE after all. As many people have said, supplement it with other sources. Add info that isn't as in-depth as you need. Anything that already is (such as useful memory jogging mnemonics) will only resurrect the stuff that you already know by virtue of being a med student.

If I had a 2005, I'd probably get the new one for the reorganization.
 
Hello,
I have tried twice with two different emails to create an account at the Firstaidfortheboards.com website in order to download missing pages and see their list of errata for the 2006 version. I tried to contact First Aid too, but no reply. Has anyone else had trouble with the website? Is anyone else peeved that we have to submit so much personal information in order to find out what mistakes are in First Aid?
Would anyone mind sending me the missing pages for 2006 and any other info from the website? My email is [email protected].
Many thanks,
Jenny
 
Hello,
I have tried twice with two different emails to create an account at the Firstaidfortheboards.com website in order to download missing pages and see their list of errata for the 2006 version. I tried to contact First Aid too, but no reply. Has anyone else had trouble with the website? Is anyone else peeved that we have to submit so much personal information in order to find out what mistakes are in First Aid?
Would anyone mind sending me the missing pages for 2006 and any other info from the website? My email is [email protected].
Many thanks,
Jenny

The errata is not worth it. They just list contributors they didn't give credit to.
 
Originally Posted by doctorTT
this is incorrect: "pg. 345--swap SR with IO at the top, and IR with SO at the bottom"

the diagram on pg. 345 in FA 2006 is correct
may i ask how it is correct??

the obliques of the eye Abduct. the diagram has them adducting towards the nose. the recti are the one that adduct.
I too believe the diagram in First Aid is correct. Clinically, if you have a damaged IO, the eye will not be able to move up while it is adducted. If you have a damaged SR, you will not be able to move up while abducted.

The confusion comes in because it depends on whether you are talking about the pure muscle movements, or the movements combined with the other muscles. Obviously what is important clinically (and on USMLE) is the combined movements. This is what the First Aid diagram shows correctly.

Maybe this eye simulator will clear it up. http://cim.ucdavis.edu/EyeRelease/Interface/eSim.htm

It is a cool program where you can do the visual field exam with different nerves and muscles damaged. It also has a quiz.
 
First Aid lists arginine as an essential amino acid (PVT TIM HALL mnemonic) --- but can't it be derived from the urea cycle?
 
Thanks. I asked because RR biochem calls it a non-essential amino acid. The most accurate resource in the world, Wikipedia, calls it semi-essential. :D
 
Thanks. I asked because RR biochem calls it a non-essential amino acid. The most accurate resource in the world, Wikipedia, calls it semi-essential. :D

They only called it essential because it is necessary for periods of growth.
 
274--Barrett's esophagus is replacement of nonkeratinized squamous epithelium with INTESTINAL columnar epithelium in the distal esophagus (not gastric)

I agree with some other posts about incorrect "corrections" (ie, complement cascade, stages of grief), and I believe this is one as well. (There was some debate back and forth around post #16 about it.) Some sources say just intestinal (colonic) and some say gastric and intestinal qualify for Barrett's... I don't ever remember being asked such a specific detail about metaplastic columnar epithelium on my Boards, though. I think the point is just remember there is a type of epithelium where it doesn't belong...
 
^^ yeah, same here.

Also, is an official errata sheet for the 2006 FA available? or is this thread the only errata source for the 2006 FA? (if the latter is true, which I hope it's not, are the errors posted here all the errors in this edition?). I decided to just stick with the 2006 edition.

Please help.

Thanks.
 
Thanks for the post! I looked on the mcgraw website (link is above) and was able to find the missing rickettsia page (182_errata), but couldn't find the cardio drug page. Has anyone else been able to find it? and if so how? I notices there are no drugs on tx dyslipidemia (ie statins etc) in the 2006 book...thanks for the help! And good luck to all!

Does anyone know if FIRST AID HAS put out an errata sheat in addition to providing their missing pages? Last time I checked the only things listed as an error was the page cross-reference table on the inside cover WAS NOT updated for the 2006 edition so the pages are wrong-- other than this there was nothing listed as errors.

Jeremy

Their website only shows the missing pages... is there a thread anywhere with the errata on the pages that were printed?


Can someone please address each of these issues? (which is basically a continuation of my previous post in this thread; the one above this post).


And one other question: Would I be better off just getting the 07 or 08 First Aid instead of using the 06 FA?


Looking forward to your help.
 
Last edited:
^^ If I DO create a thread about it, I'm just gonna get flamed with annoying comments like "Try using the search button next time", blah blah blah blah........
 
^^ If I DO create a thread about it, I'm just gonna get flamed with annoying comments like "Try using the search button next time", blah blah blah blah........

nah, the search doesn't help you in this case. What you (and I) need is to have someone email us an attachment with the missing pages.
 
For what it's worth, I found an error as well (my first one :D)

Page 345, Extraocular muscles and nerves, on the far-right side, last line says, "The superior oblique abducts, introverts, and depresses."

Shouldn't it be "adducts"?
 
It's kind of late, but I found the missing pages for the 2006 First Aid (182 and 319). If anyone needs them, send me a PM with your email (or someone tell me how to post them here).
 
Top