First Aid Step 1 2005 - where can I get it now??

[rachana]

Hi everyone,

Does anyone know if there's a place I can buy First Aid Step 1 2005 now (Amazon says it hasn't been released yet... )? Thanks!

Rachana

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Bevo]

now? dont think its out yet.

not till mid december - mid january

 

[mjl1717]

Imbebos timeframe is good.-But to pinpoint the release all you can do is call the publisher.

 

[lattimer13]

mid december according to the publisher's website.

 

[carrigallen]

seems like I heard the exact date was Dec 15.

 

[rachana]

Is there any value in pre-ordering from Amazon or will it be in the bookstores just as soon?

 

[chilipina]

I will be taking Step I (and COMLEX) in June. I have the First Aid 2003, anybody think I should buy a 2005 book? Or are the changes minor?

thanks!!

 

[Row Jimmy]

I also have a 2003 edition. I am waiting to see what changes are made for 2005 prior to buying. Hopefully they have adjusted the material to include the new empahsis on Mol. Bio.

 

[FarEastGrapplr2]

seems like I heard the exact date was Dec 15.

does that mean the bookstores will have it by the 15th? or most likely after the 15th?

 

[FarEastGrapplr2]

I also have a 2003 edition. I am waiting to see what changes are made for 2005 prior to buying. Hopefully they have adjusted the material to include the new empahsis on Mol. Bio.

i also have the 2003 edition. i prefer it to the 2004 because of the reference to the UCVs and the clinical cases at the beginning of each chapter. not sure why the 2004 edition dropped those concepts

 

[rachana]

after the 15th. by how many days, i don't know.

does that mean the bookstores will have it by the 15th? or most likely after the 15th?

 

[coconut lime]

i ordered it for my fiancee from barnesandnoble.com and it came in earlier this week.

 

[amgirlmd]

i just saw it my local barnes and nobles before christmas.

 

[Bevo]

local bookstore has it now too.

There are some changes. Removed quite a lot from the GI physio section.

 

[automaton]

local bookstore has it now too.

There are some changes. Removed quite a lot from the GI physio section.

did you notice any changes to cell and molecular biology sections? any changes to the biochem sections?

thanks.

 

[Tedebear]

did you notice any changes to cell and molecular biology sections? any changes to the biochem sections?

thanks.

Ugh. It is 100+ pages less than the 2004 version. They stripped the GI section and the rest of the sections look exactly the same. In fact, I can't find any new pathology pictures. I will repost once I do a through examination of the two first aids. Initially, it looks like they didn't add anything new but you can't really tell with superficial inspection.

 

[Bevo]

well
they did make changes. I think while it is more compact, they changed the font compared to the 2004 edition.

There are more diagrams than in the 2004 edition. Some boxes were expanded, while others were removed.

the removed the page on peripheral blood smears.

some stuff were moved between sections. I think it was the microtuble box which used to be in biochem was moved to the histo section.

I think the biggest difference though are the addition of more diagrams.

 

[chitown82]

Ugh. It is 100+ pages less than the 2004 version. They stripped the GI section and the rest of the sections look exactly the same. In fact, I can't find any new pathology pictures. I will repost once I do a through examination of the two first aids. Initially, it looks like they didn't add anything new but you can't really tell with superficial inspection.

i suspect that removing the 100+ pages (15-20%) of the book can't be a good thing....is the author suggesting that material (GI section plus whatever else was removed) isn't high yield for step 1?

 

[automaton]

well
they did make changes. I think while it is more compact, they changed the font compared to the 2004 edition.

There are more diagrams than in the 2004 edition. Some boxes were expanded, while others were removed.

the removed the page on peripheral blood smears.

some stuff were moved between sections. I think it was the microtuble box which used to be in biochem was moved to the histo section.

I think the biggest difference though are the addition of more diagrams.

thanks much lmbebo.

 

[carrigallen]

I flipped through it in the bookstore - it looked so much like my older edition I did not want to buy it yet. I have a 2003 edition and I could not tell the difference.

 

[Dreamin]

I have the 2004 edition and I've been reading through it with my organ systems course. Is it really necessary for me to buy the 2005 edition? I feel like the more I read the same material, the better I know it...instead of switching to a new book now. Any suggestions?

 

[docmemi]

WHAT DO YOU GUYS MEAN THE 2005 EDITION IS 100 PAGES SHORTER??? did they take a lot of information out??? WHY??

 

[J-Mo]

WHAT DO YOU GUYS MEAN THE 2005 EDITION IS 100 PAGES SHORTER??? did they take a lot of information out??? WHY??

After careful inspection of the font, the 2005 edition is smaller typeset. It's not even 100 pages shorter anyway.

 

[Yogi Bear]

After careful inspection of the font, the 2005 edition is smaller typeset. It's not even 100 pages shorter anyway.

so i just got a copy of 2005 today.

2005: Notes section goes from pages 59-389.

vs.

2002: Notes section goes from 75 - 380.

2005 ed has a couple more pictures than 2002.

clinical vigettes for the pathology section had 32 cases in a tabular format in the 2005 ed but *only* 30 cases in setence --> arrow --> sentence format in the 2002 ed.

-while the 2005 ed has a picture of the heart for eisenmenger's synd, the 2002 ed doesn't.

-there are 137 images, 106 of which are colored. compared to 2002, the 2005 ed have more images on one page (better use of space).

-Main text on 2005 ed is about the same size as main text in the 2002 ed, but bolded stuff in 2002 ed is bigger than the 2005 ed.

CONCLUSION? IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME STUFF.

 

[lata]

hi-
i ordered online for the 2005 ed and am waiting for it to be delivered...
now i've read other posts that say that GI physio was missing.. is it really or was it rearranged and so may be some one was mistaken?? just wondered.
thank you for your time...

 

[Yogi Bear]

hi-
i ordered online for the 2005 ed and am waiting for it to be delivered...
now i've read other posts that say that GI physio was missing.. is it really or was it rearranged and so may be some one was mistaken?? just wondered.
thank you for your time...

i'd like to hear about it too! i don't have the 2004 ed but do have the 2002 ed. For physio, the gi is still there but probably a about a dozen facts were removed from the 2004 ed. (l.e each fact would be a name-description combo). Overall, they prob removed about 15% of gi.

 

[automaton]

i have the 2005 edition, and the GI physiology is found on pages 367-372. for comparison, the 2002 edition covers it on pages 372-378. FA is a joke for physiology though. i would definitely supplement with BRS physiology.

FA is revised every year for a reason. i don't think it's always better to keep adding **** to it, otherwise it would be a thousand pages by now. FA is for high yield FACTS, just like it says. if it's not in there, it's because those facts were not high yield in recent exams.

 

[automaton]

of course part of it is to make money, but it's also updated with new stuff added and new stuff removed for the benefit of students too. if they just removed and added **** randomly do you think everyone would swear by it?

they get their new information from surveys they offer to students in addition to input from yale medical students. (the 2005 edition has input from 6 yalies of the class of 2006, i.e. 3rd year students who just took the boards.) if you read FA cover to cover like i did you would know this and not spout off stupid commie ****. thanks.

 

[automaton]

oh ok you win. first aid 2000 is just as good as first aid 2005. are you happy?

btw, oh great thinker and guardian of sdn, have you ever thought about the possibility of saying what facts are important to know about the boards without giving away the exact test questions? look around on some of the step1 experiences threads. they each have an impression of what was emphasized and what was not. for example. HLA numbers were not tested to a majority of people. thus this is a good candidate for removal for future editions. how is that giving away an exact test question?

oh but what do i know, i'm just a memorizer from medical school and i'm just talking about what an upperclassman told me. ridiculous.

 

[Yogi Bear]

the thing w/ having 6 yalies be contributors is that they all come from the same school. and if i'm not mistaken, like the majority of the contributors from past editions have some association w/ yale. thus, what they consider high yield/or adequately covered in their classes might not be the same as the rest of us. And while on the interview trail, i had a sense that yale students didn't do too well on the boards, though their matches are still amazing.

the sdn hotshots like bigfrank, jalby, idiopathic, etc. should get together and write "SDN Aid for the USMLE Step 1".