I've enjoyed everything else but words can not describe how uninteresting I find genetics, particularly lab techniques and molecular bio aspect of it. It actually makes me want to roll off of my couch onto the ground and just lay there face down to avoid looking at it. Anybody else feel the same way?
I. Hate. Genetics.
- Thread starter Pinkleton
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2008
- Messages
- 12,729
- Reaction score
- 4,901
I did, too. But then I realize it made studying for biochem WAY easier. The only gripe I had is the absurd amount of questions pertaining to cousins/etc wanting to make babies. And the fact that I had to figure out the "probability" of getting X disease. ... Which the reality of it is that you don't have that ONE disease with inbreeding...you have multiple ones.
- Joined
- May 20, 2010
- Messages
- 5,694
- Reaction score
- 7,924
What? So you were upset that they didn't ask you to calculate the probability of getting multiple diseases instead of one?
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2008
- Messages
- 12,729
- Reaction score
- 4,901
No, I just don't find it realistic asking these questions. Ask me if a wife/husband that aren't from the same family want to figure that out and I'm fine. That's realistic. Asking about one disease out of many from inbreeding is like taking your car to a mechanic with an oil leak, busted radiator, clogged air filter and faulty spark plugs and asking what the risk that the busted radiator is going to destroy your engine.
It just also reminds me of the scenario where an immigrant and her husband have a baby and the husband cuts the umbilical with a kitchen knife. Baby develops tetanus. What is the best thing that could've been done to prevent this. It was vaccinating the mother. True... but it just seems like the more realistic answer would be vaccinating the child.
I actually liked Genetics as a whole, but the two parts I hated about it were literally what you listed OP: the lab techniques and molecular bio aspect of it. I could just be ignorant at the moment, but I feel like it is unlikely I will ever have to personally employ use of CGH microarrays or an SNP chip or anything along those lines.
Not sure how that would be the more realistic answer? No flame, just not sure if I'm missing something there. I feel like the correct answer was the obvious one.
Not sure how that would be the more realistic answer? No flame, just not sure if I'm missing something there. I feel like the correct answer was the obvious one.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 65
For the first 6 months, the baby is going to have Mom's antibodies. So vaccinating her for the tetanus-knife umbilical cord cut would have protected the baby.
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2012
- Messages
- 577
- Reaction score
- 699
Young babies may not have a developed immune system that will produce an appropriate antibody response to a vaccine. The mother has such an immune system and can confer passive immunity on the child. That's probably what they were going for.
Yea, that was my point. If you're talking prevention, you want to give the vaccination to the mother so the antibodies can be transferred. On top of which, I vaguely remember that giving certain vaccinations during that 6 mo. period can lead to either a response being mounted by maternal IgG antibodies or tolerance of the antigen... which neither of which are even relevant because the baby was exposed to tetanus at birth, meaning antibodies had to be present before birth to prevent tetanus.
Yay for Immuno, probably my most loathed course of 1st year. And when I say probably, I mean definitely.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 1,699
- Reaction score
- 944
Is that normal to take immunlogy in your first year?
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,521
- Reaction score
- 108
I had it first year
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 65
Oh, whoops, I totally misread your initial comment and thought you were confused as to why you would vaccinate the mother. I should really not post things on the internet after a long day of Step 1 studying...my brain breaks 🙁
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 65
Me too. Right at the end when everyone was completely over the whole "school" thing.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Messages
- 3,640
- Reaction score
- 3,786
Yep. Infants don't develop fully functional immune systems till at least 6 mo after birth if not later. On top of that many vaccines have greatly reduced effectiveness (take rates) in infants.
Yes.
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 9,906
- Reaction score
- 10,039
You don't give a newborn a tetanus vaccine. Earliest is 2 months.
Yep, we have immuno in first year.
Genetics is mostly about understanding and logic. It's generally a conceptual subject. And as laboratory techniques/technologies in genetics continue to advance, the clinician investigator will have new tools to make diagnoses and improve patient care. This is unlike gross anatomy that is mostly about rote memorization and relatively static in terms of advances. Genetics is cool.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2008
- Messages
- 12,729
- Reaction score
- 4,901
That was kinda my point. And I was just ****ty I missed that question, so I was joking.
You guys are right, I was just like "Really? The dad uses a kitchen knife... and you're saying the mom should've been vaccinated? Well, let's just go with the fact that they're both stupid and say 'Well... no kitchen knife'"
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,521
- Reaction score
- 108
That was kinda my point. And I was just ****ty I missed that question, so I was joking.
or at the very least you could sterilize it
alcohol and fire perhaps
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 1,699
- Reaction score
- 944
You read my mind.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Messages
- 8,937
- Reaction score
- 11,418
Immuno as a first year.
And yeah, dad cutting the umbilical cord with a rusty kitchen knife is a pretty crap question. I'd be a little flustered by what the question was insinuating if I saw that on a test.
And yeah, dad cutting the umbilical cord with a rusty kitchen knife is a pretty crap question. I'd be a little flustered by what the question was insinuating if I saw that on a test.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 6
Now the knife is rusty?
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Messages
- 8,937
- Reaction score
- 11,418
Might as well assume so since the baby got tetanus. I mean it doesn't really matter since the diagnosis is made, but fine, let's just say the baby's umbilical cord shouldn't be cut with a damn kitchen knife?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,578
- Reaction score
- 37
For an immigrant that is at home, what would you propose to use to cut the cord? Bite it with your teeth?
Given the situation, a kitchen knife is probably the best possible alternative. Other choices? a pocket knife, garden shears, kitchen scissors, a machette, let the dog bite it in half...
I commend the use of the kitchen knife, as long as it is clean. There probably isn't a better tool around to cut through flesh. That is sort of what the knife was intended to do in the first place.
dsoz
Edit: I may be wrong, but I don't think being rusty is a requirement for the transmission of tetanus. The bacteria spore can be present on any surface, it just does not activate unless in an anaerobic environment. It has been a while since I had microbiology, so some of my details may be incorrect.
Given the situation, a kitchen knife is probably the best possible alternative. Other choices? a pocket knife, garden shears, kitchen scissors, a machette, let the dog bite it in half...
I commend the use of the kitchen knife, as long as it is clean. There probably isn't a better tool around to cut through flesh. That is sort of what the knife was intended to do in the first place.
dsoz
Edit: I may be wrong, but I don't think being rusty is a requirement for the transmission of tetanus. The bacteria spore can be present on any surface, it just does not activate unless in an anaerobic environment. It has been a while since I had microbiology, so some of my details may be incorrect.
