- Joined
- Dec 13, 2001
- Messages
- 426
- Reaction score
- 1
would I also find Diagnostic Radiology boring?
If I Found Pathology Boring...
- Thread starter MD Dreams
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2003
- Messages
- 2,755
- Reaction score
- 6
How should anyone know? Kind of a silly question really, they're two very different specialties. What was boring about path?
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Messages
- 144
- Reaction score
- 2
pathology is a very cellular and biochemical field. the kinds of gross pathology on imaging i would imagine has very little to do with reading pathology out of robbins! i guess both fields are related to the structural progression of disease.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 9
Agree with above: it depends on why you didn't like Path. If it was purely the micro stuff, that's one thing. If you disliked some of the pathophyst, the encyclopedic requirements, the minutiae, that might be another. (Not that rads is all minutiae, but you'll have to go through a lot of it before you become full fledged.)
Maybe read through this rad-resident message board. It might give you a good, though indirect answer to your question:
http://www.auntminnie.com/forum/m.aspx?m=18054&mpage=1&key=
(may have to create a log in)
Maybe read through this rad-resident message board. It might give you a good, though indirect answer to your question:
http://www.auntminnie.com/forum/m.aspx?m=18054&mpage=1&key=
(may have to create a log in)
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2004
- Messages
- 929
- Reaction score
- 17
If you studied really hard for histology would you do well on a gross anatomy exam?
Apples and oranges, my friend.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 9
The word of Hans is usually golden, so how about a clarification of the studying-for-the-wrong-test thing.
If I really disliked training for that marathon, should I take on the challenge of training for a triathalon?
If I really disliked training for that marathon, should I take on the challenge of training for a triathalon?
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2004
- Messages
- 929
- Reaction score
- 17
I dont think thats a fair analogy, one sport IS, by definition, RUNNING and the other also includes RUNNING, so of course if you hated one you would hate the other. Even so, if an athlete hates running long distances, it doesn't mean he can't enjoy being a sprinter.
My analogy was meant to illustrate that pathology involves studying disease at the cellular level verus radiology which studies disease at the anatomic level. I, too, do not find cellular pathology all that interesting. Sure, I can point out lots of mitotic divisions in a cancer, but otherwise the cells all look pretty much the same to me.
Radiology, OTOH, is fascinating to me. I am fascinated by the structural relationships between the organs. (Incidentally, I also happen to be interested in modern architecture and maps).
Its analagous to medicine versus surgery. Treat a disease at the molecular level with some receptor-inhibitor or anti-body or channel blocker or treat a structural disease by operating. Its a totally different scale and approach. Likewise, if I had to choose between medicine and surgery, I'd probably pick surgery.
My analogy was meant to illustrate that pathology involves studying disease at the cellular level verus radiology which studies disease at the anatomic level. I, too, do not find cellular pathology all that interesting. Sure, I can point out lots of mitotic divisions in a cancer, but otherwise the cells all look pretty much the same to me.
Radiology, OTOH, is fascinating to me. I am fascinated by the structural relationships between the organs. (Incidentally, I also happen to be interested in modern architecture and maps).
Its analagous to medicine versus surgery. Treat a disease at the molecular level with some receptor-inhibitor or anti-body or channel blocker or treat a structural disease by operating. Its a totally different scale and approach. Likewise, if I had to choose between medicine and surgery, I'd probably pick surgery.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2004
- Messages
- 929
- Reaction score
- 17
It depends on why you find path boring? Is it because of no interaction with patients? Then probably.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2001
- Messages
- 426
- Reaction score
- 1
It's not so much the lack of interaction with the patients.
When I was in Path, I found it interesting, for a week or two, but then I began getting really antsy. I couldn't handle being behind the microscope, constantly looking at slides and trying to detect anomolies, the slow pace, being confined to the limited space of the path lab, etc.
I see some of these same qualities in Radiology and I wonder if I would get antsy in the reading room as well. What do you think?
When I was in Path, I found it interesting, for a week or two, but then I began getting really antsy. I couldn't handle being behind the microscope, constantly looking at slides and trying to detect anomolies, the slow pace, being confined to the limited space of the path lab, etc.
I see some of these same qualities in Radiology and I wonder if I would get antsy in the reading room as well. What do you think?
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 2,151
- Reaction score
- 5
As a resident in pathology (and usually as an attending in private practice), the days that you are strictly stuck behind a scope are few and far between, IMO. I don't think med student rotations do it justice (just as rads rotations for med students probably don't mimic residency either). I had a difficult time deciding between the two specialties, but ended up choosing path. Carry on.
