Naming things

[farnsworth]

You know what bugs me? When a normal anatomical structure is eponymically named. I mean I can see the naming of a disease after the person who discovered it, a disease takes clinical research skill and an insightful mind to characterize (sometimes).

But how hard is it to pick through a few dead bodies to see that there's a freakin' hole coming out of the brainstem? Let alone one hole in the middle (magendie), and two on either side (luschka)? It really required 2 brilliant neuroanatomists to notice that? And it was so brilliant, that they named it after them(selves)? I don't want to see it referred to as these persons "lending their name" to it, either. You take a perfectly good median aperature and turn it into foramen of magendie, you're not doing anyone any favors. That's like saying Citibank is "lending" their name to the Rose Bowl. Gosh, thanks. Just "Rose Bowl" would have been ghastly. And who would remember it? Think of all the significant contributions Citibank has made to the Rosebowl over the past year. Do we really want that to be overshadowed by the game itself or convenience?

They're just lucky that there's an M in "medial" and L in "lateral" or I'd really be complaining.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[cpants]

For some reason I can usually remember name structures better.

 

[farnsworth]

...you're ruining my first thread.

 

[PenguinHead]

...you're ruining my first thread.

Don't worry. I'm with you. I absolutely hate it. Seriously, just because you have a hole named after you, does anyone really remember or care who you were...?

 

[SomeDoc]

Yes, this is a problem, and medical education is beginning to steer away from using eponyms, substituting actual descriptors instead (ex; "trisomy 18, rather than "Edward's Syndrome"). I would much rather learn the technical name of a condition than to memorize the name of a (questionably) egotistical scientist or physician.

 

[Flopotomist]

What REALLY drives me batty is when some overachiever goes and names MULTIPLE things after themselves (Paget, Cushing, Charcot etc). I think you get to use your name ONE time ONLY.

Oh wait.. you were talking about anatomy... /rantoff

 

[ZagDoc]

But without names we'd never have the amazingly useful Epiploic Foramen of Winslow!

 

[cpants]

Meissner is king.

 

[GuzzyRon]

Yeah, those eponyms drive me nuts as well and I agree that they should get rid of them altogether. Most of the professors in my school did a good job avoiding their use. They only mention them so we can recognize them if we see them elsewhere.

 

[farnsworth]

Yeah, those eponyms drive me nuts as well and I agree that they should get rid of them altogether. Most of the professors in my school did a good job avoiding their use. They only mention them so we can recognize them if we see them elsewhere.

Paget was basically a scientific squatter, hoarding all the diseases he could find and placing them under the oppressive yolk of "Paget's disease of..."

The same idea applies to drug names.
1) it's hard enough to learn all those names in the first place (x1)
2) it's hard enough to learn all those additional similar drugs in the same family
3) depending on the drug, the trade name usually doesn't describe what it does at all. "Wellbutrin"? Well any sick person would like to be "well"...that doesn't help me.
4) The trade name offers nothing except free advertising for the drug company, and an easier name (sometimes) for patients to remember (yeah right, they either don't remember at all, bring a list, or call it their "water pill"). I mean that's a whole 'nother ball of wax, but I doubt we should be passively endorsing premiums associated with name-brand drugs when the generic's no different....or if it isn't available yet, it will be.

 

[Flaxmoore]

3) depending on the drug, the trade name usually doesn't describe what it does at all. "Wellbutrin"? Well any sick person would like to be "well"...that doesn't help me.

If I remember correctly, it was actually US law that drugs cannot have their function as part of their name.

 

[smq123]

3) depending on the drug, the trade name usually doesn't describe what it does at all. "Wellbutrin"? Well any sick person would like to be "well"...that doesn't help me.

Oh, it's even better when the generic has TWO associated brand names, depending on the indication.

Bupropion is...
* WELLBUTRIN, if it's prescribed for depression, or
* ZYBAN, if it's prescribed for smoking cessation.

Great. It's got, I think, 2 other brand names, that I can't remember.

4) The trade name offers nothing except free advertising for the drug company, and an easier name (sometimes) for patients to remember (yeah right, they either don't remember at all, bring a list, or call it their "water pill"). I mean that's a whole 'nother ball of wax, but I doubt we should be passively endorsing premiums associated with name-brand drugs when the generic's no different....or if it isn't available yet, it will be.

It's even worse when patients come in asking for a certain drug by describing the TV commercial. It's like, "Buddy, I just got off of surgery. I haven't touched a TV in 8 weeks. No, I do not know what drug commercial had that guy...that one walking in a forest in it."

 

[GuzzyRon]

These drugs are making me sick already... and I don't know if I'm looking forward to 2nd year.