By WhenIsItTrue - 27/03/2017 20:00
Top comments
Comments
That really depends on the medical book. If it recommends using quicksilver (mercury) as a cure for syphilis, or as a more drastic one, tells you to bathe in the internal organs of a freshly killed fox, I'd say he's right on the money. If you're using modern medical books though, that's an entirely different story.
When I read quicksilver my mind immediately went to the guy from X Men for some reason
he's actually correct. medical books - and actually all books, are unlikely to be up to date with technology. scientists - essentially all of them, have moved to Peer Reviewed Journals, which can be found online. prjs will almost always be correct and have the advantage of being updated as more research is done. the reason they're always right is because they are tested frequently. so if i claim 'ctc1 is a promoter for GC pairs which protects telomers', i will put it on a prj and many scientists around the world will go and test ctc1 to see if it can actually stop cancer.
depending on the assignment the teacher could have had an instruction to use actual books and not websites to cite his essay. I had a humanities teacher that we use 2 books to cite our essays, unfortunately all the medical books we needed were taken out of the library by medical students. when i told her about this she suggested i go to the major medical university in my city and use their medical library. This wasn't even program class, it was a general ed i needed to take in order to graduate. This woman obviously didn't realise i was taking 6 other courses that semester and all teachers have roughly the same due date.
He could be right. Medical science is always changing and you should state "facts" with some degree of caution. Look into the story of H. pylori and stomach ulcers and you'll see an unbelievable tale of dogma and its overturning,
Time to pick between fake medical books or an alternative teacher
Was the paper on vaccines by any chance?
its a good thing he didn't stop you from using the internet as a source because everything on there is 100% true
try quoting facts about trump to a trump supporter you'll get the same or worse
Keywords
That really depends on the medical book. If it recommends using quicksilver (mercury) as a cure for syphilis, or as a more drastic one, tells you to bathe in the internal organs of a freshly killed fox, I'd say he's right on the money. If you're using modern medical books though, that's an entirely different story.
he's actually correct. medical books - and actually all books, are unlikely to be up to date with technology. scientists - essentially all of them, have moved to Peer Reviewed Journals, which can be found online. prjs will almost always be correct and have the advantage of being updated as more research is done. the reason they're always right is because they are tested frequently. so if i claim 'ctc1 is a promoter for GC pairs which protects telomers', i will put it on a prj and many scientists around the world will go and test ctc1 to see if it can actually stop cancer.