> as medicine and science are usually miles apart...
I was surprised by this comment by MK -
Do journalists generally see a significant divide between these
two camps? If so, then perhaps it just reflects that
journalists are presumably rather more likely to have
had a "science" background than a "medical" one.
However, those of us in medicine see medicine as an applied science,
where any technology which could be useful is fair game (including
mathematical ideas too of course). You only have to read the
science journal "Nature" to see that medicine is much in evidence
even there.
In fact we don't have to go too far down this line before we
end up discussing whether medics are scientists or not --- I guess
the public conception is that medics are not scientists ---and here we
have a fundamental problem regarding how we use these key words;
words which tend to divide us rather than bring us together.
So, in my view, journalists should try and avoid the "S" words
(Science, and Scientist)
and, if labels have to be used then we should use ones which
more clearly describe what particular line of activity we are
dealing with.
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr RWD Nickalls
Department of Anaesthesia, TEL: 0115-9691169 Ext45637
Nottingham City Hospital NHS Trust, +44-115-9691169 Ext45637
Hucknall Road,
Nottingham, NG5-1PB, FAX: 0115-9627713
UK. +44-115-9627713
email: [log in to unmask]
Pager: 0115-9691169
--------------------------------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|