TO a certain extent, it is. Physics is one of the basic fundamentals to human physiology. Though I would doubt any sane medical school would test it to a great deal. You can drop it in lieu of Bio (assuming the other two subjects should be Chem and Maths). I have plenty of friends who did so and managed to get into medicine. However, Physics will give you a better edge if you score, it looks a lot nicer of 4 flats than 3As. During the 7 months you have, what to do is entirely up to you. You could do all of those you suggested as above. You could get a job or something. It's entirely up to you. Work experience in hospitals is not as "work" per se. If you do not have a background of basic medical knowledge, I highly doubt that it'll help much, it'll open your eyes towards the life of a doctor, certainly.

Let's put it this way. Most of the things in A-levels will help you in your future. It doesn't matter it's Bio, Physics, Chem or Maths. It is your basic solid foundation to scientific knowledge. It won't be directly linked to your medical studies directly, but my experience has been that it does help by somehow helping me to understand. For example, biology in A-levels helped me get through those mitosis, gene expression selection and etc. Now, I learn what goes wrong with them (mutatations) and how it has an effect on the body. Physics helped me learn cardiovascular physiology. Most importantly, check the pre-requisits for entry to the uni. If they ask for physics, and you don't have it, then they won't be sorry.

"Test the water"? Honestly, I don't see how an A-levels person can "test" by "working" in hospital. All you get to is an insight to what doctors do. Not how they do it (thought process) or their stressors. Some doctors would welcome you for a week or so, letting you wittness consultations, surgeries and so on but yeah, sometimes you do feel in the way of normal operational procedures.

Medicine is more than liking biology. If that is your sole cause of wanting to enter medicine, please think thouroughly. It is not cheap, it is not short. It requires much more than your liking of biology. Essentially, on the surface, it is biology, but deep down, it is so much more. As an example, you need to be socially adapt enough to deal with distressed patients (especially in exam settings, since we're students). You'd need to be able to balance your time well between play and studies. THink about this. What can studying medicine do to satisfy you instead of you studying some orther Bachelor of Science (Biology) courses, or maybe vet? Or other courses.

Not when working, I agree.

But if you do not understand mitosis, how things can potentially go wrong, you wouldn't be able to understand how genetic mutations affect the cell.

It may not be the fact that its used directly in your working years, but fundamental knowledge is there for a reason. That is why most unis will have basic medical sciences as their first year curriculum.

Furthermore, if you've forgotten, medical students do need those knowledge to pass their exams.

P/S: For ISAT, the example questions are way easier than the actual exam, do not use them as gauge. The exam will be 3 hours long and therefore be mentally prepared. I lost my concentration 2hours in and it affected my score. As far as I know, there are no test papers around to practise.

This post has been edited by D_s_X: Sep 2 2012, 03:50 PM

AFAIK, Mauritius.

IMU. But I really do not know the details of the said scholarship.

Anyway, yay WA! Tassie still lagging behind with positions though..

Tassie graduates 2012 all of them should have jobs! (as all international students got places as well, though smaller areas including local Tassie). Apparently what I have heard is that there are some reserve fundings available if needed, but yeah.

Seems like the structure we have in third year...

TBH I haven't seen much use of fibrates (none that I can recall, for that matter) so far. Don't know if it has fallen out of favour in Australia (Hobart) or it's just that I've been not looking close enough.

P/S: B-blockers can mask the adrenegic symptoms of hypoglycaemia as well (!use in high risk patients).

Hypermax, are b-blockers and absolute contraindication in COPD and Asthma? I ask this only because I have seen patients on them, where the doctors say, B-blockers work for them.

Tripple whammy right there as well?

Also this article may be interest for you guys.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9264493

This post has been edited by D_s_X: Dec 19 2012, 12:10 AM

I see your point, but maybe it's just one of those things that just works for the patient.

I have no idea about diagnosis of CCF in Malaysia, but I do know theres Framingham's Citreria (not like I remember the citrerias)

EDIT: just added the criteria for completeness after searching

Major criteria:

Cardiomegaly on chest radiography
S3 gallop (a third heart sound)
Acute pulmonary edema
Paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea
Crackles on lung auscultation
Central venous pressure of more than 16 cm H2O at the right atrium
Jugular vein distension
Positive abdominojugular test
Weight loss of more than 4.5 kg in 5 days in response to treatment

Minor criteria:

Tachycardia of more than 120 beats per minute
Nocturnal cough
Dyspnea on ordinary exertion
Pleural effusion
Decrease in vital capacity by one third from maximum recorded
Hepatomegaly
Bilateral ankle edema

2 major criteria OR 1 major and 2 minor criteria.

Also, does anyone know what else they look for in echos for CCF besides Ejection fraction (Systolic failure) and LV function (both systolic and diastolic failure)?

Is it a diagnosis by a specialist only?

This post has been edited by D_s_X: Dec 19 2012, 10:26 AM

The patient's functional capacity (CCF re NYHA classification) is much more important than the Echo itself IMO. Some people function very well with relatively low EF.



Does it really matter that much if it's systolic or diastolic failure in practice? Any practictioners out there care to enlighten me?

http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/conten...pl_D/2.abstract

Summary:

Systolic failure: ACEI, Digitalis, Diuretics
Diastolic Failure: ACEI, BB, CCB, Diuretics +- Digitalis (in AF).

I don't think many people are put on Digitalis anyway unless they have AF due to risk of toxicity.

I can say that as well after receiving and talking to a few lecturers they do coexcist.

I have a very dumb question here, Angiotensin II has various functions, which of it is the most prominent? Is it constriction of vessels as I remember?

I do think that you need to reread my question more carefully, I know about all those but which of it is dominant? (Hence hypermax's: (improve survival and quality of life))

Makes much more sense right now for it to be first line for BP in certain cases as well as CCF.

I remember our lecturers told us that sartans and prils are pretty similar, although there are different side effects due to presence/breakdown of bradykinin.

However, I do remember somewhere that sartans work differently something along the lines of losartan binds loosely whereas cadesartan binds tighter?

Good for you that you're confident. But seriously, there is much more to being a doctor than you think. Can you answer me what a doctor does besides diagnosis and prescribing/delivering appropriate medicines/ procedures?

Not being your wet blanket but please do survey other careers as well, you're young and there is still much more to think about. Please note that committing this early to medicine is not necessarily good, I sometimes doubt myself in less time than I think that I'm going to have to be responsible for a person's health. It may seem very managable in paper but when you start to see things in the healthcare setting, by gosh, it is a whole new philosophical lession.

Who knows, when you're exploring you might discover some hidden gems as well! (IMHO, all professions are noble as you earn an honest living)

Also, my path post-SPM was A-levels then to University. I wasn't the brightest student in my high school but I did fairly well with Maths and Science subjects. Did fairly well in my A-levels and was lucky to be granted an acceptance letter to uni. I did 3 science and a maths for A-levels. Physics and/or biology (have not heard any that does not need chemistry) is/are not needed in all universities but to be safe, just take it if you can handle it to be safe. Do survey which universities you're planning to apply to before choosing the subjects.

In a nutshell, it is part of it. Syd G has said it is also about medico-legal obligations, professional and personal life boundries and et cetra. Your life will be dominated by medicine. In my limited years of training, having a good heart, tolerance, patience can only bring you so far, there are many unpredictable circumstances where those won't be able to help you with your judgement but in fact, might cloud it. It is not the cleanest profession where everything is either right or wrong. There is much time to explore! I hope that you'll get good results in SPM and A-levels and so on, however, if you don't; plenty of other options as careers where your good heart can be put to good use as well, don't fret! Like I said, every profession is noble if you do it with the right heart.

P/S: re:if i get good result and feels i can cope with being a doctor i will continue with it.

You seem to be able to know your limits, one of the things I have been taught to be a good doctor =)

Let's leave out other DDx and just discuss about Malignancies and Clots?