Tokunboh Odubanjo wrote on another discussion: I have a problem with their being called scientists because mixing reagents together and reading results off a chart is not actually science, in strict terms. I do Anatomic Pathology. Thankfully, in my specialty, it is difficult for the lab scientist to claim to have the skill and knowledge that a pathologist holds. After 6 yrs of training, I continue to see new and novel cases, and I need 2nd opinions on not-so-clear cases. At our induction, we were told that we had earned the certificate to learn Pathology. As I practice, I see how true this is, in 6 yrs, I had only learnt how to search out info in Pathology, I would not immediately recognize or be able to diagnose abt 10% of d cases in my tray. In Chem Path, Hematology and Microbiology where conflicts btw lab medical physicians and lab med scientists is common, there is still a clear distinction btw them. A chem path scientist mixes the reagents together, place the tests in d spectrophotometer and releases whatever results are displayed by the machine. E.g. One of them once recorded Urea of zero for a patient who was still alive, this scientist was unable to come up with skills for minimal interpretation at the testing stage, she did not understand the science behind the reactions. She was pleased with the result and would have released it except for the lab med physicians intervention. This lab physician went on a round, read through the patients notes and decided that because d patient had such and such other metabolic derangement, he was likely to have this other metabolite interfering with the results, if that metabolite is removed, then the spec could measure d urea. Now, that is science. Because they are not necessarily expected to know any science, they are called technologists in d US, d UK and other nations. I dont have anything against lab scientists, our jobs are on parallel lines, each person serves an important role but to claim superiority over doctors is unreasonable. I understand that tests/ investigations are critical to clinical diagnosis but they are often unable to arrive at any useful diagnosis all by themselves, and thats not a problem because we dont expect them to do so. There is a reason that the patients are not allocated primarily to scientists.
Posted on: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 07:54:11 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015