Preclinical medicine is a glorified endurance test
Editor - Two years of stress and exams has
taught me very little of any use when
confronted with real patients and the
demands of their consultants. This makes
me wonder why preclinical education exists
at all.
Is it really just a glorified exercise in
endurance; a series of hurdles designed to
weed out the less hardy specimens? There is
no doubt that our time spent in the confines
of the medical school gave us a basic founding in our science but with exam questions
like, "Earwax is a natural insect repellent,
true or false?" I can't help but wonder if my
time might not have been better employed
elsewhere. having watched many wonderfully understanding, intelligent, and more
than capable students flounder in the final
stages and find themselves asked to leave,
it is perhaps an astonishingly poor form
of selection.
perhaps there is an alternative. Would
three years spent obtaining an "ordinary
degree," and a healthy dollop of life prove
better preparation for life as a medic, and be
a superior indicator of suitability than
surviving preclinical boot camp? A good
degree in a relevant subject would distinguish those capable of thriving in an
environment of self motivated learning, as
opposed to the hothouse of spoonfed A
levels. Surely our graduates are more highly
qualified to take a reasoned decision as to
whether medicine really is for them than
our teenage population, and are better
equipped to cope with the consequences of
that decision.
hear! hear! for graduate medical
courses such as that introduced by the new
Leicester Warwick Medical School. Leicester Warwick is now offering a new four year
MB CHB curriculum for graduates of
Biological Sciences. Others are beginning
to offer similar courses. I look forward to
seeing the results.
Emma Searle, third year medical student, university of Manchester
Email: emma-searle@yahoo.co.uk
studentBMJ 2001;09:217-260 July ISSN 0966-6494
