Best Functional Fellowships?

[Guest]

Thanks for providing literature with this. The person you responded clearly has some deeper issues and, based on rhetoric, has posted similarly idiotic things before

[Guest]

(02-08-2022, 10:44 PM)Guest Wrote: Thanks for providing literature with this. The person you responded clearly has some deeper issues and, based on rhetoric, has posted similarly idiotic things before

From the study: "During the millennial era, serious PPIs have not been increasing. However, reporting of all levels of PPIs is increasing coincident with the ease of electronic reporting."

If I am understanding the study correctly, it is saying that problematic behavior has not been increasing, but reporting of has been increasing. So, academia is becoming a more hostile environment, where any little thing you do is wrong. 

This seems to be the case all over academia, where every little word you say can be construed as harassment and can destroy your career. 

A good example is this article today in the NY Times. The professor made a mild joke, and gave good advice, and a student falsely accused him of harassment. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/us/ha...wsuit.html

[Guest]

(02-09-2022, 10:15 AM)Guest Wrote:

(02-08-2022, 10:44 PM)Guest Wrote: Thanks for providing literature with this. The person you responded clearly has some deeper issues and, based on rhetoric, has posted similarly idiotic things before

From the study: "During the millennial era, serious PPIs have not been increasing. However, reporting of all levels of PPIs is increasing coincident with the ease of electronic reporting."

If I am understanding the study correctly, it is saying that problematic behavior has not been increasing, but reporting of has been increasing. So, academia is becoming a more hostile environment, where any little thing you do is wrong. 

This seems to be the case all over academia, where every little word you say can be construed as harassment and can destroy your career. 

A good example is this article today in the NY Times. The professor made a mild joke, and gave good advice, and a student falsely accused him of harassment. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/us/ha...wsuit.html

I know you have some victimhood agenda going on, but let me run this reasoning by you for fun: an environment where "any little thing you do is wrong" implies a large false positive rate, but your "understanding [of] the study" rather suggests a low false negative rate. The rate of problematic behavior has remained constant through time, the only thing that changed is the ease in which the prevalent problematic behavior can be identified and reported. Thus, is academia becoming more "hostile" or are you just upset that you're getting called on your bullshit?

[mmm_hotpot]

(02-07-2022, 01:54 PM)Guest Wrote: PhDs lack clinical perspective. That's why MD-PhDs and the NIH program (and other bench research programs for MDs) are so important. I agree with the above posters that the vast majority of good basic work is done by PhDs. Go through any nsgy department's list of researchers and you'll see that PhDs are mostly doing basic work and MD PhDs are translating it (with exceptions, of course). This is partially why MDs and MD PhDs are over-represented among nobel laureates. Anyone who's spent serious time in academic research will have already seen this.

For any med students or younger interested in academics who read this thread, you need years of lab work to gain skills if this is something you want. You either pay for it before residency or later as you flounder in a post-doc trying to put together scraps for a K-award while your former co-residents make $$$ operating. Most neurosurgeons don't do this because it requires immense sacrifice and lab research is an acquired taste (we need more surgeons than scientists anyway).

All that being said, don't let anyone tell you that you can't do great research in functional, tumor or any field if that's what you want. MDs and MD/PhDs' careers aren't dependent on them keeping the lights on with boring R01's so they can take more moonshots. Look at Leuthardt at WashU, Lesniak at NW, or Chiocca at BWH. None of that work would ever attempted by a PhD. Ever. There are other examples as well and there's no smoother path to chairman than through the lab.

The amount of basic science and tech that could easily be translated to improvements in patient care is also staggering in nsgy so there's plenty of opportunity.

Thank you

[Guest]

Is there a functional fellowship at Penn? Is it good?

[Guest]

A quick google search shows that yes - there is a functional fellowship at Penn. Yoshor is the chair and they just added Halpern. It's probably a perfectly great fellowship that will not limit your career. Halpern is going places and getting in as an early fellow with him has its appeal.

Will Penn supplant Toronto or UCSF at the top? Not in the near term.

[Guest]

Emory

[Guest]

Sexy teen photo galleries
http://xxx-comic-gay.thankful.sexyico.com/?alice

las vegas porn shops on strip ebony butt porn youngest teen porn ever pics streaming oprn movie kira kiwi porn

[Guest]

Tier 1 functional/epilepsy: Toronto (by a long shot), UCSF ( not as good without Larson though), Emory, UTSW since they now have Pouratian, UF probably has the best neurosurgeon/neurology collab between Foote and Okun

Tier 2: CCF, Jeff which was probably top tier but Sharan is with Medtronic now, Penn, Vandy, Sinai

Tier 3: everything else

[Guest]

I know Toronto to all the rave but fair warning, you take junior call for the program as a fellow.

Done enough of that.