Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lightning" data-source="post: 2155610" data-attributes="member: 268153">I was under the impression that medicine &#039;Isn&#039;t an exact science&quot;.I didn&#039;t think it was a science at all but an art.If its a science why are tests subject to interpretation? If the science was watertight there could only be one answer.How can a patient present to a number of doctors with the same symptoms and get given different diagnoses by each of them if its a science?Your comments please...Thanks for your answer Matt.Common is common.Your clinical skill as a practitioner comes from case history, clinical testing and differential diagnoses. I don&#039;t have a problem with medicine being the art and science fortifying the art.I&#039;m an Osteopath and I think of my job as an art not a science although I will often use objective tests to form a working diagnosis which is an educated guess at best.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lightning, post: 2155610, member: 268153"] I was under the impression that medicine 'Isn't an exact science". I didn't think it was a science at all but an art. If its a science why are tests subject to interpretation? If the science was watertight there could only be one answer. How can a patient present to a number of doctors with the same symptoms and get given different diagnoses by each of them if its a science? Your comments please... Thanks for your answer Matt. Common is common. Your clinical skill as a practitioner comes from case history, clinical testing and differential diagnoses. I don't have a problem with medicine being the art and science fortifying the art. I'm an Osteopath and I think of my job as an art not a science although I will often use objective tests to form a working diagnosis which is an educated guess at best. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…