I mean, let's do the math here. Realistically (unless you're Dougie Houser) if I qualified in neurology in 1930, it means I'd be 109 now. I'm not saying it's impossible, but pretty damn unlikely.
Of course, there are exceptions.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
We're talking A.D., right?
I was doing a survey recently, and this question came up:
1930? WTF?
I mean, let's do the math here. Realistically (unless you're Dougie Houser) if I qualified in neurology in 1930, it means I'd be 109 now. I'm not saying it's impossible, but pretty damn unlikely.
Of course, there are exceptions.
I mean, let's do the math here. Realistically (unless you're Dougie Houser) if I qualified in neurology in 1930, it means I'd be 109 now. I'm not saying it's impossible, but pretty damn unlikely.
Of course, there are exceptions.
Haha, loved the video! XD
ReplyDeleteWell, it could work, if your name was Dr. Who...and neurology was your thing instead of, you know, fighting Daleks and saving the planet.
ReplyDeleteJust jealous aren't you? ;*)
ReplyDeleteLoved the five years of missing memory part. Hope that didn't include residency and fellowship. Funny video.
ReplyDeleteWhen I asked my endocrinologist why he went into endocrinology, he told me about the excitement in the hospital the day Conn operated to prove the existence of Conn Syndrome.
ReplyDeleteThat was in 1954.
I'm not sure if my endo is in his 70s or 80s now, but I can really easily imagine him practicing another decade or even more.
I know YOU want to retire, don't you?
ReplyDeleteSlacker...
They are probably afraid of being sued for age discrimination if they did not have the complete range of years.
ReplyDeletecapcha: cooredu, no my education was sponsored by Miller High Life, not Coors
I worked with a doctor (primary care) who just retired at age 100. 100!! He got his license in something like 1937.
ReplyDelete