Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

Questions about books


Guest TKP 123

Recommended Posts

Guest TKP 123

Hello,

 

I was in the health science bookstore a few days ago to check out some books.

 

From the booklist, there appears to be a few books which are new. Since they are new, I just wonder if any people in second year has any thoughts about these books.

 

I understand that I can wait until I meet my buddy and ask him/her about that. I just want to some insight now so that I can plan how much to spend...

 

1. Anatomy:

Gray's anatomy (Drake, et. al) comes with the Atlas (Moses) at a special price. I realize that both books are relatively new.

From a review in the internet, Gray's anatomy has a high rating. How about the Atlas (Moses)? It seems to have good real pictures. Or should I buy the Atlas from Netter (a bit like cartoon drawing)?

 

2. Pharmacology:

The list recommends "Principles of pharmacology" from Golan, which is again a new book which has never been used at UBC. Which pharmacology books do you guys use? How are they?

 

3. Histology:

Although UBC does not recommend any books for histology this year, I heard that Wheaters is a good book. How about the Gartner book? I found a used copy of this book. How is this compared to Wheaters?

 

Sorry for the long messages.

 

Thanks a million times.

 

TKP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lactic Folly

The new recommended anatomy text at the U of A is the Gray's Anatomy for Students.. it looks pretty good, less detailed than Moore's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest StarGirl123

1. Anatomy- I used Netters and I also bought Rohen and Yukochi which was excellent for preparing for bellringers!

2. Pharm - still don't have one

3. Histology- Wheaters was excellent and I highly recommend it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kirsteen

Hey there,

 

Another proponent of the Rohen text here. We had our neuroanatomy peripatetic this week and the Rohen atlas was indispensible. Tons of great shots of the structures of the brain, and different aspects too, e.g., of the different foramen in the skull base, which was very handy. Although Netter's is beautifully illustrated (and even more wonderful in person, which you can see if you're in Chicago and can head to the Museum of Surgery) the structures in the body look a lot different when they're all more or less flesh-coloured. :)

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TimmyMax

Hey,

 

I also echo the comment that Rohen is the best atlas to use to prep for the bellringers with- nothing beats the full-colour photographs because things do look a lot different in real life!

The only (minor) drawback with Rohen is that it is incomplete and sometimes there is only one photograph featuring certain structures/muscles. Of course, it's debatable as to whether or not not having these structures/muscles clearly depicted will really make a difference in the end, but it's something that I noticed when I was going through my anatomy studying.

Otherwise, I'd argue that Rohen is the best atlas, although Netter, with his idealized illustrations, is more complete and some of the extra illustratons are great for helping to wrap your mind around the 3-D alignment of things! I never got the chance to see the 3rd edition of Netter, but I'm sure that it is great! If I was a super-keener, I'd buy both Netter and Rohen, even if it is a bit of overkill, but since I could only buy one, it was Rohen. Just my two cents!

 

Best of luck!

Timmy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest UWOMED2005

I used Netter's (idealized drawings) to introduce myself to the anatomy.

 

Rohen & Yokochi looks like hamburger meat the first time you look at it. . but for Bell Ringers, Timmymax is right - Rohen & Yokochi is more realistic and looks like the test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest cheech10

Rohen is nice for bellringers, but Netter is much easier to start with. Most libraries have old copies of Rohen that you can borrow for a week before the bellringer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest therealcrackers

Grant's is a great atlas for dissection, but only once you know what you're looking it. I found it quite useless in first year, but very helpful in a fourth year anatomy of body cavities course. In first year, I started with Netter, then peered over the shoulders of classmates with Rohen when it was time to go through the material for exams. Better yet, we got second years to explain the differences between Rohen and what we were seeing in the dissections!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest flying kumquat

For those of you who are proponents of the Rohen atlas in supplement to Netter, were you doing the dissections yourself in lab? Would this be as useful if anatomy is taught through prosections?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...