So, even though I’ve only had two lectures on anatomy this year, already there are some obvious differences between the content of the lectures compared to the lectures we got in medicine.
The first difference is the level of detail. Regular anatomy teaching goes into much greater detail than any of the anatomy I’ve ever been taught in medicine, and this is sure to continue, probably exponentially over the year. I just thought I’d bring this point up because medics sometimes assume they’ll know way more anatomy than most people, but both the anatomy students and forensic anthropology students will know way, WAY more anatomy than a medic without an anatomy degree. Its keeping my feet firmly on the ground, anyway, and that’s no bad thing.
The second is the way in which things are taught. In medical anatomy, you’re introduced to different regions of the body based on the conditions that are due to problems with that structure e.g. the lateral epicondyle and tennis elbow. Even during dissection, as we dissected into the spinal column, they tried to teach us the surgical technique sometimes used by neurosurgeons to get into the spinal column. Everything had a medical slant, and so a lot of discussions led onto the conditions that popped up into the anatomy course. However, with normal anatomy, things have much less of a medical slant and I have the feeling it might be quite a lot of rope-learning. In saying that, there were some medical facts thrown our way in the lecture today. However, it was quite basic medicine, so this year is going to be a bit different to me.