“校长”提到的那道考题,在《金融时报》今天的博客里是作为反面典型来批判卫生部


所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛

送交者: Amsel 于 2009-08-06, 16:03:21:

回答: 战火烧到白大哥那里了,反中医人士一定要关注这个动态 由 Amsel 于 2009-08-06, 15:45:57:

的那个报告,以及英国卫生部所谓的要“规范化”中医、针灸和替代疗法:
http://blogs.ft.com/healthblog/2009/08/05/the-force-and-consultation-on-the-pittilo-report-on-alternative-health-therapies/

引用:
The Force, and consultation on the Pittilo report on alternative health therapies
August 5, 2009 10:16am
by Margaret McCartney

My eldest and I have been giggling at a book “F in Exams: The Funniest Test Paper Blunders”, which includes such gems as:

Q: Name two religions.

A: The Force (Jedi) and Football.

This amused us greatly.

What’s the difference with this next multiple choice one?.

Q: Which of the following explain(s) the physiological relationships between qi and blood/xue.

A: Qi is the source of all material in the body and blood carries the energy

B: Blood is the source of all material in the body including Qi

C: Qi drives blood moving and blood carries Qi

D: Qi flows in the channels and blood is stored in organs

E: Qi produce blood and blood is the mother of Qi

Well, this is a real exam paper, and it isn’t funny. It is an exam paper from Salford University’s Traditional Chinese Medicine course. The wonderful David Colquhoun gives access to the full paper plus the story behind the Pittilo report.

This report would, if implemented, create lots more nonsense exam papers funded by a lot more public money - and would produce practitioners without the absolutely crucial skill of how to assess evidence and reject or use it appropriatly.

As a GP, this makes me very concerned - after all, if someone has a degree, and is “regulated” by the government, surely you’d think the “treatment” on offer works? Sadly, and worryingly, no.





所有跟贴:


加跟贴

笔名: 密码: 注册笔名请按这里

标题:

内容: (BBCode使用说明