Reddit mentions: The best internal medicine books

I'm not sure if this will be helpful for you, but I really liked this book when I was completely lost. I have a feeling you may be past this point in trying to pick a specialty, but this may be a good place to get a better understanding of the field. If you don't have access to this book and want it, PM me and I'll send you a copy. Also check out this post with comprehensive spreadsheet that another student put together.. it is pretty amazing

 

One things I often tell underclassmen is that it is better to shoot for the "harder" specialty because you can switch over to the easier one if you change your mind. However, going the other way around is often impossible. So a lot of people start residency in general surgery and change their minds about it and switch to anesthesiology. This is very common and anesthesiology is a very welcoming field to people who've changed their minds after starting residency. I would say if you're really torn and on the fence about general surgery vs anesthesiology know that you could always go for anesthesia later. You probably will not be able to choose where you go location wise, but you won't be locked of out the specialty if you decide to go with gen surg first.

 

I actually matched into anesthesiology (current MS4). Obviously take everything I have to say with a grain of salt... but I think anesthesiology is a great specialty. I'm surprised that you've heard people complaining that their job could be done by midlevels. At my program (and on my interviews) I've honestly never met an anesthesiologist who didn't love their job. Perhaps the rotation site you're at just doesn't have the complexity of cases that are seen at other places. I think the biggest thing about anesthesiology is that you have to be ok with many cases being a standard routine. Everyone agrees that you can teach a monkey to intubate and turn on some gas, but being a physician really matters in those cases where things aren't routine. Being prepared for those critical/scary situations is what the training is really about. Also, the anesthesiologists I work with are always trying to perfect what they are doing in their usual routine. Often they are trying to tweak things so patients are as comfortable as possible when they wake up. Anyways, I will admit that anesthesiology isn't for everyone, but I wouldn't rule out the specialty because a few people you've met are unhappy. Anecdotally, I find that the field has really high job satisfaction compared to other specialties (among residents and attendings).

 

Also not sure if this is going to be a big deciding factor for you, but I know many well regarded MD anesthesiology residency programs are DO friendly. One program I interviewed at that I remember most clearly being very DO friendly is case western. In terms of competitiveness, I would say anesthesiology is relatively easy. You do not need to be top of your class to match into this field. Refer to the spreadsheet above for numbers on competitiveness. My personal experience is that I got interviews from many of the top programs without being very competitive (bottom half of my class for sure and nothing especially impressive on my application to compensate for it).
 


Best of luck to you!

> I know you said you have a book or something - PM me about that, I'm interested!

I've sent you a PM about the book. Glad to hear you're interested!

> What about this theory that floats around on the internet and that celebrities like Joe Rogan talk about that the pineal gland produces DMT, especially during sleep.

There is some evidence of DMT production in the pineal gland, but it's very scant at this stage. One study, last year (2013), showed trace amounts of DMT in the pineal glands of rats. This could mean that DMT is produced there, or somewhere else in the body and then stored/used there; however the amounts were far too limited to have any kind of psychedelic effect.

It's not extremely surprising, as DMT is chemically quite similar to the likes of serotonin and melatonin, so for it to form naturally in the brain isn't a huge jump biochemically speaking... it's also however not terribly interesting or useful until we know more about how much, when, why, and so on.

It could also however simply have been a freak occurrence. I'd like to see more studies being done to confirm it - especially with multiple species and animals of different ages (which may make a very large difference as well given the possible relationship between the pineal gland and the parietal eye that I mentioned).

> How did you learn as much as you know specifically about LSD?

It helps being old ;)

More seriously - I've simply read a lot and studied a lot with a critical mind. I'm a software developer professionally, but I've spent around 15 years of my free time learning and researching psychedelics and associated fields. I have no formal training, but I read university level textbooks on neuroscience, biochemistry, pharmacology and so on for fun.

Mostly, I'm just the kind of person that's both passionately curious about the world as well as being the kind of person that likes to critically analyse things. This helps to steer away from the mystical side of things (all very interesting, but lacking in anything even remotely similar to evidence) and keep me searching in more productive lines of enquiry.

> Any other books or references you'd be willing to share?

Hmmm... quite a lot.

"LSD" by Otto Snow is a good general purpose LSD book, with pretty detailed synthesis information that helps you understand the chemistry even if you're not actually planning on synthesising it yourself.

I'm not sure of your current level of skill, but if you need an intro, or refresher in to the basics of the right kind of chemistry, then Organic Chemistry I for Dummies is a great book according to my wife (who went from "no knowledge" to "able to at least understand what I'm talking about" just from this book).

For a "step-up" from there and getting to looking at the brain specifically, I'd start with (and continually go back to) Molecular Neuropharmacology: A Foundation for Clinical Neuroscience.

Aside from that, every research paper you can find dealing with related material. There's some good review papers as well for "summing up" a lot of others. One I really liked was "The Pharmacology of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide: A Review" by Passie et al.

I also found some online courses to be really good. I recently did "Drugs and the Brain" on Coursera; it was definitely a good refresher for me, and would be excellent for anyone with a basic grounding but wanting to learn more in general. There's another on Coursera called "Medical Neuroscience", which I unfortunately missed, but will catch the next time around; and one coming up really soon titled "Understanding the Brain: The Neurobiology of Everyday Life" which I'll be doing but expect to be a somewhat simpler course than the others (I'll take it anyway - re-covering basics is always good because you do find things you've managed to miss no matter how long you've been learning).

Edit: One additional thing I should have mentioned... here on reddit, check out /r/drugnerds and maybe also /r/rationalpsychonaut

I am a PGY-4 Rad resident. Here are some resources that I think you guys might find helpful.

General

• University of Virginia, online radiology tutorials. These cover many different aspects of radiology, from CT to US, as well as some basic trauma evaluation for every modality. Many modules review normal anatomy as well. A very good resource for a quick general overview. HERE
  
• Radiology Assistant One of the BEST resources for radiology residents and all other residents as well in my opinion. Covers many high-yield aspects of imaging. It goes into a little more depth for each topic than the UVA tutorials. I have looked at their bone tumor differential article many times. This website is an excellent resource for anyone interested in learning more, even for med students. [http://www.radiologyassistant.nl/] (http://www.radiologyassistant.nl/)
  
• LearningRadiology Wonderful general resource, geared towards medical students. The guy who wrote the book is the chair or PD for a program in North Philly I think. I read his book in medical school.
  
• Radiopaedia.org You already know who it is...(Silento). Many of my co-residents and attendings make fun of this website. I call it the WebMD of radiology. It's not bad in a pinch, but StatDx is a much better alternative
  
• StatDx The UpToDate of radiology. Requires big $$$ to access. Totally worth it IMO. Has every conceivable disease on there, as well as imaging/pathology/workup/recommendations/andeverythingelse. Written for radiology residents and attendings, so having some general knowledge makes it more palatable.
  
  Chest X-ray
  
  If you're serious about it, start with Felson's Principles of Chest Roentgenology, A Programmed Text. Don't let the 288 pages scare you, half of the pages are images and the other half only contain like 100 words of text. It's set up with big pictures on one side, and easy explanations and multiple choice questions on the opposing page. It kind of reminded me of that Dale Dubin EKG book (the orange one).
  
  If you're kind of "meh" about it. Just check out the UVA tutorials above, or this..
  
  All that being said, Chest X-rays can be some of the most challenging and humbling cases to read. You could read 5 books and still suck. I'm probably going to recommend a CT anyways.
  
  Interventional Radiology Gunners
  
  This guy makes some decent youtube videos. Maybe you'll impress someone someday and only have to sell 1 limb to get into IR.
  
  Advanced
  
  
• Radiographics ABR Series. Radiographics articles geared towards the ABR. Please don't read these unless you want to be absolutely insufferable.
  
• ASNR Neuroradiology Lectures For nerds only.
  
• STR Cardiothoracic Lectures For boring nerds only. Although the PA/Lateral Xray video overview is only 30 minutes long and pretty good.
  
  Finding good articles
  
  Just google "(What your looking for) + Radiographics. The Radiographics educational journal has some of the best educational articles and modules overall. You might become too smart and lose all your friends.
  
  Hope that helps. If I think of anything else, I'll periodically update this comment

I would avoid test-prep books then-- those tend to skim the surface of things like pathophys and always seem to be more focused on important facts and associations, etc., and not on the science.

Sadly there is no quick answer for getting better at pathophys (it takes 2 years to cover the basics in med school). Working in an ED you don't have massive amounts of time to read either. As a resident I find myself wanting to review stuff all the time but am pretty busy too, so with that in mind, my recommendations would be:

-UpToDate/Dynamed/Medscape/etc. usually have nice sections in their articles on the pathophysiology of various conditions. The temptation is to skip to the "diagnosis" or "management" sections but there is usually some good stuff in those articles that you can read on the fly

-For critical illness and general physiology, The ICU Book is great and not too dry a read. If you want much more in depth stuff on medical conditions, Harrison's Internal Medicine is a great resource but reads like a phonebook sometimes. If you care about the microscopic level, Robbins & Cotran is basically all the pathology for the non-pathologist you will ever need- can also be a bit dry at times too.

-Look up the mechanism of action of meds you don't know about (Micromedex smart phone app is great for that)

-When you consult someone because you are unsure about something, ask them about what is going on (subspecialists are usually not shy about dropping knowledge if you ask for it); it may also help prevent future un-needed consults which they appreciate

Hope this helps.

I'm going to copy and paste a previous comment of mine:

> My two cents:
>
> Realistically at the medical student level the most important study to be able to interpret is going to be a chest x-ray. So, if you’re looking for resources to go past the general anatomy and “approach to a chest x-ray” I would recommend Felson’s Principles of Chest Roentgenology.
>
> It’s a ‘programmed text’ like Dubin’s for EKGs, and goes through pathology topic by topic, with lots of opportunity to practice interpretation and to see if you are right or wrong. It’s a relatively quick read and there are lots of practice cases at the end as well.
>
> I stressed interpretation before because, sure you may have a test question about the difference between an epidural vs. subdural bleed, but it’s not like you are going to be interpreting CTs or MRIs.
>
> Knowing the underlying anatomy and the differential for the pathology would probably be a better use of your time than going through any of the introductory texts like Learning Radiology: Recognizing the Basics or Squire’s Fundamentals of Radiology. (My point here being that you need to know what you are looking at if you are actually going to be able to make sense of a study.) If you were considering radiology, one might be nice to have as a reference, but again, I do not think actually trying to read through the whole thing would be a good use of time.
>
> Without cases to practice with, a lot of that knowledge probably will not stick. Whenever you have the chance, trying to look at a film before reading the radiologist’s report to test yourself can be helpful, as is trying to actively correlate what you see on the film compared to the clinical exam.
>
> After having a good knowledge of chest x-rays, your next most common scenarios that require interpretation would probably be emerg related - again chest x-rays will be super common, but others like abdo series, extremity skeletal trauma, cervical spine, etc. will be useful.
>
> Having said that, there are online resources like “Introduction to Radiology” from the University of Virginia or Radiology Masterclass.
>
> ---
>
> TL;DR:
>
> - Felson’s to learn how to interpret chest films
> - Pay attention to the little things you might be tested on like the features of arthritis on plain films, epidural vs. subdural, etc. etc. as you learn the rest of your clinical stuff
> - Know your anatomy
> - Radiopaedia for everything else that comes up
> - a PDF of an introductory text might be nice as a reference for a rads gunner - not as something to try to read cover to cover

> socialism already has democratic elements built into the system.

Not necessarily, example USSR. This video touches on the delineation well enough.

>there weren't as many corporate subsidies that would have ravaged our revenue

I could not possibly agree with you more.


As for programs medicaid, let's acknowledge that it is a poor indicator of how single payer healthcare would function in our society. The redundancy of departments mixed with required paperwork/administration (thus ensuing systemic inefficiency), inability to negotiate price with pharmaceutical companies, and the endless pitfalls of profit motive in warping ethical decision making create an environment where healthcare is senselessly expensive and inefficent. Free market profit motives cannot be trusted to fix our healthcare issues. A government body, for better or worse, is the only institution of sufficient size and importance that is able to offer us an ability to manage population level health care properly.

Not to mention the increased public health benefits gained by a society through providing basic human health care are undeniable (in terms of pocketbook as well as basic safety in our future. I can't recommend Paul Farmer's "Infections and Inequality" highly enough to learn more about the ever growing importance of public health and safety and its relation to economics).

I'm not saying current programs are adequately functional to serve their intended purpose, in fact quite the opposite. I don't believe it wise to dismiss the goal of universal health care or the benefits of social welfare programs in principle because we don't currently achieve perfection. Saying 'we tried these programs, and they just don't work, you end up with too many takers' is illogical.

Fundamentally, I think what might separate us in our ways of thinking is the level of trust we are willing to put into the free market to optimally work out our problems (socially, politically, economically, etc.)

I'm not a chemist; I'm currently studying ChemE at university. I'm also the "science mod" over on /r/trees, so I think I can help out a bit with this one.

The science behind cannabis and how it works is extremely interesting, but it won't help you with 99% of Biochemistry.

Everything we know about cannabis can be learned pretty quickly, provided you have the backgrounds in chemistry, biology, and preferably a bit of pharmacology.

What you can is do is study drugs and their functions as a whole to supplement and enhance your studies in biochemistry; I know that it's granted me a new appreciation for the human body and the processes that regulate it. These fields are vast and expanding at an astonishing rate.

The field of pharmacology is huge, but in a nutshell you can break it into pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics. They focus on effects and the relations between dosage and response (dose response curves, etc.) as well as the mechanisms through which the drug is processed and how the drug passes through the body, respectively.

In short, pharmacokinetics studies what the body does to a drug, while pharmacodynamics studies what the drug does to your body.

As a Biochemistry major, these topics will likely be right up your alley. You'll still have to do the mundane, but perhaps some background along these lines will provide you with a new perspective on the processes you are studying in class.

If this sounds like your thing, I'd recommend the following text, provided you already have a good grip on molecular biology and a little electrochemistry: Molecular Neuropharmacology: A Foundation for Clinical Neuroscience

If you like this text or you just want something to supplement it, Caltech, easily one of the top research universities for this field, offers a course taught by Dr. Henry Lester via Coursera, here.

It's a highly informative course that pairs very well with the text I linked above. You'll touch on everything from drug addiction to recreational drugs to the different receptors and how they are activated.

It's not active right now and I'm not sure when the next session will be, but you can go onto Coursera and watch Professor Lester's lectures which are, by far, the most integral part of the course. I went through it last session (January - February) and I was very satisfied with both the material and the way it was presented.

Tl;dr: You can supplement your classroom material with all sorts of interesting studies related to drugs, but if you're not interested in the material you're studying in class at all, it may be time to rethink your field. You can't tie everything to drugs, but you can use the study of drugs to enhance your appreciation for the "macro" systems you're studying.

Whoa, there. Healthcare data scientist here, mainly working in areas like clinical epidemiology and with a background in health services research and pharmacoepidemiology.

First, kudos for having questions and reaching out for help. This is my opinion, but health care is different from other sectors. The work you do has the potential to affect people in visceral, fundamentally life-changing ways...such as recommending a patient should or should not get treatment. Or a patient should or should not be placed on end-of-life-care...that a life-threatening complication is or is not related to a pharmaceutical on the market. Point just being - I think this sector carries responsibility that many other sectors don't.

Second, are you at a pharmaceutical/related organization? If so, there should be qualified biostatisticians/epidemiologists/psychometricians/health economist/something similar to sit down with you and help you figure you this out.

Third, you said you study 'data science and knowledge engineering', but I'm not sure what your curriculum consists of - do you study causal inference? If you don't, it's the most important topic you need to be familiar with (not competent, mind you). Here are several references that could get you familiar with identifying and dealing with bias and confounding, and designing experiments to assess causal relationships instead of just association. In healthcare you have to know when a question warrants a causal analysis vs a predictive or associative one. If a causal analysis is needed, an epidemiologist or biostatistician might likely do that work, but it certainly helps to know what a DAG is and how to read one.

https://www.amazon.com/Epidemiology-Introduction-Kenneth-J-Rothman/dp/0199754551

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/miguel-hernan/causal-inference-book/

Fourth, I'm hesitant to suggest anything about your dataset, because I still only have a rough idea of the details. Also, it sounds like you've got a psychometric dataset, and I've never studied psychometrics. I will say, though, that the question (hypothesis) being asked should really drive the analytic approach. Is the goal to look at a homogenous population and find that there's something about that causing them to require or be adherent to treatment? Do those results then need to get applied to a diverse, heterogenous population? That's a very high bar to achieve for experimental purposes. Is it enough to look at some data and say that certain characteristics are associated or predictive of certain outcomes? That's a much lower bar from an experimental standpoint and probably an analytic standpoint, too. If there is a selection bias, I think that's only relevant if there's a desire to extrapolate the study results to a different population. As you point out, if the desire is to generalize results to a larger population it's likely a significant problem that would require a intentional experimental design to address. If the company you're working with doesn't recognize this or can't have a qualified person explain why it's not a study design problem, you're working with bad people that likely don't know what they're doing. I've colloborated with several software/'health analytic' companies and startups that are like this, and it's why I'm dis-trustful of all health analytic software until proven.

Hope this helps!

​

This book is not too bad. Has a profile for each specialty, as well as specific advice. I picked up the old version cheap a while ago.

The AAMC Careers in Medicine page is actually pretty good too. You have to sign up and log in to see the material, but they go through lots of stats. A new version of Charting Outcomes from the Match will likely be published by the NRMP/AAMC this year or next, and will have valuable data regarding each specialty's competitiveness.

But as far as "playing the game" goes, it's a much simpler game than the med school admissions process was. You don't have to have extensive lists of extracurriculars, and a lot of it boils down to a few big things you need to do.

• Do well on Step 1, obviously
  
• Get lots of good grades in the clinical years
  
• Get involved in research
  
• Get good letters of rec, which usually results from doing well on rotations
  
• Getting inducted into AOA can be very helpful
  
  Those are really the biggest things, and it applies to virtually every specialty. The more competitive a specialty is, the more you will need to excel in each of those areas.

This is a great list so far, and I'd love to see it added to the sidebar.

I'd suggest adding "Neuroethics" by Martha J Farah under "Other". It gives an interesting perspective on the influence of neuroscience on law and society.

http://www.amazon.com/Neuroethics-Introduction-Readings-Basic-Bioethics/dp/0262514605

"The Human Brain in Photographs and Diagrams" is good for anyone interested in neuroanatomy. I've only used the 3rd edition- there is an updated edition, but I can't speak to how useful it is.

http://www.amazon.com/Human-Brain-Photographs-Diagrams-CD-ROM/dp/0323045731/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411223019&sr=1-2&keywords=the+human+brain+in+photographs+and+diagrams

"Structure of the Human Brain" is a very comprehensive section-by-section atlas of the brain.

http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Human-Brain-Photographic-Atlas/dp/019504357X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411223434&sr=8-1&keywords=structure+of+the+human+brain+a+photographic+atlas

"Molecular Neuropharmacology" is a good advanced text for anyone interested in drug development.

http://www.amazon.com/Molecular-Neuropharmacology-Foundation-Clinical-Neuroscience/dp/0071481273/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411223180&sr=8-1&keywords=molecular+neuropharmacology

I've mentioned these because they seem to fill gaps that are currently in the library. If anybody knows of better anatomical texts, though, I'd be interested to know about them!

If you're looking for a good book, I recommend Marino's The ICU Book 4th Edition. It's geared towards medical students and residents, but I think it would be useful for anyone who is somewhat new to critical care. And the price seems high at first glance, but compared to other recently published texts containing the same info, it's pretty reasonable.

It reads quite smoothly and was published this past October. You certainly won't retain everything you read in the book, but from the start you'll recall where in the book you read something and can refer back.

Also, if you're looking for something cheaper that involves less reading. The Society of Critical Care Medicine offers a self-paced online introductory course called Resident ICU. It is a collection of lectures/ power points which discuss the fundamental principles of critical care. Again, it is designed for physicians/ new residents, but having a solid understanding of your patient's condition is important for critical care nurses and this will only help. Oh, and the course only costs $25.

I know more than just these two, but I can't think of anything else at the moment. Hope this helps!

I love to type during lectures, rather than writing with a pen (so slow, and printing, pens and paper are expensive!), so either a tablet with an external keyboard, or a laptop would be important for me, at least. Maybe you find you remember lecture notes more easily if you write them on paper, and some people don't like studying from a computer screen. However, internet access is important anyway, so even if you just have a basic laptop at home it will come in very useful. I use a Lenovo G510, which I really like, but that's more expensive than you need to pay.

A smartphone is also very important for me (calendar, timetable, e-mail, reminders, drug databases, etc. always available). I use a Sony Xperia S (had it for nearly 3 years, no signs of dying yet!)

First Aid for the USMLE (when it comes to it)

These two might be more useful in clinical years, but these are essential for me:

• Oxford Handbook of Clinical Medicine (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Handbook-Clinical-Medicine-Medical-Handbooks/dp/0199232172)
  
• A small notepad and pen that you can easily fit in your pocket (when something new / interesting comes up). I'm using a notebook by Rhodia, but it doesn't matter what brand, really
  
  Also,
  
  You don't need to purchase a gym membership, but go for a damn jog!! I find it very easy to be completely sedentary around exams, and it's bad! Yeah. Jogging and regular bedtime (and waking up time) make me wayyy more productive. It makes it easier if you have a great breakfast in mind ;)
  
  You don't need to buy a phenomenal amount, you don't need to buy every book that's recommended or anything, but I think a laptop and a mid-range smartphone (or better) will allow you to study almost everything.

There's a good book by Kenneth Rothman (one of the top epidemiologists in the world) that would be a good intro into study design and how to interpret findings. Epi folks often called it the 'Baby Rothman' because he's also written (arguably) the top text in epidemiology as well. The two books work well in tandem as well.

Edit: Just to add, the FDA and AHRQ put out pretty good guidance documents as well that explain the nuances of trials, observational research, etc. I actually used them a fair bit when I was studying for my comprehensive exams. If you're interested, I can fish out the links.

You are going to get a lot of recommendations for 'mainstream' neuroscience books, which is not a bad thing, but it might be useful/fun to get an alternative perspective as well. Something like The Embodied Mind by Francisco Varela, Evan Thompson, and Eleanor Rosch might be nice. Also a 'networks/graph theory' approach would be a great perspective to get. Networks of the Brain by Olaf Sporns is a great resource, and these approaches are on the upswing IMO.

"What are the parts of the brain and what do they do?" is a much better formed question, but now you're getting into unsolved questions and areas of active research. There are hundreds of "identifiable parts" of the brain, and short of writing an entire textbook, there's not much I can do to answer such a broad question!

My recommendation for you would be to keep reading wikipedia (maybe start here ) and if you run into any specific questions come back to reddit and ask them, or try to get your hands on a basic neuroscience text book (the Purves book is good).

I hope I don't sound too discouraging! If you have specific questions I'm happy to answer them and I'm sure other panelists are too, but for me personally, I don't want to spend more than an hour answering any single question, and as it stands, your question would take me hours to answer well.

If you want the standard sequence of Neuroscience textbooks, there is a rough ordering of 3 common books. Each are very comprehensive and more than you would likely be able to read cover to cover, but they get more sophisticated and comprehensive as you go. The last one specifically is essentially the bible of neuroscience and you will be hard pressed to find a more comprehensive coverage of any of the topics outside a specialised textbooks or research papers.

These books will cover the general overview of neuroanatomy, physiology, pharmacology and pathology but if you want to go further in depth, there are more advanced books for each of those and dozens of other subfields.

1. Purves - Neuroscience
   
2. Bear - Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain
   
3. Kandel - Principles of Neural Science
   
   I would specifically recommend Nolte - The human brain: an introduction to its functional anatomy as an exceptional example of a specialised text. Unfortunately, I do not recall the neurpharmacology text that I used, but it was very good too. I shall look it up and get back to you! For a more general introduction to pharmacology, the standard text is Rand and Dale - Pharmacology.

I'm not sure about single-cell recordings but with EEG experiments (and most other electrophysiological measures i.e. EOG, EMG) the voltage (also known as electrical potential difference) recorded at a place on the scalp is measure of the potential for current to move from one place to another. So you need 2 electrodes to measure this: the one (or more) on the scalp, and the ground electrode which provides a common reference point for all the other electrodes.
As far as I recall the site for this can vary, I know the EEG system we use (Biosemi) has two electrodes that work as grounds that are placed on the scalp (they are slightly more complex than just ground electrodes though but don't ask me to explain how!).

In addition (and slightly confusingly) you have reference electrodes, which can be placed in a variety of places (earlobes, nose, mastoids, etc for EEG). The key property of a site for a reference electrode is that it must be unaffected by the source you are recording. It picks up all the internal and external noise and is then subtracted from the active electrodes to give a cleaner signal. Just like the normal electrodes the reference is measuring the potential difference between itself and the ground electrode.


Luck (2005) puts it like this: Signal = AG voltage - RG voltage

[A = Scalp electrode, R = Reference, & G = Ground electrode]


Hopefully that makes sense and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong!

Source: I'm Cognitive Neuroscience PhD student, & Luck (2005) explains this pretty well.

For the type of graph (network) theory that is currently hot in neuroscience contexts, [Newman's book](http://www.amazon.com/Networks-An-Introduction-Mark-Newman/dp/0199206651
) is a great compendium (quite readable, but fairly comprehensive).

For bedside reading about mammalian cortical networks in particular, Networks of the Brain and Discovering the Human Connectome, both by Olaf Sporns, are well worth a look.

From there... it's already becoming a pretty big literature. If you have some specific areas of interest, I can do my best to point you to resources. Take my suggestions with a grain of salt, though... I'm a pure mathematician who kinda got seduced into applied maths... which means I probably don't know as much about either discipline as I should.

I recommend [Beating Back the Devil] (http://www.amazon.com/Beating-Back-Devil-Maryn-McKenna/dp/1439123101/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1450903258&sr=8-1&keywords=beating+back+the+devil) to learn about the CDC's Epidemic Intelligence Service. It was SO interesting, and you learn a lot about one of the more exciting jobs in public health. I'm in epi but I definitely don't have it in me to travel around the world fighting disease. But even if you're a homebody like me, I would still recommend it just because it's a great read.

Hi there,

Some suggestions for ya!

The Quest for Consciousness by Christof Koch. Minimal neuroscience background required, but the more you know, the more you'll derive from this book. Focused on illustrating how complex networks can manifest behaviour (and consciousness). Outside of Koch's regular pursuits as an electrophysiology, he worked alongside Francis Crick (ya that one), to study arousal and consciousness. It's a fantastic read, and it's quite humbling.

Rhythms of the Brain by Gyorgy Buzsaki. Written for neuroscientists and engineers as an introductory textbook into network dynamics, oscillations, and behaviour. One of my favorite books in the field, but it can also be the most challenging.

Treatise of Man by Rene Descarte. Personal favorite, simply because it highlights how far we've come (e.g. pineal gland, pain, and animal spirits).

Synaptic Self by Joseph LeDoux provides the fantastic realization that "you are your synapse". Great circuit/network book written with a lot of psychological and philosophical considerations.

Finally...

Physical control of the mind--towards of psychocivilized society by the one and only Jose Delgado. (In)Famous for his experiments where he stopped a bull charging at him through amygdala stimulation- along with some similar experiments in people- Delgado skirts the line between good intention and mad science. It's too bad he's not taught more in history of neuroscience.

Let me explain why I brought up dyslexia as a common comorbidity of having problems expressing yourself and adhd, but first lets talk about language. I will get back to dyslexia and ADHD. Do note while my post is long, I provide lots of links to pictures.

I am going to be using a lot of images from a biology textbook called Biological Psychology: An Introduction to Behavorial, Cognitive, and Clinical Neuroscience. Mostly from Chapter 19 which deals with language, while I am going to provide specific images you may find it useful to read the visual summary if you want more info.

http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs19.html

-----

 

 

Put simply to do language you are going to use multiple regions of the brain together as a circuit. See here

http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs/vs19/vs1905.png

You are going to use areas in the back of the brain tied to vision, then you are going to pass that information to a multisensory processing area where your brain combines the senses and figures out what to do (aka you are forming the visual images in your mind before you think of the words that correspond to the visual images). You are then going to pass the information once again to a multisensory processing area but this area is more auditory based, followed by you passing the information to a specific area of the frontal lobe that is very close to the prefrontal areas which is tied to language, but also attention, sequencing of data, and response inhibition (stopping impulsivity) but also activation (aka release the brake and now go). This information is then passed to premotor and supplementary motor areas which is then passed to the motor areas. And during all these steps there are inbetween fine tunning by the subcortical brain areas such as the cerebellum and the basal ganglia.

Now I was trying to explain all of that without using medical terms but here is the names for those brain areas

http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs/vs19/lowres/BIOPSYCHOLOGY7e-Fig-19-07-0.jpg


 

 

And here is a diagram that compares speaking a heard word and speaking a word you read off a piece of paper. When you are composing inside of your head without mental feedback and you are imaging what you are going to say your thought process looks more like speaking a word you read off a piece of paper for you use more of the visual areas to visualize in your mind's eye what you are going to do and say.

http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs/vs19/lowres/BIOPSYCHOLOGY7e-Fig-19-09-0.jpg


 

 

-------

Now we know things like head injuries and lesions to specific brain injuries to specific brain injuries can all disrupt speech but if the area is localized to specific regions you may only have some problems with certain aspects of language. When language problems are caused by some form of trauma we call this aphasia.

http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs/vs19/artWin.html?BIOPSYCHOLOGY7e-Table-19-01-0.jpg


 

 

And people with different types of aphasia may have different problems. Like a person with expressive aphasia may know what they want to say and they can draw what they want to say but they can't find the words for it. While people with receptive aphasia have problems understanding language. Now receptive aphasia can be more than this where people accidentally skip words in their explanations that are crucial in the sentence, or they have anomia where they know what they want to say (the word is on the tip of their tongue) but they can't remember it, or they do an unintentional word subsitution subsituting another word with a similar sound or meaning, sometimes they mess up not the grammar of the sentence but the word tense, or use the wrong pronoun (like her vs she)

• A subtype of this with additional issues with the left and right half of the back of the brain not talking as well as they should is Dysprosody sometimes called foreign accent syndrome for you do not talk with the local accent / family accent. People with dysprosody have problems with the timing of sounds and things like rhythm, cadence, pitch, and movement of words. They can't tell when you are inflecting or not. This is quite important for they do not get a lot of important information in communication such as emotional tone and inflection which can rapidly changing the meaning of something. Most humans are annoyed by synthetic computer speak for it just sounds wrong, now imagine if everyone spoke like that and you were not familiar with what most of us would consider normal speaking.
  
   
  
   
  
  Now all of these issues I described were studied in people with head injuries. That said we see much the same pattern of behavior with many different types of disorders, one of which is autism, but another of which and is completely separate is dyslexia.
  
  Now with dyslexia many brain regions are implicated and some of them are the same areas I have shown above
  
  http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs19.html (go to slide 6)
  
  In many forms of dyslexia you are not using the back of the brain areas tied with the early visual information which is passed to the angular gyrus which is passed to the wernicke area. See picture
  
  http://www.hoperesourcecentre.com/wp-content/uploads/Brain-Illustration-CellfieldCanada.jpg
  
  And you are trying to compensate for all of this information with actually using more of the frontal lobe to compensate for these areas. Well the frontal lobe is not designed to do such a thing its arrangement and types of nerve cells are different.
  
   
  
   
  
  Now its not just that picture I showed you, its also some of the subcortical areas such as these areas I am about to post here
  
  http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs/vs18/artWin.html?BIOPSYCHOLOGY7e-Fig-18-15-0.jpg
  
  Involving the thalamus and an area known as the pulvinar, as well as certain areas of the brainstem, and certain areas of the cerebellum mainly vermis 6 and vermis 7 (often labeled VI and VII)
  
  http://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/156522/fnins-09-00296-HTML/image_m/fnins-09-00296-g002.jpg
  
  These parts of the cerebellum are used for multiple functions but they are often called the occular motor areas of the cerebellum. They are also involved with the control of attention and shifting smoothing from one object to another for one of the purposes of the cerebellum is to "fill in the blanks" between gaps. Imagine you were watch a film but instead of watching a video you were seeing slide by slide, well the cerebellum along with the thalamus and brain stem regions are used in the predicition of what is going to happen next and smooth movements of the eyes, while other areas in the frontal lobe are more involved with figuring out these things are important so why don't we set this as the new priority of what to look at and the rest of the brain figures out how best to move there.
  
  https://kin450-neurophysiology.wikispaces.com/file/view/SACCCAAADDDEEESSS.jpeg/393831860/480x346/SACCCAAADDDEEESSS.jpeg
  
   
  
   
  
  Now if you have not probably figured out there is a connection to all of these brain regions with ADHD. Some ADHD people have these issues, but if you have these issues you are also more likely to have ADHD.
  
  If you look at the previous chapter 18 of Biological Psychology you will see this picture on slide 6
  
  http://7e.biopsychology.com/vs/vs18/artWin.html?BIOPSYCHOLOGY7e-Fig-18-16-0.jpg
  
  There are two attention networks here. The top attention network is known as the frontal parietal control network where it controls and and it also modulates the dorsal attention/perception network. While a second bottom network in orange involves the frontal lobe and connects to areas shared both with the temporal lobe and the parietal lobe where they meet and the surrounding areas, this bottom attention network is more with detecting new things and novel things, while the top network keeps you on track and looks for the goals held within working memory to solve the problems.
  
  If you have not noticed the same areas of the brain that make it hard to express onceself with language, are also the same areas that are common in dyslexia, and are the intersection of two of key networks tied with attention (now there are more than those two networks I just showed you with ADHD but now you understand why there is a connection.)
  
  (Now most of pictures I linked to came from Biological Psychology by Breedlove and Watson, this is an introductory college text meant for undergraduate use. It will not go into all the stuff involving the brain with attention and such, other books made by the same publishing company (Sinaeur) but done by other authors are better if you are mainly wanting to talk about attention instead of language such as
  
  Sensation and Perception
  
  Neuroanatomy through Clinical Cases
  
  Dale Purves Neuroscience 5th Edition
  
  And Principles of Cognitive Neuroscience

Not an RT, but CVT here. I just finished 2 years of school (1 year of clinicals) specifically to learn cath lab stuff and I STILL feel overwhelmed. Don't get down on yourself, it takes a long time. Everybody I know says 1-2 years before you're comfortable.

If you haven't read or looked at it yet, I HIGHLY recommend this book by Kern. Easy to understand and good pictures.

If you want to spend some money, https://www.amazon.com/Neuroscience-Fifth-Dale-Purves/dp/0878936955/ref=mt_hardcover?_encoding=UTF8&me= is a perfect resource. This was our textbook for neurobio in college and I still find myself referencing it. It's possible you could find the PDF somewhere online, I haven't looked. If you have a little background in cell bio, this would be a great place to start learning.

Beyond that, I agree with the suggestions of /u/Hypercuboid and /u/Noobsessed.

If you are getting information off of forums (about pathways, interactions, etc.), make sure you do your own research, ask for or check sources, and try to understand the mechanisms. Wikipedia rabbit holes can sometimes help with this in the beginning, and can provide you with reliable sources/resources to follow up on. Keep in mind that the answers are almost always not as simple as people portray them. Many MOAs are not fully understood, especially with nootropics. That's why some refer to these substances as RCs and us as guinea pigs; because, in large part, that is true.

Neurobiology with Dr. Xu-Friedman was probably my favorite class, and he is probably my favorite professor. It can be a challenging class, but it's worth it if you enjoy neuroscience.

When I took it, we used Purves - Neuroscience 5th Edition .

The book is definitely needed, as it really helps to reinforce what they lecture on. If you're looking to get ahead before the semester begins, I think he follows the first few chapters tightly. If I recall correctly, he starts with some basic neuroanatomy, and then jumps into electrophysiology (similar to what you did in Bio 213 physiology lab, except in more detail) and receptor kinetics.

If Dr. Medler is also teaching it, she can be somewhat abrasive and difficult, but you can still do well if you go to lecture and pay attention.

• Purves text isn't that easy but a great and thorough introduction.
  
• Gazzaniga's text is fantastic but less on the biology side of things.
  
• Others have mentioned Kandel's text but I don't think that's a good first text for anyone wanting to "dip their toes" in.
  
• Someone else also mentioned the Bear text, which is very good.
  
  Those are really all you'll need; from there you will find things on your own or from professors.

No formal education but I have some friends in the field and I've been studying some of their textbooks and talking to them about it a lot lately. Molecular Neuropharmacology is a great book, not an easy read, but full of information. NMDA antagonists like magnesium are also supposed to help prevent neurotoxicity from Ca influx, many people take them for tolerance prevention:

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/501875-NMDA-antagonists-for-tolerance-a-collection-of-the-evidence-and-anecdotal-reports?highlight=amphetamine+tolerance+nmda

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/97021-Speed-Meth-tolerance-prevention-reduction-long

I cannot more strongly recommend Steven W. Smith's The Scientist and Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal Processing.

Every chapter is freely available as a PDF on the website.

Everyone who is interested in EEG/ECoG/LFP/single-unit research should absolutely read this book.

Steve Luck's Introduction to the Event Related Potential Technique is great, and will really help you to set up a top-quality ERP lab, but the DSP book really teaches you what happens to the signals you're recording.

If you want to get deeper into the underlying physiology of EEG, I'd recommend Electric Fields of the Brain by Nunez & Srinivasan.

You'd also be happy reading Buzsaki's Rhythms of the Brain.

"Neurology" is a medical discipline, i.e. a department you would find in a hospital, so that would not be appropriate for your case. "Neuroscience", on the other hand, is the name of the scientific study, which is what you should look into, but overall that is too broad of a field.

For what you're trying to learn, I'd just start directly diving into neuropharmacology. Any good resource should give you enough of an overview before things get more complicated; perhaps having a review of high school science might be good, but not necessary.

Here's a recommendation for a good reference textbook: https://www.amazon.com/Molecular-Neuropharmacology-Foundation-Clinical-Neuroscience/dp/0071481273

>The vast majority of a CCT’s training is on lead II, so that’s where I focused.

Bahahahahaha!

So you are trained to interpret a single lead - ie a rhythm strip - so presumably you can spot elementary rhythm abnormalities and suggest to a nurse when they should maybe call a doctor? Good for you!

None of that qualifies you to opine on the OP's 12 lead ECG and it certainly doesn't qualify you to espouse entirely unfounded opinions on potassium homeostasis. If you think it does, then you do undoubtedly need more training, because - as the saying goes - a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

BTW the link was for your benefit, not mine. But the book below has served generations of medical students and would be a good intro to the 12-lead ECG for you.

Best wishes.

https://www.amazon.com/Made-Easy-John-Hampton-DPhil/dp/0702046418

Marino’s ICU Book is great. The latest edition from Amazon comes with an Inkling copy which is convenient on the go. The Washington Manual of Medical Therapeutics and Critical Care are both good quick references, though they have less explanation than Marino’s.

For Anesthesia, Miller’s Anesthesia is the standard Harrison’s-style specialty text. At the medical student level a lot of places recommend “Baby Miller” aka Basics of Anesthesia. I personally preferred Morgan & Mikhail’s Clinical Anesthesiology, but both are good introductory texts. FWIW, my school had both available online so it was easy to pick and choose.

Both posts above are great advice. You have a short amount of time to accomplish as much as possible, and practical experience is invaluable if you want to be competitive in the job market. I'm in a 2-year MPH program (in Epi), and finished all the required coursework in a year and a half taking 5 classes. The workload hasn't been too bad, and having a part-time job on the side shouldn't be too much of a problem (except maybe around midterms/finals, obviously).

A friend of mine who was already in the MPH program recommended reading this book before I started, and it helped get comfortable with Epi, so I didn't feel like I was plunged into a whole new world when classes began: http://www.amazon.com/Epidemiology-Introduction-Kenneth-J-Rothman/dp/0199754551/ref=dp_ob_title_bk

The ICU Book by Paul Marino is also a great resource. I’ve learned a lot and it’s made me question a lot of practices at my facility.

The previously mentioned icufaqs.org is definitely a good place to start and is free.

Yeah, this definitely sounds influenced by Malcolm Gladwell's work, from Atul Gawande in The Checklist Manifesto:

> He examines checklists in aviation, construction, and investing, but focuses on medicine, where checklists mandating simple measures like hand washing have dramatically reduced hospital-caused infections and other complications.

From Malcolm Gladwell's Blink:

> A cardiologist named Lee Goldman developed a decision tree that, using only four factors, evaluates the likelihood of heart attacks better than trained cardiologists in the Cook County Hospital emergency room in Chicago

I'm a medical anthropology Ph.D student studying/interested in infectious diseases. Let me try to explain.

It's not so much that educating people about biomedicine is not going to work, more that the education is not being done in a good way. Weird people walking in trying to get them to completely disregard their long, LONG standing beliefs for this new form of "witchcraft" that is completely counter-intuitive is never going to work; this is a cliche, but imagine if the tables were turned and they came here to help us fight an epidemic and insisted germs weren't real and that it was sorcery that was the issue (I know, not a perfect analogy because of one of the systems of knowledge is "scientifically correct" and the other isn't). But, your solution of coming up with brand new magic to incorporate into their beliefs wouldn't help either, because it's not a deeply-ingrained belief. These people have been living with these belief systems for thousands of years. Every part of what they believe about health is interrelated with what they believe about God, relationships with each other and nature, etc. Every part of knowledge is connected with every of type of knowledge. So to run in and say, "Here are your new magic beliefs on health," would never work, because the new beliefs wouldn't be compatible with the rest of their beliefs.

What actually needs to happen is finding a way to make biomedical knowledge compatible with their traditional knowledge. Think of it kind of like how the Christians "got" pagans by turning their old holidays into new Christian holidays. This is why anthropologists (think "cultural brokers") are so sorely needed in situations like this--and the CDC and WHO know this and are hiring/consulting with medical anthropologists...but it should be done before disasters happen, because, like everything, it takes time.

This is rather stream of consciousness so it might not make sense, but it's all I can crank out for now.

Edit: For the people who are interested in medical anthro, I'd suggest reading Stranger in the Village of the Sick by Paul Stoller, The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down by Anne Fadiman, and especially Inequalities and Infections by Paul Farmer.

Felson’s principles of roentgenology is a great book to get comfortable at reading CXR and chest imaging.

https://www.amazon.com/Felsons-Principles-Roentgenology-Programmed-Goodman/dp/1455774839/ref=nodl_

I use RIP ATMLL (are there many lung lesions)

RIP for quality of the image (rotation, inspiration, penetration)

ATMLL for search pattern (abdomen, thoracic cage, mediastinum, individual lung fields, both lung fields together).

• Rising PGY-2

I agree completely, Kandel's book is definitely my favorite neuroscience text. For a more undergraduate level introduction Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain by Mark Bear et al. and Neuroscience by Dale Purves et al. are good starting places.

So that they can be seamlessly rolled into the services if the need arises. For instance, elements of the Epidemic Intelligence Service (part of the Center for Disease Control and US Public Health Service) were inserted into the command structure for the DOD response to the Ebola outbreak in Africa a few years ago. the NOAA commissioned corps has a wartime mission supporting the Navy.

If you had never heard about EIS here is a great book on the subject.

https://www.amazon.com/Beating-Back-Devil-Maryn-McKenna/dp/1439123101

Merenstein & Gardner’s Handbook of Neonatal Intensive Care is a fantastic resource I have used. It’s very easy to skim for quick information.

Here’s a link to the one I purchased: https://www.amazon.com/Merenstein-Gardners-Handbook-Neonatal-Intensive/dp/032332083X/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=NICU+merenstein&qid=1573252195&sr=8-1

Know you asked for links but this book
http://www.amazon.com/Only-Book-Youll-Ever-Need/dp/1451119054 is amazing. I learned all my foundation of ecg with this one. Highly recommend it

Kandel is a very comprehensive neuroscience textbook with a lot of good figures as well as descriptions of experimental evidence. The most recent version came out just last year, so it is very current.

Purves also contains excellent figures but concepts are delivered on a more basic level, probably better suited for undergraduate/non-research perspective.

I used Doctors In Training videos! I put myself on a schedule using Cram Fighter . Then I would read that section in Step Up To Medicine. Lastly everyday I would do a random set of UWORLD questions. The actual test will be random so make sure to practice this way. During the last 4 weeks of studying (I studied for 7), I did an NBME or a UWSA. These are good to show you how the questions will be asked and what topics are important. DO NOT take your score to heart, I never scored above a 230 and I got a 262. Most important thing is keep learning from your mistakes and moving forward!

Oxford handbook of clinical specialities

And the Oxford handbook of Clinical medicine are great quick reference guides.

However the best advice given to me was know you're anatomy, and its helped so far!

Marino's ICU Book. It was recommended to me for an ICU rotation I'm doing soon (I'm interested in the field). It's really an excellent book, does a great job explaining concepts that I always had trouble with (like shunt vs. dead space, a-A gradient, etc), and they added little snippets like this to keep things interesting.

✨INTJ ✨interested in Cardiology or Palliative Care

I knew this sounded familiar. I came across The Ultimate Guide to Choosing a Medical Specialty by Brian Freeman, MD a couple of years ago and found this chart relating personality types and specialties: 1 and 2. Just something fun to look through!

Step-up to Medicine, it's a review book on Internal Medicine (Amazon). It's one book in the "Step-up series", but its the most well-known and respected.

​

I personally did not use the Step-up books because I felt Q-banks were a better use of time. Up to you though...

Try LITFL's ECG basics, and Maven should keep you in sinus once the basics set in.

There's also this book which is great for the basics, but I'd say LITFL does a great job.

---
edit: typo

Everyone is going to say Dubin's, but The Only EKG Book You'll Ever Need is very good as well. Both are introductory EKG books. I skimmed Dubin's at first along with 90% of my classmates, but I ended up ditching it because the organization wasn't very good and the explanations left something to be desired. You should check your library to see if you can compare them.

Congrats!!

Here is a book I’ve heard recommended a lot: Merenstein & Gardner's Handbook of Neonatal Intensive Care

ISBN-13: 978-0323320832

Link: https://www.amazon.com/Merenstein-Gardners-Handbook-Neonatal-Intensive/dp/032332083X/ref=nodl_

Methodology-wise, Steve Luck has a really nice, clear introductory text to ERP techniques.

A book called ECG's made easy is a great resource. Takes you through every step, then shows you examples of all you need to know. http://www.amazon.com/The-ECG-Made-Easy-8e/dp/0702046418/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1396159650&sr=8-5&keywords=ECG+made+easy

https://www.amazon.com/Cardiac-Catheterization-Handbook-Morton-MSCAI/dp/0323340393/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1536618435&sr=8-3&keywords=cardiac+catherization+handbook

This book is a great place to start. Your background will help you tremendously but be prepared to feel like you have no idea what is happening for a little while. There is a lot of equipment and supplies that are foreign to us ER transplants, but with a little time it all starts to make sense.

Merenstein and Gardner is often considered the bible for new NICU nurses up here in Canada.

​

https://www.amazon.com/Merenstein-Gardners-Handbook-Neonatal-Intensive/dp/032332083X

​

I found it invaluable and still pull it out from time to time. Enjoy the NICU - it's a fabulous world!

Nonfiction - Atul Gawande's The Checklist Manifesto. It's awesome if you're at all interested in process and how complex things get done.

Oh looks like you may be interested in studying complex systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system

Here's some stuff on using complex systems analysis to look at the brain: http://vimeo.com/13953303
http://www.amazon.com/Networks-Brain-Olaf-Sporns/dp/0262014696

>I mean the concept that Life is a force of the Universe present since its absolute beginning with a function of building toward higher complexity as an opposing force to Entropy, which builds toward nothingness. That the experience of consciousness as we know it is the result of organic matter reaching a critical threshold of complex structure in our brains.

Some people have been working on quantifying consciousness, and they're doing it by measuring reduction in entropy! Maybe you'd be interested in that? Check out Integrated Information Theory. It kinda requires some understanding of Shannon information theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Information_Theory

> Mountains Beyond Mountains

Paul Farmer is a fantastic human being. If you want to read some of his own work, I highly recommend Infections and Inequalities.

Sure, I'd start with Neuroscience for an overview, some more cognitive related computational systems are described in Cognitive Neuroscience, more advanced ones in Vision and Finally Rhythms of the Brain, you can then branch out further into language and memory.

​

https://www.amazon.com/Neuroscience-Dale-Purves/dp/1605353809/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=neuroscience&qid=1563645060&s=gateway&sr=8-6

https://www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Neuroscience-Biology-Mind-Fifth/dp/0393603172/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=cognitive+neuroscience&qid=1563645142&s=gateway&sr=8-2

https://www.amazon.com/Rhythms-Brain-Gyorgy-Buzsaki/dp/0199828237/ref=sr_1_1?crid=813HTOI3332A&keywords=rhythms+of+the+brain&qid=1563645094&s=gateway&sprefix=rhythms+of+the+%2Caps%2C199&sr=8-1

https://www.amazon.com/Vision-Computational-Investigation-Representation-Information/dp/0262514621/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=vision+neuroscience&qid=1563645008&s=gateway&sr=8-1

book recommendation for ya https://www.amazon.com/Checklist-Manifesto-How-Things-Right/dp/0805091742 - it definitely has a bunch of military references too. checklists are amazing

Here's the one I was talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/Comprehensive-Certification-Recertification-Examinations-Assistants/dp/1605477265/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1380770283&sr=8-2&keywords=pance+review

Here's the Davis, which has better reviews:
http://www.amazon.com/Daviss-PA-Exam-Review-Focused/dp/0803629516/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380770187&sr=8-1&keywords=pance+review

Here's my personal favorite:
http://www.amazon.com/Step-Up-Medicine-Series-Steven-Agabegi/dp/1609133609/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380770247&sr=8-1&keywords=step+up+to+medicine

I tried Dubin's, did not like it that much. Much more preferred Malcolm Thaler's book, was super useful during a cardiology elective I did.

https://www.amazon.ca/Only-Book-Youll-Ever-Need/dp/1451193947/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1478375011&sr=1-1&keywords=the+only+ekg+book+you%27ll+ever+need

Edit: Also, Life in the Fast Lane (EM/Crit Care-oriented blog) has a massive set of ECG cases and examples to go through for specific conditions.

Cardiac Catheterization Handbook, 6e https://www.amazon.com/dp/0323340393/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_CnpIAbP8VJ4WT

I like this book.

Know your cardiac meds (duh), anti-coags, vasoactives... pretty much the ones we use most.

I love the Oxford Handbook of Clinical Medicine!

EEG analysis is a bit of an art form and mastering it just comes with experience, trial and error, and really knowing your particular dataset and aims. I use Matlab with the EEGLAB toolbox for ERPs and FieldTrip for time frequency analysis.

There are so many different steps, it's definitely not just a matter of pushing a button and getting a nice p-value out at the other side. I'd recommend getting your hands on this book in the first instance.

Probably the best is Felsons https://www.amazon.com/Felsons-Principles-Roentgenology-Programmed-Goodman/dp/1455774839/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=JDCA2381R8J6EBY4BATW

This one is great for beginners: http://www.amazon.com/Only-Book-Youll-Ever-Need/dp/1451119054

More clinical: http://www.amazon.com/Chous-Electrocardiography-Clinical-Practice-Pediatric/dp/1416037748/ref=sr_1_17?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1419552313&sr=1-17&keywords=EKG+textbook

I have not read it but a lot of cardios recommended this when I was on rotation. So maybe it's worth checking out.

http://www.amazon.com/Only-Book-Youll-Ever-Need/dp/1451119054

The best option is this book(i read it on an ipad, does that count?)

the only ekg book you'll ever need

I know youre not after a book, but this is written in a fun way, i accidentally read the whole thing..

I don't disagree with you. There's something really wrong going on at the CDC, especially in their policy department. The main point that I want to make, though, is that there is a lot of extremely noxious vitriol currently directed at the CDC. While I agree that some criticism is warranted, fear and distrust of the organization may end up being extremely counterproductive in the long run. Much of their good work goes unnoticed in the media. If you have a moment, take the time to read Beating Back the Devil by Maryn McKenna on the CDC Epidemic Intelligence Service -- they do truly heroic work.

also http://www.amazon.com/Neuroscience-Fourth-Edition-Dale-Purves/dp/0878936971 is a link to the textbook used. I will not post a link to a pdf of that version (which i cannot actually find) but there is a third edition pdf readily accessible that looks like a different chapter order.

This is RIDICULOUSLY good. So easy, intuitive and progressing!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-ECG-Made-Easy-8e/dp/0702046418

I think the modern classic on ERPs is considered to be Steve Luck's book. I can vouch that it's an excellent book.

I can't help you with non-event-related EEG, though.

+1 on the Purves text. I find it pretty accessible even though my background is not neuroscience (or any other type of biological science). Also, you can pick up a used copy of an older edition for less than $20

https://www.amazon.com/Marinos-ICU-Book-Updates-Marino/dp/1451121180/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1483792693&sr=8-1&keywords=marino+icu

I found this book very easy to read. It helped me out the most.

This is actually a pretty good question because it brings attention to the fact that docs need to provide this information vs nursing judgement. Which obviously needs to be the docs providing the info because they are the ones with the liability insurance and we are not.

You want better nursing judgement? It doesn't get any better than understanding this book: http://www.amazon.com/Marinos-The-ICU-Book-Updates/dp/1451121180

Buzsaki's book is also a good general reference for this:

http://www.amazon.com/Rhythms-Brain-Gyorgy-Buzsaki/dp/0199828237

https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Radiology-Recognizing-Basics-3e/dp/0323328075/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1510081056&sr=8-1&keywords=radiology+books

and this if you like the style of Dubin's EKG book for chest x-rays:

https://www.amazon.com/Felsons-Principles-Roentgenology-Programmed-Goodman/dp/1455774839/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1510081108&sr=1-2&keywords=chest+roentgenology#reader_1455774839

http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Choosing-Medical-Specialty-Edition/dp/0071790276

This book might be helpful

Yes, absolutely. http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Event-Related-Potential-Technique-Neuroscience/dp/0262621967

Felson's Principles of Chest Roentgenology

Simple, clear, concise. Will teach you to understand how pathology presents on x-rays.

OP this is what you want I promise you.

http://www.amazon.com/Molecular-Neuropharmacology-Foundation-Clinical-Neuroscience/dp/0071481273?tag=coursera-course83-20

I like these programmed texts too and know of two:

Sidman's Neuroanatomy: A Programmed Learning Tool
https://www.amazon.com/Sidmans-Neuroanatomy-Programmed-Learning-Lippincott/dp/0781765684

Felson's Principles of Chest Roentgenology, A Programmed Text, 4e
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1455774839

we use this book in my neurobiology class and i like it.. covers a lot on how neurons do their thing

My school typically recommends Bear's textbook for systems-level information and Purves' Neuroscience for cellular stuff. I prefer Purves because it actually covers both subjects and it goes more in-depth on the molecular topics!

Do you guys see that small second book from the top? The Oxford Handbook of Clinical Medicine is probably the only book any medical student will open a thousand time before graduating.

Ain't no one going to open Kumar&Clark or Davidson more than a few time a year

The first holiday my wife was in school, I got her this book on choosing a medical specialty. The year she graduated, I got her a collection of papers that were specific to the specialty she matched into (her idea, not mine haha). When she started rotations, I got her an iPad--they weren't necessary for her rotations, but she got a lot out of it.

Read The Checklist Manifesto. It talks about the ways that people forget the every day things they are doing and there was actually a specific section related to chefs, it's a quick and interesting read.

I'm reading a book about lists at the moment!

It's called the Checklist Manifesto and is not as boring as it sounds.

Felson's Principles of Chest Roentgenology. Reasonably priced on Amazon, but I think a quick Google search yields a PDF.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1455774839/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473217110&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=felson%27s+principles+of+chest+roentgenology&dpPl=1&dpID=51U09SiOghL&ref=plSrch

https://www.amazon.co.uk/ECG-Made-Easy-8e/dp/0702046418

The Bible

kandel
bear
purves
martin

Each of these books is aimed at a different audience, but this should get you started.

Videos: https://www.khanacademy.org/science/health-and-medicine/circulatory-system

Books: http://www.cvphysiology.com, https://www.amazon.com/Only-Book-Youll-Ever-Thaler/dp/1451193947/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=PVZK7GHPGGQXBP2ME4MB (if you Google it you can find a PDF...) and/or https://www.amazon.com/Physiology-STUDENT-CONSULT-Online-Costanzo/dp/145570847X

Marino’s ICU Book - get the real deal and don’t buy pocket reference books.

Marino's The ICU Book: Print + Ebook with Updates (ICU Book (Marino)) https://www.amazon.com/dp/1451121180/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_bWs0DbQ90QXY6

Marino's ICU Book is the ICU bible

For medicine, I'd vote for the Oxford Handbook of Clinical Medicine, or Kumar and Clarke - depending on what you're trying to achieve by getting this information

Also this:
Stephen Luck's book

Here is the mobile version of your link

No cheese and onion?

Oh shit, so I meant to add these as well, but they're the physical books which explains my forgetfulness. Apologies if not everything seems to relate but my original goal was "how did we get from slavery to where African-Americans are today as still-oppressed people?", which obviously the reason is "because white people have historically shown serious inferiority complexes n' mental issues and have been all-around assholes to everyone else" but truly history is tied into everything so, uh, yeah:

Pox Americana: The Great Smallpox Epidemic of 1775-1782

• Reads more like a dissertation than a book for the public, ye be warned
  
  Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present
  
• Haven't read it yet
  
  Infections and Inequalities: The Modern Plagues
  
• Haven't read it yet
  
  
  

It is only natural for researchers with vested interests in different levels of analysis - in this case, more abstract computational models that ignore the molecular and subcellular levels of detail, even the cellular level entirely (with point process neuronal models, for example) - to be opposed to so much funding going into the HBP, which inherently is geared towards simulating even the smallest functionally relevant level of analysis (viz., the molecular). This open letter is a window into the general phenomenon of competing visions and paradigms, only amplified because the stakes are so much higher (1.2 Bn Euro higher, to be exact).

On the one hand, I agree that more independent review would be helpful in order to stop some of the more un-scientific moves that the HBP has been taking in terms of letting go of people who do not "toe the line", as outlined here. On the other hand, there would be a downside to independent review as well, in that ideological differences from the reviewers may unnecessarily stifle the project. This is a problem with the reviewing process in most journals, in fact, so in that sense, nothing new there.

From my point of view, I believe that the framing of this debate in terms of the amount of money being "only invested in one person's vision" is misleading and avoids the bigger picture. The fact remains that we do have too much neuroscientific data, and the research & funding structures are geared so as to encourage little bite-sized bits of research that demonstrate some effect of one molecule, or modulation of a synapse, or any similar isolated aspect of the nervous system - i.e., towards "quick returns". True, newer tools like optogenetics are allowing for larger-scale investigations into the nuances of function of entire circuits, but even then, the brain is complex enough that the story of any individual opto paper is inherently narrow and limited. We do need to integrate all of this data, and what better way than to throw it all into one big computational simulation that doubles up as a data repository?

The HBP project aims to be a "service provider" as discussed in the BBC article linked to above. Even in computational neuroscience, where there is fierce debate as to appropriate levels of analysis of study and therefore understanding of brain function - there is no debate as to the fact that neurons do operate on a molecular level. This huge diversity of neurotransmitters, ion channels, cell types, even glial cells (groan, cries almost every neuroscientist who realizes that we can't continue to ignore them) has evolved for a reason, and each one has shown to have some kind of functionally relevant role to a neuron, circuit, and therefore behaviour. So whatever abstract models we use in our pet studies, must necessarily bottom out at the lowest level of detail in order to be relevant to understanding of the actual brain. Otherwise, we are no better than armchair philosophers trying to understand how the brain works. You need to examine the actual product of evolution, the actual tissue itself - the very nuts and bolts - and understand it at that level.

No, the HBP will never be complete, and no, it will probably be grossly incorrect in many, many ways - because important facts about the brain are not known and remain to be discovered. That shouldn't stop us from starting somewhere. As Markram says, sure, we can invest all this money into the usual ecosystem of research. But that will ultimately generate another few hundred isolated and entirely independent papers with more data, but no more integrated understanding of the brain.

The bottom line is that what is at stake is the question of how best to continue doing neuroscience work. Henry Markram believes (as do many others, let's not forget that - it's not just a "single quirky guy's vision") that some kind of integrated approach that starts to put it all together is needed at some point. It won't be perfect, but we have enough data as it is that it is needed now - in fact, it was needed yesterday. Certainly, it won't even provide all the answers, and it's not meant to. For instance, the criticism of the HBP replicating the entire brain and still not providing any answer about its function is correct in a way. It is indeed silly to think that when the "switch is turned on", the simulation will exhibit (rat) cognition. We need input from the environment, not just to provide data but also to entrain the brain and calibrate its endogenously generated rhythms - just think of the unravelling of the mind that occurs when humans are subjected to sensory deprivation. (For a fuller treatment on this issue of the environment serving to entrain or calibrate the brain, see Buzsáki's excellent treatise, Rhythms of the Brain).

What the HBP will provide, however, is a repository for integrating the swathes of data we already have, and a framework for testing any ideas of the brain. No, it will never be complete, but it is badly overdue, and thoughts of continuing to live without an integrating framework that can be tested, prodded, and drawn upon - instead continuing each researcher's narrow pet projects in isolation from one another - is as past folly as it would be to pretend to be studying and understanding genetics without having the entire genome sequenced.

In that sense, the HBP can only help in any and all endeavours in understanding the brain by providing that baseline model with as much cellular and molecular detail incorporated as possible, because any higher levels of analysis will ultimately have to interface with it (or at least with the level of detail the HBP is aiming to capture) in order to show ultimate relevance in terms of the brain. The brain, as a biological system, is inherently different in nature than the phenomena that many computational neuroscientists (coming as they do, mostly from physics and engineering backgrounds) are comfortable dealing with - which is in the framework of physical systems that can be described with a handful of equations that summarize the overall complexity at hand. The brain, sadly, is not such a system and is not amenable to "spherical cow" levels of analysis. That's not to say that it cannot be done, and that no fruitful results will emerge from such studies. On the contrary, we can learn many useful facts about the brain by building and analyzing simplified models. It's just that inherently, any such endeavours will miss the mark in important ways. The "answer", then, is to stop thinking in terms of a zero-sum game (which is the attitude that signatories of this open letter seem to be coming from) and instead consider it as a joint project or venture. Indeed, the more abstract levels of analysis have been too much in the limelight for many years, without paying any dividends. The connectionist paradigm, started in the 80s, hasn't given us any concrete and large-scale understanding of the brain, and has unfortunately (for our knowledge of the brain but not for commercial ventures) and quietly devolved into machine learning tricks for learning Netflix user preferences, etc.

In fact, such an approach that the HBP is embarking on, is badly overdue, and vastly underrepresented. It's not a popular approach because it accepts the messiness of the brain and doesn't shirk away from it by abstracting it away. Sure, it's a double-edged sword, in that by opening the Pandora's box of the molecular level, you risk missing out on what we do not yet know, but that is part and parcel of any scientific approach. Thus, kudos to the HBP project and Henry Markram for managing to get this kind of project off the ground.

I believe it will only help further our understanding of the brain in an integrated way that can evolve over time and with contribution from other levels of analysis. Those who are opposed to it, in my opinion, are doing so unfortunately primarily on personal and ideological grounds -- i.e., on ultimately selfish and jealous grounds -- than on valid scientific rebuttals.

Sadly, I lack Markram's eloquence and diplomacy in addressing the critics, but sometimes you have to grab the bull by the horns and address the real issue rather than skirt around it and be afraid to step on eggshells (meaning other people's egos).

-- PhD candidate in computational neuroscience, whose own biases have been amply revealed, he hopes.

That would be highly unusual and unlikely. I won't say it's literally impossible, but there's absolutely no reason to make such an untenable assumption when a clear and solid motivating factor, such as in this case, the separation from a close partner, exists.

"LSD, which is widely abused, does not appear to be addictive." -source

"In contrast to many other abused drugs, hallucinogens
do not engender drug dependence or addiction and are
not considered to be reinforcing substances (O’Brien,
2001)." -source

"There are no literature reports of successful attempts to
train animals to self-administer classical hallucinogens, an
animal model predictive of abuse liability, indicating that
these substances do not possess the necessary pharmacology to either initiate or maintain dependence. Hoffmeister
(1975) has reported that LSD actually had negative
reinforcing properties in rhesus monkeys trained in an
avoidance task." -source

"Several other classes of drugs are categorized as drugs of abuse but rarely produce compulsive use. These include psychedelic agents, such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)" -source