|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
3 cm/min vs 1cm/minFrom: Geffrey H. Klein, MD (gklein@bcm.tmc.edu)Sun Nov 16 19:17:44 1997
On 11/16/97, Peter Wein wrote this:
>>>> <excerpt>At 10:19 AM 16/11/97 -0600, you wrote:
> Although I am used to looking at strips with 3cm/min I still
>cannot say this strip would concern me. John
>
>J.G.M.Robertson MD, 109-9181 Main St. Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 4M9
>(604) 793-9988 e-mail jgmr@unixg.ubc.ca </excerpt>To start a different thread, could those members who advocate 3 cm/min explain what the advantage is, given that one can learn to interpret either speed satisfactorily once you are used to it. Is there and reason to use 3 times as much paper except to make the company selling it 3 times as much profit? I would love to know. Seems this is a US convention. This is how I was trained and how my brain learned to interpret it. Everyone else here does it this way. Changing it would be a monumental effort. ---------------------------------- Geffrey H. Klein, MD ----------------------------------
-- ---------------------------------- gklein@bcm.tmc.edu
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 05:22:03 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.