Læknablaðið - 01.08.1966, Page 81

L Æ K N A B L A Ð I Ð
187
think that it would be further possible to have two unequal groups of
doctors namely, the superior group of specialists and the inferior group
of G. P.s.
It is fully clear that in the very near future the G. P.s and all
specialists and sub-specialists must have equal social, academic and
intercolleagial status.
Labour division also is a feature of our modern times, from which
the G. P. of the near future can no more be excluded. In this sphere of
work load and labour division also the near future will bring many new
forms of G. P. activity.
It is no more thinkable that 50% of all doctors could be excluded
from the universities, the academic ladder and the field of their own
resaarch. Research in General Practice would soon pay for itself, be-
cause it is research for the general public, fortheday today ailmentsand
for daily use. Especially industry, commerce and the daily life of man-
kind will receive the benefit from research in General Practice as the
general practitioner deals with the little but many ailments.
G. P.s of the future will have their own organizations, their own
leaders, their own image and their own aims. They will also lead their
own life which will be a very useful one for the public, the specialist
groups, but also a happy one for the G. P.s themselvesandtheirfamilies.
If we consider the status of the G. P.s in all five continents at present
and if we compare it with this short list of reforms we will see that
many reforms are necessary to reach that aim.
Reforms in this and many other ways, which only the future will
reveal to us, will be necessary and indispensable. So, concluding, we
can state that the career of the G. P. of the future will and must be a
very interesting one in the centre of human life, but it must also be a
career which gives happiness to all concerned.
nnÉF TIL nTAÐSINS
Einhver ,,besserwisser“ hefur komizt í handritið af greinarstúf
þeim, sem ég sendi blaðinu í febrúar og birtist í júníheftinu. Hafa
verið gerðar ýmsar breytingar á textanum og ekki allt til bóta.
í læknisfræðilegu tímariti skiptir ekki máli, hvort er notað t.d.
—synovitis í fingurliðum— eða -—liðaþelsbólga í kjúkuliðum—. Þar
hlýtur smekkur höfundar að ráða, og tæplega hlutverk ritstjórnar að
breyta neinu þar um. Höfuðatriði er aftur á móti, að lesendur blaðsins
fái í hendur skiljanlegan texta. í þessu tilliti er ýmsu ábótavant, því
víða hefur merkingin brenglazt í þýðingartilraunum og öðrum lag-
færingum. Finn ég mig knúðan að tilgreina það helzta.
Síða 119.
,,Úlnliðsskekkja“ er fráleit þýðing á ulnar deviation. Skekkjan er
einungis bundin við metacarpophalangeal liðina og hefur ekkert með