🚀 go-pugleaf

In response to the query re the context of the responder, raised
by Scott Selco (who appropriately identified himself):

I am a faculty member in the Departments of Internal Medicine,
History, and Health Services Management and Policy at the
University of Michigan.  My Ph.D. is in the History and
Sociology of Science (Penn 1987) and my research is based
on trying to understand the historical reasons for the
current Anglo-American obsession with medical technology.
So, obviously, my plea for a broad interpretation of the
fundamental disciplines necessary for medical care, and
the kinds of Ph.D.s needed to study them, was in part a
reflection of my background.  But, isn't that true for all
of us?  8*)'

More seriously, I just wanted to clarify that sometimes people
use terms like "basic science" when they mean "natural science,"
and that we Ph.D.s who try to make medicine a little bit better
sometimes work in the natural sciences, and sometimes in
other areas.

Joel D. Howell, M.D., Ph.D.
U Michigan, Depts of Internal Medicine and History