you got the perfect picture, i get the same impression
when i see researchers articles i usually see rationality when i see some doctor's article it is exactly like you said i sometimes see some kind of church belief
i have also seen some hiv articles from time to time, they seem much more serious
Ah! In that case, I don't remember all the details like you do. I just remember finer details of things that concern my health, and otherwise, just broad strokes.
Having read http://www.projectsinknowledge.com/cp/Activity/indexb.cfm?pretestAction=npt&jn=1948&sj=1967.02 to the bottom, I get the impression that they seem to be reflecting a very narrow and dogmatic versions of Buddhism and Taoism :-).
my memory can t remember pin codes, passwords and even birthdays of my parents....but surprisingly i remember every single detail about hbv articles
I agree entirely. What remains in our heads is a distilled version of all the things we read, anyway ;-).
very interesting but there are some mistakes like the use of adefovir instead of tenofovir in a patient with entecavir+lamivudine resistance, i'd say a mistake that cannot be done so articles are old/wrong or gilead sponsor has too much influence on articles since adefovir is a dead drug for both hiv and hbv
from 2009 adefovir is not good for hbv treatment since weak, toxic and predispose to tenofovir resistance, tenofovir is almost the same drug with less toxicity and so higher dose, a very big mistake for any doctor with no excuse, a big money loss for gilead