See here: I'm sick of this ambiguity. Which of these is which?
Certain medical procedures where they cut you are called "-ectomies." Others are called "-otomies." Years ago somebody must have told me that one of them is for when you simply snip something, and the other is for when you actually cut something out - remove it. Somebody must have told me that at some point, because that's the idea that I have. It's possible that I figured it out for myself, but in any case, I was misinformed. I think I was misinformed. Because the distinction doesn't hold up under scrutiny!
Take your major "-otomies" for instance. You've got a tracheotomy. That's just a simple poke in the throat! Then you have your lobotomy. I'm pretty sure that's a poke in the skull and then a clip job. They have to snip the webbing or connectitures between the two lobes. They sever those, so the two sides of the mind can't talk to each other anymore - which apparently is one of the chief causes of anger and dangerousness.
Thank God they figured that out! I have no idea how they did that. I think it was from fossils.
So anyway. As you can see, already we have a strong case for "-otomy" as being a simple poke and snip deal. Yet suddenly the muddiness of the picture intensifies: vasectomy! Simple snip, right? But then: appendectomy. That's definitely not just a snip! They cut the whole thing out, they remove it. You can't tell me that is not an inconsistency. Doesn't that create an inconsistency? And what about some of the others? You see, it gets more and more convoluted the more I think about it.
Those of you who already know the "real reason" - please, spare me. I'm sure I could look that up on Googlepedia. I'm not interested in the tiny little distinctions that they trump up to justify why this one gets this and that one that. Like the difference between Astrology and Astronomy - these snicky little distinctions may make technical sense, but really they're just shallow justifications for bandying about essentially identical terms indiscriminately while claiming a "technical" difference. It's semantics.
I've been thinking about making this blog into more of a focus on medical issues in the future. Tighten the spotlight a little. Because I think that's going to be a bigger and bigger deal as time goes on - what do you think?
Certain medical procedures where they cut you are called "-ectomies." Others are called "-otomies." Years ago somebody must have told me that one of them is for when you simply snip something, and the other is for when you actually cut something out - remove it. Somebody must have told me that at some point, because that's the idea that I have. It's possible that I figured it out for myself, but in any case, I was misinformed. I think I was misinformed. Because the distinction doesn't hold up under scrutiny!
Take your major "-otomies" for instance. You've got a tracheotomy. That's just a simple poke in the throat! Then you have your lobotomy. I'm pretty sure that's a poke in the skull and then a clip job. They have to snip the webbing or connectitures between the two lobes. They sever those, so the two sides of the mind can't talk to each other anymore - which apparently is one of the chief causes of anger and dangerousness.
Thank God they figured that out! I have no idea how they did that. I think it was from fossils.
So anyway. As you can see, already we have a strong case for "-otomy" as being a simple poke and snip deal. Yet suddenly the muddiness of the picture intensifies: vasectomy! Simple snip, right? But then: appendectomy. That's definitely not just a snip! They cut the whole thing out, they remove it. You can't tell me that is not an inconsistency. Doesn't that create an inconsistency? And what about some of the others? You see, it gets more and more convoluted the more I think about it.
Those of you who already know the "real reason" - please, spare me. I'm sure I could look that up on Googlepedia. I'm not interested in the tiny little distinctions that they trump up to justify why this one gets this and that one that. Like the difference between Astrology and Astronomy - these snicky little distinctions may make technical sense, but really they're just shallow justifications for bandying about essentially identical terms indiscriminately while claiming a "technical" difference. It's semantics.
I've been thinking about making this blog into more of a focus on medical issues in the future. Tighten the spotlight a little. Because I think that's going to be a bigger and bigger deal as time goes on - what do you think?
Comments
I'm a little confused about your point with the vasectomy, though. Some are more like tubal ligations these days, I guess, but that's not what they used to be, which is why they were such a big deal. El gonzo to the vas deferens. Thanks for letting me use that term. Probably one of the prettiest sexual/reproductive organ/system names around. Fallopian is sort of okay, too. Even ovary is okay. Why does the stuff that you rarely refer to get the better names?
Fallopian is cool!
I also always liked areola.
Yeah. Big surprise.