- 在線時間
- 0 小時
- 最後登錄
- 16-10-22
- 國民生產力
- 0
- 附加生產力
- 55
- 貢獻生產力
- 0
- 註冊時間
- 12-11-7
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 帖子
- 17
- 主題
- 0
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 72
- UID
- 1055912
|
HKU should have the upper hand, e.g. world first in live liver transplant.
I couldn't hide my mirth when I came across this misinformation largely fed by the irresponsible press to the public.
What you refer to is Living Donor Liver Transplant (LDLT) and was first successfully performed over 2 decades ago at the University of Chicago, exactly at that time HKU was still learning the nitty-gritty of the trade from Australia. The technique obviates the need for cadaveric donor and is particularly popular in countries where the shortage is acute.
Anyway liver transplantation is nothing new since the techniques and sciences had been largely worked out and established by mostly Cambridge and Pittsburg over 30 years ago. Nowadays you will find such countries as far flung as Peru where transplantation is a well-established standard procedure.
Obsession of the public for showbiz feeds the press but for a university to exploit this vulnerability to gain local coverage - not international with material that is largely nuanced is simply a sin. Old news normally shouldn't make headlines.
This ploy seems to have been picked by by the administration in the medical school following a run of bad news with corruption, academic fraud that have blighted its standing recently. To the discerning eye there is something fishy going on behind the scene that they need to headhunt the dean at that time from overseas to mend the rift.
Both university find reasons to boast for each has now a truly locally grown world-class academic in the last few years, first time in their history in actual fact ( Prof LC Tsui, Prof Malik Peiris and Prof Charles Kao not counting for their fames were rooted largely overseas before they returned to HK ) - Prof Tam at HKU in the department of chemistry and Prof Lo at CUHK at the department of Medicine respectively - and particularly the latter who has garnered memberships of both the Royal Society (UK) and the National Academy of Sciences (US) is just nothing short of spectacular and he is really Nobel-worthy. Point of note is when Prof Tam was nominated the HKU publicity went into full frenzy with all the fanfare more deserving for a Nobel laureate whilst that of CUHK is more subdued, probably more in accordance with the wishes of Prof Lo, who is rather low-key.
Either university, following the old British tradition will grant your son essentially a similar basic qualification - both are as reputable and I really see no differences in them. The faculties in either medical school all have the same professional qualifications granted by the Royal Colleges in the UK or Australia. To say one is better than the other is an opinion of the lay public.
I would say definitely CUHK Global MBChB has the edge, by a large margin - as the chance to gain a wider perspective overseas in truly top-notch universities like Oxford and Cambridge could be a life-changer - as this is not just simple electives.This special collaboration comes in through the efforts of Prof Lo who studied medicine at Cambridge and trained in Oxford.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
發表於 13-7-30 19:35
