cirugia con tecnica de SISTRUN

Everyone agrees that the anatomy of Head and Neck is the most difficult, yet important, part of human anatomy. McMinn did a really great job in this book which presents detailed but clear structures which are clinically(surgically) relevant. Lecturers usually recommend medical students, who eager to pursue a srugical career in the future, to read Last's anatomy and using the the real-specimens-featured McMinn's Color Atlas of Human Anatomy. The latter atlas is enough for Med School anatomy course, but the content of Head and Neck part chapter is less than the Color Atlas of Head and Neck Anatomy which in the whole book deals with ENT. I think this Head and Neck atlas is particularly useful for ENT surgeons(and Dental Surgeons as well) or students who want to be ENT surgeons. Otherwise one may find enough to read Last's and McMinn's(I also use Netter as a supplement).

First of all the word complete does not belong on the cover of this book. I think that this book is a perfect example of someone trying to do everything but ends up not doing anything well. There are books dedicated to subjects such as guns, knives and decoys, which could have been left out of this book. I think chapter 14 is a good example this chapter tries to cover cartridges, shotshells,and powder cans and kegs. There no descriptions, or pictures and it barely touches on each subject. If i had to describe this book in one word it would be disappointing, I would not recommend this book to anyone.

Take this great little book along with you to the next church yard sale, estate sale, or flea market, and you may find yourself going home with a unique fishing lure, an old Orvis rod, or a box of old shotgun shells-without paying too hefty a price. Great descriptions; great pictures. I keep it by the bedside for quick reads. Highly recommended by an old duck hunter and his black labs.

First of all, let me make clear that I'm writing about the "cinquieme" (5th) edition of this textbook. The earlier editions aren't, I think, too bad.

This is a shockingly miserable textbook. I've been jotting down its faults as they crop up while I study 1st semester French. Here are some of them, though definitely not all (and no, this isn't sour grapes -- I'm getting an "A"):

Firstly, all the grammatical explanations are in French, and thus, very difficult to understand for someone learning beginning French. I realize the theory of language immersion is currently in vogue, but this is a ridiculous application. Students of French need to learn common vocabulary, not words like "preposition" and "pronoun." Even if they are cognates, it's still hard to understand and a source of extreme frustration, even for me, though I've taken French before. Also, while the student is stumbling through these explanations, he's probably also mispronouncing them, and memorizing his own mispronunciations. Then, to avoid English, the editors resort to all sorts of extremes, like the silly picture on p. 119. And, at the end of it all, they still end up having to use English footnotes, anyway (p. 114, etc.)

Another problem is the choice of vocabulary. They use irregular words (like "oeil" and its plural, "yeux," introduced too early on p. 20) in examples of grammatical rules, making for more confusion than if they'd used simpler, more regular words. (Vocabulary words, in fact, are thrown in almost without context: there are some 100 vocab words listed at the end of each chapter, many of which have only been used once in the chapter, and not at all in any exercise. These lists have no accompanying English translations, so you have to flip, flip, flip to the back of the book, a big waste of time.)

The dictionary is not good. There is no English-to-French section, and in the French-to-English, some words are missing ("demon," for instance, used in an illustration on p. 49 but not in dictionary, and "choque" is not defined - does it mean shocked, or shocking?). And of course there's no pronunciation key, a problem common to many language texts nowadays but still bad news for the student of a language that has many irregular pronunciations. Also, there are problems like the fact that ce/cet/cette/ces are all listed together in the dictionary, so if you look up "ces" and don't remember it's the plural of "ce," you won't be able to find it.

Emphasis is not on the type of things you would need to communicate. In only Chapter 6, they are teaching which articles need to be used for cities vs. countries, something which takes a lot of memorization but would not be a big problem if you didn't know it. You have the feeling they just jumbled up the order in which things are introduced so as to make it different from the previous editions, so students couldn't get by with the old one.

Explanations are so terse as to be incomplete: in the same Chapter 6 mentioned above (p. 124), they list the rules for deciding which article to use, but then, when the rules overlap, they don't say which one takes precedence. I've noticed this problem frequently. Also, on p. 100, they give a list of colors to learn, including "blond" and "brun," but fail to note that these colors are used for people but not objects. Masculine and feminine are given, but no plural forms, except for marron and orange.

There are other little signs of thoughtlessness: on p. 83, for instance, in a exercise on telling time: they show two clocks at "12:00" and "12:20" but fail to show if it's supposed to be noon or midnight, which you're supposed to be learning: "midi" and "minuit."

The workbook and audiotapes are even more sloppily done: there are sometimes lines in the workbook laboratory section that are not said on the tape (the last few words in a list, for example, are forgotten). Often the choice of vocab in exercises is thoughtless: they'll give 2 masculine singular sentences, for instance, leaving out feminine and plural forms, which the student is supposed to be learning, too. There are never enough exercises, at any rate, in either text or workbook, to go over everything being taught - probably the worst problem out of the many.

The tape often leaves you no time to reply. You might think they expect you to use the pause button on your tape recorder -- but, if so, why are there humongous pauses while they wait for you to write things in? And why do they have written exercises in a workbook, anyway? Laboratory should be for speaking skills - you can do your writing at home. (My teacher says it is because people weren't buying the workbooks, so the editors took all the written exercises out of the textbook and put them in the workbook, so students would have to buy both.) Also, the speakers speak at a normal-to-fast conversational rate, which is way too fast for first year learners, resulting in more frustration.

Both textbook and workbook have been dumbed down, which may explain a lot of the above problems - it's almost like a slash job in places. This may be common in textbooks nowadays but the editors here could win awards. It's like huge chunks of content and sense were torn out to make more room for those nice, wide, white borders - and the pictures.

"Decouverte et Creation, cinquieme edition" is barely better than no text at all, especially since the price is obscene. Most teachers could probably do a better job producing handouts on the fly. Much better would be to have everyone in the class buy "Teach Yourself French" or any of the many other non-scholastic book and tape sets available.

I have been teaching French for 17 years and I have never found a first-year method that even begins to equal M. Jian's. It strikes the perfect balance between simplifying complicated grammatical principles and encouraging students to resist passivity in their language acquisition efforts. I find the readings, cultural materials, and supplementary lab exercises exemplary. For any mature student who is interested in learning French language rapidly and correctly, I enthusiastically recommend this method. A must for first-year college and university French courses.

The book was poorly writen, often repeating the same idea multiple times within a paragraph, making the material harder to understand due to sentice structure and unrelated tangents. While this book is required for some classes, if you can get by without it, do so. Perhaps they will write a better one soon.

A new edition will appear in summer 1999. The book has a new publisher, Kendall/Hunt.

the author

I really wanted to like this book. Truly. But it fails. Miserably. It does not represent a comprehensive approach to circuit and field theory. What I mean by this is that there is absolutely no method or application of field theory that provides insight into the quantitative design requirements of electronics to be found here. There is some solid construction advice concerning shielding and grounding, but this is probably better covered in the author's previous works. The numerous mistakes, not just typos, should have been caught in editing. The "fields" of schematic circuits... I wish they were laughable.
The graphics are not even good enough to make this pass as a good con job.

This is a very helpful book for practicing electrical engineers. It discusses in detail the relationship between basic physics (particularly field theory) and electrical engineering, and shows how a knowledge of practical physics forms the basis for a complete understanding of electrical phenomena. This book fills a gap left by most college physics courses, which are too theoretical to be helpful with practical engineering problems. Five stars.

I was a avid huntress until I read this book. It showed me in an odd reverse pschology way that what I was doing was murdering animals and burying them in my bowels for NO APPARENT REASON. I would not recomend this book to anyone and certainly not anyone 'environmentally concerned' as the author so lamely put it.

I'm not sure what homegirl's gig is, but it seemed to be a pretty straight-to-the-point book. It was pretty much step by step, with advice on keeping the meat cool, avoiding spoilage, maintaining quality of the meat, butchering techniques, etc. Nothing unusual, just apparently good information. It was helpful.

Golda Meir was a remarkable woman, but you would never be able to tell by this book. If you want to learn more about her, read a better book than this (almost any book is), like one by her son, or one by her friend, or one by herself. This book is very unsubjective and is based on superficial rumors. It is basically a collection of gossip in disguise as a book.

The previous "reviewer" contradicts him/herself when claiming that the book was very "unsubjective" and based on rumors. Did s/he mean subjective? What's wrong with quoting those around her anyway? Why would an immediate relative have to write the book, as that reviewer argues? Ralph Martin is a professional and does a fine job here.

As with most books I read, or intend to read, my first look is to the book's publisher. In this case the publisher is that distinguished publisher of theology, the State University of New York Press. I searched my personal library for other books of that publisher, and could find none. I searched the internet for SUNY Press's stable of justly-famous theologians, and could find none. I did note that the book is ranked 572,509th in Amazon.com's sales list. Undaunted, I read the book anyway. So that those who might not want to read this entire review, I will cut right to the bottom line. This book is a primer on how modern theological thought is done. If you can name any theological idea that has seen the light of day in the last one hundred years (5% of the Christian Era's entire time, mind you!) these authors have accepted it. You might name historical-critical method of Biblical interpretation. You might name feminism, evolutionary social theory, reframing, the homosexualist agenda, etc. All have been uncritically accepted and used as if everyone would think that each of these has universal and absolute authority in the life of the entire Christian (world?) community. The underlying assumption is that of a modernist bias that says only the accumulated knowledge and wisdom of the present age is of any value in doing theology. I have known of pastors, priests, bishops and theologians who do what has come to be known as "paperback" theology. But I think this is the first volume I have ever seen that actually has it printed in paperback! It does not surprise me any more that anyone in the Christian community might buy into this way of doing theology. It saves on having to do one's homework in the formative or conciliar era of Christian formation. Modernist bias simply rejects that as as being anti- or at least pre-scientific. Thus it is no wonder I have not heard of this volume. It is now seven years old as a book of paperback theology and is, no doubt, out of date and can be relegated to the pile of hundreds, nay thousands, of other such paperback theological tomes. In terms of its theological arguments, the authors attempt quite successfully to explain exactly what this new moral category of "heterosexism" actually is. They do so by analogy with other sinful "-isms" such as "racism." Racism comes about when one particular race is seen as normative and all other races are judged against it. Generally, that is how these authors define heterosexism. Their argument is that there is not one "model" for sexuality against which all others are to be judged. They claim that today the notion of heterosexuality is taken as the prevailing norm for human sexual relationships. As such all other notions of sexuality when judged against that model are found to be wanting. That wanting has been described historically by some as sin, sickness, maladjustment and by many other pejorative epithets. This understanding, pervasive in church and society, they claim, must be dismantled. For, after all, any sexual orientation, being a gift of God must be judged on its own terms, not by comparison or contrast with any specific orientation that might be normative. With full and uncritical acceptance of the modern notion of "justice," and with full and uncritical acceptance of modern biblical criticism, they then proceed to support this claim. Their method is the tried and true method of paperback theology -- reverse logic. Having claimed that a = c, they then proceed to try and prove that a = b and b = c. (For those who have forgotten, first you prove that a = b and b = c; then, all things being equal, a = c.) The Bible, they say, does not speak to the issues and therefore we as Christians must find a moral norm outside of the Bible. And, since justice is demanded by all for whatever orientation or behavior is desired, we must accept all of these just because we ought to love each other. That, after all, is what Christians do! I have obviously reduced a closely thought-out argument to rather simplistic terms. But I do so not to belittle the argument, but to cut through the rhetoric to see not the faulty conclusions, but the faulty method. When 95% of Christian wisdom is whisked away by the modernist bias, there will result faulty method. When scientific data is used simply to support preconceived conclusions, there will result faulty method. And faulty method produces faulty conclusions. As stated earlier, my fear is not of what is said in this book. My fear is that theology will continue to be done in this way. My fear is that the church's leaders will continue to accept this throwaway theology. My fear is continuing rejection of the wisdom of the Church from its inception. Yes. Read this book. There is much to learn about how theology is done in the modern church today. But--caveat christianum emptor!

As a response to the previous reviewer who was so appalled by the alleged "modernist" tone of the book, I found this volume to be a serious and thoughtful analysis of the issue. There is nothing to suggest that the authors are not comitted Christians engaging a contemporary issue. Nor is there any indication that the authors reject core Christian beliefs/theology simply because they chose to address a contemporary question. The first review says more about the reviewer than it does about the book itself. Whether one accepts or agrees with the authors, their book deserves a careful and critical reading.

this book uses old approaches and was written long ago the ideas and concepts are old fashioned.

Good reading for those interested in the effects of hypnotism on physiology and hypotisms relationship to psychology and psychiatry.

I was instructed to purchase this book as a pre-requisite for a course on the new features of AutoCAD 2000. I found that it lacks proper explanations of the newer features of the software. This book might be acceptable for someone who has never used AutoCAD before; but for someone who has extensive knowledge it is nearly useless. Every command listed in the book is also listed in the help topic "commands". It doesn't discuss most of the new features of AutoCAD 2000 that make A2K more powerful (for example the Design Center). Even though it provides descriptions for just about every setting, it doesn't explain why a user would use one setting as opposed to another. This book is written for people who merely want to increase their AutoCAD vocabulary without needing to understand the complexities of the software.

I use AutoCad 2000 to make my living working for myself. The program is so versatile that it is impossible to remember all the commands. This book sits right next to my monitor and I use it probably 3 or 4 times a week. Some great features are that it: 1) shows you the button for the command, 2) gives you commands that are related, 3) gives you tips for the command, 4) the alias for the command, and much more. I am able to be that much more productive and accurate, which are the reasons behind computer drafting. I would recommend this book for every AutoCad 2000 user, beginner or advanced.