There is some bad radiography in some of the images - as bad as Indian radiography! Lateral patella at 11.13 is 10 degrees off straight and 20 degrees of rotation. Foot fracture includes the lower leg at 12.07 which doubles the dose for no reason. Hopeless humerus radiography at 13.12 where no AP or lateral was produced. Disgracefully dangerous dose for the clavicle at 20.41 where the whole chest, arm, neck and skull have been included where collimation should have been limited to a 10x15cm rectangle. No gonad protection for a pelvis at 21.42 or any sign of collimation. Hand and wrist needlessly included in a finger series at 22.22. Chest and neck needlessly included in a humerus series at 24.18. Lower leg include in a foot xray at 26.21 which is one reason there is low contrast due to increased scatter radiation. A truely disgraceful maximum gonad and body dose for the lateral sacrum at 28.09 with no attempt at collimation of the beam. At 41.13 we see the foot has been included in an ankle series for no good reason which doubles the dose and reduces contrast. Triple the dose for the foot xray at 44.49 and horrible degradation of the image due to massive unnecessary scatter radiation coming from the whole lower leg. Overall, the radiography shown is of extremely poor quality with minimal collimation. If you think the quality of general radiography shown is good, you have been working with horribly trained radiographers. Give them a test that 75% will fail which relates to the value (or lack of it) of the centring point method. czcams.com/video/mZPD_gLs5Dw/video.htmlsi=AW5VpjG5xviqJpBp. 95% of students will fail the test but only 5% of radiologists. Why has this error continued for a century? I presented papers at the National Conferences on radiography in Australia in 1988 and 2016, the latter being after all three university tutors failed the tests and refused to teach their students about the geometry of a projection. Look at my lowest dose spinal series beginning with lumbar spine that shows how my lateral sacrum will be 1/10th the body dose and 1000th the gonad dose. czcams.com/video/4W1g0UVOGq0/video.htmlsi=2kxhsXDyyb29gnTC. So why has the profession refused to publish my papers? Why have they refused to forward links to my videos? Because of the shame, horror and disgrace of being exposed as a backward ignorant profession when they want to be seen as leading scientific heroes. But my criticism currently is directed at The Indian Subcontinent where radiography tutors teach the method that increases body dose is 6 times my standard and 1000 times the gonad dose.
Thank you alots
Bennet triangle # vs Rolando intraarteculr and Y ❤❤
smith volar vs collar dorsal ❤❤
Jons transvers vs oblique avulsion
What are the answerssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is some bad radiography in some of the images - as bad as Indian radiography! Lateral patella at 11.13 is 10 degrees off straight and 20 degrees of rotation. Foot fracture includes the lower leg at 12.07 which doubles the dose for no reason. Hopeless humerus radiography at 13.12 where no AP or lateral was produced. Disgracefully dangerous dose for the clavicle at 20.41 where the whole chest, arm, neck and skull have been included where collimation should have been limited to a 10x15cm rectangle. No gonad protection for a pelvis at 21.42 or any sign of collimation. Hand and wrist needlessly included in a finger series at 22.22. Chest and neck needlessly included in a humerus series at 24.18. Lower leg include in a foot xray at 26.21 which is one reason there is low contrast due to increased scatter radiation. A truely disgraceful maximum gonad and body dose for the lateral sacrum at 28.09 with no attempt at collimation of the beam. At 41.13 we see the foot has been included in an ankle series for no good reason which doubles the dose and reduces contrast. Triple the dose for the foot xray at 44.49 and horrible degradation of the image due to massive unnecessary scatter radiation coming from the whole lower leg.
Overall, the radiography shown is of extremely poor quality with minimal collimation. If you think the quality of general radiography shown is good, you have been working with horribly trained radiographers. Give them a test that 75% will fail which relates to the value (or lack of it) of the centring point method. czcams.com/video/mZPD_gLs5Dw/video.htmlsi=AW5VpjG5xviqJpBp. 95% of students will fail the test but only 5% of radiologists. Why has this error continued for a century? I presented papers at the National Conferences on radiography in Australia in 1988 and 2016, the latter being after all three university tutors failed the tests and refused to teach their students about the geometry of a projection. Look at my lowest dose spinal series beginning with lumbar spine that shows how my lateral sacrum will be 1/10th the body dose and 1000th the gonad dose. czcams.com/video/4W1g0UVOGq0/video.htmlsi=2kxhsXDyyb29gnTC. So why has the profession refused to publish my papers? Why have they refused to forward links to my videos? Because of the shame, horror and disgrace of being exposed as a backward ignorant profession when they want to be seen as leading scientific heroes. But my criticism currently is directed at The Indian Subcontinent where radiography tutors teach the method that increases body dose is 6 times my standard and 1000 times the gonad dose.