Friends Biologists, hello.
One step forward, one step back. The leg should be straight, torso straight and his face lit by a huge smile. And most importantly, mostly follow the music. That's what is sure to repeat the jury a television where "people" try their hand with more or less success, to ballroom dancing.
It is unclear whether biologists appreciate that it was imposed. They are dropped in the middle of the runway knowing that they had repeated no longer valid. The orchestra has changed with the music and the dance card. Moreover, they do not know very well who heads the new group.
To illustrate this discomfort, I began to post the very relevant comments of Alain, a biologist and faithful reader of the blog.
"In addition to the appointment of PH PU and other department heads to hospital biology, points of order on which the Minister wishes to return the samples are liberal by nurses and rebates.
Of the samples, Nursing unions are of course very much against any form of contract between them and the biologists and consider the ordinance as an infringement on their freedom ... So there was here the germ of what nurses bronce greatly feared our government.
As for rebates, our hospitals they begin to realize that their accounts and their tutelage has made them a very bad financial gift?
For me, the order was really awkward on the preanalytical and had not considered the problem of abstraction by the liberal FDI in city and countryside. As for patronage, he must believe in Santa Claus to imagine that this would not be challenged quickly.
I'm still surprised at the turn of the debate on the ordinance since February 9. After having thrown out the window, we see on the blogs of the profession a lot of colleagues bring to bare, saying that this text would save us, was the panacea for our profession, that accreditation is not that difficult and if we fail to be accredited by the large COFRAC, we have that 'to blame but ourselves.
Ordinance as it was published in January 2010 remains a bad text, imposing restrictions on exercise completely delusional and more importantly, because of this accreditation prevents us from exercising our work calmly and correctly. Very people who find this admirable text would they not a few colleagues accredited?
I do not deny it necessary to ensure the best possible quality of our service but not at any price, especially not totally inapplicable to this standard routine.
And then there's also something we do not talk right now but still important is the decrease of the nomenclature. Have you looked as good as your records since February 11? Should it not also be our fight to preserve our profession? It is this formidable addition
"accreditation over nomenclature" that will take us.
Good luck to all who find themselves in my words. "
Of the samples, Nursing unions are of course very much against any form of contract between them and the biologists and consider the ordinance as an infringement on their freedom ... So there was here the germ of what nurses bronce greatly feared our government.
As for rebates, our hospitals they begin to realize that their accounts and their tutelage has made them a very bad financial gift?
For me, the order was really awkward on the preanalytical and had not considered the problem of abstraction by the liberal FDI in city and countryside. As for patronage, he must believe in Santa Claus to imagine that this would not be challenged quickly.
I'm still surprised at the turn of the debate on the ordinance since February 9. After having thrown out the window, we see on the blogs of the profession a lot of colleagues bring to bare, saying that this text would save us, was the panacea for our profession, that accreditation is not that difficult and if we fail to be accredited by the large COFRAC, we have that 'to blame but ourselves.
Ordinance as it was published in January 2010 remains a bad text, imposing restrictions on exercise completely delusional and more importantly, because of this accreditation prevents us from exercising our work calmly and correctly. Very people who find this admirable text would they not a few colleagues accredited?
I do not deny it necessary to ensure the best possible quality of our service but not at any price, especially not totally inapplicable to this standard routine.
And then there's also something we do not talk right now but still important is the decrease of the nomenclature. Have you looked as good as your records since February 11? Should it not also be our fight to preserve our profession? It is this formidable addition
"accreditation over nomenclature" that will take us.
Good luck to all who find themselves in my words. "
Thank you Alain. I'm sure you do not lost (sense of) pace. Well done also for the nomenclature.
Bioclinical yours.
GoM 
0 comments:
Post a Comment