 |
 |
Hello Barb, Sun, 21 Jun 1998 08:56:16 -0400 Barb Rager <[log in to unmask]>, on the subject "On-line medical dictionary", reacting on a posting by William Heitman, wrote: <<<< >This info. came from an internet source called On-line medical dictionary. >The URL is http://www.graylab.as.uk/omd/ >You might wish to contact them to discuss these points. It seems to me, >though, and I admit I am not a medical professional, that your definition of "agonist" summarizes the main point of the dictionary's definition.>>>> I agree with your opinion, Barb! <<<< Could you clarify for me where your definition differs from that provided by the dictionary? I would really appreciate it, as I am trying my best to >understand as much as I can.>>>> I think William wants clear and for a layman understandable definitions. That would be nice and easy, but then the definition would be incomplete. The defined words are sometimes also used in other areas of the medical profession, where they have other meaning. Try not to mix them up. Since studies for neuros are very long and even they often mix these things up (so we PWP get even more confused than we were), there are three choices: 1) you find yourself an easy definition, that you can understand, realising that it won't do in all situations. 2) you find yourself complicated definitions, you can partly understand, realising that for complete understanding you need to know almost as much as a medical professional. 3) you write to this list and hope someone can clarify things for you. Greetings, Hans.