To pursue this subject further, I did my own quick search on this topic of "References" in published works in our department library. I looked at texts written by authors in the UK, Canada, USA.
Boyd's textbook, "Pathology for the Surgeon" edited by William Anderson from Toronto General, had NO references in the text (of the chapters). At the end of the chapter was a list of "References for Further Study". Textbook of Medicine titled "Current Medical Treatment" edited by C.W.H. Havard from the Royal Northern and Royal Free in London. It had NO references at all in the text NOR at the end of the chapters. Textbook "Principles of Surgery" edited by Schwartz and others (USA) had NO references in the text; but had a list of "References" at the end of a chapter. The series of "The Ciba Collection of Medical Illustration" had NO references. Textbooks for POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS, scientific journal articles and doctoral dissertation papers had an ABUNDANT supply of references in the text. The references (50-300) were listed at the end of the paper. Audio and Video discs presentations had no references. Medical articles in lay-peoples' magazines and "throw-away" medical journals contained NO or ONLY a few references (for further reading). These "throw-away" medical journals usually have excellent 'Review Articles' with the latest data, treatment practices and information. IMHO Goanet posts on this LAY-PERSON bulletin board requesting "all references" are aimed to get the original author to do the work in its entirety. A few desire to over-burden and / or intimidate other people with really no interest in the subject matter. I have pointed this out before. Some individuals (usually the same folks) make the request while providing no references to contradict the original statements or conclusions. Clearly high school and undergraduate students should be encouraged to study, research and analyze as much published data they can get their hands on. The more they study and read, the better informed and more confident they will be on the subject matter. And they should use the information without burdening themselves with the fear of or using the excuse of plagiarism. If one is merely engaged in "cut and paste" just because one is savvy at "net-surfing" (which we see on this bulletin board) one is short-changing themselves. These individuals have done the rote-work (and appear intellectual), without even understanding the subtleties of the subject. The beauty of research is the challenge to look more and more about less and less on the nuances of the topic. So I hope young Goans are not intimidated from research, presentations and publications because of this discussion or the constraints that are listed. I fully concur with the concerns expressed by Fred over, "others who spread FUD (fear, uncertainity and doubt) over issues like "intellectual property"." Now is FUD a intellectual / literary property of Fred? And if yes, can it be proven? (serious questions). And please note I had to block my spell-check from correcting Fred's quote. The technical and legal definition of 'Plagiarism' is complex, including motive and financial gain. Sometimes plagiarism's definition sounds like the judge's definition of Pornography, "One cannot define it. But one knows it when one sees it.":=)) And along the same simile those who express the greatest moral outrage on the subject may .... just may .... just may ... be engaging in it, as we have seen in recent years among more than one moralist. Regards, GL
