I definitely agree with this.
Hear me out.
Two things.
Firstly, the medical education of the past was different from what it is now
Earlier, there were 4-5 students for every cadaver.
Now, there are 6-7 per batch. That means one cadaver could be shared by 15-16 people also (I also know of an institute where there are 25/cadaver)
In some institutes the dissection is carried out by the resident doctor, and students are allowed only to watch, or to assist by retraction.
The people carrying out the dissection are also learning, so they don't know much enough to teach.
Fortunately, I was part of a good institute, and the other 7 people in my batch of 8 were not too interested or were scared/disgusted of dissection; so I got the opportunity to actually learn. And definitely, by doing it, I got to learn a lot.
But the same cannot be said of the other rod the lot, who spent the hour shifting through Cunnigham's manual, barely comprehending anything.
We live in a digital age.
I learnt a lot from YouTube.
A lot of things apart from medicine, but yes, medicine too
There are excellent teachers on YouTube.
You get a zoomed in, 3d perspective to everything, like a one on one teaching class.
I saw YouTube videos throughout my student journey, including Neurosurgery.
Clear concepts, well-explained
(Did not understand anything? Rewind and rewatch)
Take notes
Still don't understand, google it.
Now there is ChatGPT etc
Digital learning is the future.
Unpopular opinion: Cadaveric dissection is redundant. 20 kids crammed up trying to see catch a glimpse of someone struggling when they can access the lessons of the great Dr. Robert Acland instead. All we're left with is memories that reek of formalin and an unused Cunningham.