| |
|
After the first series discussed here
He's back with 'life & death' autopsies about disease and the causes of death and the spread fo disease
Is anyone watching it? Got any views?
Not being of a medical or scientific background, I'm enjoying aspects of it, but it seems like alot of the criticisms of the previous series have not been remedied:
1. If it is for educational purposes, why does the camera often cut to members of the audience spewing, grimacing, looking green, or whatever? titillation?
2. Van Hagens himself. Too much of a showman for scientific education? Perhaps it's merely in the historical vein (pun intended)of this kind of thing - the 'theatre' aspect, but does he have to wear a wide brimmed hat that makes him look like the witchhunter-general?
I also find him difficult to understand when every word is full-stopped (perhaps unfair - maybe the guy is just looking for the right words in translation).
3. Where do the bodies come from - Siberian 'institute' anybody?
4. Some of the explanations are a little patronising and perhaps unnecessary and sometimes gratuitous - Arterial sclerosis was demonstrated with two tubes: one thin, one thick. Fluid that would be blood is passed through them. And guess what? The thinner one carries less fluid. Noooo. Don't say.
In another example, was there a need to pass UV dye through a dead old woman's arterial system? We all know how it works - he'd already shown us.
So I'm in two minds about the show, but am addicted so will be watching tonight. I think he's exploding soemone's bowel, or something. Should be fun. Anyone else? |
|
|
