Customer Reviews

Grant's Atlas of Anatomy (Grant, John Charles Boileau//Grant's Atlas of Anatomy)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Definately underated. I have no idea why. I have Netter's, Adams and Grant's and I find that both Adams and Grant's are more useful to me than Netter's for anatomy lab classes, especially when used together. Netter's made a very good name for itself. However, before you purchase, take the time and visit the bookstore or the library and compare them all and you will see what I am talking about. I could have used Grant's alone as a student but I bought it last, if only I had the same advice I am giving you I would have chosen Grant's in the first place. I am a curious person and I like to know and understand everything about what I am learning to enhance my skills in the area and I definately think Netter's is lacking in the area of detail information but is very good on labeling the body parts and also has great illustrations. In my opinion and the opinion of my husband and 19 year old, the illustrations in this book may not be as good as Netter's but the information on body parts in Grant's is much better than Netter's. I think Netter's would be better for a graduate while Grant's could be used for the medical student as a study material and for lab classes as well as for a graduate. I say again look before you leap and know what you want so you can make the best choice. I actually think that Grant's is a keeper, but you be the judge. I am not really saying the others are bad, but wouldn't you want the best for your money? 10/08

I find this book to be ok. There are some muscles and charts that they just refuse to put in for origin and insertions ect because they find only certain "ones" important. For example i wasnt pleased when they just included 8 muscles for facial expression when there are more like 20 or so. So then i had to find another book to look them up to study from which makes this atlas obsolete in some ways.

I bought this for my first year of med school and it is a joke! The pictures are great, but the organization of the book is not intuitive and you spend precious time searching the index for structures. Also, I was very frustrated when structures were not labeled on the pictures. The pictures showed the structures that I believed I was after, but I could not verify my hunch due to inadequate and poor labelling. Netter's is by the best atlas on the market.

I am in my first year of Physician Assistant school, and Grant's Atlas of Anatomy is on the required reading list.

The drawings are very high quality, however the organization of the book is terrible. Often, important muscles are left out of origin/insertion/function charts, and you have to peruse the index to find them, and when you do, you are given 10 possible pages where the muscle could be.

A huge waste of both money and time. On my father's recommendation (Physician), I have ordered the 1987 version of Clemente's Regional Anatomy, which he says is far superior and got him through Medical School.

Even if this is required reading for your particular program, if you are smart, you will avoid this like the plague.

There are many atlases on the market and they all do the job well. I do prefer Grant's over Netter's because Grant's has more text and descriptions. However, some of my classmates (med school) do prefer Rohan's which is actual pictures of cadavers. You can't go wrong with any of the atlases though.

Grant's Atlas has some of the best conceptual illustrations of the body of any atlas I have read. They are clear and are loaded with details that can truly buttress anatomy classes. However, there is very, very little text, and the text that the authors do include are mere descriptions of the illustrations. When studying anatomy, Grant's is very helpful if you need to look up a structure and clearly see its features and relationships to other features of the body. But when you're trying to learn by visualization - which at least in my experience is probably the best way to learn all of this information - I don't find Grant's to be very helpful. It's also not very expansive on the functional importance of structures and how their dysfunctions can cause serious problems.

This is a good anatomy book that is easy to follow, and has good pictures and information. Truth be told, I like Clemente's Anatomy a bit better, but that just boils down to personal taste.

This is a very good book for an advanced artistic anatomy atlas. Most of the material isn't that useful for me but the parts that are useful are more than enough to give this a high recommendation. I especially liked the regions of palpation that were colored on the skeleton. For an artist, those regions show the parts of skeleton that define the surface form of the body (i.e. they are closer to the surface of the skin).

This is indeed a splendid atlas to the anatomy of the human body. The particular current edition benefits from photographs and CT scans in crucial places, and is greatly improved over earlier versions. Although it is a bit much to expect it to be present on everyone's bookshelf (even in paperback), I believe that every household should be aware of its existence, particularly in this age of self-managed medicine.

This edition comes with a supposed subscription to "ThePoint" at ThePoint.LWW.com which is one of the most combative and useless sites I have visited...I would class it as a total waste of time, but this is not meant as a negative comment about the book itself. I would comment in passing that the front-cover reference to "thepoint.Iww.com" is wrong, and that the "I" is supposed to be an "L." In a sans serif font it is difficult to decide which is right.

The book is very descriptive for most regions of the anatomy. Some regions could be more detailed, but over all I would recommend this book to help to understand the anatomy more than the class room books,

cas