Response from the editor

I know from personal experience that otolaryngology faculty members are interested in creating a diverse specialty, and I’ve never heard anyone speak publically or privately against the goal of diversity. Given that there are only about 275 first-year otolaryngology positions and the applicant pool contains an abundance of qualified candidates, flexibility in selecting residents is a challenge. Nevertheless, it is a challenge that needs to be met, and I encourage the Otolaryngology Program Directors Organization and the Association of Academic Departments of Otolaryngology to work with other groups, including the Academy, to address this important issue.

All of us need to work on this issue collectively because we benefit collectively from diversity in all its forms.

Robert H. Miller, MD, MBA
Physician Editor, ENT Today
Headlight vs. Head Mirror

Regarding the article “An Iconic Tool: Is there still a place for the head mirror?” (Sept. 2010), I’ve practiced ENT for 30 years, and during that time I’ve tried dozens of headlights. I do use a high-powered headlight for surgery, but nothing can replace the head mirror. It is light weight, allows binocular vision and most important for me avoids parallax error. I frequently see deeper into the nose with the mirror than I can see with the headlight, as I’m looking down the column of light. If some manufacturer could reproduce that effect, then I think the head mirror could be discarded. Until that time, I think residents of all specialities, especially ENT, should spend more time learning the benefits of the head mirror.

Carl W. Wulfestieg, MD
Woodstock, VT