Irina Gennadievna Marinicheva,
- Doctor of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Plastic Surgery of the RUDN University,
- certified plastic surgeon,
- maxillofacial surgeon of the highest qualification category,
- Member of the Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons of Russia,
- Member of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ISAPS),
- Member of the European Association of Craniomaxillofacial Surgery (EACMFS),
- Member of the Association of Aesthetic Medicine Specialists,
- Member of the American Association of Women Surgeons.
- Chairman of the Board of the Russian Association of Women Plastic Surgeons.
Professionalism!..
What is the difference between a good plastic surgeon and just a surgeon? Firstly, an integrated approach to solving the problem. And this requires a broad outlook, experience and the ability to make the right decisions in non-standard situations. And the main thing is to understand the patient, his desires and needs.
The development of these qualities requires a long time of painstaking work on oneself.
I received an excellent academic higher medical education. Already within the walls of the institute, I decided on my choice of profession, which allowed me to choose and undergo training at the best department of reconstructive and plastic surgery in our country, specializing in maxillofacial surgery under the guidance of Professor A.I. Nerobeeva.
During my graduate studies, I completed training at the Institute of Reconstructive Plastic Surgery at New York Medical University (USA) under the guidance of the legendary Joseph G. McCarthy. It was the American school that formed my basic knowledge and skills in plastic surgery, which allows me to think outside the box in difficult situations, to operate quickly and accurately, and not to delay the time of plastic surgery.
Comprehensive training has formed in me the need for constant improvement, development and implementation of new ideas in the specialty. My dissertation is devoted to a very complex problem - the correction of the protective apparatus of the eyes in case of damage to the facial nerve.
At the same time, I managed to develop an entire section of plastic surgery dedicated to leg plastic surgery. Before the advent of factory implants, I made the first silicone endoprostheses for shin surgery myself. Then, with the arrival of Eurosilicone and Polytech products on our market, I improved the cruroplasty technique, and today I have experience with more than 500 patients (1000 implants). Currently, I am introducing plastic surgery of the inner thighs with implants into practice.
Modern plastic surgery dictates the need for widespread use of cosmetic methods of restoration and improvement of surgical results. For the professional use of these products, I have specially completed training in dermatocosmetology and additional certification in the use of preparations containing botulinum toxin, fillers, and thread lifting.
I am an active supporter of anti-age medicine, and I am convinced that after plastic surgery my patient should not only look younger, but also achieve overall rejuvenation and healing of the body.
Internet ombudsman Dmitry Marinichev about the scandal surrounding his speech
Marinichev’s statements were made at a meeting of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, where scientists discussed import substitution of technologies that were inaccessible to Russia due to Western sanctions. Of all that the ombudsman said, two theses caused indignation among netizens: about the need for Russia’s military presence to impose our technologies on the West and the pointlessness of training IT personnel.
“We will be able to provide technology to other countries only when we have (there - Gazeta.Ru) a military presence. When other countries do not have an alternative opportunity not to take it from us,” Marinichev said. This was followed by another thought:
“I honestly and openly say: if you want to harm the country, then you should invest in training IT specialists on the territory of the Russian Federation. It is impossible to cause more harm.”
The public reacted to Marinichev's statements with a hail of ridicule. Politician Alexei Navalny called the ombudsman a “militant moron” and accused the Russian authorities of “leading the nation to defeat, including by imposing technological backwardness on us.”
Gazeta.Ru tried to find out what exactly Dmitry Marinichev wanted to say, who for the first time since his appointment was subjected to truly harsh criticism.
-Did you really say what the press attributed to you?
- I subscribe to every phrase, I will not refuse a single one. But all these phrases describe only one of the possible ways. I never expected that one of the possible paths would be presented as my absolute position. It is not normal.
— It is expected that people are indignant, because instead of theses about the need to create conditions for their innovations, they heard a phrase about the military presence.
Wikipedia faces criminal charges
After blocking a page on a resource against the administration of the Russian-language version of Wikipedia, it may be...
24 August 17:58
“I said absolutely banal things that have been known since the times of the Roman Empire. First, the army comes to the territory, followed by traders, and then you get state power and the market. Only this way and no other way. That's why
if at the state level we choose the “Russia against everyone” regime, then we will have no chance to sell our products and technologies, except to carry out geopolitical expansion into the world.
And since the world is divided in any case, this will lead to inevitable confrontation with those countries that are already present in some region. This is the same thing that the Soviet Union did, spreading the ideology of socialism, technology and, in fact, its model throughout the world. And, accordingly, the BRICS countries and others should fall under the geopolitical influence of Russia as the dominant center. And I'm not being ironic at all.
So the question is: how will events develop? If there are Europe, England, the USA, Canada, and against them are Brazil, China, India, Russia - depending on whose protectorate this or that country will be - then this is one situation. If there is a third country, then there will be a third source of technological dominance.
“But there is a natural market option.” That is, simply produce a product that would be in demand regardless of the political situation. Is this not for Russia?
— I agree, and this is precisely the second option, which was not taken into account in the Kommersant article. This is an option when the markets of the future are identified and the foundation is laid in the market of the future for development and training of specialists in order to dominate there. And this option implies absolute integration of Russia into the global economy. She takes her place, knowing full well that in many ways she is giving up dominance by using foreign technology. Like, for example, processor technology.
But Russia can also have nuclear energy, aircraft manufacturing, and military equipment. This may also be a dominant technology that will be in demand abroad. This speaks of a balance of interests.
But today this balance is impossible, since there is a clearly expressed confrontation between the Western world and Russia.
Whether Russia is to blame here or not is not important. The state itself is important, and it is impossible to discuss technological exports and imports, because in this situation we must produce everything ourselves entirely. And in this situation, training IT specialists using foreign basic technologies is actually undermining Russia’s sovereignty.
I don't want to consider this option because it is unacceptable. We all managed to live as citizens of the global world, moving freely: on vacation in Italy, riding carousels in America. But it may happen that everything will change. And the question about the use of one or another method of technology transfer lies in this plane: who are we, why do we and where do we want to go?
— Russia is not capable of producing an IT product that is interesting for the whole world?
— We cannot do something breakthrough in the field of technology if we depend on the owners of the technology. For example, when Intel develops a new processor, the first person it shares its thoughts with is Microsoft. And together with her they are developing a hardware and software complex. Question: How can we develop an operating system ahead of Microsoft if we don't have a lead time because we don't have access to their knowledge? That's it, it's a vicious circle.
And there is only one option: we can make our own processor, and then whoever develops their own processor in Russia will share it with a local company.
Or - on a global scale - we are in the zone of a trusted circle, and Intel will share not only with Microsoft, but with some “Russian operating systems”. And Intel, in principle, doesn't care. The penetration of his technologies and competition are important to him. It is also not beneficial for him to have only Microsoft.
But there is always a basic technology that a company or state has. So today we need to consider all options: both pessimistic and optimistic. Moreover, it is not a fact which of them is which given our current perception of events.
— So it seems to you that it is better not to invest at all in training IT specialists, because we are playing on an obviously foreign field?
- No, that's not true. Training our programmers is a useless exercise today, but only if we do not open the market and create a comfortable market for creating creative teams and companies in Russia that will be able to sell their products to the whole world.
If we don’t do this, then all creative teams and all programmers will instantly move abroad. This has been the practice for the last two years.
This is normal. Like in the cartoon about “Nemo” - a fish from an aquarium wants to escape into the ocean.
It's impossible to argue here. The state has no other tasks than to take care of its own citizens and develop their skills. This is my tough position. Vocational education, continuous certification, participation in conferences and modernization of knowledge are the most important things that the state should do. But the question is what and where it should do.
“But we have to admit that in the current situation the state is not coping with its responsibilities well.
- Well, we don’t know everything. And even I don't talk about everything I know. And the state has good initiatives, and what is being done is quite advanced. The question relates rather to propaganda and the political situation. Americans also pursue their own selfish interests.
Just as they are trolling me now with my words, the States are trolling Russia.
Therefore, we need to talk about this here so that people understand the situation, other than simply “we need to train specialists.”
“But the fact is that in this area we have little to brag about. Do you have friends from the IT field who went abroad?
- That's enough.
- And how do you evaluate their decision?
“It is hardly possible to attract large foreign investments today”
On the role of import substitution of software in ensuring national security, prospects for creating a competitive…
10 May 20:06
— People understand that what they want to do is currently subject to a number of restrictions in Russia.
He might not have wanted to leave Russia, but the stars were so aligned that he had nowhere to go.
Professional lack of demand is worse than being in demand, but not in the homeland. This is from the point of view of a person, not a country.
— So you don’t criticize them for their decision?
- Of course not. On a human level, I cannot criticize them. The question of changing conditions within the country. And they will return one way or another, because language determines consciousness, and a person who grew up in this environment is still drawn to the society that is comfortable for him. But comfortable conditions for self-realization must be created, otherwise it is impossible.
