Result: Pass (51). Finally, as with MCB (having attempted it twice) this was the inflexion point. I took this in Sem 1 2025 but the final result was just agonisingly short. Jess & Keit did an excellent job in coordination & delivery. There are 5 maladies that get covered (CF, Pandemics, B cells, T1DM & RA). If you are an immunology major, you're in luck as three to four topics do link with fundamental concepts & principles. This does alkrivate your study. But, please, do not slack off. It's not a walk in the park either. Assessments were fair (2 MSTs, group poster & final exam). With a solid group, the poster should be the *easiest* assessment. Keep it simple, format it well with AMA citation style & that's 12-14/15 marks in the bag. MSTs can be jit & miss. Compared to 2025, I was unusually a little bit off with my average for both this year (2025 57% vs 2026 45%). The final exam is 85 marks (15 MCQs, 1 integrated Q 10 marks & 5 multi part SAQs 20 marks but you choose 3). The SAQs are key. Practice. Focus on concepts principles explaining & understanding how & why a mechanism occurs. For me personally I did CF, B cells & RA this year (2025 was B cells, RA & Pandemics- the latter might've contributed to me not getting through initially). All topics throughout the semester are interesting especially rheumatoid arthritis (RA) which is probably the most difficult but fascinating. Cystic fibrosis (CF) was surprisingly reasonable. Pandemics can be hit & miss (HIV via Professor Sharon Lewin is interesting despite complexity. Malaria can be dry but Professor Brendan Crabb is decent). B cells was simply revision. T1DM I absolutely hated. Overall just so relieved to finally get this done. Only one more subject left in MIIM30003 Medical Applied Immunology. Then rover it's over.

A really well run subject! Jess and Keit (the coordinators) are amazing, and they are so easy to contact/talk to. They frequently monitor the discussion board and answer student questions. The lectures themselves are interesting, and there were five broad topics we focused on, with different lecturers for each one. The MSTs were not too difficult, and the coordinators provided us with lots of revision material. Group assignment was fairly straightforward, but we did not receive feedback (unless you asked for it). The exam was also pretty standard for a biomed core subject, not too tricky but not easy either. It was definitely one of the better-run subjects in the Biomed degree. If you stay on top of the content, you can easily do really well, and there's lots of opportunity to ask questions/practice with friends if you attend the interactives.

This subject is honestly pretty good, one of my favourite biomed cores. Jess and Keit are extremely thoughtful with how they organise things, for instance making sure no lectures fall in the week of an MST and providing MST viewing sessions so you can see where you went wrong. They're even willing to check your answers to your SAQ practice on Ed Discussion. As mentioned before, some lecturers are not that great but they're also not that bad! I think as long as you review the lectures afterwards and get support from Ed Discussion, talking with lecturers after class, etc., then you should be fine. They're very eager to clear things up, and there's even FAQ pages for each module for you to find your answers. The content is also super interesting! I recommend you go over high-yield concepts but also know that specific things on the slides can be tested (as long as you relate it all back to the main concepts/LOs it should hopefully stick). That's one thing that threw me off with this subject. The group assignment can honestly be hit-or-miss, as with all group stuff. I was very fortunate to have an amazing group that was communicative and proactive, but I know friends that didn't get that unfortunately. Having said that, I feel like this project is not as bad as people have framed it. Jess and Keit provide a lot of LMS information/general feedback for posters, and if there's something specific you need help with they're quite active on Ed Discussion.

This subject is poorly organized. Most lectures are held at 9 am in a venue with a capacity of over 500; however, attendance typically peaks at around 6-10 students. The ratio of attendance to cohort size speaks to the subject coordinators' utter incompetence. There is good communication on the MSTs; however, no feedback was given for the final exam nor the poster assignment. Marking is completely ambiguous. The subject seems to have fallen of a cliff in 2025. DISAPPOINTING!

Like another review said below some of the lecturers are not great. There is also minimal guidance for the assessments and if your group members are not great for the group assignment it really does impact your grade. I did not enjoy this subject compared to other subjects I have taken at uni.

A good core biomed subject that requires a high standard of work from students in both assignments and exam answers (short answer questions). Thought most of the lecturers taught well and the coordinators are really supportive (Keit and Jess). The subject does require you to have a good level of depth in understanding so make sure you understand the "molecule to malady" story well for each of the diseases. Learning about disease in a holistic way from molecular defects to clinical and future solutions was quite interesting.

Not bad, some of the lecturers are literally the worst teachers. I have never had worse lectures in my life, but at the same time some of them are really good :/

My favourite subject at university so far. Jess, the subject coordinator, is incredibly supportive and is a lovely person. Subject is also very organised and I found all that all the disease modules we covered were all equally fascinating. Quite heavy in terms of immunology content (since immunity is basically involved in most human diseases), which can be good or bad depending on how you feel about immunology. Patient interviews were the highlight of this subject for me and I really enjoyed how they introduced the 'human' element behind all the diseases we covered. Feedback quizzes for each module and little 'tutorial'/workshop sessions interspersed throughout the subject were helpful in consolidating content. All in all a very interesting and well-coordinated subject.

catchy name, where you learn a few diseases in depth. I liked some modules over the others. Really depends on the lectuere/guest speakers you get

One of the best core subjects! Highly coordinated, organised, and structured. Content delivered by topic-specific expert lecturers/professionals. The subject, incorporated patient interviews, which provided with a more integrative and holistic learning experience. The assessments were also quite fair!