<snip>"Scalpel blades are not as sharp for a reason [As a microtomb - used for slicing tissue perfectly flat and thin for microscopic viewing]. The razor edge [ of a scalpel] cuts cleanly but not as cleanly as a highly polished blade (sharpened with an extra fine stone). This is a good thing if you want to reclose the cut which in most surgical cases is the goal. The roughness helps blood clotting giving it better binding sites and speeds up healing.
they said scalpels are no sharper than razor blades. There was also a statement that a new spyderco is sharper than a scalpel. "The knife you cut yourself with is sharper than the scalpel I am using to fix it"
surgeons? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Jim <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
This agrees with the study I read about in a popular science mag (Discover?) about 5-6 years ago. The study found that sharper scalpels caused wounds to heal more slowly. The study did not cover issues about "easier to sew" or scarring. So the study suggested that scalpels should be slightly less than razor sharp for quicker healing.
Now a microtomb is something else altogether. I believe it is used to shave skin off to replace burned skin, and perhaps other reasons.
My point: cuts from razors heal more slowly than from dull knives IF YOU GET CUT. This has been my personal experience also. When I got cut from a razor it took about twice as long to heal up.