![](https://assets.isu.pub/document-structure/200616064452-5287ecb57e62e210f0d7e3393977c1f7/v1/a0b3ca9ec4e6318edce4e9730723d5ab.jpg?width=720&quality=85%2C50)
3 minute read
12 Whose perspective?
The Man and the Lion: A man and a lion were travelling together. They started comparing their superiority, prowess, skills and courage. Presently, they came across a statue of a man subduing a lion. "Look at this," said the main pointing to the statue, "the man is indeed stronger than the lion.” "That is because a man has sculpted this statue," said the lion, "If a lion could sculpt statues, I am sure you would see the man underneath and the lion on top."
Ram and Ralph were friends from their school days. Ralph got into an MBBS course and became a physician while Ram graduated in an alternate system of medicine. Once they got into an argument about their systems of medicine. Each highlighted the greatness of his system of medicine. To clinch the argument in his favour, Ram showed him a big advertisement gloating about his system. "Not so fast, Ram," said Ralph, "That is your view point from your perspective. If we could also advertise like you, I am sure we would be shown to be the best."
Advertisement
Comments
The World Health Organisation has said that all systems of health care have their place in modern day practice. A parallel may be drawn from various modes of travel. There is a need for travel by a jet, a car, a bicycle or even by walk depending on the distance, time and expenses involved. Just because walking is an ancient and slow method, it can't be ruled out as a mode of travel in the modern times. Similarly,
39
traditional home remedies still have a place to take care of minor self-limiting illnesses like common cold, viral fever, tension headache, etc.
At the same time, it is essential that the limitations and weaknesses of each system are documented and known to the community. This calls for healthy scepticism, unbiased research and reappraisal of various remedies. Media should report these findings in a balanced manner and not yield to glorification, panic-mongering or debunking just for the sake of sensationalism.
As enlightened consumers, one should be critical of generalisations based on
40
anecdotes. Anecdotes say what can happen, not what generally happens. An anecdote may make a good advertising copy but is not a scientific proof.
I have a collection of "faithful fans" who have gone on record stating things like "A touch by your stethoscope keeps me healthy for six months", "If I consult you, all my selfdoubt vanishes," and even the ultimate cliché a doctor likes to hear, "You are a God in human form"! I am sure every allopathic doctor has his/her collection of such "old faithful" patient fans. Can we publicise their statements to boost the our own image and that of allopathy? Medical Council prohibits such unethical acts. It should apply to equally to all the systems of health care.
On empiricism, Shaw has said, "Empirics say 'I know' instead of 'I am learning' and pray for credulity and inertia as wise men pray for scepticism and activity. Science becomes dangerous only when it imagines that it has reached its goal.” Any science with closed doors becomes a dogma.
Science is verifiable truth. Scientific medicine is rational medicine. The rest are empirical, unproven or faith-based. It is time rationalists and health activists insisted on scientific scrutiny of all systems of health care to identify their strengths and weaknesses. An unbiased, evidence-based consumer guide to the rational use of different systems of health care will be a boon to the society.
In view of the current craze for uncritical acceptance of ancient empiricism, such a consumers' health care guide is urgently needed.
41