Testing the diagnosis

Testing the diagnosis

Traditional and scientific medical systems cannot be integrated.

Context:

• Desiring the integration of all medical systems is naive and unrealistic.
• Traditional and scientific medical systems cannot be integrated.

Doctrine of traditional way:

• All cultures wanted explanations on why some fell ill while others did not, and, what remedies cure different illnesses.
• All had come up with concepts, dogmas and beliefs, as well as many treatment modalities.
• Three examples that have survived the test of time are the ancient Indian and Chinese traditional systems and the more recent homoeopathy.
• All of them are together called ‘traditional medicine’.

Doctrine of homeopathy:

• In homoeopathy, the basic doctrine is that molecules of chemicals that simulate symptoms similar to those in illnesses, given in minute and non-toxic quantities, are the remedies.
• The principle “similia similibus curentur” (likes cure likes) is implied in the name homoeopathy, in contrast to allopathy (synonym of scientific medicine), in which antidotes counter the causes of diseases.

Doctrine of Chinese system:

• The major doctrine in the Chinese system is that Qi, life’s vital energy, flows via ‘meridians’ that connect all organs and tissues.
• If any gets blocked, illnesses result.
• Acupuncture, acupressure, massages, specific exercises and special diets and herbal medicines are applied as remedies.

Doctrine of Ayurveda:

• Ayurveda has the Thridosha doctrine.
• Imbalances between three hypothetical doshas cause illnesses; remedies are herbal concoctions, oils, oil massages, special diets, purgation, deworming, etc.

Doctrine of Scientific medicine:

• Scientific medicine developed and grew in Germany, Austria, France, Britain and the U.S. during the 18th and 19th centuries through an iterative and cumulative process.
• Natural sciences (physical and biologic, including microbiology, biochemistry and genetics) with their methods of inquiry and emphasis on objective evidence heavily influenced its growth, which continued in the 20th century and is still continuing.
• Scientific medicine can and must question and revise dogmas, concepts, explanations and therapeutics through research inquiries.

Question of accountability (scientific system):

• Since the scientific system is open to verification, physicians have accountability to make evidence-based diagnosis and formally recommended remedies.
• Any two independent physicians are required to make the same diagnosis and the same guidelines of therapy.
• All diseases have been named, numbered and classified into a compendium — the International Classification of Diseases, the 10th edition being in current use and 11th edition in the making.
• If one physician makes a diagnosis and treats as such, the patient has the right to ask if both are based on evidences available in books and periodicals.
• In case the physician had not followed such norms, he/she is liable to be tried for medical negligence and the patient compensated, if so proven.

Question of accountability (traditional system):

• In other words, scientific medicine demands ‘accountability’ on the part of the physician — for ‘correct’ diagnosis and treatment.
• Since such verifications and detailed classifications are not present in traditional medical systems, a physician diagnoses and treats as best as he/she could, but without verifiability or accountability.
• Fortunately, therapies in traditional medicines are generally harmless — hence patients do not face much risk.