[കേ.ശാ.സാ.പ] Re: [കേ.ശാ.സാ.à´ª] Medical integration

I never thought practicing medicine is not as scientific as the medical
science it self. it is true that most of the inventions in medicine came
from scientist working in other fields and not from practicing doctors. that
doesnt mean the practice is not scientific. only that it is an applied
branch of science. so practice of medicine and for that matter,any branch of
science should be scientific.
leaving the decision about who should be eligible to practice medicine or
should be allowed to interfere with the body functions of the citizens to
populist concepts is not a responsible attitude. there should be some
differentiation between freedom and anarchy. for example, the state doesnot
allow suicide or mercy killings inthe name of freedom of person to decide
about his/her life.
Deepa

On 4/25/07, Kuttappan Vijayachandran <kvijaya40_at_yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> 25.04.2007
> In response to Santhosh Kumar: Due to a variety of reasons medicine, or
> the art of treating people continues, to be an emperical science. In fact,
> this is the situation while treating system disorders, including the large
> variety of cancers and heart ailments. Maybe, this situation will continue
> for quite some years. Alternative, idegenous medicines and bare-foot docors
> have great relevance in countries like India. And we should also accept
> that, what is known as modern medicine is driven by the global market and
> profit motives, which compromoises with the spirit of science in ever so
> many ways. Let us not wait till the end of all these, but start putting to
> use all our resources in the most acceptable manner.
> K Vijayachandran
>
>
> *santhosh kumar <dr_santhosh1972_at_yahoo.com>* wrote:
>
> This discussion is going absurd
>
> we should define what is integration atleast
> i feel many of us differ so much in the definition it self
> and atleast am sure every thing is so unclear
>
> is it having diferent systems of medicine in same university
> is it having all different systems in the same hospital
> is it learning different systems by same individual
>
> i feel integration can have 2 meaning
>
> as we knw thr are different systems of medicine
> and many are believed to have good effects on different ailments
> (like ayurveda is said to have very good effect on arthritis
> while modern medicine is said to hav good effect on infections and
> also for emergency care)
> one way of intergration for an arthritis patient would be to treat acute
> painful phase of an arthritis with modern medicine and later part with
> ayurveda
>
> This is the integration from patients point of view or therapeutic point
> of view. This doesnt need a assistance or research of an university.Or
> even having diferent systems in same hospital
> people are actualy doing it out of their own experience. when a human
> becomes a patient or sufferer he just needs relief. Its true also that
> infact all systems of medicine are for aleiviating pain.
> Patient doesnt want to know if it is scientific or not.
> from years of experience, trial and error, research
> we have a big body of knowledge
> about effects of diferent plants, extracts,
> chemicals , etc on human body
> and all systems of medicine are
> utilising such knowledge to alieviate suffering
> many of the drugs in modern medicine
> are also the same
> we dont know how and were a drug is acting
> practising a system is not merely aplying
> the knowledge which is aquired
> its also puting in the creativity and generating knew knowledge
>
> any one who is believed to be
> adequately knowledged by the society
> ( it might be liscence, it might be traditional belief,
> it might be societies own experience)
> can practice a system of medicine
>
> we should understand that knowing why such
> substances have an effect and were it is acting
> and how it is acting is totaly diferent from
> jst practising the system
>
> so practising a system of medicine
> (including modern medicine) is totaly
> different from being scientific
>
> now we should have a consensus
> on defining science and knowing what is scientific
>
> I believe that all of the members would agree with the following
> definition
>
> science is a democratic methodology of assimilating knowledge
> we use our senses and all aquired knowledge to the point
> to observe, analyse, diferentiate phenomenons
> things, and what ever to be studied
> then we again try to formulate postulates
> then subject it to experiments
> then generalise it with laws
> and most important part
> is subject all these process to a
> strict and meticulous peergroup interogation
> and democraticaly accept that as a piece of knowledge
> which is open to question at any time
> by another interogation by any body.
>
> so its a eloborate and democratic methodology
>
> i know that all the ayurveda , homeopathy and modern medicne
> students are taught this methodology from
> their schooling ang college education
>
> but once they go into different systems of medicine
> it is not so
>
> sudenly
> thridosha sidantham is scientific principle for ayurveda students
> like kills like becomes the scientific principle for homeopaths
>
> so now to talk of the second type of integration
> is to ponder and find out how, why, were
> a drug or treatment modality acts etc
> this is aplicable to all systems of medicine
>
> there is 2 pre requisit to this
> 1) we should make sure that there is a objective
> therapeutic action to a drug or treatment modality.
> we should accept some methodology (like randomised control trial)
> to do this. But this has become difficult due to dissagreement between
> different
> systems.
> Infact there is a big body of evidence by the scientific community that
> many systems of medicine dont have effects more than a placebo
> ( eg homeopathy)
>
> 2) we should have a consensus to what science means. Sadly it is
> has been not able to reach a concensus opinion on
> what scintificity also
>
> so there is no scope for intergration of diferent systems
> in the scientific basis by active co operation of practitioners
>
> but such works are going on in the
> scientific world wer people belive
> in the methodology i said before
> actualy such efforts are made not by practisers
> of any of the systems of medicine
> its rather done by people in the laborataries and institutes
> such works are often multideciplinary
> and can be done in a university
> and infact such scope is ample in the sugesion made by Dr Eqbal committee
>
> one advantage of a modern mecine practitioner(may be disadvantage too)
> is that he can use the scientific methodology
> to take into confidence the patients
> this is why modern medicine grew in such
> a big pace through last 2 centuries
> more over the drugs and modalities of treatment
> even if it just has an effect only
> has undergone such democratic quantification and qualification
> (ofcourse there are malpractices)
> this is also utilised by the modern medicine practitioners
> to atract patients
> and such literatures are freely available to general public to question
>
> the modern medicine actually grew in this
> way by rationalising , standardising, and democratising
> such traditional knowledge and ofcourse also
> by new invetions too
>
> so if we say that integration is subjecting all such
> traditional therapeutic knowledge to above said process
> it might be true
>
> but the advantage of such integration is taken only by
> modern medicine practitioners
>
> the other system of medicine canot use this
> jst because they dont belive such procedures are scientific
> and for them the term scientificity means some thing else.
>
> i believe that the medical university
> has to work from a single definition of science
> it can include a ayurveda department or homeopathy department
> but they should have a absolute agreement
> on atleast what scientificity is
>
>
> santhosh
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
> Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48245/*http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE1YW1jcXJ2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3LWNhcnM->
> ------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up
> for your free account today<http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mail/winter07.html>
> >
>

-- 
Dr.Deepa Chandran,
Puthiyapurayil, Kadamberi,
Kanul (PO),
Kannur(Dt), Kerala.
9249423123,
0497-2781384.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Friends of KSSP" group.
To post to this group, send email to ksspexchange_at_googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ksspexchange-unsubscribe_at_googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ksspexchange?hl=ml
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---