Following on the incredible success of the first installment of our "Medical Monitor" I am proud to introduce to you all our latest foray into combating a controversial issue:
"Does Only Nature Heal?"
Sit back, read this issue, and answer the survey we have created on the right-hand side. Your comments and insights on the matter will be immensely appreciated.
The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease: Voltaire
Voltaire above attempts to marginalize the medical practice through his disdainful statement about the art of medicine. Propounding upon his era’s inability to rid him of his chronic dyspepsia, his bronchitis, and his deafness, he may have made the statement above to aggrandize the medical fraternity that had failed to cure him at the time. Nevertheless, many drug trials have revealed how placebos in single-blind and double-blind studies led to better outcomes than the drugs themselves; perhaps, it was the positive attitude embraced by the participants in the efficacy of their “drugs” that allowed nature to follow its course quicker and cure these people. Alternatively, a lack of understanding of the mechanisms behind a disease in Voltaire’s time often led doctors to administer dubious procedures on patients that had wildly varied levels of success. It may be that Voltaire’s statement took this into account and this statement may very well have been true in Voltaire’s time. Finally, many would argue that alternative medicine like naturopathy rely on mechanisms on “self-healing’ and seem to propagate the Voltaire’s message above.
However, the above statement could also be thought of as a dig at everything modern medicine stands for. In a world where medical procedures are tightly regulated by insurance providers and by adherents of “Evidence Based Medicine (EBM)” and “Logical Positivism” and only permitted to occur if they bring tangible benefits to a patient’s condition. Furthermore, if a doctor leaves nature to cure a disease, they would arguably be violating the ethical pillar of non-maleficence (do no bad) and beneficence (only do good) through their inaction in preventing a disease’s spread through the patient’s vital organ systems. Finally, Voltaire’s saying contradicts the upwards trend in human longevity from 41 years in 1700 to 72.6 years today. If nature does indeed cure a disease, then has nature become more effective now? Climate-change advocates would beg to differ!
In conclusion, Voltaire’s statement could be considered a valid commentary on the medicine of his time where limited understanding of the human body hampered much of illness treatment. However, the rapid strides made in medicine today have brought to us treatments like “Antibiotic Cycles,” “Monoclonal Antibody Therapy,” and “Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)” that bring about tangible improvements in patient health and patient life expectancies far beyond what would have been possible with no treatment. As a result, Voltaire’s statement today does not hold up in any manner or form with conventional medicine.
Comments