Close X
Get more out of WDDTY.com
by joining the site for free
Free 17-point plan to great health
Twice weekly e-news bulletins
Access to our News, Forums and Blogs
Sign up for free and claim your
17-point plan to great health
Free 17-point plan to great health

Twice weekly e-news bulletins

Access to our News, Forums and Blogs
OR

If you want to read our in-depth research articles or
have our amazing magazine delivered to your home
each month, then you have to pay.


Click here if you're interested
Helping you make better health choices

In shops now or delivered to your home from only £3.50 an issue!

Subscribe!

The patient vanishes

CommunityBlogsBryan Hubbard2008MayThe patient vanishes

Search

About

Bryan Hubbard is Publisher and co-editor of WDDTY. He is a former Financial Times journalist. He is a Philosophy graduate of London University. Bryan is also the author of several books, including The Untrue Story of You and Secrets of the Drugs Industry.

Archive

2016

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

The patient vanishes

May 30th 2008, 15:29
52,008 views

One fundamental difference between alternative and conventional medicine is the way each treats the patient. To the alternative practitioner, every patient is different, and presents a unique array of symptoms; to the conventional doctor, the patient's case is one of many other similar ones.

To an extent, conventional medicine defines disease by its similarities, and so seeks to treat these, while alternative medicine looks more for the unique features of an illness, as this may provide the key to the problem.

These differences became stark at the beginning of the last century with the rise of the pharmaceutical industry, and its mass production of chemical agents. An industrial production line needs a mass market, which, in turn, requires common features.

To facilitate this, medicine adopted the raiments of science, and the double-blind, placebo study. To catch everyone within its net, the double-blind study succeeded merely in catching nobody in particular, and created a generalised hodge-podge of the typical - but non-existent - 'patient'.

It's little wonder that a senior GlaxoSmithKline executive has estimated that his company's drugs work in just 30 per cent of cases (and, in reality, probably even less).

Similarly, the double-blind uses the measurement of ratios and percentages. This is another trick in which the patient vanishes. Just one per cent of people died while taking the drug, the study might conclude, but that one per cent is, in fact, perhaps hundreds of people who died fully and completely. One hundred per cent, in fact.

These thoughts came to me this week after reading the latest Lancet journal, which quotes an extract from Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilych. It reads: "To Ivan Ilych only one question was important: was his case serious or not? But the doctor ignored that inappropriate question. From his point of view, it was not a question of Ivan Ilych's life or death, but one between a floating kidney and appendicitis."

Ivan - and his unique and individual concerns - had vanished.

Latest Tweet

About

Since 1989, WDDTY has provided thousands of resources on how to beat asthma, arthritis, depression and many other chronic conditions.

Start by looking in our fully searchable database, active and friendly community forums and the latest health news.

Positive SSL Wildcard

Facebook Twitter

Most Popular Health Website of the Year 2014

© 2010 - 2016 WDDTY Publishing Ltd.
All Rights Reserved