Live
- Abduction of Sita led to Ramayana: Mohan Bhagwat says RG Kar rape case shameful
- Lord Malayappa rides mammoth chariot
- Goddess gives darshan as Mahishasura Mardini
- Robin Uthappa to lead India in Hong Kong Cricket Sixes 2024
- RG Kar protest: Hunger strike by junior doctors enters day 8
- EG district declared open defecation-free
- Hyundai Motor India to invest Rs 32,000 cr in India, predicts strong EV market growth
- Dy CM orders probe into allegations against DFO
- Finally, Samrat Choudhary to shift to Deputy CM's residence today
- VSP condition has become worse: Amarnath
Medical Pluralism – Gift of Patriotism but Bane to Society
Highlights
Pluralism is the nucleus of our country. India is blessed with diverse culture, religion, ethnicity, language, spiritual practices & faith system and food habits. Pluralism is the life line of India. Therefore we need to respect, accommodate and recognize pluralism and only then fair representation for views of all sections of society possible and so their concerns can be addressed.
Pluralism is the nucleus of our country. India is blessed with diverse culture, religion, ethnicity, language, spiritual practices & faith system and food habits. Pluralism is the life line of India. Therefore we need to respect, accommodate and recognize pluralism and only then fair representation for views of all sections of society possible and so their concerns can be addressed.
.jpg)
But the big question is whether pluralism poses any challenge to our growth and development? In Governance, as per the historic records, the political pluralism has caused more confusion and holocaust to our country than any good.
The best example we wish to refer to the above are the governance of UPA 1 and UPA 2 where, the then Prime Minister himself has acknowledged ‘coalition compulsion’ and ‘coalition dharma’ as reason for many problems.
The pluralism creates multitude of interest, views and voices and as a result of that consensus cannot be achieved. The bizarre outcome and complete washout of last session of parliament itself testify only the above possibility.
The point is that although pluralism is constitutional and constitutionally ‘right’, but it does affect the governance adversely.
It means, in certain areas, considering the larger interest of the society and country, the role of pluralism has to be reduced and minimized.
In democracy, people have shown such wisdom & maturity in minimizing the role of political pluralism in Governance and that is the reason why, today Modiji is heading a majority Government at the centre.
In judiciary, education, health & family welfare and in governance, pluralism is not desired and instead, interest of the nation should over weigh the political decisions. The global harmonization should be the guiding principle of governance and not pluralism.
In the name of respecting pluralism, if we allow medical pluralism to thrive, the health care system of our nation would suffer adversely and so are our people.
For treating diseases, how can we allow different philosophy and faith based systems under AYUSH and the scientifically proven & validated allopathic system of medicine to exist simultaneously?
Treatment of diseases definitely requires proven drugs and globally approved and accepted medical practices. Such treatment is possible only by allopathic system.
For maintaining health and wellness, the pluralistic practices according to different regions can be allowed and which is the legitimate right of people.
When large sections of north Indians eat roti/bread and cheese, south Indians eat idly/dosa with sambar and such pluralism in food choice is strictly habitual. Such pluralism does no harm to our society.
But if allow different paramedical practices under AYUSH as medical science and allow such practices to treat diseases as a mark of tribute to ‘medical pluralism’, will such approach offer any answer to our disease burden?
In restaurants, we can have choice of what food we like to eat. In the same way, treating diseases, can we offer different systems of medicine (AYUSH) and its products as personal choice? Then what would be the consequence? What would be our epidemiological understanding of the diseases in our country?
If we allow such broad choices as a respect for medical pluralism, is it not the responsibility of the Government to establish the efficacy, validity and science of such medical pluralism? Without having such scientific proof and evidence, allowing such faith based practices under medical pluralism to thrive; won’t it affect our country adversely?
In treating diseases and offering medical care, we should never allow medical pluralism. Let us harmonize our medical practices and policies in addressing medical care and treatment, in line with the approaches of advanced countries like US, UK, France etc.
Let allopathic system be the first, best and the only system of medicine for the treatment of diseases and offering medical care.
For health, wellness, paramedical care, home health management and post medical care, let us promote AYUSH pluralism. For wellness and paramedical care, people can have the freedom and right to chose what they want. Let us differentiate wellness based paramedical AYUSH system and scientifically proven and validated allopathic system of medicine.
Due to political pluralism, the present Government has suffered the worst in the last parliament session with reference to passing land acquisition bill, GST etc., despite having absolute majority in parliament.
Due to the legal sanctity enjoyed by AYUSH under medical pluralism, our country suffers the worst from cross pathy and quackery. Rural people are the easy victim to such cross pathy.
The selectively high prevalence of various infectious diseases in rural India is a clear indication of lack of proven medical system available in rural India. Quackery and cross pathy only worsening the problem and they cannot solve our health problems. Therefore legalizing cross pathy will do no good to our country.
We need to understand the truth behind why allopathic doctors are not willing to serve rural India. Lack of infrastructure and unattractive remuneration only deter the allopathic doctors not to prefer rural service. Government can easily address this problem without incurring any additional financial burden.
Instead of appointing AYUSH (ISM) practitioners in PHC’s and rural dispensaries, Government can hereafter appoint only allopathic doctors. To make their remuneration attractive, Government can divert the revenue incurred for paying salary towards ISM practitioners to allopathic doctors in rural service. Once their reward is doubled, naturally allopathic doctors would prefer rural service as their first choice.
Instead of appointing ISM practitioners in PHC’s and rural dispensaries, the ISM practitioners can be appointed in wellness centres that can be created by AYUSH Ministry. In these wellness centres, the ISM practitioners can offer their service at cost and can earn from their service.
Government also must encourage multi-specialty hospitals to create separate department called ‘Wellness Clinics’ and must accommodate ISM practitioners to provide their paramedical services to the patients as post medical care.
For life style associated health problems and for small number of non communicable diseases, the support role of ISM can be advised to the patients. Like the role of physiotherapist or dietician, the role of ISM practitioners can be augmented and sufficient opportunity for them also can be created.
By doing the above, both AYUSH and allopathic system will find its role relevant, meaningful and valuable. This is how we must respect and support AYUSH pluralism.
We should not mix allopathic science and AYUSH. Similarly the AYUSH private practitioners should not be given the right and privilege to practice allopathic drugs. Such an effort not only would legalize cross pathy & quackery, but also open door for many ISM practitioners to trespass their boundary and that would harm our health care system in rural India.
Sir, more than any other political party or Government, the present Government can understand the problem of political pluralism. The present Government is victim of political pluralism (multiple political parties) despite having absolute majority in Parliament.
Therefore the present government must understand the problem of ‘medical pluralism’ to our society, especially to people in rural India.
We should promote ISM for wellness and not for treating or curing diseases. Let us not promote pseudo science by granting permission to ISM private practitioners to practice allopathic drugs. Many people are getting the actual medical benefit from allopathic drugs but are made to believe that such benefit has come from AYUSH products.
We need science from AYUSH and not AYUSH be promoted as pseudo science.
Dr S Ranganathan
Next Story
ADVERTISEMENT
