Debate

Today's doctors tend to put themselves on hight horses; why else would they behave so condescendingly towards their patients? It's really time for all "medical expertise" to step down from self-erected pedestals. A doctor's first duty is to stand up to them he serves.


Blind knowledge

Doctors in general go through a basic education for about 6 years, in addition there is a public service for about two years and also a specialist education for at least five years. Why then, from the perspective of a care recipient, do the majority of doctors appear as cold-blooded cynical bullies, totally lacking the basic prerequisites to understand a person's life situation? The answer probably lies in a variety of factors: The profession requires its man and woman respectively in terms of an unimaginable 'cramming' of scientific facts. Analysts and theorists are seemingly able to accumulate this amount of knowledge in their cluttered brains, but how do they manage social competence? The answer is that they are "socially illiterate".

Another important factor is that there is an overconfidence in science as a source of knowledge. The world is not exclusively logical, an intuitive region exists parallel to the theoretical realm. Doctors generally also regard the psychological field as a theoretical discipline, how can they with any credibility maintain a knowledge of the human being seen from a wider perspective? Without the ability to empathize, without the knowledge that man is a physical, mental as well as spiritual being and without the ability to reason on the basis of known facts; how can the doctor be able to solve the individual's problem? When the blind lead the blind, do not both fall into the pit?
 

Ancient diagnostics

The world no longer looks like it did a hundred years ago, when the number of known diseases was relatively few, now they can no longer be overlooked. But still, as a rule, the patient must meet a general practitioner who expects to make the correct diagnosis within fifteen to twenty minutes. The sampling is usually a sporadic procedure, which if done at all gives a general blood level that says nothing or anything at all. Now for the strangest of all; the doctors seem to consciously or unconsciously look for diseases that they do NOT suspect are present, they use the method of exclusion.

In other words, they do not seek confirmation of the disease they have as first choice, they instead try to exclude all other possible illnesses so that in the end there is only one alternative left. This approach would perhaps work in a laboratory setting, with test tubes and culture plates. But now it actually happens to be living people you are dealing with, has this little trifle not been recorded by medical science? As a patient in today's healthcare, you can't go around for endless samples, in a sick environment you get even sicker.

A couple of tips for the medical profession: Get straight to the point and seek confirmation of the most likely option. If this turns out to be wrong, examine the next most likely, and so on. Don't be so damn afraid to make a mistake, it's not about your sad reputation but about a person who urgently needs help. The patient usually knows what is wrong, so take the time to actually listen to what the person in question gives for information. Don't be so naively proud, but admit that you usually know much less about the patient than he knows about himself. Try to be helpful to the patient in his search!
 

What you can't see, don't exist...

Man is an incredibly complex being. Medical science has made some progress but it was only a little over a hundred years ago that bloodletting was pretty much the only treatment that doctors performed. Isn't it time to be a little humble before the mystery of man? In other words, doctors should realize that they cannot possibly know all human conditions and ailments. But in the case of tangible physical problems, one must, in the name of justice, give praise to medical science. Anything that can be patched and fixed (like an old busted chair), doctors can perform miracles with: Broken bones are screwed together, missing body parts are restored, teeth are implanted, skin is regenerated, you even manage to get nerve endings to heal together. But, if the problems are "invisible", then it's literally "the lid on".

Doctors, generally speaking, are totally incompetent when it comes to arriving at a probable diagnosis via logical deduction. That thing about cause and effect does not seem to be included in medical education at all. Taking an "anamnesis", eliciting through an interview the patient's experience of his situation, has shockingly little meaning for a doctor. According to what some doctors believe, a patient's account cannot possibly have any kind of probative value. On the contrary, the doctors seem to use the anamnesis only as a factor they can immediately exclude from the examination; the patients are considered idiots. Unfortunately, the doctors in question rarely have any hypotheses about what is missing from the patient. Hence the next phase; to try to rule out the patient's own delusions by taking samples.

The treatment

Huh, we've examined you, do you want treatment too? It may seem astonishing, but the majority of medical expertise in fact makes no distinction whatsoever between diagnosis and therapy. In other words, measures such as blood tests and X-rays are regarded as something concrete that helps the patient recover! The only thing that possibly works with these "forms of treatment" is the placebo effect, a phenomenon that all medically trained people normally spit and sneer at as something highly unscientific, almost ungodly. However, the diagnostics are lenghty and drawn out, you never even come close to taking action.

Those who trust the health care and the doctors' advice are usually in dangerous waters. To be able to cope with being sick, you really have to be healthy. You must have a plan for yourself, a strategy that leads to recovery. If you linger too long in the care system, you will remain there, no doctor with a "standard education" behind him dares to make a diagnosis, they do not want to be caught having made an incorrect assessment. So there will be more tests, examinations, x-rays, maybe referral to another instance, re-referral, new tests. If I hadn't sought out alternative medicine myself, it is perfectly clear what would have happened to me: I would have been dead, buried and forgotten!
 

The medical mafia

How many of you still believe that medical science and medical research work for the good of humanity? Doctors do not choose medicines based on what they themselves think is best for their patient, they go exclusively on recommendations from the Medicines Agency. And the Medicines Agency is of course entirely in the hands of the multinational pharmaceutical companies. But do for-profit medical companies kindly wait for diseases to break out so that they can research the area, come up with some clever countermeasure in the form of an effective and safe medicine? Well of course they do, you say.

The very best thing, from a pharmaceutical company's perspective, would be to be able to predict diseases, in order to have medical preparations ready when the need arises. Sometimes it is a bit difficult for the common man to distinguish between cause and effect. What comes first, is it the flu itself or is it reports that the flu has arrived? Did the flu become a little less widespread because people vaccinated themselves in time, or did the flu actually arise as a direct effect of the vaccination program. Don't you find it strange that we have the flu every eternal year?!


 

◄ Go back