Pharma- Malaise may get treatment: unique IDs of drugs soon to check fakes


Usually every problem related to health is called medical malaise, but that is a misnomer.  In fact health care comprises tens of different industries. Collective malaise of all these is conveniently projected as medical malaise, related to doctors. Rest remain invisible, earn money and  doctors are blamed. As doctor is a common universal link that is visible with patient. By an average application of wisdom, it is easy to blame doctors for everything,    that goes wrong with patient.

One such problem is presence of fake medicines.  If patient gets fake or low quality medicines and does not get well or gets side effects, doctor will face harassment. Whereas people involved and industry will be sitting pretty and  make money.

Therefore any such step  to correct Pharma –malaise should be a welcome step for  doctors. Although it will be a complex issue, because of complexity involved in implementation and execution of policies. But recognition and beginning to think of the problem is also an important step.

May be a time to treat Pharma- malaise.

India’s highest advisory body on drugs will discuss a mechanism to end the menace of counterfeit medicines at a meeting on 16 May.

According to the proposal to be discussed at the Drug Technical Advisory Board meeting, consumers will be able to check whether the medicines that they have purchased are genuine by texting a unique code to be printed on the medicine’s package to a number, said two people aware of the matter, both of whom requested anonymity.

The government plans to initially build a data bank of 300 medicine brands and their consumption pattern in various parts of the country.

Drug companies will then be asked to print a unique 14-digit alphanumeric code on the package of the drug. Consumers buying the medicine can then inquire via a text message whether the code—and therefore the medicine—is genuine or not.

Pharma firms may be asked to print a unique 14-digit code on drugs’ packaging; consumers can send a text message to find out if the code is genuine or not

A government survey conducted between 2014 and 2016 had found 3.16% of drug samples it tested to be sub-standard, while 0.02% were spurious

A WHO report in 2017 revealed approximately 10.5% of medicines in low- and middle-income countries including India are sub-standard or fake

 

The unique identification code will help consumers avoid buying fake products. The idea is that within seconds, the person should receive a reply indicating whether the drug is legitimate.

 

Fake medicines lead to drug resistance in humans and cause a significant number of deaths, according to public health experts. A government survey

conducted between 2014 and 2016 to check the proportion of substandard drugs in India had found 3.16% of the samples it tested to be substandard, while 0.02% were spurious.

Significantly, even samples from big drug makers were found to be not of standard quality during the survey carried out through the National Institute of Biologicals, according to regulator Central Drugs Standard Control Organization.

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals under regulatory scrutiny for alleged misconduct


Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd is under regulatory scrutiny for alleged misconduct in carrying out clinical trials recently in Jaipur.

The Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) has allegedly found that fake identities were used in clinical trials, as well as evidence of substantial departures from good clinical practice (GCP), in what could be the latest blow for India’s drug-testing industry, which has run into a series of problems with international regulators in recent years.

The alleged misconduct on the part of the company has triggered a tough response from India’s apex drug regulatory authority, which has sent a show cause notice to the company for failing to ensure that clinical trial was conducted in accordance with the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Rules 1945, GCP guidelines. The regulatory body has sought an explanation about the alleged irregularities within 10 days. Glenmark has, however, denied any wrongdoing.

The company came under the scanner following reports that several people were deceived into participating in an ongoing trial for pain medication to treat osteoarthritis at a  Multispeciality Hospital in Jaipur. A total of 38 kits were supplied by the company, of which only three were issued to the enrolled patients on April 6. Glenmark has suspended the trials.

CDSCO, which had initiated the inquiry and sent a team from its head office on 22 April to the site, found inadequate and inconsistent patient identification. According to the investigations, the enrolment of subjects was “falsified” and “cannot be relied upon”.

The team also found that out of three patients mentioned in the informed consent form (ICF), two were related to each other and did not visit the hospital in the last six months.

 

Expensive Medical college education (NEET) & poor health system: systematic root rot


Imagine, an opportunity is available to a patient, to decide the doctor as based on his route or marks for entry into medical college. Whether patient will like to get treated by a doctor, who   secured 20% marks, 30 % marks or 60% marks or 80% marks for medical college.  Even   an illiterate person can answer that well. But strangely for selection of doctors, rules were framed so as to dilute the merit to the minimum possible. So that a candidate who scores 20 -25 % marks also becomes eligible to become a doctor. What is the need to dilute and shortlist around half a million for few thousand seats. Answer to that is simple.  To select and find only those students from millions, who can pay millions to become doctors.  

      Although the whole effort and huge expenditure to become doctors in this way may be really worthless in today’s scenario, considering the difficult times and vulnerability of medical profession. By allowing a intentional dilution of quality  can be advantageous only to  few and detrimental to others.

  • Beneficiaries are rich candidates, medical colleges who collecting fee and may be public who will get numbers of doctors. Surplus of doctors is thought to be an advantage to society. But here quality is least of the consideration.
  • Disadvantage to students, who are meritorious but can’t pay, and possibly society in long run, who is deprived of good quality doctors.

 

Dilution of Merit :

  • Before NEET was made mandatory in 2016, the cut-offs for admission were 50% marks for the general category, and 40% for the reserved categories. From the 2016 admission year, these were changed to 50th and 40th percentile, respectively, opening the doors to candidates with just 18-20% marks in the NEET aggregate. Thereby candidates securing 5% marks (physics) and 20% in  biology are also eligible to be doctors (times of India).
  • The student with the highest NEET marks among those admitted into the private university had lower marks than the last student admitted to the open category in each of the government colleges.
  • In the private university, the fees for the MBBS course are Rs 64 lakh compared to just Rs 4 lakh in the government colleges.
  • when NEET was introduced, many private colleges increased their tuition fees many fold.  This  ensured that meritorious students without money would never get admission. The tuition fee is fixed arbitrarily to cater to only rich or super rich students. (times of India)         System of medical business and  medical education is created based on willful dilution of merit.   Quite a few successful candidates may eventually feel that the money spent and the hard work may not be worth it especially those candidates who may have invested in heavy fees or bought a seat in medical colleges with hefty amount. Some of them, who invested millions for becoming doctors, will be even probably unable to recover their investments. The students with strong financial backgrounds may be more benefited as they can become health  investors or health managers. But for others, it could be a dream turning into a nightmare.

    If the society continues to accept such below par practices, it has to introspect, whether it actually deserves to get good doctors. Paying the irrational fee of medical colleges may be unwise idea for the candidates, who are not from strong financial backgrounds. But at the same time unfortunately, it may be a compulsion and entrapment for students, who have entered the profession and there is no way  forward.  So children have to be careful while choosing medical careers from the beginning.

    A famous axiom “as you sow so shall you reap” has an application to health system in this scenario, so people should not rue scarcity of good doctors.  

Supreme Court judgement on End of Life & Living Will: Partaking moral and ethical dilemma of doctors and relatives


A welcome, long awaited judgement, where law has come to help the doctors and relatives of terminally ill patients. Doctors are often accused of over treatment, without realizing that law does not permit them the termination of treatment as desired by patients or relatives. commonly  doctors come to face these difficult situations, where moral and ethical dilemma  is larger than treatment itself.

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that individuals have a right to die with dignity, in a verdict that permits the removal of life-support systems for the terminally ill or those in incurable comas.

The court also permitted individuals to decide against artificial life support, should the need arise, by creating a “living will”.

 Living will

A ‘living will’ is a concept where a patient can give consent that allows withdrawal of life support systems if the individual is reduced to a permanent vegetative state with no real chance of survival.

It is a type of advance directive that may be used by a person before incapacitation to outline a full range of treatment preferences or, most often, to reject treatment. A living can detail a person’s preferences for tube-feeding, artificial hydration, and pain medication when an individual cannot communicate his/her choices.

In its verdict on Friday, SC has attached strict conditions for executing “a living will that was made by a person in his normal state of health and mind”.

The US, UK, Germany and Netherlands have advance medical directive laws that allow people to create a ‘living will’.

 Active and passive euthanasia

Active euthanasia, the intentional act of causing the death of a patient in great suffering, is illegal in India. It entails deliberately causing the patient’s death through injections or overdose.

But passive euthanasia, the withdrawal of medical treatment with the deliberate intention to hasten a terminally ill patient’s death was allowed by the Supreme Court in Friday’s landmark verdict.

The court also laid down guidelines on who would execute the will and how a nod for passive euthanasia would be granted by a medical board set up to determine and carry out any “advance directive”.

In cases where there is no “advance directive”, the patient, family, friends and legal guardians can’t take the decision on their own, but can approach a high court for stopping treatment .

 Terminally Ill Patients (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill

In 2012, the union health ministry posted a draft of the Terminally Ill Patients (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill on its website and invited public reactions.

The Bill is popularly referred to as the Passive Euthanasia Bill although its draft did not use the emotive word “euthanasia” to skirt complications around the term, a health ministry official told HT in 2016. It says every advance medical directive (also called ‘living will’) or medical power of attorney executed by a person shall be taken into consideration in matter of withholding or withdrawing medical treatment but it shall not be binding on any medical practitioner.

 Misuse of law

A major concern is the misuse of the law. If it is legal to passively allow or hasten death, what’s to say an aged parent won’t be hastened in favor of an inheritance, or a spouse have treatment withdrawn for the sake of a hefty insurance payout? That is why there are legal provisions  in the judgement  by Supreme court, to safe guard the patients.

The bench also stipulated strict conditions for the execution of the living will, which includes the setting up of two medical boards and certification by the judicial magistrate. It also directed high courts to maintain a record of all living will documents prepared within the state.

 Euthanasia in other countries

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have been legal in The Netherlands and Belgium since 2001 and 2002. In the US, Switzerland and Germany, euthanasia is illegal but physician-assisted suicide is legal. Euthanasia remains illegal in the UK, France, Canada and Australia.

Source- Hindustan times

NMC Bill and bridge course, a suggestion: How to create doctors for area of need, if required?


Crosspathy is dangerous to human race and potential global catastrophe because of antibiotic resistence.  All  allopathic medicines are hazardous chemicals in inexperienced hands. Incorrect and massive use of antibiotics will  cause antibiotic resistance, which has global ramifications. From this angle, it is a retrograde step. When all over the world, need is being felt that there has to be better control of antibiotic prescription.  We are entering an era, where antibiotics are getting useless and more so because of rampant misuse of antibiotics.  Rather than exercising a better control, it will be a catastrophic to human race world over by causing antibiotic resistance.

Will  thousands of alternate medicine graduate will dispense all antibiotics,  anticancer , anti diabetic , cardiac medications? It is hard to think about hundreds of potentially dangerous medicines being given without structured training and  proper exams in this system of crosspathy.

Following steps should be taken before implementation:

 

Main Aim; to create doctors  for area of need. (AON doctor)

  1. To identify areas of need; most basic step is to identify the areas of need, where doctors are not available. Government should identify area of need and implement the scheme in selected areas, and with  selected simple drugs. Such areas should be such that which do not have medical facilities or lack doctors. Areas which already have doctors will not accept the diluted  or suboptimal care, for example urban population.
  2. Limited seats-To identify the number required; let us say start with pilot project of  selecting 500 to1000 such doctors. All the lakhs of alternate doctors  can not be allowed to prescribe allopathic medicines. It will put the community at risk.

 

  1. To identify the skills required for the area; for example emergency, for paediatrics or obstretics and gynaecology, trauma.
  2. Willingness to work in area of need- to identify the doctors: have a written competition from all candidates who apply for bridge course. To identify doctors who have given willingness to work in these areas of need. People who perform well should be taken for bridge course  only on limited seats. Bridge course should not ne free for all.
  3. To develop a structured bridge course, which should be around one year after comparing the course of MBBS and the course done by the candidate.
  4. Admission and exit in the bridge course should be through exam and limited seats.
  5. Bridge course and allopathic medicines should not be made free for all, that any body can dispense it. We can get benefit only if is specific to needs of people. If everyone is allowed to practice allopathy in all locality, it will be a global hazard besides our community as well.
  6. These trained doctors will have an undertaking to serve in area of need only. For a period at least 10 to 20 years.
  7. Number should be limited but training should be good.
  8. A special course needs to be designed separately for one year, so that people in area of need do not get substandard care

Without proper planning and implementation and identification of area of need, this bridge course will not benefit anyone, rather it can be disastrous.

 

 

NMC bill, Medical crosspathy and antibiotic resistance : recipe for potential global catastrophe


   Genesis of a system, where every body will suffer and no one is beneficiary.  There has been lot of debates going on  about the Government willingness to allow crosspathy. There has been indications in newspapers about possibility of government  allowing Ayurvedic,  homeopathic and Unani medicine graduates and others  to practice modern allopathic medicines.  Most importantly which medications will be allowed to be practiced? Will  thousands of alternate medicine graduate will dispense all antibiotics,  anticancer , anti diabetic , cardiac medications. It is hard to think about hundreds of potentially dangerous medicines being given without structured training and  proper exams in this system of crosspathy. No one is bothered about the fact that every allopathic medicine is a potential hazardous chemical, if not used properly.

              It will be done through some bridge course. The structure and effectiveness of the said course is yet to be knowm. Whether it will be of 3 days or 3 months?  Who will be able to do it ? whether some level of efficiency  will be expected or every body will be allowed to just dispense allopathic medicine. What ever some one may argue, bridge courses can not be substitute to proper training for these complex diseases and drugs. Following may be side effects of dilution  of medical education and crosspathy:

  1. Alternative or ayurvedic medicine systems themselves: detrimental to these systems themselves because of many reasons. If  the  ayurvedic doctors   start allopathic practice, how we expect ayurvedic stream to florish and respected. It will be diluted to no end. After few years no one will be left will ayurvedic practice.  In my opinion it is a death sentence to ayurvedic system.

       Secondly,  the decision is not respectful to ayurvedic stream itself. Stream of                Ayurveda will suffer.

  1.  Public and patients: crosspathy clearly means a diluted and suboptimal medical services. Government may create few area of need and implement the scheme in selected areas, and selected simple drugs.
  2. Allopathy will be clearly a sufferer. If every body can practice allopathic medicine, why one should go for rigorous training. It will discourage the people who have opted and got admission to allopathic courses. They are paying and slogging hard for their training.
  3.  Dangerous to human race and potential global catastrophe:  All  allopathic medicines are hazardous chemicals in inexperienced hands. But  incorrect and massive use of antibiotics will  cause antibiotic resistance, which has global ramifications. From this angle, it is a retrograde step. When  all over the world,  need is being  felt that there has to be better control of antibiotic prescription.  We are entering an era, where antibiotics are getting useless and more so because of rampant misuse of antibiotics.  Rather than exercising a better control, it can be a catastrophic to human race world over by causing antibiotic resistance.
  4. have our public and people given consent for such diluted medical  excellence and services? It is  public  ultimately who  accepts  a decision for suboptimal medical service. Government may create few area of need and implement the scheme in selected areas, and selected simple drugs. But that also has not been planned.

 

Hammurabi’s medical regulation code (1750 BC): Noble profession has always been regulated cruelly ?


Children are always taught in school that medical profession is a noble one. But they are never told, about the cruelty this profession has faced since ancient times. the ancient rulers always blamed the physician for the poor patient outcome and also made regulations to regulate medical profession, and this was when the medical science was not even developed enough to deal with most diseases.

A great military commander, Hammurabi consolidated small states in the vicinity after ascending to the throne on the death of his father. Sometime around 1780-50 B.C., the Babylonian king Hammurabi promulgated the now famous  Code of Hammurabi, covering both civil and criminal law.

Hammurabi’s Code of Laws was considered the first documented Code ever used by human civilization in Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization, the land of Assyro-Babylonian culture. This era first saw the interface between medicine and law in the dawn of civilization.

Among the 282 laws in Hammurabi’s Code, nine (215-223) pertain to medical practice:

 

HAMMURABI’S CODE OF LAWS :

  1. If a physician performs eye surgery and saves the eye, he shall receive ten shekels in money.
  2. If the patient be a freed man, he receives five shekels.
  3. If he be the slave of some one, his owner shall give the physician two shekels.
  4. If a physician performs an operation and kills someone or cuts out his eye, the doctor’s hands shall be cut off.
  5. If a physician performs an operation on the slave of a freed man and kills him, the doctor shall replace the slave with another slave.
  6. If he had opened a tumor with the operating knife, and put out his eye, he shall pay half his value.
  7. If a physician heal the broken bone or diseased soft part of a man, the patient shall pay the physician five shekels in money.
  8. If he were a freed man he shall pay three shekels.
  9. If he were a slave his owner shall pay the physician two shekels.

 

As we can see, it did  not take into account  the earlier works or contribution of doctors to society. It also did not take into account the  uncertainty of medical science and uncertainties of the outcome.  The regulatory system was based on  principle of revenge and punishments.

Deselection of providers: Hammurabi’s Codex specified the harshest form of deselection possible. If the physician erred through omission or commission, his fingers or hands were cut off, immediately stopping his practice. This severe punishment for negligence supposedly weeded out physicians incapable of delivering adequate care. In addition, it prevented these physicians from practicing in a different locality. Obviously, such a penalty discouraged a physician surplus.

Since ancient civilization, medical regulation has been always cruel to doctors.   Hammurabi at the start of civilization believed that doctors needed to be punished in case there was poor prognosis. He failed to understand the complexity of human body and the limitations of medical profession.

Today our system  is becoming somewhat  similar, to those ancient regulations in  terms of punishment and revenge. Differential payment system for health care also resembles the Code of Hammurabi in some respects.And this is despite the fact that now we are very well conversant with the workings of the human body and despite cognizance of the poor prognosis in certain disease states.

In an effort to institute managed healthcare, our society is in a way re-entering the realm of an ancient medical care system. Certain aggrieved health care consumers may welcome a move toward harsh penalties in the name of justice and simply for revenge but we need to keep in mind the  poor outcomes in complex diseases, limitation of science and of course the idiosyncrasies of the human body.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

Code of Hammurabi. (2017, December 18). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:58, December 23, 2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Code_of_Hammurabi&oldid=816023447

 

 

Save the doctor to save yourself: An era when genesis of diseases is not punished, but treatment is.


            “Young girl killed by doctors at Fortis Gurugram” and “alive baby declared dead by doctors at Max Hospital Delhi”. These two news items  have recently jolted everyone in medical fraternity. Doctors have  yet  to come to terms with harsh reality  in order to   realize about the  harm   that can happen to themselves, when they just  say yes to treat the complex cases. A worst form of dengue already complicated, or a premature delivery at 22 weeks. I am sure doctors will know, how many patients and pregnancies have survived at this stage in the world, in both of these conditions.

     We have all kind of preventable diseases happening around us. Thousands of people suffering and many loose life, just because of worthless causes. Even healthy people are killed because of preventable calamities like open pot holes, floods, heat or preventable fires, accidents and so on. But strangely when disease happens and gets complicated in one patient, death due to these complications in the hospital is taken very severely. Although it may  have been  just untreatable at some point, but whole burden of death and punishments are  passed  over to doctors very conveniently.

   In both these complex cases, there are no clear cut guidelines by government. In whatever way doctor will act, he can be blamed easily on some pretext or another. By such yardsticks,  all complicated cases and subsequent  deaths happening in hospital settings can be termed as ‘ negligence’ by a fault finding retrospective approach. Now doctors have become scared  to treat complex cases.  

   It is sad to see that our leaders, media and all stakeholders have no knowledge of complex medical issues. I do not see any solution to these kind of exploitation and extortion of medics in near future.  But   are all complicated cases and deaths in hospital are Negligence?  This is going to be tough time for doctors but subsequently for patients.  These are worst days for doctors, where genesis of disease is overlooked and unnatural death of hundreds is not taken care of. But doctor who is working with intentions to treat the complex situation is being punished.  But society should be able to count its losses after few years, if such trend continues.  Good doctors will easily quit or shift to safe positions. Society has to save doctors, if it wants to save it’s people.

     

Medical Regulation and Medical Community of Ancient Rome


Medical community

Medical services of the late Roman Republic and early Roman Empire were mainly imports from the civilization of Ancient Greece, and then through Greeks enslaved during the Roman conquest of Greece. Greek knowledge imparted to Roman citizens visiting or being educated in Greece.  A perusal of the names of Roman physicians will show that the majority are wholly or partly Greek and that many of the physicians were of servile origin.

The servility stigma came from the accident of a more medically advanced society being conquered by a lesser. One of the cultural ironies of these circumstances is that free men sometimes found themselves in service to the enslaved professional or dignitary, or the power of the state was entrusted to foreigners who had been conquered in battle and were technically slaves. In Greek society, physicians tended to be regarded as noble.

Public medicine

The medical art in early Rome was the responsibility of the pater familias, or patriarch. The importation of the Aesculapium established medicine in the public domain. There is no record of fees being collected for a stay at one of them, at Rome or elsewhere.  individuals vowed to perform certain actions or contribute a certain amount if certain events happened, some of which were healings. Such a system amounts to gradated contributions by income, as the contributor could only vow what he could provide. The building of a temple and its facilities on the other hand was the responsibility of the magistrates. The funds came from the state treasury or from taxes.

Private medicine  A second signal act marked the start of sponsorship of private medicine by the state as well. In the year 219 BCE, a vulnerarius, or surgeon, Archagathus, visited Rome from the Peloponnesus and was asked to stay. The state conferred citizenship on him and purchased him a taberna, or shop, near the compitium Acilii (a crossroads), which became the first officina medica.

The doctor necessarily had many assistants. Some prepared and vended medicines and tended the herb garden. These numbers, of course, are at best proportional to the true populations, which were many times greater.

Roman doctors of any stature combed the population for persons in any social setting who had an interest in and ability for practicing medicine. On the one hand the doctor used their services unremittingly. On the other they were treated like members of the family; i.e., they came to stay with the doctor and when they left they were themselves doctors. The best doctors were the former apprentices of the Aesculapia, who, in effect, served residencies there.

 

The practice of medicine

The physician

The next step was to secure the cura of a medicus. If the patient was too sick to move one sent for a clinicus, who went to the clinum or couch of the patient.

That the poor paid a minimal fee for the visit of a medicus is indicated by a wisecrack in Plautus. It was less than a nummus. Many anecdotes exist of doctors negotiating fees with wealthy patients and refusing to prescribe a remedy if agreement was not reached. The fees charged were on a sliding scale according to assets. The physicians of the rich were themselves rich. For example, Antonius Musa treated Augustus’ nervous symptoms with cold baths and drugs. He was not only set free but he became Augustus’ physician. He received a salary of 300,000 sesterces. There is no evidence that he was other than a private physician; that is, he was not working for the Roman government.

Legal responsibility Doctors were generally exempt from prosecution for their mistakes. Some writers complain of legal murder. However, holding the powerful up to exorbitant fees ran the risk of retaliation. Pliny reports  that the emperor Claudius fined a physician, Alcon, 180 million sesterces and exiled him to Gaul. By chance a law existed at Rome, the Lex Aquilia  passed about 286 BCE, which allowed the owners of slaves and animals to seek remedies for damage to their property, either malicious or negligent. Litigants used this law to proceed against the negligence of medici, such as the performance of an operation on a slave by an untrained surgeon resulting in death or other damage.

Social position While encouraging and supporting the public and private practice of medicine, the Roman government tended to suppress organizations of medici in society. The constitution provided for the formation of occupational collegia, or guilds. The consuls and the emperors treated these ambivalently. Sometimes they were permitted; more often they were made illegal and were suppressed. The medici formed collegia, which had their own centers, the Scholae Medicorum, but they never amounted to a significant social force. They were regarded as subversive along with all the other collegia.Doctors were nevertheless influential. They liked to write. Compared to the number of books written, not many have survived; for example, Tiberius Claudius Menecrates composed 150 medical works, of which only a few fragments remain. Some that did remain almost in entirety are the works of Galen, Celsus, Hippocrates and the herbal expert, Pedanius Dioscorides who wrote the 5-volume De Materia Medica.

Military medical corps

Republican

 The state of the military medical corps before Augustus is unclear. Corpsmen certainly existed at least for the administration of first aid and were enlisted soldiers rather than civilians. The commander of the legion was held responsible for removing the wounded from the field and insuring that they got sufficient care and time to recover. He could quarter troops in private domiciles if he thought necessary.

Imperial  

The army of the early empire was sharply and qualitatively different. If military careers were now possible, so were careers for military specialists, such as medici. Under Augustus for the first time occupational names of officers and functions began to appear in inscriptions. The term medici ordinarii in the inscriptions must refer to the lowest ranking military physicians. No doctor was in any sense “ordinary”. They were to be feared and respected. During his reign, Augustus finally conferred the dignitas equestris, or social rank of knight, on all physicians, public or private. They were then full citizens and could wear the rings of knights. In the army there was at least one other rank of physician, the medicus duplicarius, “medic at double pay”, and, as the legion had milites sesquiplicarii, “soldiers at 1.5 pay”, perhaps the medics had that pay grade as well.

Practice

Medical corps in battle worked on the battlefield bandaging soldiers. From the aid station the wounded went by horse-drawn ambulance to other locations, ultimately to the camp hospitals in the area. There they were seen by the medici vulnerarii, or surgeons, the main type of military doctor. They were given a bed in the hospital if they needed it and one was available. The larger hospitals could administer 400-500 beds.A base hospital was quadrangular with barracks-like wards surrounding a central courtyard. On the outside of the quadrangle were private rooms for the patients. Although unacquainted with bacteria, Roman medical doctors knew about contagion and did their best to prevent it. Rooms were isolated, running water carried the waste away, and the drinking and washing water was tapped up the slope from the latrines.Within the hospital were operating rooms, kitchens, baths, a dispensary, latrines, a mortuary and herb gardens, as doctors relied heavily on herbs for drugs.. They operated or otherwise treated with scalpels, hooks, levers, drills, probes, forceps, catheters and arrow-extractors on patients anesthetized with morphine. Instruments were boiled before use. Wounds were washed in vinegar and stitched. Broken bones were placed in traction. There is, however, evidence of wider concerns. A vaginal speculum suggests gynecology was practiced, and an anal speculum implies knowledge that the size and condition of internal organs accessible through the orifices was an indication of health. They could extract eye cataracts with a special needle. Operating room amphitheaters indicate that medical education was ongoing. Many have proposed that the knowledge and practices of the medici were not exceeded until the 20th century CE.

Regulation of medicine

By the late empire the state had taken more of a hand in regulating medicine. The law codes of the 4th century CE, such as the Codex Theodosianus, paint a picture of a medical system enforced by the laws and the state apparatus. At the top was the equivalent of a surgeon general of the empire. He was by law a noble, a dux (duke) or a vicarius (vicar) of the emperor. He held the title of comes archiatorum, “count of the chief healers.” The Greek word iatros, “healer”, was higher-status than the Latin medicus.Under the comes were a number of officials called the archiatri, or more popularly the protomedicisupra medicosdomini medicorum or superpositi medicorum. They were paid by the state. It was their function to supervise all the medici in their districts; i.e., they were the chief medical examiners. Their families were exempt from taxes. They could not be prosecuted nor could troops be quartered in their homes.The archiatri were divided into two groups:

Archiatri sancti palatii, who were palace physicians

Archiatri populares. They were required to provide for the poor; presumably, the more prosperous still provided for themselves.

The archiatri settled all medical disputes. Rome had 14 of them; the number in other communities varied from 5 to 10 depending on the population.

 

 

 

Medical college education: NEET cut off variation: any moral questions by society, celebrities and media?


Going by selection of candidates as doctors, If given a choice, by whom  a patient will like to get treated? A candidate who scored 20 % marks or a person getting 60% or 80%  marks.   NEET eligibility getting lower and  a  candidate getting around 20 % of marks  may be able to secure a degree to treat patients.  What will be the deciding factor? The criteria as to why a person with 60%  marks will  not be given a seat and with 20% marks will be able to secure. It will depend upon, whether  a student  is able to pay the exorbitant fee or not. Present system and mechanism of admission permit and accept such huge  variation! That strange equation is acceptable in lieu of money paid!

In this whole process, who will be the sufferer?

Is it only the  meritorious  and honest candidate. children who has worked hard are going to lose faith in system, besides irreversible damage to career.

– the people and society, who wish for best doctors.

– in general, honesty and hard work and merit is a causality.

– But in the long run candidate, who purchase degrees with money  may also suffer. As in the times of consumerism and risk associated with less desirable medical services. Candidates may themselves be at risk. Rich candidates may be capable of becoming health investors and health managers by money power, so as to evade  the increasing litigation. But  those from average family backgrounds ,who practice as doctors, will  be at some risk in today’s  difficult environment   for doctors.

 Exit  exams from these paid colleges  need to be better regulated. These colleges are minting money for distributing degrees. Likely is that, ultimately  most of the  students will pass and try to recover  their investments.

Infrastructure ,  number of teachers and investment on training is unlikely to be uniform in such colleges.   It is a matter of speculation, how much facilities a student gets, specially at a time uncertainty  about uniformity of medical education is a matter of great debate. It is also doubtful that money charged  from students as fee, is spent on medical education of the aspiring doctors.

      National exit exam may solve uniformity issues to some extent, but like NEET, its correct  implementation is a big   uncertainty itself.  Doctors have to listen comments about quality of doctors everyday. Rather than doctors themselves, it is the system to select them  needs improvement, which permit and accepts such huge variation in marks and fee.  Someone will definitely ponder, why one should not get best available candidate as doctor?  

 

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑