"You seem excited on this
matter," L smiled, "I suppose for people practising in this field, it
has been well known for a long time?"
"Yes, but I must say I was touched -
may be in my ass - when the Duke in this case defends by saying that the
injections were meant for health protection rather than the treatment of any
specific disease."
“Well…?” my friend certainly knew I had not
finished.
“I mean, what’s the difference between
maintenance of health and treatment of disease – or, is there such a
difference? If you are entirely well and have your stool tested for colon
cancer as a screening, are we taking it as for health maintenance? In that
case, if we replace the test by colonoscopy – an invasive but more reliable
test to screen for cancer, wouldn’t it also be considered for health
maintenance? In that case, can we be excused from any responsibility if the
patient dies of the complication of the test, for example, rupture of the
bowel? In fact, all prophylactic treatment – warfarin for the prevention of
stroke, and anticonvulsant for epilepsy control – fall into the category of
health maintenance because their responsible target problem has not yet
surfaced!” I tried to catch my breath after finishing this mini-lecture.
“I know very well what you mean. Alas, just
like the relation between theology and philosophy, maintenance of health and
treatment of disease are the two poles of a magnet,” L nodded, “They seem to be
exactly opposite, but do really attract each other. More importantly, you can’t
cut the magnet and just take away one pole! But, maybe I can go one step
further: Do you remember the motto of the Hong Kong Medical Association?"
"Why!?" I exclaimed, "It is
To Safeguard the Health of the People (維護民康). Yes, medicine is all about health
protection. How could one ever says that a procedure that aims to maintain
health – however simple it is – is not a medical treatment?"
No comments:
Post a Comment