Several years ago, a prominent magazine published an article that discussed the problems doctors and researchers face in understanding, diagnosing, and treating illness. The changes in scientific beliefs as increasing knowledge constantly shifts the landscape, the conflicting motives of those involved, whether profit or ego, and the limitations of what we can and do know all conspire to make it near impossible to deal with complex medical conditions.
Could any condition pose those dilemmas more profoundly than Multiple (as in “many”) Sclerosis (as in “crazy ways this heinous disease behaves and responds to treatment”)?
I think not.
The article in question elicited the following letter to the editor of said magazine. This response has affected and in some ways affirmed the way I look at the treatment of my illness.
SIR – For three decades I studied biomedical science. Your article summarized well the basis for my decision years ago never to see a doctor, except for emergencies. Given the option of relying for my well-being either on hundreds of thousands of years of objective, biological evolution contained in an organism that is self-maintaining and healing (me), or on advice and treatment from a physician relying on knowledge that, for whatever reason, is probably biased, false and misleading, I choose the former.
It’s a safer bet…
The author, a former university professor whose name I’ve left out and from whom I confess to have borrowed this excerpt without permission, describes in far more eloquent terms than I ever could some of the reasons I’m wary of most modern healthcare and pharmaceutical approaches to the treatment of illness, most specifically of MS. (He neglects one thing I would add: faith in a wise, loving God.)
Make your bets…