Medicine and practice of medicine today, is standardized around allopathic (Western) medicine. All other systems are called “Alternate therapies”.  Allopathy has become some kind of standard (like the dollar) against which we evaluate other schools of medicine.  So most alternate medicines are compared with allopathy and found wanting.  This also masks the fact that allopathy has as many “ifs” and “buts” as any other school of medicine.

Most alternate therapies are non intrusive and the treatments advocated are symptomatic.  Homeopaths use drugs that create the range of symptoms to address the problem–using a diamond to cut a diamond.  Accupressure and Accupuncture aver that diseases occur because the patient is experiencing energy blocks and removal of these blocks by exerting pressure on specific points will result in relief from the problems.  Allopaths are reluctant to accept the efficacy of these systems on the ground that they do not go to the root of the problem and identify the cause of the symptoms. Moreover, the treatment for every patient (even though the possible cause of the problem could be the same) is different.  Alternate therapies call this “constituitional treatment”. They believe that the disease may be the same but each person is constituitionally different and hence requires to be treated with constitutionally suitable medications.

Patients consulting the allopath are sent running from pillar to post, undergoing a number of tests in an effort to prove that the symptom is the result of a particular suspected condition. Doctor’s hope that some kind of picture will emerge from the different tests and this will help in the diagnosis of the problem.  The Doctor then, proceeds to make a diagnosis on the basis of the tests and prescribe from a standard set of medications–irrespective of their consitituition.  If a particular patient experiences more side effects than his fellowsufferer, it is just too bad.  An alternate drug may be prescribed –from the group of similar medications–or the patient may be asked to take the effect with the side effect as normal.

A recent illness of a relative had me doing the rounds of allopaths and hospitals. The tests concluded that the person was suffering from severe oesteoporosis.  The drug prescribed was Idrofos 150. This medication was to be taken once a month with injunctions that the patient should not lie down and should walk around for at least an hour after taking the medication etc.  Unfortunately, the allopath prescribing the drug did so without reference to the age of the patient, the possible side effects etc.  The fact that the patient experienced dizziness, hallucinations, undefined anxiety etc was dismissed as not related to the drug and a part of a psychological process of aging.  However, research into the possible side effects of the drug on the Internet clearly showed that the drug had the potentiality of producing just the side effects that my relative was experiencing. When we returned to the allopath with the evidence of the research, he refused to discuss further on the ground that no patients had experienced similar side effects in his practice.  He referred us to a psychiatrist.

Our visit to the psychiatrist was equally disheartening. She refused to consider the possibilty that the hallucinations were drug induced.  She refused to even look into the possibilities. Strangely, the psychiatrist spoke to me and not to the patient and preferred to arrive at her conclusions from her discussion with me.  Then she drew a page towards herself and began prescribing a tranquillizer, a sedative and some vitamins. When I queried about side effects of the drugs, she dismissed my question with an airy “All medications have side effects. Why worry about them?”  I was not satisfied.  I thought side effects of drugs required some amount of worrying over. In fact, I felt the Doctor should worry about it.  I had been worried enough by the side effects of the drugs already consumed.

Needless to say, I decided that “alternate therapies” were less intrusive and proceeded to get my relative treated with one of the several branches of Indian medicine, that is similar to accupressure, called Varmam.  She is gradually coming out of the woods and the side effects of the medication consumed also seems to be reducing with the passage of time.

So, do you agree there are “ifs” and “buts” in allopathy? Do you agree that the ifs and buts need to be recognized before all alternate therapies  are dismissed as unproven science.  The standard of reference is not a perfect standard! It has its own grey areas.