But their surface mentality, obsessed with vested interests tries to confuse the issues. They will themselves be held responsible to bring out a chaotic condition in the teaching of other systems of medicine in the institutions of modern medicine by men versed only in their lore. In fact, this bicameral system of education was actually tried at Lucknow in connection with the Ayurvedic teaching and had to be discarded as an impracticable method.
Further it has been definitely established that the introduction of Homoeopathy, only at a post – graduate level, is impracticable physiologically, psychologically and economically, and the Government of India has definitely, given up that idea by accepting the proposal of having a Homoeopathic college with a degree – course standard in the country.
This Conference has asked for founding of more medical colleges. If they are really sincere to ensure the uniformity in the standard of medical education they could have asked for staring new Homoeopathic colleges of a standard similar to that of their own colleges. To demand further facilities for the development of a system of treatment by the practitioner of that system is somewhat intelligible.
But to urge for abolition and not for upgrading institutions of other systems of medicine is absolutely out of bounds on their part. It does not behove any right thinking man with a fair share of education or any profession which is still judged to be noble by the public. Psychologically it might be an instance of inferiority – complex on their part.
Now that under the Second Five Year Plan the Central Government of India has allocated Rupees I crore and 25 lakhs for Homoeopathy and other Indigenous system of Medicine and different States have ear – marked about 80 lakhs of rupees for the development of Homoeopathy the behaviour of such an august body like the Indian Medical Association is highly disappointing and certainly deserves highest condemnation from every point of view.
In this connection we might recall the remarks of Honble Health Minister, Govt. of India in her message to the recently started Homoeopathic journal sponsored by the U.P. Homoeopathic Medicine Board; “The Government of India is devoting considerable attention to this question of promotion of study and practice of homoeopathy etc. etc.”
We are sorry to find that superstition and dogmatism die so hard; and the old fire of antagonism for Homoeopathy still burns so fiercely in the hearts of the votaries of the so – called modern scientific medicine. We hereby, particularly draw the attention of the Government and the public to this recalcitrant attitude of the I.M.A. which might sabotage the schemes for development of Homoeopathy etc. under the First and the Second Five Year Plan.
B.K. SARKAR.
THE DAVE COMMITTEE.
Editorial Comment
Lately the press seems to be giving much publicity to the Dave Committee with Sri D.T. Dave, Saurashtra Health Minister, Chairman, its terms of reference and its proposed recommendations. The Government of Indian set up the Dave Committee for uniform standardisation in training and regulation of the practice of Homoeopaths, Vaidyas and Hakims. To our mind the Government of India is trying to approach the problem from its wrong end.
With so much state patronage and active state help, financial and otherwise, for over a century, can it be said that quack – practice in the so – called Allopathic system of medicine has been eliminated in the country? On the other hand the Homoeopaths, Vaidyas and Hakims have flourished without recognition by the Government in any direction.
Every body admits that the individual and public health of a nation, should be in charge of those persons who are especially qualified for the purpose. But the remedy for abolition of quack practice in any system of treatment, in vogue, in the country, surely does not lie in merely legislative enactments prohibiting quackery. The law of demand and supply is quite applicable in the sphere of medical practice.
If the number of medical practitioners, qualified in the eye of the state – law, is hopelessly inadequate to render medical relief to our people, if the recognised system of treatment fails to cure all cases of sickness, practitioners of other system of medicine. which have stood the test of time, must be abounding in the country. The sick wants cure of his ailments and not any learned jargon of medical terminologies.
It is also quite true that these hitherto non – recognised systems of treatment are found to be practised by a majority of men who can be technically styled as quacks i.e. who practice the art of a particular system of treatment without knowing the science of it. Well, this fact is deplorable, but not at all surprising under the existing circumstances. The very fact that particular systems are unrecognised by the state and lie outside the jurisdiction of the orthodox system is a sufficient invitation to the petty adventurers and charlatans who hang upon the society, ever ready and eager to take advantage of human suffering and credulity.
It is also a fact that the orthodox treatment does fail to give relief to many sufferers with diverse ailments. As these systems do not possess the seal of complete state approval and recognition no standards of competency are yet legally imposed on the teachers and practitioners of the respective healing art. What wonder, then, if certain unscrupulous people have taken advantage of the opportunities thus offered? What wonder, then if certain people who practise these systems know little more of the systems than its name?
Under these circumstances it is meet and proper that the that the Government of our country instead of devoting its energies to find ways and means for stopping quackeries in these systems, would be better advised if it diverts its energies to provide adequate facilities for the teaching and practice of these systems of treatment.
The best method of stopping quackery in homoeopathic, Ayurvedic and Unani systems, is not the suppression and withholding of state recognition as demanded by the Indian Medical Association in its last annual conference but an all – out help by the Govt. to turn out properly practitioners in those systems of medicine.
That the approach of the Dave Committee to the problem of stopping quackery is wrong is made apparent by the halting and self – contradictory manner of its proposed recommendations. The committee propose that only registered practitioners should be allowed to practice indigenous medicine and Homoeopathy and that for registration a practitioner must possess “some recognised qualifications.”
Thus the committee begs the whole question as the recognised qualification is not yet defined and there is no state Homoeopathic faculties or Boards in many states or Boards in many states have not yet started functioning, that the existing practioners, who are not qualified for registration, may continue their practice. Further the whole problem of stopping quackery in Allopathic Practice remains unsolved. The whole episode thus seems to us as one of putting the cart before the horse.
B.K.S.
STEP – MOTHERLY DEAL
Though voice are occasionally raised against further lease of life being granted to the indigenous system of medicine and Homoeopathy, the concensus of popular opinion is definitely against such a drastic step. And though Bhore Committee displayed an uncertain attitude about the efficacy of these systems – it preferred to leave the issue with the State Governments – the Plaining Commission, which must have been guided by expert opinion in the matter, not only set its face against such a proposal but made recommendations for upgrading training in such systems, for standardisation of their education and for institution of research in them.
Later, the government of India set up the Dave Committee for regulation of practice of the vaidyas, Hakims and Homoeopaths, which is reported to have finalised its interim report to be submitted shortly to the governments and thereafter, to be considered by the Central Council of Health.
There are good reasons in favour of the continuance of these systems. The comparative cheapness of treatment under these systems in a country, to the overwhelming mass of people of which Allopathic treatment is still beyond reach, is of course a strong argument for it. There does not appear to be any justification besides, why on medical grounds also these systems need be apologetic.
The Ayurvedic and Hakimi systems have stood the test of time and have established their efficacy in all branches of medical treatment except, perhaps, in obstetrics, gynaecology, advanced surgery and some of the specialities. The Ayurvedic and Hakimi drugs, mostly made of indigenous herbs and minerals, are also believed to be better suited to Indian constitution.
All these weighty factors definitely tend to tip the balance in favour not only of continuance but of improvement of these system. As for Homoeopathy, the significant fact cannot be forgotten that it enjoy considerable popularity and patronage even in the advanced countries of the West where it has extorted and maintained a co – existential status for itself by the side of Allopathy.
Calcutta