How does a person influence the development of medicine

Over the many centuries of the existence of human society, the brilliant minds of medicine have managed to defeat many diseases that seemed to be the scourge of God – leprosy, tuberculosis, cholera, plague, typhus, smallpox, which claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

However, other equally terrible diseases remain relevant – HIV, oncology, cardiovascular pathologies that kill people every year, and a panacea against them has not yet been invented.

Yes, and the number of suicides from depression and psychological problems has increased markedly in our time.

What is the way out? Some scientists are sure that humanity will be able to defeat all these terrible problems in only one way – drastically changing its social ecosystem.

1. How people make discoveries for the development of medicine

2. New scientific models for the development of medicine

3. New trends in the development of medicine in society

How people make discoveries for the development of medicine

In the last century, new discoveries for the benefit of medicine and society were made much easier and faster than in our time.

In the 1950s, one after the other, several varieties of antibiotics were discovered at once, which turned deadly diseases and infections into "troubles" that were no longer considered a death sentence for the patient.

Then the mysteries of science were like a field where you just had to move forward and remember to look at the path so as not to miss the next discovery.

Now scientists agree that new medical discoveries and the whole development of medicine in general – it is no longer a field, but rather a tree.

That is, a much more complex and branched system that "grows" not horizontally, but vertically. So now it's not enough to just keep moving forward non-stop (read: working the same way for years).

Now you need to show real ingenuity, creating for yourself "props"; and "stairs".

At the same time, the lowest "apples" from the discovery tree have long been plucked – they were the simplest inventions, such as the simplest medical interventions to improve the patient's condition.

And the top "apples" not everyone can get it, as they are from a much more complex field of evidence-based medicine with questions about the maximum possible benefit that you can no longer prove with just a few cases.

For example, when antiretroviral treatment for HIV was first invented, it was a phenomenal success and breakthrough. However, scientists and researchers did not immediately go on to look for other new methods to combat the insidious virus, but began to branch the acquired system into issues of limited use.

For example, in what combinations the invented drugs will work more effectively.

Agree, compared to the global benefits of the discovery itself, further experiments – this is already a matter of limited benefit for a narrow circle of patients, because they can help one in a thousand, and they can help everyone, but only one percent more effective than the old combination of drugs.

Thus,

the value of medical discoveries can be greatly exaggerated, and the possible harm from it, on the contrary, underestimated. And this is just an example from one area

of the development of medicine. But now the situation is similar in the whole world medicine. It seems that humanity again needs a revolutionary shift of the old paradigm. New scientific models for the development of medicine

An original way out of the current impasse

was proposed a few years ago by the famous American oncologist of Indian origin, scientist, author of books and Pulitzer Prize winner Siddhartha Mukherjee. During a TED Talk, one of the most famous thinkers of modern medicine intrigued everyone with his idea.

According to Mukherjee

, people continue to die from common diseases, and humanity has stopped making breakthroughs in medical science, not because we do not have good drugs, but because we do not try to look at medical problems from a new, more insightful point of view.

In her capacity, Siddhartha

suggests using scientific models and new metaphors for old problems. After all, to get something new, you need to learn to think in a new way. "When building a model, an architect tries to explain the world through a miniature. The scientist, in a similar case, tries to explain the world through metaphor. Thumbnail – this is a shift in scale, but the – it's a shift in the way you perceive it, — the philosopher briefly explains his concept of the subsequent development of medicine.

Most of the medical discoveries already made have been like a straight arrow shot straight into a target (this is also Dr. Mukherjee's metaphor).

A prime example of – antibiotics, which, as it turned out, have a truly miraculous effect of blocking some processes in the body and activating others. Because

the success of discoveries was overwhelming

, this way of thinking became dominant in all branches, slowing down the further development of medicine. After all, it is illogical to try to fight infections and oncology or Alzheimer's disease with the same method, isn't it? It has already become obvious that the approach of looking for the magic arrow is not suitable.

The key to the next door, behind which the source of knowledge is hidden, the Indian scientist sees in the example of nature, where cells form an organ, organs make up an organism, and organisms are combined into a single ecosystem, that is, a community.

If you use this as a metaphor for the development of medicine, then you can easily come to the conclusion that solutions should not come in the form of new drugs, but at the level of cellular changes in the human body – regeneration technologies.

This can be regeneration, both of individual cells and of entire organs, if they are already completely affected by a disease or pathology. The scientist especially emphasizes the importance of global changes in the social ecosystem of mankind. While world scientists are arguing which will win first – genetic technologies, molecular biology or generally

artificial intelligence to help us – an unexpected thought was expressed by a Western specialist in information technology in health care, Leonard Kish. He believes that the new medical revolution will not be technological, but humanistic. In light of this, Leonard calls "involving patients in medical decision making" the most promising trend in the development of medicine.

His opinion has so far taken root more among medical marketers than scientists. However, read his arguments and, most likely, you will agree that there is a grain of meaning in them.

Patients' involvement should be promoted by medical professionals and the entire healthcare system. The proposed involvement implies that patients and their families will be able to make difficult medical decisions on their own, provided that they receive complete, diversified and balanced information and consultations from doctors.

In the same way, the ability of patients to independently resolve non-life-threatening medical issues and take on most of the issues in the course of treatment for

chronic diseases. Inspired by the results of the research, Kish likened the method of patient engagement to a "blockbuster drug" that could be considered "malicious" if not used.

As a result, by encouraging responsibility for one's own body, the interest of patients in promoting health and finding ways to do this will increase.

There have been a number of scientific studies that have shown that patient engagement actually results in improved treatment outcomes and improved patient satisfaction.

Who knows, perhaps in a few years we will see the introduction of a new evolutionary healthcare system and admire its positive results.

Universal blood for transfusion: myth or reality

You may be interested in: Memory test