Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;334:587 (17 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.39153.707465.59
Balaji Ravichandran, editor, studentBMJ
bravichandran@bmj.com
Do we need another 400 minute radio series on the history of medicine, excellent though it is, asks Balaji Ravichandran
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The history of medicine, it seems, must always be progressive and be celebrated. Recently, though, it has become fashionable to write accusatory historiesconsider, for example, Bad Medicine by David Wootton (review BMJ 2006;333:606 doi: 10.1136/bmj.333.7568.606). Yet the common thread of progressivism binds them all, and Andrew Cunningham's radio series is another case in point.
Modern medicine, the argument usually goes, is scientific. For most of human history, it wasn't: from the days of Hippocrates and Galen, the patient centred approach to medicine was more of an art than a science, and this viewpoint dominated medical thinking till the late 18th century. But in the aftermath of the French Revolution scientific discoveries, particularly microbiological ones, were slowly yet systematically adopted by practitioners of Western medicine. Medicine, therefore, has moved from strength to strength, and is likely to move on in the same direction in the foreseeable future.
Accusations of viewing
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses