Islamic Medical Association
BMJ 2011; 343 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5592 (Published 07 September 2011) Cite this as: BMJ 2011;343:d5592
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The Jewish hospital opened its doors after first world war(although
conceived before that by the resident Jewish community in East London)as a
result of 'far sightedness' by them rightly so to cater for their
religious requirements.
This situation is nowhere comparable to private Aga
Khan hospital in Pakistan which serves the needs of those who can afford
it rather than serving religious needs. Actually all the hospitals in
Pakistan will be considered Islamic hospitals serving all the patients
and teaches all whatever their belief may be.
I am not surprised that there was no sectarian troubles in 1920s as
missionary hospitals and schools were of very high standard served natives
well.My sister went to christian school too.Imran Khan was educated in one
of those post partition.
We now live in a different world(look at the progress,
robots are operating!).An Islamic hospital serving all faiths seems
strange concept specially if all NHS hospitals are serving Halaal and
Kosher according to Dr.Anand.
The scholars from ALAzhar or in UK are allowed to give opinions which
can not contradict Quranic orders
I can understand Dr.Anand's confusion as shown by
his repeating questions.I am prepared to speak to him
or even meet him if he is genuinely interested in knowing Islamic
decisions on evidence based Quran.
In chapter 5 verse 32 will answer Dr.Anand's queries
which says that if you save a life as if you have saved whole human
race.Similarly in chapter 2 verse 173 even pork can be eaten(heating is
voluntary)if
that is the only thing available to save a life.
From religious angles all blood transfusions and organ
transplants(even pig's valves) are most welcome,
for it saves a life.
Finally Quran repeatedly tells us to think and ponder.
Muslims accepts the Quranic order and then scholars
ponder about the reason.They can give their opinions
(not binding)to try to explain like boiling may be changing
biochemistry(may be killing virus etc) as long as it is based on honesty
with the knowledge which
is available at the time.For example up to last week schools taught that
speed of light is the fastest!!!
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dr Memon states that the London Jewish Hospital was established to
cater for the Post-war refugees. Not so. It was established in the early
1900s. The poor (and not so poor) East End Jews were devout and they spoke
Yiddish. The hospital catered for their cultural sensitivities far more
easily than could be done by the other voluntary hospitals - there was no
NHS then.
Now, I understand, that in consideration of the religious
sensitivities of Jewish and Muslim patients, "Halaal" and Jewish "Kosher"
meats are served almost universally in NHS hospitals and in LA schools. It
follows that those of us who wish to avoid such ritually slaughtered meat
are obliged to eat pork or vegetarian food in NHS hospitals and LA
schools.
Dr Memon suggests that an Islamic hospital would be divisive. Not so.
As I pointed out previously in my rapid response, the Aga Khan funded a
teaching hospital in Karachi. It serves all and teaches all - including
Hindus.
The (Christian) missionary-funded hospitals and medical schools in
Vellore and Ludhiana certainly caused no sectarian trouble. My mother, a
non-Christian was educated in the Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, in
the 1920s.
I also believe that such hospitals will be more readily able to cater
for the needs of the fervent practitioners who will have more faith in the
staff's bona fides. It has been suggested in correspondence in bmj.com,
that curricular time should be devoted to such matters as the needs of
"Hajj". There is plenty for the medical students to learn already. Hindus
wanting to visit Allah Abad for "Kumbh" or Moslems wanting to go on "Hajj"
should really be catered for by non-NHS bodies. Medical Schools and the
NHS should cater for the common medical needs.
I have asked before - and ask again - how does boiling pork bones and
cartilage turn "haraam" in to "halaal"? It is a matter either for
pragmatism or for biochemistry. I would like to know the answer. So, I
would guess, would some Muslims - Al Azhar's blessings to the WHO not
withstanding.
Equally important, not only from biochemical but also from religious
angles is the question I have raised about blood transfusion and organ
transplants. Any answers, please?
JK Anand
Competing interests: No religion, Do not wish to push faith,nor pragmatism, on anyone.
The Jewish hospital in east London was appropriate in the years gone
by as east Europeans refugees post war
following persecution settled in the area.
Islamic hospital in this day and age is meaningless
for many reasons including finding the site where it can meet needs of
millions which are scattered all over
UK.
By grace of God the girls medical intake will be able to take care of
some sensitive needs if and when situation arises.
Finally and most importantly let us not make it a place like ground
zero (NEW YORK) where some misguided people gather outside to cause
'nuisance'. We should learn from recent riots that there are 'people' out
there who need excuse to jump on the band wagon. Let us be a role model
like that brother in Birmingham who lost his son which
we can be proud of and that what should be expected
from us at all times.
Competing interests: No competing interests
I see this article as very disappointing even for Muslims. Thank God
that the majority has rejected their (Muslim Association) ideas. However at
the same time, I am surprised that the author of this column wrote a two page article about it and mainly focused on negative views
of very tiny minority. Nowhere in the column is there mention of what the
majority of Muslim doctors thinks and practise.
Firstly I totally agreed with mhmd Imran for his explanation about
vaccines. I want to tell all the readers that these Vaccines are being
used in all Islamic countries in nearly 100% of the populations.
I could not understand what the article was trying to prove in referring to a vague story in 2007 and a
result of study (which I am not aware of authenticity). I would again like to inform the author that during my educational and
training period in an Islamic country I was educated and trained in STD,
alcohol related disease and, despite being a male doctor, I was posted
and worked as trainee anaesthetist in a Gynae ward. There was a male
obstetrician present as well.
Finally, I totally agreed with Dr. JK Anand's view about having an Islamic
hospital. I do not see any harm if it is run on charitable basis and has no
discrimination for any race, gender or religion.
My request to every one is that you should please ignore these odd cases
as the majority of Muslims do.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dr.Anand regarding your question, we believe that the
final judge is the Creator and our intention. The order in Quran is to save
a life whatever it takes.
Competing interests: No competing interests
I thank Dr Mahmud for his contribution and for supplying a reference
to the views of noted scholars, including those from Al Azhar.
I have read the English version cited by Dr Mahmud. I question how
gelatine from porcine material can be considered to have changed in to
"halal" by the simple process of prolonged cooking. How long must cooking
go on to turn "haram" in to "halal".
Secondly, could Dr Mahmud please tell us his answer to the question I
posed with respect to blood transfusion and organ transplantation?
I can well understand and accept the "Doctrine of Necessity".
However, the question arises: who is the final judge of "Necessity". The
patient? The doctor? And if the doctor, can he give the verdict if he does
not practise the particular faith that the patient practices?
Besides, Dr Mahmud, I would welcome the views of academic ethicists.
JK Anand
Competing interests: I like to hear diverse views. I have no religion.
Katme is totally wrong in every aspect. His
quote about witchcraft clashes with Quran (sura:113) which was preached by
the holy prophet.
To save a life, Quran says, is as if you have saved the entire
human race, hence all the vaccinations are highly recommended (and practiced
in Saudi Arabia where entery
depends on vaccination certificate). Even pork can be eaten (if that is
only available) if a life can be saved, according Quran (pork insulin has
saved millions of lives)
Competing interests: No competing interests
It's a very amazing discussion on islamic medical association. In the
same issue we read also a discussion on defining health. Combining both
issues one could raise the question about "islamic or orthodox or jewish
or whatever health". In a modern world the health can have only one
definition. All other discussions are regarding hotel component of a given
hospital as it is the case with different meal requirements in different
cultures or religions. Most important is the right to health which means
i.e. no arbitrary harm to mental or physical health of individuals which
is not resepected in many countries independent of their religion.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Regarding your recent "Lobby Watch" publication on the Islamic
Medical Association (perhaps a misnomer, as by their own admission they
cannot afford an office or any staff), I would like to shed light on an
alternative Islamic viewpoint on the permissibility of vaccines and
medications containing gelatine derived from porcine products.
Islam, unlike many other "organised" religions, has no organised
central clergy, with religious edicts and rulings emerging through
discourse between qualified religious experts and the laity, who are
encouraged to seek their advice and accept rulings based upon the strength
of the argument proposed by a scholar. It is from this continual discourse
that a dynamic religious authority has historically emerged and dealt with
the pressing issues of any particular time. Not unlike modern medical
practice, orthodoxy emerges from a plurality of opinions presented by
scholars, and fortunately for "lay muslims" such as myself, there is not
infrequently substantial agreement between scholars.
The Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, featuring the most
highly qualified profile Islamic scholars from across the world, concluded
in 1995 that gelatine produced from porcine skin, bones and tendons
contained within medications was "halal" (ie: permissible), on the basis
that the porcine products are transformed through the production process,
and can no longer be thought of as their original constituent parts. This
view has been endorsed and disseminated by the World Health Organisation.
The statement can be found at:
http://www.immunize.org/concerns/porcine.pdf
Competing interests: I am interested in a plurality of viewpoints.
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re: Islamic Medical Association
I am obliged to Dr Memon for answering my questions.
In short, a person suffering from a potentially fatal illness can
ingest, or receive by venoclysis, or through surgical implant or
transplant, material that would, in other circumstances, be considered
"haraam".
I trust that I have understood Dr Memon correctly.
Turning now to hospitals run by religious bodies (be they Islamic,
Hindu,Parsi, Christian (catholic, protestant, or whatever), I remain of
the view that many people would be happy to use them.
I do not need to return to this forum and I thank Dr Memon for
clarifying the position.
JK ANAND
Competing interests: No religion. Want freedom for all to be pragnmatic or to obey their faith.