Defending the patch or capitalising on misery
By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana-May 13, 2020Though not many plaudits have been earned by the British government, for the way it handled the COVID-19 epidemic, the adoration for the British National Health Service (NHS) has gone sky high, despite the high death rate which has defied explanation so far. In many major cities, conference centres were turned into Nightingale Hospitals which were largely underused. At no stage, even at the height of the epidemic, deserving patients were turned away from intensive care and the confusion seen, with intensive care beds, in other European countries was conspicuous by its absence. After all, the NHS saved the life of Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, who was nearly killed by COVID-19. He was treated like any other patient at St. Thomas’ Hospital in London and, on recovery, thanked profusely the two nurses who watched over him meticulously when he was desperately ill and the two ‘Nicks’. The two nurses were Jenny McGee from New Zealand and Luis Pitarma from Portugal. The two ‘Nicks’ turned out to be Dr Nick Price and Prof Nick Hart who were honoured, with Nicholas as one of the middle names, of the new-born son of Boris and his partner, Carrie Symonds.
From 26th March onwards, every Thursday evening at 8pm, households in UK break the monotony of lockdown to come out to ‘clap for carers’; applauding NHS workers and carers. Many courtesies are showered on NHS and Care Workers. supermarkets reserving periods for them to shop conveniently etc. On the front of a London hospital, as seen in widely circulated photographs, a giant poster displays, ‘Donation from Tamil community to our NHS and Frontline Health Workers’. What a wonderful gesture but for one snag; an ‘Eelam flag’ adorns the poster! Another photograph shows a donor and an NHS worker holding the flag; a flag associated with mass murder of many thousands of innocents, fluttering for those attempting to save lives from a deadly virus: What irony!
Some uninitiated may wonder how this is possible and question why a rump of Tiger sympathisers is allowed to fly the Eelam flag, in the name of all Tamils, when LTTE is still a banned terrorist organisation. It is due to some quirk of British logic that resulted in banning the LTTE but not its flag! Such an attempt at spreading a political message, during a grave crisis like this, surely smacks of capitalising on misery.
Watching the numerous interviews on Sri Lankan TV channels, there are plenty of examples of trade unions, Political Parties etc. defending their patch, some attempts bordering on exploiting the grave situation for their advantage. What needs emphasis is that, compared to many countries Sri Lanka has done exceptionally well. Though the number of cases is approaching 900, the number of deaths remains very low at 9. Had Sri Lanka been unfortunate enough to follow the British trajectory we would have ended up with around 10,000 deaths, as the population of UK is around three times ours and UK has had about 32,000 deaths. Perhaps, it would have been more like 20,000 as we do not have as many intensive care beds and ventilators.
As many economists are at pains to point out, our economy is in severe trouble but we are not in isolation; the whole world is heading towards the worst recession in our lifetime. In this situation, crying out for more testing, the way some politicians and trade unionists do, is more for advancing their agenda. Not that the authorities do not realise the value of extensive testing but are adopting a cost-effective strategy.
As I pointed out in my previous articles, "When experts disagree" (23 April) and "What is more dangerous, Covid or Covidiot? (4 May), many unsubstantiated claims are made which could be very dangerous in a situation like this. Following my second article, Dr Sumedha Amarasekara has made an interesting response, ‘Deyyange Leda’ (The Island, 11 May) wherein he makes a suggestion that advances in modern medicine should be made available for Ayurveda, for it to advance and for us to have a better understanding of how Ayurveda works. Perhaps, we should do the opposite. Put Ayurvedic medicines to scientific tests and if they are found useful, introduce them for wider use. Afterall, Modern Medicine has developed by absorbing the knowledge gathered by all systems of medicine of the past, as explained well by Prof N.A de S. Amaratunga in his article "Ayurveda and COVID-19" (The Island, 5 May).
In utter contrast to Dr Amarasekara, who indulges in an intellectual debate, I got a telephone call, on the day my second article was published, when the caller inquired, in Sinhala, why I am writing against Ayurveda. I pointed out that what I did was pointing out facts and that Ayurveda had no place in a pandemic like this. Then he said, "Ours is a system thousands of years old and we use plant material which are natural". When I pointed out that many plant materials were indeed poisonous, the caller became abusive and continued hurling personal abuse, which I did not listen to. I kept the receiver away so that he could continue to shout till he was exhausted! He was more interested in defending his system; defending the patch and, interestingly, his telephone number was an Australian mobile number!
I still see claims made by many of cures for COVID-19. Dr Ananda Wijewickrama, the Senior Physician in IHD, in an interview with Chatura Alwis on Derana, explained in detail the rationale for target testing; how COVID-19 patients were treated in Sri Lanka and how to test suggested medication. It was easily the best interview I have seen on the present epidemic. When questioned by Chatura about Ayurvedic medicines, he explained that all claims had to be put to scientific testing for efficacy before use. What concerned me most was the revelation he made about an incident in the past. An Ayurvedic Physician had claimed that she had discovered a cure for HIV and some patients who were on Antiretroviral treatment for HIV, which is very effective as long as they continue to take the tablets, had stopped treatment opting for her cure. As a result, a patient got a stroke, many developed other problems and, unfortunately, a child had died. If that had happened in UK, she would have been charged for manslaughter.
The need of the hour is not defending treatment systems, defending political ideologies, defending patches or capitalising on misery but saving lives, with the scientific knowledge we have, which is ever expanding.
