Is climate change a valid diagnosis for patients who are 70 years old and suffer from asthma and diabetes, throwing a bit of heart failure into the mix, and all that while living in a trailer in the southern part of Canada’s British Columbia?
Dr. Kyle Merritt of the Kootenay Medical Centre in Nelson, B.C., and a member of Clinicians for Planetary Health, wrote the two words into a patient’s chart. This has that created a major stir within his profession. But, he explained when these two words started making headlines around the world, he didn’t write them in as a valid part of a diagnosis but, rather, as a factor that must have contributed to his patient’s problems.
Looking for causes
The lady patient suffered her symptoms following a wave of wild forest fires that ravaged the region she lives in.
Forest fires in and of themselves present a contradictory issue.
The late Professor Vladimír Krajina who taught plant ecology for 24 years at the UBC Botany Department, developed an ecologically-based system of vegetation classification (Biogeoclimatic Zones).
He used to teach that humans should respect natural forest fires and learn how nature is renewing herself.
Invested into the Order of Canada in 1981, Professor Krajina has a Canadian National Park named after him (on Queen Charlotte Island).
In any case, Professor Krajina used to question humans’ obstinate refusal to take nature seriously.
But Dr. Kyle Merritt has committed a cardinal sin: he used the two words that have been as politically charged as anything debated these days, to try to explain the reasons for his patient’s ailments.
Way too many have abused the expression in attempts to justify reverting modern society into one run by what American economist Martin Armstrong describes as feudalistic socialism. Both feudalism and socialism have proven themselves wanting, yet, supporters of the so-called Great Reset use the notion of climate change as their justification for their own existence (raison d’être, as the educated individuals among us like to say).
As mentioned, Dr. Merritt hotly denied he was using climate change as a diagnosis.
“If we’re not looking at the underlying cause, and we’re just treating the symptoms, we’re just gonna [sic] keep falling further and further behind,” is what he said.
And that’s the issue: most of today’s physicians seem to have never heard of the idea that in order to be able to treat their patients properly, the simply must know what’s caused the disease. Knowing the symptoms and what to use to alleviate them has never been enough, yet, for one reason or another, it had become today’s medical profession’s mantra.
“She has diabetes. She has some heart failure…She lives in a trailer, no air conditioning,” Merritt said of his 70-year-old patient.
“All of her health problems have all been worsened. And she’s really struggling to stay hydrated.”
Yes, absolutely, diabetes, asthma, heart failure, all of these complaints have found their medications to treat them.
But, and that’s the real problem, insulin injections do not solve the issue of lacking insulin creation in a human’s body.
Asthma can be taken care of using all kinds of medications and gadgets, today’s medical professionals say, never stooping as low as to suggest it could be useful to know the reason why it afflicts some and not the others.
And the same goes for heart failure. Why are the blood vessels clogged? How about changing the sufferer’s lifestyle, including diet, without spending untold thousands on medications and/or surgeries?
To get back to the artificial scandal about Dr. Merritt, here’s verbatim what he said: “Oftentimes it’s vulnerable patients that are the most affected. It’s people who don’t have air conditioning in their homes in the case of the heat dome, or live in places where they can’t get away from the wildfire smoke.
“To see a patient affected that way,” he added, “and being forced to come in and get admitted to hospital because where they’re living is not really safe for them anymore, I found it upsetting.
“I wanted to think about the underlying factors that were driving (her deterioration), so that’s why I wrote it down.”
Dr. Merritt expanded his explanation: “The diagnosis has to be a specific medical condition that’s recognised as a medical condition. As physicians, we can’t just start making things up, of course we work within a medical framework.”
Dr. Merritt said he was “totally unprepared (for the attention). I had no idea it would be like this. It’s nice to have interest, but at the same time it’s been definitely overwhelming because I have to carry on with my regular job as well.”
Imagine a patient who had prostate surgery known as TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate). The doctor told him a couple of weeks later that he had removed come cancerous growth but, he added, not to worry, in 85 per cent of the cases, this clears the patient and the disease will never come back again. He’s much more likely to be run over by a bus in the middle of an abandoned highway somewhere in the Prairies than get the illness again.
A decade later, the patient begins to complain of urinary issues similar to those he had suffered from before he was cut up and left in stitches.
The urologist doesn’t listen too carefully: his instruments don’t tell him much, and hearing the patient out is such a waste of time.
The patient reports more problems, the doctor has a urine test done and finds that there’s indeed some kind of an inflammation. He prescribes antibiotics and, sure enough, after a week-long course on the pill, the next urine test comes back clear.
What caused the inflammation? The doctor can’t care less. His course of action removed it, didn’t it? What’s the bloody patient still bitching about?
And yet, the patient continues with his complaints. So, a year, a full year after the original complaint, the urologist orders an MRI test.
OOOPS, the image shows some inexplicable lesions.
After a usual delay, two biopsies are performed: indeed, a prostate cancer. The first one a decade ago sat on stage one so far as its aggressiveness went. The new one is at stage three (of five).
What went wrong?
Dr. Kyle Merritt opened a Pandora box (some call it can of worms): an overwhelming number of physicians these days are nothing more but drug peddlers.
Are you kidding? Listening to your patients while watching them carefully for the inevitable body language signs? Using guesswork where a blank stare at one’s computer screen would suffice?
Have a headache? Here’s your Advil (or Tylenol, your or your doctor’s preferred choice).
Why have you got a headache? Who knows? Next!
The history of this incredibly cynical change that has seen a calling develop into a business model is convoluted. It’s filled with misleading misinformation traps that could land those falling for them in court for libel and criminal defamation of character.
Yet, it exists, and if there is one thing clear it’s that somebody’s pockets are getting lined beyond usually acceptable standards, while the general population’s overall health has been going to hell in a handbasket.
It may be open to debate whether Dr. Kyle Merritt chose the right words in his Don Quixotic attempt to return medicine to where it used to be, and where it should be.
But he’s knocking on the right door: medicine should become medicine again, not a conveyor belt for increasing dumbing down of the world’s population that could lead to its complete extinction.
That’s precisely where it has been marching the last century or so. Unfortunately.