Secondary Source Analysis
Bad Medicine Better Medicine attempts to summarize, and examine the history of medicine, and how all medicine before 1865 can be considered bad. It wasn’t until the last century and a half did good medicine start to find its place in medical history. In Wootton’s opinion, it is said that the history of medicine has been often written by doctors, for doctors. Modern discoveries which should actually be considered good have only come about through evidence-based methods, entirely contrary to the Hippocratic medicine that which made up the previous millennia. It is claimed that medicine, it’s applications, and therapies, need to be examined from a point of speculation, doubt, and understanding that in the last millennia, …show more content…
Dr. Wooton is most convincing in the allegation that because doctors did not develop diagnosis and therapies from evidence-based medical research, that all, if not a great majority of medical knowledge acquired and utilized prior to 1865 could be considered unsubstantiated, and not suitable for modern medical practice. In this era of medicine, it was not uncommon for many patients and individuals to undergo excruciating painful surgeries and treatment, they were at the expense of the doctor's abilities, most of which had no official certification to conduct such procedures, often times hastening the onset of sickness, and even death. An excellent example is Mr. Wootton's commentary on Hippocrates and his belief he could “alleviate pain, shorten sickness, and postpone death”1. As now, looking back on medical history, it’s appropriate to say that such claims were certainly …show more content…
Wootton's approach in criticizing, explaining, and understanding why all medicine before 1865 should be considered bad was clear, and convincing. Even for individuals with little to no knowledge of medical practices and procedures, would, indubitably, rather be treated in our modern society rather than in 18th century europe. Mr. Wootton's commentary on the history of medicine should be considered important in understanding the field of medicine and medicine as progress. As Mr. Wootton explains “ before we study progress, we must make an effort to understand failure”1. It's in this approach to understanding the history of medicine does Mr. Wootton provides us with a convincing and interesting perspective on the history of bad medicine and better
Bad Medicine Better Medicine attempts to summarize, and examine the history of medicine, and how all medicine before 1865 can be considered bad. It wasn’t until the last century and a half did good medicine start to find its place in medical history. In Wootton’s opinion, it is said that the history of medicine has been often written by doctors, for doctors. Modern discoveries which should actually be considered good have only come about through evidence-based methods, entirely contrary to the Hippocratic medicine that which made up the previous millennia. It is claimed that medicine, it’s applications, and therapies, need to be examined from a point of speculation, doubt, and understanding that in the last millennia, …show more content…
Dr. Wooton is most convincing in the allegation that because doctors did not develop diagnosis and therapies from evidence-based medical research, that all, if not a great majority of medical knowledge acquired and utilized prior to 1865 could be considered unsubstantiated, and not suitable for modern medical practice. In this era of medicine, it was not uncommon for many patients and individuals to undergo excruciating painful surgeries and treatment, they were at the expense of the doctor's abilities, most of which had no official certification to conduct such procedures, often times hastening the onset of sickness, and even death. An excellent example is Mr. Wootton's commentary on Hippocrates and his belief he could “alleviate pain, shorten sickness, and postpone death”1. As now, looking back on medical history, it’s appropriate to say that such claims were certainly …show more content…
Wootton's approach in criticizing, explaining, and understanding why all medicine before 1865 should be considered bad was clear, and convincing. Even for individuals with little to no knowledge of medical practices and procedures, would, indubitably, rather be treated in our modern society rather than in 18th century europe. Mr. Wootton's commentary on the history of medicine should be considered important in understanding the field of medicine and medicine as progress. As Mr. Wootton explains “ before we study progress, we must make an effort to understand failure”1. It's in this approach to understanding the history of medicine does Mr. Wootton provides us with a convincing and interesting perspective on the history of bad medicine and better