Gone to pot?

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Gone to pot, the sixteenth century phrase originating from England, referring to the leftovers and offal going to the pot for a soup for the next day, evolved to be a euphemism for those unfortunate enough to fall victim to cannibals, a century later. More recently it referred to those who opted to taste the ‘pleasures’ of marijuana and pay with addiction. Of late, our politicians have given a new meaning to it: enriching rivers with pots full of a magic portion created by a hardly-known singer turned celebrity faith-healer. And, the purpose? To ward off the evil of Covid-19! Reminds of the old Sinhala saying “Athisareta amuda gahanawa wagey”: Like wearing a loin-cloth to stop dysentery!

It is said the past is a foreign country, worth an occasional visit but not to stay but we seem to relish living in that foreign country. In spite of evidence to the contrary, we are unable to unburden ourselves of the baggage of the past and continue to stick to old beliefs and try to justify. It is not only the uneducated that is affected by this phenomenon. As someone said, instead of passing the modern epidemiological messages, if it was promulgated that Covid-19 is a curse from gods “Deiyyange lede” most would have practiced quarantine and social distancing religiously. I suppose politicians merely reflect the attitude of the general public!

Though this faith-healer gets hardly any mention in the English newspapers I read, he seems to be getting frequent mention in Sinhala newspapers with unbelievable claims. Once it was reported that India is sending a special flight for him to go across to treat Covid-19 and then it was stated that he had received testimonials for having cured 33 Indian VIP patients. Following on this, this ‘mutti’ incident occurred. If she wanted to give benefit of doubt and do whatever possible to rid the country of COVID-19, the Health Minister could have performed this ritual in privacy instead of doing it before the cameras. When mocked by her opposition colleagues in the parliament, she stated that she would even jump to the sea if it would get rid of the epidemic. It is a pity she lacked the intelligence to understand the science behind the epidemic and that both her actions would be equally futile.

It is well-known that this faith-healer has the patronage of the Prime Minister. Then there was the ‘royal astrologer’ who made him lose the presidential election. Now, this faith-healer! Poor Mahinda! I presume his heart is too soft to get rid of hangers-on like this.

There was no end to my delight when two distinguished members of my profession were appointed state ministers. Unfortunately, one is still drawing crticism because of a requisition made by one of her subordinates. The other, who is a senior academic in pharmacology has been accused of promoting Ayurvedic medicines. I am not aware that he has any special interest in Ayurvedic medicines or done any research on them. I was left wondering why, until I read the opinion piece ‘Sudharshana Syrup’ in The Island of Nov 13 ,by a professor of community medicine who justifies this action by stating, “In this endeavour, he has to be considered as a minister not as a pharmacologist.” I did not realise that my colleagues had to sacrifice their specialisation at the altar of politics!

How much Ayurveda is in our psyche is evident in the arguments in this piece. In support of his colleague, the professor goes on to say, “Also important to note is that the assessment tools used to assess allopathic drugs may not be suitable to asses the efficacy of Ayurvedic medicines due to two different bases of origin.” In addition to the unsubstantiated suggestion of double standards, this makes one ask how a system that does not recognise infective aetiology can produce drugs for infections? The article concludes thus: “But, at times of crisis or disaster what is done in good faith is acceptable”. My question is whether it is acceptable even if does no good or does harm?

It should be a matter of grave concern that the simple but important preventive health messages are getting diluted by actions of this nature. Of the recent deaths reported, a significant number of deaths have occurred at home. Is it possible that these patients were treated by practitioners without the requisite expertise?

Another thing that may go to pot is the hysteria over the much-touted vaccine. Reference to the hysteria in the BBC was made in Light Refractions on Saturday14th. What happened since is laughable. On his political chat show on Sunday morning (15th), veteran journalist Andrew Marr interviewed the chief executive of the German Bioscience firm that co-developed the vaccine with Pfizer and at the end, after thanking him, said, “We can say that he is the man who saved the world.” I was wondering whether the BBC journalist had gone off his rocker.

Many drugs have failed on use after successful small trials though this vaccine may not be so but to brag and heap praise like this even before wide use is ludicrous, to say the least. We must hope that the other vaccines in the pipeline are more user friendly for them to be of value to countries like ours. Pfizer vaccine has to be stored at minus 79 degrees. For comparison a domestic freezer can reach only about minus 24. Before injection a complex process is involved to get it to injectable temperature. Further, two doses have to be given, a fortnight apart. Pfizer, naturally, wants make a kill before other vaccines with ease of use arrive and hence the hype! Let them do so with the rich West, as this vaccine offers unsurmountable obstacles for developing countries, even before the cost is taken into consideration.

Maybe, using the ‘Sudharshana syrup’ arguments, serious consideration should be given to sending all the parliamentarians on furlough. When the President manged the pandemic, without Parliament, praise-winning success was the outcome. It may well be the curse of politicians that is hampering efforts now. Sri Lanka is in a grave crisis due to the pandemic and the faltering economy. Perhaps, now is the time for a ‘dictatorial president’ to steer us through for a year or two, giving an opportunity for the parliamentarians to rest at home which they would not mind as long as they are paid! My suggestion is bound to give heart attacks to liberalists but after all, as the good professor has stated, “At times of crisis or disaster what is done in good faith is acceptable!”