[bharatvarsh] In defence of Dr Anbumani Ramadoss, Union Minister for Health.

July 8, 2006

To Dr Vaman Rao. --------------------- Dear Rao Garu, Namaste. I am no cronie of Dr Ramadoss. The very nature of my campaign puts me at loggerheads with him. But being a person who has seen a bit of the medical establishment and has had his share of confrontations with egoistic doctors, I don't get easily folled by their seemingly altruistic rhetoric. Dr P Venugopal has portrayed himself as a power hungry beaurocrat. This does not match with the vows of his vocation. I marvel at the way he and the medical community guided the media and managed to interview his former patients and allies. Please do not think that they were hunted down by the media, the media was led to them. I wish the doctors and the Medical Council of India concentrate on leading India out of the morass they have led it into. Doctors today are more

interested in holding on to prestigious positions and in developing friends within the drug industry. At their clinics they spend more time with medical representatives than their patients. Instead of educating themselves they prefer to go out on jaunts sponsored by the drug industry. However much I go against Dr Ramadoss I cannot deny that he has scented the nexus between the doctors and the drug industry. It is not without reason that he pokes his nose into the affairs of the medical institutions. I can guarantee that his moves have inconvinienced many an "altruistic" soul who have now come out in large numbers to defend Dr Venugopal. The High Court has supported Dr Venugopal purely on technical terms. The judiciary is no longer in the dark about the shenanigans of the medical establishment. In a landmark judgement against the Medical Council of India, the Supreme Court has dubbed it a "den of

corruption". It is high time the doctors were reminded of their duty towards their patients. A doctors duty is to heal, not to recommend any particular mode of treatment. Why then is the Medical Council against the idea of introducing homeopathy and ayurveda in mainstream medical colleges? When modern medicine has created chronic diseases and made the life of the common man miserable both in terms of physical and mental pain and the effect on his finances, is it not the duty of people who call themselves doctors to hunt for a solution? They are however more interested in their earnings. How many doctors are interested in exposing the nefarious activities of the drug industry? How many doctors educate the public about the side effects of chemical medicines? How many speak out against vaccines despite being fully aware of their dangers? How many speak out against unnecessary surgeries resorted to by their

dishonest colleagues? How many deal with the subject of overmedication for profits? How many speak out against the junk food and drinks industry? How many are involved in educating the public on health matters? Dr Ramadoss has now framed the concept of Public Health Institutions just to deal with these things. He is also not against proven holistic therapies. When the Lancet carried an article predicting the end of homeopathy, Dr Ramadoss was the only Health Minister to publicly come out against it. Again it is he who is taking the initiative to harmonise and record the various ayurvedic remedies. It is he who is holding holistic healing camps all over the country to judge the reaction of the public. All this has put him in the bad books of the medical community who percieve him as a threat to their booming business. We health activists are solidly behind Dr Ramadoss in exposing the Medical

Council and its dubious role in drafting the health policy of India. Yours sincerely, Jagannath Chatterjee, Health Reform Activist."Dr. Vaman Rao" <vrao wrote: The letter is partisan and is one of the salvos from the armory of Dr A. Ramdoss. I did not expect such partisan advocacy of untenable positions adopted by the Minister and the dirty politics of Tamil Nadu. In spite of the claim that the Minister is a medical graduate, he has never practiced medicine to help the poor. Instead he indulged in politics to usurp power, enjoy the perks of office and mislead the people in the name of caste, etc. to rule the roost. The letter in defense is so feckless that it fails to give a shred of evidence for the numerous allegations made by the author. If Venugopla were a dictator, how come almost a thumping majority, both inside and outside the AIIMS, has backed him? The High Court has favored his position. Those who made the accusations are in a hopeless minority and are counted as sycophants belonging to the paid lobby of the Ministers Ramdoss and Arjun Singh. Is he not the same Minister who without any rhyme or reason put the stamp of approval of his ministry to level unsubstantiated charges against Baba Ramdass? Is it not the same man who raided on the autonomy of the Medical Council of India and the National Board of Examinations to achieve his political ambitions? Is he not the same man who supported the commie Brinda Karat against her stand obliquely opposing Ayurveda or any thing

connected with India and her past?. The glorious tributes paid by all recognized institutions, eminent doctors, former and current members of the medical community, his award of Padma Bhushan, his various national and international honors and enhancement of the prestige of AIIMS - all redound to his glory than what is attempted in the letter. The instances of all students not being treated well is an indication of inferiority complex. To say that deserving persons were denied opportunity to become some bodies is more apt amongst the tottering politicians rather than skilled, intellectually first rate and professionally A-One individuals. There can be more positions created if there are people who deserve. These are all administrative pinpricks are what are called after-thoughts in absence of any case. In this entire episode, the casualty is the merit. There seems to be a tendency to promote mediocrity in the name of democracy. While that may work in politics as it is so obvious, it brings disaster to knowledge sector. Is it not that the future of nation is in the knowledge sector, whether one likes it or not? VRao -----forwarded message ----- Dear Sirs, The media is unsure about which side to take in the ongoing war between Dr Venugopal of AIIMS and our Health Minister, Dr Anbumani Ramadoss. The newspaper editorials shriek that autonomy is under threat and that professionals are being attacked. But the answer probably is not so simple as that. Autonomy means responsible functioning under a democratic setup. It does not mean

an autocratic regime which Dr Venugopal can be safely accused of ushering in. He has transformed himself into a one man institution just as Dr Kurien did in Amul. Such concentration of authority in a single person is a double edged sword. It breeds sycophants who wish to share the pie and as a result the interest of the organisation goes for a toss. Dr Venugopal has been accused by his colleagues, many of whom have since left the institution, of usurping the credits of individuals. This is a very serious charge and goes against the basic ethics of a professional person. The resultant dissatisfaction of qualified doctors was made up by taking sides with students unions and keeping a firm grip on the sycophant lobby. This too is unbecoming of a professional. Dr Ramadoss has been accused of politicking, which incidentally is his job, but it cannot be denied that Dr Venugopal too is an astute

politician. Another dissatisfaction brewing in the Institution is the segregation of students belonging to a particular category and keeping them under constant threat. In any well managed institution such things should not be condoned. After one is admitted all should be treated as equals and on merit. Why has Dr Venugopal overlooked this glaring shortcoming? Why has he preferred to look the other way? This does not reflect well on his administrative acumen. Dr Venugopal has exceeded his term, thanks to his proximity to the political establishment. This itself has denied promotion opportunities to meritorious candidates who were more than eligible for the post. What makes Dr Venugopal so greedy for the chair? Is it for the sake of welfare of the patients, the welfare of the institution, for the sake of enjoying power, or what? The aim of the AIIMS is to treat patients, not to turn

them away pushing them to their death. But this is exactly what this premier Institution is doing now. A professional director of a premier Institution who has already overstayed his term should realise the folly of this personal struggle for power and resign with grace. He will be more beneficial to his patients if he concentrates on his personal practice. Yours sincerely, Jagannath Chatterjee, Health Reform Activist . "Our ideal is not the spirituality that withdraws from life but the conquest of life by the power of the spirit." - Aurobindo.

Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.

Try it free.

July 8, 2006

Dr.Venugopal and Dr.Kurien belong to a class of technocrats who do not tolerate indiscipline, inefficiency and lethargy, usually associated with bureaucrats esp. those recruited without merits. Both have achieved and have been acclaimed by the World so much so that many Countris have sought their advice and services to develop their own systems.

A Minister is a short term powerful position and arrogance with power at times makes them forget their worth and turn to rash actions.

But here is the Arjun Singh factor playing the crucial role of OBC versus Upper Caste, which openly came out when Anbumani expressed of bringing 80 OBC doctors from Chennai to run AIIMS if strike continues.

The UPA Govt. is out to destroy our institutions of eminence to draw the Country into deep abyss whether Arjun Singh on reservations or Anbumani on AIIMS and the earlier we wake up the better it is for the Country

On 7/8/06, Jagannath Chatterjee <jagchat01 wrote:

To

Dr Vaman Rao.

---------------------

Dear Rao Garu,

Namaste. I am no cronie of Dr Ramadoss. The very nature of my campaign puts me at loggerheads with him. But being a person who has seen a bit of the medical establishment and has had his share of confrontations with egoistic doctors, I don't get easily folled by their seemingly altruistic rhetoric.

Dr P Venugopal has portrayed himself as a power hungry beaurocrat. This does not match with the vows of his vocation. I marvel at the way he and the medical community guided the media and managed to interview his former patients and allies. Please do not think that they were hunted down by the media, the media was led to them.

I wish the doctors and the Medical Council of India concentrate on leading India out of the morass they have led it into. Doctors today are more interested in holding on to prestigious positions and in developing friends within the drug industry. At their clinics they spend more time with medical representatives than their patients. Instead of educating themselves they prefer to go out on jaunts sponsored by the drug industry.

However much I go against Dr Ramadoss I cannot deny that he has scented the nexus between the doctors and the drug industry. It is not without reason that he pokes his nose into the affairs of the medical institutions. I can guarantee that his moves have inconvinienced many an " altruistic " soul who have now come out in large numbers to defend Dr Venugopal.

The High Court has supported Dr Venugopal purely on technical terms. The judiciary is no longer in the dark about the shenanigans of the medical establishment. In a landmark judgement against the Medical Council of India, the Supreme Court has dubbed it a " den of corruption " .

It is high time the doctors were reminded of their duty towards their patients. A doctors duty is to heal, not to recommend any particular mode of treatment. Why then is the Medical Council against the idea of introducing homeopathy and ayurveda in mainstream medical colleges? When modern medicine has created chronic diseases and made the life of the common man miserable both in terms of physical and mental pain and the effect on his finances, is it not the duty of people who call themselves doctors to hunt for a solution? They are however more interested in their earnings.

How many doctors are interested in exposing the nefarious activities of the drug industry? How many doctors educate the public about the side effects of chemical medicines? How many speak out against vaccines despite being fully aware of their dangers? How many speak out against unnecessary surgeries resorted to by their dishonest colleagues? How many deal with the subject of overmedication for profits? How many speak out against the junk food and drinks industry? How many are involved in educating the public on health matters?

Dr Ramadoss has now framed the concept of Public Health Institutions just to deal with these things. He is also not against proven holistic therapies. When the Lancet carried an article predicting the end of homeopathy, Dr Ramadoss was the only Health Minister to publicly come out against it. Again it is he who is taking the initiative to harmonise and record the various ayurvedic remedies. It is he who is holding holistic healing camps all over the country to judge the reaction of the public. All this has put him in the bad books of the medical community who percieve him as a threat to their booming business.

We health activists are solidly behind Dr Ramadoss in exposing the Medical Council and its dubious role in drafting the health policy of India.

Yours sincerely,

Jagannath Chatterjee,

Health Reform Activist. " Dr. Vaman Rao " <vrao wrote:

The letter is partisan and is one of the salvos from the armory of Dr A. Ramdoss. I did not expect such partisan advocacy of untenable positions adopted by the Minister and the dirty politics of Tamil Nadu. In spite of the claim that the Minister is a medical graduate, he has never practiced medicine to help the poor. Instead he indulged in politics to usurp power, enjoy the perks of office and mislead the people in the name of caste, etc. to rule the roost.

The letter in defense is so feckless that it fails to give a shred of evidence for the numerous allegations made by the author. If Venugopla were a dictator, how come almost a thumping majority, both inside and outside the AIIMS, has backed him? The High Court has favored his position. Those who made the accusations are in a hopeless minority and are counted as sycophants belonging to the paid lobby of the Ministers Ramdoss and Arjun Singh. Is he not the same Minister who without any rhyme or reason put the stamp of approval of his ministry to level unsubstantiated charges against Baba Ramdass? Is it not the same man who raided on the autonomy of the Medical Council of India and the National Board of Examinations to achieve his political ambitions? Is he not the same man who supported the commie Brinda Karat against her stand obliquely opposing Ayurveda or any thing connected with India and her past?.

The glorious tributes paid by all recognized institutions, eminent doctors, former and current members of the medical community, his award of Padma Bhushan, his various national and international honors and enhancement of the prestige of AIIMS - all redound to his glory than what is attempted in the letter. The instances of all students not being treated well is an indication of inferiority complex. To say that deserving persons were denied opportunity to become some bodies is more apt amongst the tottering politicians rather than skilled, intellectually first rate and professionally A-One individuals. There can be more positions created if there are people who deserve. These are all administrative pinpricks are what are called after-thoughts in absence of any case.

In this entire episode, the casualty is the merit. There seems to be a tendency to promote mediocrity in the name of democracy. While that may work in politics as it is so obvious, it brings disaster to knowledge sector. Is it not that the future of nation is in the knowledge sector, whether one likes it or not?

VRao

-----forwarded message -----

Dear Sirs,

The media is unsure about which side to take in the ongoing war between Dr Venugopal of AIIMS and our Health Minister, Dr Anbumani Ramadoss. The newspaper editorials shriek that autonomy is under threat and that professionals are being attacked. But the answer probably is not so simple as that.

Autonomy means responsible functioning under a democratic setup. It does not mean an autocratic regime which Dr Venugopal can be safely accused of ushering in. He has transformed himself into a one man institution just as Dr Kurien did in Amul. Such concentration of authority in a single person is a double edged sword. It breeds sycophants who wish to share the pie and as a result the interest of the organisation goes for a toss.

Dr Venugopal has been accused by his colleagues, many of whom have since left the institution, of usurping the credits of individuals. This is a very serious charge and goes against the basic ethics of a professional person. The resultant dissatisfaction of qualified doctors was made up by taking sides with students unions and keeping a firm grip on the sycophant lobby. This too is unbecoming of a professional.

Dr Ramadoss has been accused of politicking, which incidentally is his job, but it cannot be denied that Dr Venugopal too is an astute politician.

Another dissatisfaction brewing in the Institution is the segregation of students belonging to a particular category and keeping them under constant threat. In any well managed institution such things should not be condoned. After one is admitted all should be treated as equals and on merit. Why has Dr Venugopal overlooked this glaring shortcoming? Why has he preferred to look the other way? This does not reflect well on his administrative acumen.

Dr Venugopal has exceeded his term, thanks to his proximity to the political establishment. This itself has denied promotion opportunities to meritorious candidates who were more than eligible for the post. What makes Dr Venugopal so greedy for the chair? Is it for the sake of welfare of the patients, the welfare of the institution, for the sake of enjoying power, or what?

The aim of the AIIMS is to treat patients, not to turn them away pushing them to their death. But this is exactly what this premier Institution is doing now. A professional director of a premier Institution who has already overstayed his term should realise the folly of this personal struggle for power and resign with grace.

He will be more beneficial to his patients if he concentrates on his personal practice.

Yours sincerely,

Jagannath Chatterjee,

Health Reform Activist .

" Our ideal is not the spirituality that withdraws from life but the conquest of life by the power of the spirit. " - Aurobindo.

Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.

Try it free.