Indian Journal of Urology Users online:3022  
IJU
Home Current Issue Ahead of print Editorial Board Archives Symposia Guidelines Subscriptions Login 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
  Search 
  The Journal 
  The Association 
  Site Statistics 
  Addresses 
  e-Alerts 
  Online Submission 
 Back To Article

  Reader Comments

Year : 2018 | Volume:  34 | Issue Number:  1

EDITORIAL

Medical Council of India's amended qualifications for Indian medical teachers: Well intended, yet half-hearted

Bandewar Sunita V. S., Aggarwal Amita, Kumar Rajeev, Aggarwal Rakesh, Sahni Peush, Pai Sanjay A

Add Your Comments
 
1 Harish Gupta, 3/29/2019 12:57:31 PM
Bandewar et al. write in detail about challenges in front of our present day Medical teachers in her article entitled ‘MCI’s amended qualification for Indian medical teachers: Well intended ,yet half hearted’. While several points are highlighted in this article, what I want to add is that writing original article is not the only way for progression of science. Werner Forssmann ,a German scientist discovered cardiac catheterization through his heroic adventure. While cardiac catheterization was strictly banned in his time, he dared to swim against the tide. One day he inserted catheter in his own vein and got himself X Rayed. That attempt another chapter in the march of science. But he did not get accolades afterwards. He was ostracised, harassed, had to leave his job and work in another hospital. Later on he changed his branch of practice to urology. Much later in his life, he was awarded Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1956.

Had he been an Indian scientist working under control of present day MCI inspector, his amazing X Ray of himself would have been passed off casually as a mere case report. And as case reports are not included for assessment as research -publication, once again this scientist would have been forced to undergo similar cycle of harassment and agony. So for him nothing would have changed in all these years. So what I believe is that if our criteria do not award, or even recognise , something as great as first cardiac catheterization in a human ,something is seriously out of its place. How many such original discoveries have been sidelined and workers demoralised, only time will tell. But what I want to highlight is that not all the case reports are similar, as not all the original articles. If somebody puts all of these at single pedestal for assessment, that will be one of the greatest fraud with the science.

https://www.bmj.com/content/354/bmj.i5002/rr-3


 

 

 

HEALTHWARE INDIA