Satyamev Jayate - Aamir Khan

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
I am not talking about negligence. I am talking about withholding information and not providing reports even though we asked for it so that we could take second opinion. I am talking about scare mongering. The doctor said my aunt will have to live one oxygen for life.
He would have told about a possibility of such thing.

But what you are saying is sadly true. The scare mongering and shit. Worse,. they dont even give the reports you say? Hmm. Cant you force their hand Legally?

Anyway, I will share my experience with treating my friend in my own Hospital-(Which by the way is kickass hospital being the Model for the govt colleges of TN and all:rolleyes:). We would not have admitted him here in the first place, if not for an emergency. Later, once admitted, they wont let us take him somewhere "safe" even if we wanted:lol:

he got in with a heavy fever and and chills. The immediate suspicion was that he had Malaria, since it is common in Chennai. But the treatment did not work. He got worse and worse after two days of treatment. We were asked to take a blood test. We gave the blood test to the lab in our own Government Hospital:tsk:. But just for our satisfaction, we gave the blood test to private lab too. The govt lab showed us a normal- Platelets count. But the test from the Private lab showed a huge drop in the Platelets count. So this caused Suspicion for us and we went to confront the lab assistant on this issue. That bastard told us that , he dint check properly first time, and then re-did the test and it was indeed very low. Then he was given an immediate Platelet infusion. Now with a new symptom-that is the falling platelet counts, he was successfully diagnosed with Leptospirosis by our HOD of medicine and was treated and got alright. But those bastards, said they wont give us the case sheet.

The most irritating part regarding this issue is that, the job of that assistant bastard was not that difficult really. He just had to look at the machine, in which he gives in the blood sample and just copy it and write it down in the report. Even this copy and write work that pig did not do.

And to cover up his bloody negligency, that pig refused to let the case sheet out. Whats more, you cant Xerox copy that in any shop. Dont know what law is there to protect these bastards. As I said, the judiciary sucks in India big time.

Now, the truth is, whenever the students from our college get sick and are admitted here, they are given preferential treatment(Our medicine Directer himself attended the case) in our hospital. Now if some one with this preferential treatment is treated like this, imagine the fate of the regular patients?

The negligence that runs in govt hospitals is just too unforgivable:tsk:
 

niharjhatn

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
899
Likes
391
Its not simple as that, The lung abcess could have been from a lot of Microbes, not just TB . And Pneumonia is not a cause for Lung abcess, it is a disease per se.. Here go through . Look at the organisms involved. Most of them are involved in Pneumonia too
Lung abscess - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pneumonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The lungs might have actually worked at 25% and could have improved later on. No way to know for sure. And for old age, there might already be a compromised lung function from fibrosis, and pneumonia could have made it worse. even the Lung abcess would have done that. So treating in the assumption of pneumonia is not a delibrate negligence.
Better to think of abscess vs pneumonia as simply different manifestations of infections - some organisms will produce a pneumonia like picture whilst others will produce an abscess like picture. The molecular method of the acute inflammatory reaction is different.

TB typically causes concomitant necrosis cf. abscess only...
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
Better to think of abscess vs pneumonia as simply different manifestations of infections - some organisms will produce a pneumonia like picture whilst others will produce an abscess like picture. The molecular method of the acute inflammatory reaction is different.

TB typically causes concomitant necrosis cf. abscess only...
The thing is both pneumonia and lung abcess have nearly the same treatment. So I cant find the doctor at fault.

TB is entirely different case.
 

niharjhatn

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
899
Likes
391
The thing is both pneumonia and lung abcess have nearly the same treatment. So I cant find the doctor at fault.

TB is entirely different case.
He should be able to diagnose bloody pneumonias w/out the need of a freaking lung biopsy.

But IDK anything apart from what was written on the path report.

But your story on screwing up the WCC on a routine FBP is concerning - if it wasn't just contamination or something and the labs really messed up that bad... well it downright disgusting really.
 

niharjhatn

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
899
Likes
391
Heh... I was just watching that video posted and at the start Aamir asks what Nehru would have thought of India today.... Nehru would have thought why did I become PM and screw India so badly? :D
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
He should be able to diagnose bloody pneumonias w/out the need of a freaking lung biopsy.

But IDK anything apart from what was written on the path report.
Dude, the patient was old. Pneumonia and lung abcess show nearly the same features in routine clinical examinations. Probably x-ray could have cleared it up. Beside, the patient being old, there is always the risk of Lung cancer. Hence safer to rule it out.Anyway, we dont know all the details so cant comment on the Doctor's efficiency or negligence

But your story on screwing up the WCC on a routine FBP is concerning - if it wasn't just contamination or something and the labs really messed up that bad... well it downright disgusting really.
There is no bloody contamination. When we approached that fag bastard on this(the count was as low as 20,000/cc which is dangerously low but he gave a report of platelets being 1.5 lakh per cc of blood-completely normal), that pig told that he dint have time to do the test properly. So he just divided the RBC count in Millions into Platelet count in lakhs. Since My friend's RBC count was 4.5 million/cc, he gave the report as 1.5 lakh platelets/cc,We wanted to slap that pig there. the machine is an autoanalyser, all that moron needed to do was to look at the value which comes from it and type it. Even that that pig could not do.

That aside, look at the way he writes the reports on Complete Blood count- divinding the no. of RBCs to get the no. of Platelets:mad:

Heh... I was just watching that video posted and at the start Aamir asks what Nehru would have thought of India today.... Nehru would have thought why did I become PM and screw India so badly? :D
Now thats a good one :rotflmao:
 
Last edited:

niharjhatn

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
899
Likes
391
Dude, the patient was old. Pneumonia and lung abcess show nearly the same features in routine clinical examinations. Probably x-ray could have cleared it up. Beside, the patient being old, there is always the risk of Lung cancer. Hence safer to rule it out.Anyway, we dont know all the details so cant comment on the Doctor's efficiency or negligence
Yeah thats true re: cancer. But correct me if I am wrong, but I was always taught to make such a diagnosis of lung infections virtually based on clinical exam and plain films alone - blood tests, sputum cultures, pleural aspirates, bronchoscopy etc all have pretty crap sensitivity and specificity and so don't really help anyway.

Seems ridiculous exposing anyone to such a risk of lung biopsy when infection is suspected - I certainly wouldn't have consented unless there were other signs of the patient 'not being right' and cancer being a possibility.
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
Yeah thats true re: cancer. But correct me if I am wrong, but I was always taught to make such a diagnosis of lung infections virtually based on clinical exam and plain films alone - blood tests, sputum cultures, pleural aspirates, bronchoscopy etc all have pretty crap sensitivity and specificity and so don't really help anyway.

Seems ridiculous exposing anyone to such a risk of lung biopsy when infection is suspected - I certainly wouldn't have consented unless there were other signs of the patient 'not being right' and cancer being a possibility.
I agree with what you said, if thats a pure infection, there wont be any need for biopsy, since the sputum culture and blood tests and sensitivity tests would have established the infection/treatment plan. But we dont know the exact details on what the symptoms and signs are and so how can we comment on the doctor's negligence for suspecting carcinoma and ordering a lung biopsy?
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
MI, government hospitals are the last resort for the poor and there is no value for life in India that, that everyone knows. There is willful negligence which is rife. Even the doctors on duty are more bothered about their private practice and they act as if they are doing a favor on the patients.
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
MI, government hospitals are the last resort for the poor and there is no value for life in India that, that everyone knows. There is willful negligence which is rife. Even the doctors on duty are more bothered about their private practice and they act as if they are doing a favor on the patients.
The crappiest part is none of them are delivered justice for their negligence:(. And the worst part is that now a days the way things are run in govt hospitals is actually better than how they used to run before:(

Instead of this shit regarding lokpal, We should have pressed on for Judicial reforms which are the root cause for all our miseries. We can choose to vote these corrupt poiliticians out, but we cant vote in the judges, nor can we question their judgements.
 
Last edited:

niharjhatn

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
899
Likes
391
I agree with what you said, if thats a pure infection, there wont be any need for biopsy, since the sputum culture and blood tests and sensitivity tests would have established the infection/treatment plan. But we dont know the exact details on what the symptoms and signs are and so how can we comment on the doctor's negligence for suspecting carcinoma and ordering a lung biopsy?
Sorry what I was trying to say is that all those baseline tests are POOR predictors of infection - i.e. sensitivity and specificity of those tests are poor and hence a result from such tests cannot be interpreted accurately and is not going to help interpretation of the case in anyway... its really a waste of resources in an already dilapidated system.

But as you quite rightly point out, they have NO fear for any retribution and hence just want to get away with as much shit as they can.

Indian law is an absolute mess that can let you get away with almost anything :(
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
Sorry what I was trying to say is that all those baseline tests are POOR predictors of infection - i.e. sensitivity and specificity of those tests are poor and hence a result from such tests cannot be interpreted accurately and is not going to help interpretation of the case in anyway...
:hmm: They help in confirming the diagnosis. Thats how we do it here. We make presumptive diagnosis based on Clinical examinations and then confirm it with culture, blood tests, radiological examinations.

But I have never heard of a lung biopsy for Pneumonia or Lung abscess:D. The only place I heard of that is of course in Carcinoma of Lungs
 

Raj30

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
1,325
Likes
1,603
outlookindia.com
Silence Eva Jayate
Aamir Khan not only deviously censored any discussion of Ambedkar and Reservation, but seemed content to use the 1920s language of high-caste reformers
S. Anand

This Sunday morning I received a call from a friend who alerted me to the tenth episode of Aamir Khan-anchored Satyamev Jayate since the focus was on caste and untouchability. I mumbled something about his spoiling my Sunday, but tuned in nevertheless. It began with Kaushal Panwar narrating her harrowing tale for about twenty minutes: from her childhood where she was forced to join her mother in cleaning shit to her pursuit of a PhD in Sanskrit. I was glad that the audience heard her say that the discrimination she had experienced in her school in a Haryana village was no different from what she faced in the enlightened campus of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi—where she continues to be denied a rightful job.

Following Kaushal, we were allowed a glimpse into the life of Balwant Singh, author of the tract An Untouchable in the IAS. I noticed a shot of him looking up to a larger-than-life portrait of Dr B.R. Ambedkar in his Saharanhpur house, and realized that so far—30 minutes into the show—there had been no verbal mention of Ambedkar. Balwant Singh, among the first dalits to enter a career in civil service in post-independence India, had said in his interview that he was perhaps the first and only IAS officer ever to be demoted to the rank of tehsildar. That had been edited out. I intuitively felt the show was going to scrupulously avoid any mention of two key ideas—Reservation and Ambedkar. I was hoping to be proved wrong. I wasn't.

How did Kaushal Panwar do her BA, MA and PhD and land a job with Delhi University? What is it that facilitates access to hitherto-excluded spaces for dalits? What is the one policy that enables dalits to stop cleaning shit and reclaim their humanity? The one weapon that helps them get an education? Get a job? Reservation. And who made this policy possible? Ambedkar. But Aamir Khan wouldn't mention the R and A words even once for fear of alienating his middle class audience, which as a friend perceptively said, is fed "bourgeois moralism of the most pathological sort," on a programme where "the only solution turns out to be nothing more than emotional catharsis".

Not surprisingly, Khan would also not mention the fact that an atrocity is committed on a dalit every 18 minutes according to the National Crime Records Bureau. The penchant Khan and his research team showed for various laws and statistics in the first two episodes of SJ that I had seen—on prenatal sex determination and domestic violence—was nowhere on display here. Hence no mention of the Prevention of Atrocities Act of 1989 and its dismal failure to curb violence against dalits. No discussion of a case like Khairlanji, where, in 2006, the mother and daughter, Surekha Bhotmange and Priyanka Bhotmange, had not just been raped repeatedly but tortured in ghastly ways (stripped, paraded naked, with fact-finding reports saying bullock cart pokers were thrust into their vaginas, and that Priyanka was raped even after her death). An interview with Bhaiyalal Bhotmange, the sole survivor of the Khairlanji carnage, may have not fit into the preordained script.

Then the show featured documentary filmmaker Stalin K. Padma and several clips from his three-hour film India Untouched. Again, the cherry-picked excerpts skirted any reference to A and R. In a cringe-worthy moment, Stalin even fawned on Khan and congratulated him for taking up the issue of untouchability on television 65 years after independence.

This was followed by homilies from His Holiness, Justice (retired) C.S. Dharmadhikari, who in his self-introduction, pretending to denounce labels, paraded every label of privilege that adorned his CV—including the 'blessings' allegedly bestowed by Adi Sankara on his ancestors. This man could equally pompously announce his Deshastha Brahmanness as his apparent rejection of it. I would have given up right then but for the fact that I had spotted Bezwada Wilson in the audience, and I was waiting to see if this leader of the Safai Karamchari Andolan—a man who had pioneered the demolition of dry latrines across India—would salvage the morning. He too was asked to narrate his early life, and he too shed tears. As did Khan with practised ease.

The next day I called Wilson and told him I was annoyed that even he did not bother to mention Ambedkar and Reservation. Wilson clarified that he indeed had. It had been edited out, as was his rant against the Supreme Court and Parliament—since both institutions had been dragging their feet on the issue of manual scavenging. Then he revealed something that shocked me. He said he had not been in the audience when Kaushal Panwar was being interviewed by Khan. I countered saying I had seen him 'reacting' to what Kaushal said on stage. "Even I saw myself in the audience and hence was shocked," said Wilson. He said Kaushal had been interviewed in total isolation, in an empty studio. And yet on Sunday we saw, every once in a while, close-ups of fretful, anxious, pained and agonised faces of members of the studio audience as Kaushal was narrating her story. They even clapped on cue, like when Khan asked Kaushal her heroic father's name. Clearly, all this had been manipulated and faked—with clever editing and splicing of shots.

I checked with Kaushal if this was true. It was. I further found that Khan and his team had shot interviews with two members of the Dalit Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry—its chairman Milind Kamble and key advisor Ashok Khade. They were informed just a week ahead of the 8 July telecast that their interviews wouldn't be aired since they "did not fit in with the story". In fact, when Chandra Bhan Prasad, mentor to DICCI and an exponent of 'dalit capitalism', watched the show with Kamble in Pune, they could not believe their eyes. Kamble's interview with Khan had been shot with Dharmadhikari and Kamble seated next to each other on the studio couch; but Kamble had been weeded out. Prasad wondered if some 'dirty trick editing' made this possible. More likely, Dharmadhikari took a leaf out of Khan's book and did not mind giving a 'fresh take' minus the unsuitable presence of Kamble. I also discovered that every participant on the show is forced to sign a 'confidentiality agreement' saying they will not speak about their participation—recorded many months ahead—in any social media.

In his weekly column in The Hindu, Khan began his discourse with "Gandhiji's struggle" for "those ostracized as untouchables". Perhaps Khan and his ghostwriters did not ever hear about what young Bhimrao had to face right in Satara at age 10. After a few paragraphs extolling Gandhi, Khan mentions "Babasaheb Ambedkar" in passing, as someone who led the drafting of the Constitution. Since the bulk of SJ's episode chose to focus on manual scavenging, and since Dharmadhikari and Khan chose to highlight Gandhi's imagined role in the fight against this practice—an issue largely and sadly neglected even within the dalit movement—let us turn briefly to what Gandhi said about "the most honourable occupation".

Gandhi wrote in Harijan in 1934: "I call scavenging as one of the most honourable occupations to which mankind is called. I don't consider it an unclean occupation by any means. That you have to handle dirt is true. But that every mother is doing and has to do. But nobody says a mother's occupation is unclean." In another essay entitled 'The Ideal Bhangi' in 1936 he wrote, "My ideal Bhangi would know the quality of night-soil and urine. He would keep a close watch on these and give a timely warning to the individual concerned. Thus he will give a timely notice of the results of his examination of the excreta. That presupposes a scientific knowledge of the requirements of his profession." It is this stranglehold of Gandhism that has kept manual scavenging alive.

Ambedkar held a view that was the exact opposite: "Under Hinduism scavenging was not a matter of choice, it was a matter of force. What does Gandhism do? It seeks to perpetuate this system by praising scavenging as the noblest service to society! What is the use of telling the scavenger that even a Brahmin is prepared to do scavenging when it is clear that according to Hindu Shastras and Hindu notions even if a Brahmin did scavenging he would never be subject to the disabilities of one who is a born scavenger?" Ambedkar argued that in India a man is not a scavenger because of his work, but because of his birth irrespective of whether he does scavenging or not.

Khan and his team not only deviously censored any discussion of Ambedkar and Reservation, they seemed content to use the 1920s language of high-caste reformers. A friend chided me saying I shouldn't expect Khan to be an activist. But surely my friend did not know how Khan manipulates and fools his audience—in the studio and outside—to nod and cry at moments he chooses. Wilson said, "In fact, during the shoot it was not I who actually began crying. Aamir Khan started to cry, so I was forced to cry along." Khan obviously thinks we can flush away middle class shit with tears.

S. Anand is publisher, Navayana. A shorter, edited version of this appears in print.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sob

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top