I would like to comment on the article '14pc suffer long-term illnesses' (South China Morning Post, May 15). This 14 per cent of the population requires long-term treatment for chronic illnesses, according to an official report. Nearly 80 per cent were taking Western medicine and 89 per cent went to Western trained doctors. The five main disease categories quoted were high blood pressure (hypertension), diabetes, heart disease, joint and back problems and eye diseases.
The strange thing about these statistics is that it is widely accepted that Western medicine is usually the best modality for trauma, while Chinese or other alternatives to Western medicine are usually better for chronic conditions. It has been said that if a treatment does not cure a disease in the acute stage it will not cure it in the chronic stage, so one should be seeking alternatives. One can conclude that by far the majority of the respondents with chronic diseases were simply having their symptoms suppressed with no attempt at a cure. It seems to follow that, if such a high percentage of patients are being treated for chronic illnesses by Western doctors and with Western medicine, then something has gone wrong.
For example, it is well documented that backache is Western medicine's greatest weakness and that 80 per cent of people generally who wear glasses don't need to (simple mental and physical exercises will very often restore good eyesight), though the figure may be less in Hong Kong.
My conclusion from all this is that the public is not being given correct guidance on how to tackle chronic illnesses. The emphasis is all on Western orthodox medicine, even when it is least appropriate. Insurance companies largely restrict their cover to Western treatment. The Hospital Authority employs predominantly Western-trained doctors, even when there are far better therapists available for chronic conditions in the private sector.
Before the Government moves towards charging the population more for Western medicine they should critically examine the medical service to see if it is being delivered in the most cost-effective way, which from the above discourse and examples it quite clearly is not.
KEN BRIDGEWATER
