My Team: Right or Wrong

IT is become fashionable among the intelligentsia to be ‘well balanced’. It seems to be old fashioned to be ‘one sided’.

I recall, whilst resident in a south Asian country, I was a supporter of a particular person to be the head of the Indian business chamber. Originally the head-ship was thrust on him, becoz no one wanted it. He turned out to be a ‘popular’ head and was re-elected to that office for many years, most of the time uncontested. Not that there weren’t any other candidates. There were, but they knew that they will be defeated. So they never stood for election.

As years went by, the opposition got a bright idea: there should be a provision in the constitution that a person can not be head for more than 2 or 3 years running.

Due to this ‘dispute’, the Indian diplomat located in that town took matters in his hand. He asked for a general body meeting to be called to consider this amendment to the constitution as drafted by him.

The incumbent head n his Team were opposed to this. They argued that if anyone wants, he can come forward n contest elections.

Personally I was in favour of the proposal to limit the number of years one could be Head.

On the eve of the General Body, the Head n his supporters called on me to get my support. In principle I was in favour of the amendment. After a lot of debate, I asked myself: if I am a supporter of this Team, I must support their stand. Else what kind of a supporter am I. (in later years on return to India, I have heard the phrase: issue based support).

So I cast my vote with the Incumbent.

The point I am making is that if one belongs to a particular party, ideology, Team, he cannot in all honesty oppose his party, ideology, Team when it comes to a public airing. It is no dishonesty to voice the difference within the Grouping. But when it comes to a public airing, it has to be my Team, right or wrong.

Medical Lessons - 2nd opinion?

It is accepted wisdom in medical treatment to go for 2^nd opinion. I have had more than my share of these n I have lost more often than won.

Case 1. Prostate

My urologist in Lilavati suggested, in 2005 that I should get operated for prostate. I spoke to some friends and was encouraged to go for 2^nd opinion to the top most urologist of Bombay. He prolonged my treatment for about 18 months. In 2007 he also suggested surgery. I duly underwent laser- based surgery in Aug that year. The upshot was that I had three bouts of post -operative infections entailing heavy medication. Also in the 18 months I was receiving increasing dosage of medication.

Verdict: I lost.

Case 2. Dental

In Viet Nam I had got a 5 piece dental bridge. It kept coming off. I went under care of a dentist in Bandra suggested by my neighbour. After some quick fixes n one extraction, he suggested that I should go in for implant becoz a new bridge is not feasible. I went for 2^nd opinion to my old dentist in Bombay (pre viet nam era). He readily opined that a new bridge was very much feasible n there is no need for implant. He provided the bridge. I developed infection under the bridge and had 3 different surgeries: excision by my dentist to remove infection; second surgery by a specialist surgeon; third surgery involving curetting of the bone under the gum. The bridge proved not viable. I settled for a removable partial denture. Meanwhile one more adjoining tooth gave way n the denture got extended. The denture is proving useless for eating. Now finally we have come a full circle n implants are contemplated. The dentist is afraid that the bone that was curetted may not provide a stable base for the implant. Today I have undergone a scan to assess this. First look shows narrowed bone width. Prospects are 50:50

Verdict: I lost – time, money n damage.

Case 3. Eyes

The car accident in Dubai in Nov 2005 had caused injury to the tissue around the eyes: Sort of ‘black eye’. The doctors there had suggested that the damage would go away n I should get a recheck in 3-4 months. In Bombay I was referred to a famous eye doctor in Bandra. He opined that I had a developing cataract but could wait. He did not prescribe any medicine for my complaint of the eye watering on reading. Six months later, Aug 2006, he opined that I was due for cataract surgery n should set the date. Again my friend n senior suggested that I should assess the quality of my vision n go for surgery only if I was feeling handicapped. I was not handicapped in any way in 2006 nor in 2010! Meanwhile I went for 2^nd opinion n the verdict was ‘dry eyes’. Third eye doctor in 2008 opined that surgery should ‘now’ be done. Fourth eye doctor in Jan 2010 opined ‘no need’ because I can see v well. My spectacle Nos are v small.

Curiously Sukhjit overtook me n has had a cataract surgery done!

Verdict: Open – hopefully I won.

There are one or two more but the point is made i.e. 2^nd opinion is not always beneficial.

Doctor to the lady patient: Your eye sight is weak.

Lady patient: I want a 2^nd opinion.

Doctor: You are ugly.