Standard and individuality

Pages: 1 2

Turgenevskaya hero Bazarova one belongs clearly controversial idea. "Study of the individual, " he says, " it's not worth it. All people are alike in both body and soul; each of us marrow, spleen, heart, lungs similar construction; ...small changes mean nothing. Only one human instance to judge about all the others. People that the trees in the forest; no botanist will not deal with every individual birch". It was a call to doctors to break away from the fact, to rise above details and to find a formula generalizing the standard of health or of a disease. Maybe buzarovski slogan, a few straightforward and pronounced, is out of date due to the passage? Perhaps not. Doctors and is now interested in common regularities. But this is only half the way. There is a road to the individual.
How is it with the valuation, the value of the individual characteristics of today? Unfortunately, the tendency to cram all the people in the frames of average indicators remain in the activity of some doctors. To me, a Clinician-pediatrician, especially when conducting consultative work. Therefore, I would like to talk about the child's identity. It is this individuality that influences the development of a healthy child, and especially the course of his illness.
What is disease? What healthy people, healthy child?
Questions, I must say, not so easy. Why? Yes, because the concept of "disease" philosophers put one, economists and other social scientists - third, doctors - fourth. Have an idea of a certain standard of health. And the trouble is, they say, deviating from the standard.
However, this is not always the case. There are and transitional stage. Every human body is unique. Immunologists, studying features of protective reactions 'body, received a clear proof of identity. Norms, standards - average. For them it is impossible and unrealistic to fit all. No wonder today, when conducting dispensary observation remove the electrocardiogram in humans in the period when he is healthy, because it is his individual norm. Later removed during illness electrocardiography compared with that obtained in healthy condition.
Why the same disease one is easy, the other hard, and for the third becomes fatal? This question is accompanied by the art of healing time immemorial. Since ancient times doctors have offered a variety of explanations, assumptions, theories. A long time ago was born and some General biological concept, stating that human health depends on its Constitution. So, from the point of view of Hippocrates, the Constitution can be bad or good, strong or weak. Under "good" Constitution Hippocrates understand the harmony of the four bodily fluids. Another Patriarch of the ancient medicine - Roman Claudius Galen is meant by the Constitution of the different state "pneuma", drawn from the human body.

the Hippocratic oath
Future baby doctors take the Hippocratic oath

German F. Paracelsus has introduced the concept of "chemical" trends her, XVI century. He explained to human health predominance in the body of salt, sulfur and mercury. In the XVII century, the doctrine of the Constitution is the doctrine of temperaments. The special composition or structure of the body makes people sick " this thought was gradually formed and takes root in the minds of doctors. Until our century, when the disease has ceased to be the result of a breach of the blood, and began to understand how the pathology of cells, attempts were made to bring the morphological basis for the concept of the Constitution.
Why is it so hard, almost throughout the history of medical science, doctors holding on to the concept of the Constitution? Because I could see selecting certain features of the Constitution of the people, they shall approach to the person as an individual. Of course, in the eye first of all rush symptoms, i.e. morphology. And you know morphology always combined with function. But the fact of the matter that features remained hidden.
Try to open up these features and to boost the doctrine of the Constitution has been in the twenties domestic paediatrician Professor Mikhail S. Maslova. He was interested not external, but internal processes. He believed that the Constitution determines the body's ability to make the disease an individual character. Moreover, properties and characteristics can be not only bought but also inherited. However, there is a Constitution and it is an anomaly. What is it? "An anomaly of the Constitution,is believed M. S. Maslov,we say, when the functions of the body are in a state of unstable equilibrium, when the body has such... properties that predispose him to pathological reactions to external hazards, make it prone to certain diseases and more difficult to flow".
But how to find these properties?