I went to see a dermatologist once because of a rash on my arm. Nothing serious, it turned out to be an allergy and was affected by stress, but I did not know that then.
She prescribed me a cortizone creme, which has a possible side effect of turning your skin pale – and it did. She also told me to shower less often. Apart from smelling bad, neither of those measures had any significant effect.
The problem is that she was trying to treat the symptom, not the cause. She wanted to make the rash disappear, not the problem that caused it. What caused it was in fact stress, as it is with very many conditions.
It’s like saying: “I’m a dermatologist, my speciality is skin, that’s all I can help you with.” And this happens everywhere in health care. How can you understand an organism that is so complex from merely one (limited) perspective? You can’t. That’s why clinics like MayoClinic, where a whole team of specialists evaluates your health as a team, are doing so well.
The same problem exists in developing countries. Not in health care in particular, but in the way we help them. Often, we donate money and food. There is nothing wrong with that, but these measures alone, while making us feel good, will not treat the cause. They will simply alleviate pain that the symptom is causing. I believe that the best way to help a country is to invest in its education, as this will provide lasting change rather than dependence on foreign aid.
What about business? If your sales are falling, have you considered that maybe your product sucks, and not the way you sell it?
Treat the cause.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Excellent article!
I would go further than you on the international aid front. Giving on a regular basis actually sustains the corrupt in power. They appropriate large proportions for themselves, their family and friends, either directly or indirectly, through leaving the international community to provide services that they should be providing. Money saved on their budget is more money for them. 60 years of substantial aid has had little effect in the developing world, but it has made a few people very rich. Aid should be limited to disaster relief. And education funded only if the donor has complete control over the use of the money – but that does not happen in these enlightened days when the recipient government must be “empowered”. Don’t know how I got onto this site! Back to work ….