Pierre Louis
The French revolutionary has paved the way for Pierre Louis’s first clinical trials with the medical emphasis on a new concept of the medical gaze, detached and impersonal (Gere). Louis’ skepticism in the traditional medical practice arose when he found himself helpless during the mid of an epidemic of diphtheria (Gere). Eventually, Louis grew to become a therapeutic nihilist and came up with an experimental design to seek for the numeric evidences, indicating the inefficiency of the traditional healing method (Gere). The first clinical trial that Pierre Louis conducted involves the testing of the common healing method of bloodletting. Louis used his numerical method and obtained the data as evidences to prove that the bloodletting method is
…show more content…
inherently useless in the curing process (Gere). In his book of Researches on the Effects of Bloodletting in Some Inflammatory Diseases, he categorized bloodletting patients into different groups with various conditions and factors that can manipulate the outcomes, such as the influence of age and the physical strength. He investigated the effect using straightforward calculations and measurement, disregarding the patient’s individuality and embodiment of the spiritual sickness (Louis 57).
Pierre Louis’ numeral method has fit into the new spirit of empiricism in medicine in which he advocates the evidence based medical practices.
The evidence based medical practice requires multiple trials of experiments for an improved result. Hence, Louis indicates that the learning process needs to be formed with numeric data of experiments for a clear analysis of flaws and achievement. The statistics on the former trials can display the results clearly without the sentimental assumptions (Louis 65-68). In fact, Louis was skeptical of the bloodletting healing method since there were no evidences to confirm the actual effectiveness. Thus, to free the endurance of ambiguity and vagueness, Louis came up with the first clinical trial to seek for the truth. Different than the traditional believers, Louis disregarded the spiritual or special embodiment of the patient in each case. He would refuse to perform a healing method if it is based on assumptions without actual data. Indeed, he stated that based on the calculation, the treatment can be further analyzed to be accurate for a certain condition instead of being generalized for different diseases. Thus, the treatment needs to be enumerated to be collected as a recorded evidence for the future medical education (Louis 68). He also once again concluded his ideology of the necessity to disregard the medical practice basing on an idea or romance but an analysis from a series of detailed facts (Louis
70).
Pierre Louis’ trial inserted an opposing clash on the traditional view of the humoral healing process that centralized around the patient’s sentiment. The former practice of diagnosing patients based on the patient’s narration showed the adoration of the human uniqueness and the importance of individuality. Therefore, Louis’ idea of categorizing patients into various groups based on their shared characteristics to perform experiment and trial has encountered many objection from his fellow therapeutics. In fact, Louis also pointed out many arguments that he came across: the patient cannot be measured using mathematical exactness and categorical groups; the unique of each medical case is impossible to measure with mathematical exactness (Louis 61). Louis refuted his challengers with the philosophy of anything in the medical practice can be enumerated such as even though the time of diseases cannot be estimated but the duration of pain can be use in the account of the trial (Louis 61). Louis also affirmed that the errors can also be normalized if patients are grouped together in respond to the criticism (Louis 61). In his response to the criticism, Louis turned their questions on the human individuality and spiritual embodiment into numeric explanations. This shows his attempt to establish a new and unfamiliar concept of medical practice turned science in the early 19th century.
inherently useless in the curing process (Gere). In his book of Researches on the Effects of Bloodletting in Some Inflammatory Diseases, he categorized bloodletting patients into different groups with various conditions and factors that can manipulate the outcomes, such as the influence of age and the physical strength. He investigated the effect using straightforward calculations and measurement, disregarding the patient’s individuality and embodiment of the spiritual sickness (Louis 57).
Pierre Louis’ numeral method has fit into the new spirit of empiricism in medicine in which he advocates the evidence based medical practices.
The evidence based medical practice requires multiple trials of experiments for an improved result. Hence, Louis indicates that the learning process needs to be formed with numeric data of experiments for a clear analysis of flaws and achievement. The statistics on the former trials can display the results clearly without the sentimental assumptions (Louis 65-68). In fact, Louis was skeptical of the bloodletting healing method since there were no evidences to confirm the actual effectiveness. Thus, to free the endurance of ambiguity and vagueness, Louis came up with the first clinical trial to seek for the truth. Different than the traditional believers, Louis disregarded the spiritual or special embodiment of the patient in each case. He would refuse to perform a healing method if it is based on assumptions without actual data. Indeed, he stated that based on the calculation, the treatment can be further analyzed to be accurate for a certain condition instead of being generalized for different diseases. Thus, the treatment needs to be enumerated to be collected as a recorded evidence for the future medical education (Louis 68). He also once again concluded his ideology of the necessity to disregard the medical practice basing on an idea or romance but an analysis from a series of detailed facts (Louis
70).
Pierre Louis’ trial inserted an opposing clash on the traditional view of the humoral healing process that centralized around the patient’s sentiment. The former practice of diagnosing patients based on the patient’s narration showed the adoration of the human uniqueness and the importance of individuality. Therefore, Louis’ idea of categorizing patients into various groups based on their shared characteristics to perform experiment and trial has encountered many objection from his fellow therapeutics. In fact, Louis also pointed out many arguments that he came across: the patient cannot be measured using mathematical exactness and categorical groups; the unique of each medical case is impossible to measure with mathematical exactness (Louis 61). Louis refuted his challengers with the philosophy of anything in the medical practice can be enumerated such as even though the time of diseases cannot be estimated but the duration of pain can be use in the account of the trial (Louis 61). Louis also affirmed that the errors can also be normalized if patients are grouped together in respond to the criticism (Louis 61). In his response to the criticism, Louis turned their questions on the human individuality and spiritual embodiment into numeric explanations. This shows his attempt to establish a new and unfamiliar concept of medical practice turned science in the early 19th century.