In early 1950s, Sydney Farber ( Pathologist ) and Mary Lasker ( Social activist) launched an Anti cancer movement with much fan fare to eradicate cancer. They managed to bring in huge money to fund this initiative. In 2011, Anna Hazare ( social activist) and Legal experts launched Anti-corruption movement to eradicate 'corruption'.
Both movements had one striking similarity : Both movements concentrated on curative remedy, at the expense of preventive remedy: cancer movement concentrated on chemotherapy ( post-cancer) while anti-corruption movement concentrated on legal measures ( post-corruption). Both made the same mistake: Despite the knowledge that cancer , like corruption, is heterogenous (there are different type of cancers and therefore different causes); both marched on to find ONE UNIVERSAL CURE.
Despite pouring billions ( not millions) of dollars to find this universal cure, cancer remain 'undefeated' according to the Bailar report of 1994. After 60 years, we know that several successes in cancer cures have happened due to one reason: Researchers identified and studied specific cancer pockets and found appropriate strategies to address it.
For example, colon and cervical cancer cures were reported due to early detection caused by new methods of screening. This is preventive remedy. Leukemia and lymphoma cures resulted due to better methods in chemotherapy. This is curative remedy. On the other hand, breast cancer mortality rates improved due to the mix of preventive ( mammography) and curative remedy ( surgery and chemotherapy to remove remnant cancer cells).
The reduction in lung cancer mortality happened due to preventive methods, which are beyond medical field. The reduction happened due to political activism ( FTC action on warning labels on cigarettes), inventive litigation ( cases to rope in tobacco companies) and counter marketing ( anti-tobacco advertisements)
What is one-liner lesson for us? That anything as big as cancer is heterogenous by its nature. It is necessary to identify self-contained individual pockets ( lung, cervical and other areas), study the causative factors in each of the pocket, and devise an appropriate mix of preventive and curative remedy to address that pocket.
Promise of universal cure, despite all the activism or good intention, cannot solve the problem. It just wastes money, efforts and drives away the motivation. Mary Lasker, the activist, was not active in anti-cancer at all when she died in 1994.
If we do not have to sit after 60 years and mourn that nothing happened due to anti-corruption drive, what should we be doing?
Corruption, like cancer, is heterogenous. It is important to identify self contained pockets, study them individually and devise appropriate remedy for addressing it. Tackling corruption at Passport and RTO offices require different mix of preventive and curative remedies than tackling corruption at 2G License grants. Every pocket of corruption requires a different mix of preventive and curative (i.e legal) remedy. While Company law corruption could be reduced by e-enabling of company registration, the same remedy cannot be applied to granting of non-agriculture land approvals. In pockets similar to lung cancer, such as anti-dowry or RTO police, we may have to adopt social activism to change laws and people's habits , and extend the remedy to include social activism.
Let us not 'simplify' the monster of corruption and believe that it can be tackled by one social activist and legal specialists. Let us become realistic and sane. Howsoever it may be tempting to get into action mode and do something, we must control our impulse and take meaningful actions. As Betrand Russell writes: Thoughtless action and Actionless thought are equally bad.
Both movements had one striking similarity : Both movements concentrated on curative remedy, at the expense of preventive remedy: cancer movement concentrated on chemotherapy ( post-cancer) while anti-corruption movement concentrated on legal measures ( post-corruption). Both made the same mistake: Despite the knowledge that cancer , like corruption, is heterogenous (there are different type of cancers and therefore different causes); both marched on to find ONE UNIVERSAL CURE.
Despite pouring billions ( not millions) of dollars to find this universal cure, cancer remain 'undefeated' according to the Bailar report of 1994. After 60 years, we know that several successes in cancer cures have happened due to one reason: Researchers identified and studied specific cancer pockets and found appropriate strategies to address it.
For example, colon and cervical cancer cures were reported due to early detection caused by new methods of screening. This is preventive remedy. Leukemia and lymphoma cures resulted due to better methods in chemotherapy. This is curative remedy. On the other hand, breast cancer mortality rates improved due to the mix of preventive ( mammography) and curative remedy ( surgery and chemotherapy to remove remnant cancer cells).
The reduction in lung cancer mortality happened due to preventive methods, which are beyond medical field. The reduction happened due to political activism ( FTC action on warning labels on cigarettes), inventive litigation ( cases to rope in tobacco companies) and counter marketing ( anti-tobacco advertisements)
What is one-liner lesson for us? That anything as big as cancer is heterogenous by its nature. It is necessary to identify self-contained individual pockets ( lung, cervical and other areas), study the causative factors in each of the pocket, and devise an appropriate mix of preventive and curative remedy to address that pocket.
Promise of universal cure, despite all the activism or good intention, cannot solve the problem. It just wastes money, efforts and drives away the motivation. Mary Lasker, the activist, was not active in anti-cancer at all when she died in 1994.
If we do not have to sit after 60 years and mourn that nothing happened due to anti-corruption drive, what should we be doing?
Corruption, like cancer, is heterogenous. It is important to identify self contained pockets, study them individually and devise appropriate remedy for addressing it. Tackling corruption at Passport and RTO offices require different mix of preventive and curative remedies than tackling corruption at 2G License grants. Every pocket of corruption requires a different mix of preventive and curative (i.e legal) remedy. While Company law corruption could be reduced by e-enabling of company registration, the same remedy cannot be applied to granting of non-agriculture land approvals. In pockets similar to lung cancer, such as anti-dowry or RTO police, we may have to adopt social activism to change laws and people's habits , and extend the remedy to include social activism.
Let us not 'simplify' the monster of corruption and believe that it can be tackled by one social activist and legal specialists. Let us become realistic and sane. Howsoever it may be tempting to get into action mode and do something, we must control our impulse and take meaningful actions. As Betrand Russell writes: Thoughtless action and Actionless thought are equally bad.
Source of inspiration: Siddhartha Mukherjee, The Emperor of all Maladies ( the biography of cancer)
