اھڙا ڪيترائي طبي علم سائنس آھن جيڪي ثابت قدمي يا افاديت جي ثبوت جي مڪمل کوٽ جي باوجود جاري آھن. ڪجهه عمل انهن جي اصليت جي ثقافت مان نڪرندا هئا، يا اڳئين سائنسي دور جي رائج خيالن مان نڪرندا هئا، جڏهن ته ٻيا شايد چڱي معنيٰ رکندڙ پر انتهائي گمراهه ڪندڙ انفرادي عملي جي تصور مان ٺاهيا ويا هئا. اهي صرف ٺهيل هئا - هوميوپيٿي، مثال طور، يا subluxation نظريو.
Iridology belongs to this latter category – a system of diagnosis that was invented entirely by Ignatz Peczely, a Hungarian physician who first published his ideas in 1893. The story goes that Peczely as a boy found an owl with a broken leg. At the time he noticed a prominent black stripe in the iris of one eye of the owl. He nursed the bird back to health and then noticed that the black line was gone, replaced by ragged white lines. From this single observation Peczely developed the notion of iridology.
پيزيلي جو خيال هو ته آئرس ڪنهن نه ڪنهن طريقي سان جسم جي باقي حصن ڏانهن نقش ٿي ويندا آهن، ان ڪري آئرس ۾ رنگ جا ڦڙا جسم جي مختلف حصن جي صحت جي حالت کي ظاهر ڪن ٿا. تشخيص يا علاج جي هن بنيادي طريقي کي هومونڪولس اپروچ سڏيو ويندو آهي - اهو خيال آهي ته جسم جو هڪ حصو باقي جسم ڏانهن نقشو ڪري ٿو، بشمول عضوي سسٽم. Reflexology، auricular ايڪوپنڪچر، ۽ اڃا تائين سڌو chiropractic هن طريقي جي پيروي ڪندا آهن.
اھو اھو آھي جيڪو اڳتي ھلي سگھي ٿو: پنھنجي شروعاتي مشاهدن کي شايع ڪرڻ کان پوء، پيڪسلي پنھنجي خيالن کي چڱي طرح ڊزائين ڪيل مشاهدن سان جانچڻ لاء تيار ڪيو جيڪي پنھنجي مفروضي کي غلط ثابت ڪرڻ جي قابل ھئا. هن احتياط سان تشريحاتي، پر چڱيءَ طرح قائم ڪيل، آئيني ۽ صحت جي وچ ۾ تعلق بابت حقيقتون ٺاهيون. بعد ۾، انااتومسٽ هن رابطي جي بنيادي ميکانيزم کي دريافت ڪيو - iris ۽ باقي جسم جي وچ ۾ رابطي جو هڪ وسيع نظام. آئيرس ڪنيڪشن تي وڌيڪ تحقيق ڪئي وئي، ۽ بعد ۾ طبي سائنسدانن اناتومي ۽ فزيالوجي جي هن دلچسپ پہلو کي استحصال ڪرڻ لاء وڌيڪ ۽ وڌيڪ طريقا ڳوليا.
Of course, this is not what happened. Peczely did not do any serious scientific research. Rather, he simply invented a pseudoscience, by drawing maps of the iris that were as much a product of his imagination as observation, and were largely the result of confirmation bias. He did not perform blinded studies, or produce the kind of evidence that could separate a real phenomenon from an imaginary one. Iridology, as his practice became known, is the N-rays of medical diagnosis. Further, no subsequent science has supported the plausibility or reality of iridology. There is no underlying anatomy or physiology that can explain how the iris would reflect the state of function of any other part of the body.
This, unfortunately, has not stopped iridology from surviving on the medical fringe for more than a century. The modern popularity of iridology, especially in the US, can be traced back to a chiropractor named Bernard Jensen. He published the book, سائنس ۽ ارادي جي مشق in 1952. Iridology, or iris diagnosis, continues to be practiced by so-called alternative practitioners, including some chiropractors and naturopaths. It has never been recognized as a legitimate medical practice. For example, for $150 naturopath Frank Navratil will diagnose you from a digital image of your eyes.
گهڻو ڪري آئيرس جي تشخيص (جيڪو سافٽ ويئر جي تجزيي سان پڻ ٿي سگهي ٿو) اضافي لاء سفارشون ڏئي ٿو، جيڪي آساني سان iridologist طرفان وڪرو ڪيا ويا آهن. هتي هڪ وضاحت آهي ته ڪيئن iridology هڪ حامي طرفان استعمال ڪيو ويندو آهي:
آئيرس جسم جي هر حصي ۽ عضون جي بدلجندڙ حالتن کي ظاهر ڪري ٿو. جسم جو هر عضوو ۽ حصو هڪ چڱي طرح بيان ڪيل علائقي ۾ iris ۾ پيش ڪيو ويندو آهي. ان کان علاوه، مختلف نشانين، نشانين، ۽ آئرس ۾ بي رنگ ٿيڻ جي ذريعي، فطرت وراثت ۾ مليل ڪمزورين ۽ طاقتن کي ظاهر ڪري ٿو.
By means of this art / science, an iridologist (one who studies the coloration and fiber structure of the eye) can tell an individual his/her inherited and acquired tendencies towards health and disease, his current condition in general, and the state of every organ in particular.
Iridology ڪنهن خاص بيماري کي ڳولي نه ٿو سگهي، پر، هڪ فرد کي ٻڌائي سگهي ٿو ته انهن جي جسم جي مخصوص علائقن ۾ سرگرمي کان مٿي يا گهٽ آهي. مثال طور، هڪ غير فعال پينڪرياز شايد ذیابيطس جي حالت کي ظاهر ڪري سگھن ٿا.
ٻيون سائيٽون احتياط ڪن ٿيون ته iridology حمل جي تشخيص نه ٿي ڪري سگهي، ڇاڪاڻ ته اها جسم جي هڪ قدرتي حالت آهي، ۽ اڳئين سرجري جي تشخيص پڻ نه ٿي سگهي، جيئن ته ڪجهه به جيڪو بيشماريء جي تحت ٿئي ٿو انهن سگنلن کي بلاڪ ڪري ڇڏيندو جيڪا ٻي صورت ۾ آئيرس کي تبديل ڪندي. ٻين لفظن ۾ - iridology صرف توهان کي بيماري جي حساسيت جي باري ۾ ٻڌائي ٿو - اهو اصل ۾ بيماري يا ڪنهن ٻئي تصديق ٿيل حالت جي تشخيص نٿو ڪري سگهي. هن استدلال کي خاص التجا سڏيو ويندو آهي - هر حقيقت لاءِ هڪ خاص استدلال جي ايجاد جيڪا ٻي صورت ۾ دعويٰ يا عقيدي کي غلط ثابت ڪري سگهي ٿي. Iridology، ظاهري طور تي، صرف انهن شين کي سمجهي سگهي ٿو جن جي تصديق يا غلط ثابت نه ٿي سگهي.
جيڪو توهان ختم ڪيو آهي اهو هڪ طبي ٿڌو پڙهڻ آهي - ساڳي طرح جيڪو هڪ ذهني ماهر دماغي پڙهڻ يا نفسياتي طاقتن جو وهم پيدا ڪرڻ لاءِ ڪندو آهي. جڏهن ته "پڙهڻ" جي iris iridologist ڪجهه صحت جي مسئلن بابت پڇي سگهي ٿو. جيڪڏهن اهي موجود آهن، ته iridology جي تصديق ڪرڻ لاء استعمال ڪيو ويندو آهي. جيڪڏهن غير حاضر آهي، ته موضوع صرف غائب مسئلو لاء حساسيت آهي.
Iridology lacks any plausibility and its history is that of a pseudoscience, not a legitimate practice. But still we listen to the best scientific evidence in determining whether or not iridology is real. Perhaps Peczely got lucky and made a correct observation despite his lack of scientific confirmation. If iridologists could demonstrate that their readings provide real information, then we would have to take their claims seriously.
In 2000 Edzard Ernst (not surprisingly) published a systematic review of iridology research. He concluded:
In conclusion, few controlled studies with masked evaluation of diagnostic validity have been published. None have found any benefit from iridology. As iridology has the potential for causing personal and economic harm, patients and therapists should be discouraged from using it.
As with N-rays, when blinding is introduced iridology is exposed as a complete fiction. Under controlled conditions iridologists cannot agree with each other as to diagnosis, and cannot distinguish healthy subjects of very ill subjects. Since the Ernst review I found one other well-controlled study of iridology, this one in cancer diagnosis. From the abstract:
SUBJECTS:
One hundred ten (110) subjects were enrolled in the study: 68 subjects had histologically proven cancers of the breast, ovary, uterus, prostate, or colorectum, and 42 were control subjects.
METHODS:
All subjects were examined by an experienced practitioner of iridology, who was unaware of their gender or medical details. He was allowed to suggest up to five diagnoses for each subject and his results were then compared with each subject’s medical diagnosis to determine the accuracy of iridology in detecting malignancy.
RESULTS:
Iridology identified the correct diagnosis in only 3 cases (sensitivity, 0.04).
CONCLUSION:
Iridology was of no value in diagnosing the cancers investigated in this study
There are no well designed studies that are positive.
Conclusion:
Iridology is an excellent example of pseudoscience in medicine, displaying many of the core features. It was invented by one individual based upon a single observation. It follows a pre-scientific notion of biology – the homunculus model. It lacks any basis in anatomy, physiology, or any other basic science. Its practitioners are mostly “alternative” practitioners who use the technique as a cold reading. And the research clearly shows that iridology has absolutely no effect – it does not provide any useful information at all.
Anyone using or promoting iridology is, therefore, a pseudoscientific practitioner. Any profession that endorses iridology is not science-based and should be looked upon with suspicion.
MAIKONG IRIDOLOGY سافٽ ويئر تنصيب ۽ آپريشن
