Andre d’Avila et al. Marco F. Vidal Melo
Jabuticaba
Brazil has a peculiar medical environment. Although interventions like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin disappeared from the international scientific debate once disproved in clinical trials, Brazilian practitioners continue to debate the validity of these studies. Like jabuticaba – a fruit native to and predominant (but not exclusive) in Brazil – this debate is still current only in this country. Previous attempts to discount the results of studies with the argument that they had been conducted abroad and could not be extended to the Brazilian population can no longer be justified as many of these studies have included Brazilian patients. As individuals, we do understand the difficulty in accepting evidence opposing someone’s conviction; however, as a doctor, this attitude is indefensible.
In this context of conviction and belief over evidence and data, several practitioners have created websites and even solicited the government to support and disseminate their practice despite proven inefficacy of the proposed interventions. Even though many are excellent physicians in their fields, this situation has only been possible because, under the auspices of trying to help, almost anything has been allowed in Brazil. If there were any regulation proposing a fine or termination of medical license to those who supported unproven medical practices, none of this would have happened. This regulation would be, in fact, similar to previous decisions of ethics committees in cases of charlatanism, when medical practices based on consensual decisions are not accepted as justification to exempt the infringer. However, these types of regulations are defective or absent in Brazil. Curiously, the term “accountability”, that in English means an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility for one’s actions, does not exist in Portuguese. On the other hand, there is no English word for “jabuticaba”.
[…]
