doing anything, said Albert Einstein.

My name is Kadiyali Srivatsa. I brought tears of happiness to the eyes of 1000s of adults and children who suffered, until one cold winter day in December 1989.

A healthy boy aged 14 years walked into A&E in a hospital and died holding my hand that very evening.

WHY?

We scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not we could, that we did not stop to consider if we should. It is ironic that a science fiction film, Jurassic Park, aptly describes the medical crisis we face today. I am not talking about saving modern medicine, but about saving the lives of people like you. We are now confronting a mortal enemy that surpasses our own intelligence.

A tiny microorganism has indeed brought us to our knees. It has learned from us, adapted to us, and now exploits our genetic vulnerabilities with lethal precision. Sadly, those who dare to speak up are ridiculed, ignored, dismissed, and often ostracised by members of our own profession.

Yet the death toll mounts, while our greed, addiction toward, over enthusiastic urge to encourage consultation, perform tests, procedures, hospitalisation and antibiotic abuse escalates at alarming rates.

Pharmaceuticals, medical device manufacturers, government, and even some doctors ignore this Elephant in the room.

By not safeguarding the miracle drug as custodians, we have allowed antibiotics to be used to fatten chickens, treat animals, and encourage nurses with no formal medical training to utilise our skills, diagnose illnesses, prescribe drugs, and sell antibiotics without prescriptions. We have now lost the only drug that helped us fight infections, learn more about our bodies, make medical advances possible, perform surgical procedures, transplants, IVF, and save millions of lives. I sincerely hope we will change this destructive pattern of consultation and illness management.

In 1996, I published an article in the British Medical Journal to remind my colleagues that “The duty of a doctor is to listen to the story of a person”. My mission is to help encourage members of our profession to share knowledge, innovate, and develop products and methods to fight infection. Using advances in communication technology, I hope to provide basic healthcare to fellow humans, reduce healthcare costs, and decrease cross-infections that cause pain and suffering worldwide.

We must stop greedy entrepreneurs from commercialising our service to humanity.

Before I start rattling on about Our Ancestors, teachers, or our contribution to protecting humanity, Innovations, and fighting institutions, hospitals, and politicians for offering Sub-Standard care to fellow humans.

I beg members of my profession to shun their Ego, Share Knowledge, communicate, Communicate And Join Hands with us and help us stop this Elephant, In The Room, that is now,

Threatening our Profession and Our Very Existence.

#PremaKiosk. #DrMayaAI, #DigitalHealthIndia, #HealthcareInnovation, #CommunityHealthcare, #FutureOfHealthcare,

#PreventiveHealthcare, #AIinHealthcare, #SmartHealthcare, #HealthTechIndia, #InfectionPrevention, #PandemicPreparedness, #AntimicrobialResistance, #PublicHealthInnovation, #EarlyDetection, #HealthSecurity,, #DiseasePrevention, #OutbreakPrevention, #HealthcareSafety,#ProtectYourFamily, #HealthForAll #DignityInHealthcare, #FamilyFirstHealth, #HealthyCommunities, #ApartmentLivingIndia, #CommunitySafety, #SmartSociety, #SocialInnovation, #PurposeDrivenBusiness, #HealthcareStartup, #SocialEnterprise, #ArtificialIntelligence, #DigitalTransformation, #FutureTechnology, #TechForHumanity, #AI, #AIinHealthcare, #DrMayaAI, #DrMayaGPT, #Drkadiyalisrivatsa, #MayaMeditation, #AMR, #Antibiotics #doctors, #Doctor, #MayaAI #NewIndiaHealth,

Dr. Kadiyali Srivatsa made a protected disclosure after he collected evidence to prove wrongdoings he observed and identified the reason for in a pilot nurse-led practice in Woking. He was the salaried GP where nurses were allowed to consult registered patients, examine if necessary, and offer advice or treatment. The project aimed to see if the NHS could adopt this model and create an independent nurse-led practice that provides medical advice to citizens within the NHS.

Dr Srivatsa identified numerous problems because the patient was managed by nurses in the same practice and at the three local Walk-in clinics established in Woking by Surrey PCT as a “Pilot project”. Dr Srivatsa was employed as the trainer and assessor of nurse prescribers in this pilot project.

Once he was convinced that this method was unsafe, because there was a delay in making the correct diagnosis and providing the appropriate treatment. This is unethical because the first duty of a doctor is to make the correct diagnosis early to prevent complications, and not to "Save lives" as people have been brainwashed to believe.

Doctors know all about drugs, dose and how they work. The only drug that cured bacterial infection was Antibiotics, but now they don’t work as they used to. Drugs rarely cure and mainly offer symptomatic treatment, such as anti-inflammatories, antidepressants, antivirals, and steroids to mask symptoms, but they are not designed to eliminate the cause.

Allowing nurses to be the first point of contact gave patients the false impression that they have the knowledge and experience to diagnose, leading them to trust that the treatment will cure their illness. This is what he calls a false sense of security. Simple illnesses like a throat infection can result in a tonsillar abscess when the antibiotic dose is too low and serious illnesses are missed, requiring emergency care, as in many cases HE has shared.

Once he was convinced, he collected information to prove his concern, and made a protected disclosure, assuming the Chairman of Surrey PCT would contact me, discuss, and see my evidence, but he did not.

Three months later, he received an email informing him that the message had been passed on to the Manager of the Walk-in Clinic and the Pilot Nurse-led Practice. Unfortunately, the complaint was detrimental to them because they were the ones making the clinical errors, known as "Negligent Care."

NotebookLM AI reviewed the documents he shared, explaining cases and reports of enquiry, and illegally removed his name from the Performers list, preventing him from working as a doctor. His case was reviewed in the Grievance Proceedings, but they did not respond to the 99 points he listed because the BMA representative told them it is not necessary to conceal the truth to protect the NHS. All she was insisting on was reinstating his name on the performers’ list. The PCT also appointed a doctor, paying him £1000 to access my confidential notes without my or the patient's consent, in violation of the "Colldicot Principle." He reported this to the GMC, but no action was taken, and the doctor was appointed as a board member.

Checklists are widely seen as a major achievement in modern safety. Naturally, they are used in many fields. We include checklists in airplane cockpits so pilots don't forget to lower the landing gear and prevent aircraft crashes. We have checklists in operating theatres so surgeons don't operate on the wrong limb or leave us behind. Someone. Yeah, exactly. So why wouldn't we want junior doctors to use checklists to ensure they remember to ask all the necessary questions? It's a very reasonable assumption, and honestly, that’s the very logic institutions follow when implementing these tools initially. It makes sense on paper.

However, the key distinction that Doctor Srivatsa's letter highlights is between a safety checklist used after a decision is made and a diagnostic checklist used to make the decision in the first place. That's a really interesting difference. Yeah.

Yes. This involves actively listening to the patient's story, picking up on their tone, noticing what they emphasise and what they omit. That is the absolute foundation of clinical medicine. It's a conversation, not a survey. Exactly. It's a highly active, dynamic cognitive process. It requires the doctor to act like an investigative detective. So how does a piece of paper disrupt that investigative process?

Well, when you give a practitioner a preprinted sheet of prompts, you are essentially short-circuiting their independent clinical reasoning. They simply stop using their brains to dynamically collect and analyse the data in front of them because they're just reading the next line. Exactly. The psychology of the encounter shifts entirely. The practitioner's goal is no longer to solve the mystery of the patient. Their aim becomes merely to find the specific answers needed to fill in the blanks on the form. The form then dictates the conversation.

The form truly governs the room. Yes. And the behavioural impact of this, as outlined in the sources, is so vivid and so widely recognisable. Think about the last time you were in a clinic. It physically changes the space in the room, doesn't it? It certainly does. The practitioner breaks eye contact with you. You're sitting there. You might be in severe pain, or worried about a symptom you've been experiencing, and the person who is supposed to be healing you is staring down at a clipboard. Or, more likely today, they have their back turned to you, staring into the glowing rectangle of a computer monitor, typing as you speak.

Yes, the act of typing is maddening, and losing eye contact is devastating for the doctor-patient relationship. It truly is the first domino to fall in a misdiagnosis. So, mechanically, what happens? Well, when contact is broken due to the checklist, the patient immediately feels unheard. They feel reduced to a data point on a conveyor belt. Yeah, you just feel like a number, right?

And the sources point out that when a patient senses that the doctor is not genuinely interested in understanding their specific problem, but is instead just processing them through a standard procedure, the patient loses confidence. This makes perfect sense, and because of that, they might actually withhold information, feeling rushed or perceiving the doctor's questions as irrelevant to what they are truly experiencing. Right, because the patient's actual problem might not fit neatly into any of the predefined boxes on that specific assessment sheet. Exactly, and that is where the delay in diagnosis occurs.