Thomas Brian and the Discrediting of Uroscopy
BAUS ePoster online library. Iqbal R. 06/21/21; 319111; p7-3
Disclosure(s): No conflict of interest
Mr. Rizwan Iqbal
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Discussion Forum (0)
Rate & Comment (0)
Introduction: Uroscopy, the practice of examining a patient's urine for diagnostic purposes, was common throughout antiquity and universally adopted by ancient civilisations from Mesopotamia to the Medieval period. Physicians who performed uroscopy enjoyed much popularity and status from the public, who often demanded that their diseases be diagnosed solely from observation of their urine samples. Despite the widespread praise of uroscopy as a definitive investigation tool, critics such as Thomas Brian attempted to discredit this practice.
Materials and Methods: A literature search relating to the critics of uroscopy was undertaken, including reading Thomas Brian's published work.
Results: Thomas Brian, a physician, was perhaps the most famous of uroscopy critics who published a book entitled 'The Pisse-Prophet' in 1637. This was a tongue-in-cheek attempt to highlight the bizarre practice of what he claimed to be 'uromancy', that is the mystical examination of urine without any empirical evidence. Brian used the term 'Pisse-Prophet' to discredit physicians who engaged in this act and 'confessed' that this practice lacked evidence-base. He stated that physicians, when presented with a urine sample, tried to fabricate knowledge about the patient's disease in vague terms, sometimes exaggerating the severity so that they would be correct if the patient died or a saviour if the patient lived. If physicians refused to perform uroscopy then patients would simply take their sample elsewhere until they received a suitable diagnosis.
Conclusion: Thomas Brian was a fierce critic of uroscopy and contributed to its decline in Medieval times.
Materials and Methods: A literature search relating to the critics of uroscopy was undertaken, including reading Thomas Brian's published work.
Results: Thomas Brian, a physician, was perhaps the most famous of uroscopy critics who published a book entitled 'The Pisse-Prophet' in 1637. This was a tongue-in-cheek attempt to highlight the bizarre practice of what he claimed to be 'uromancy', that is the mystical examination of urine without any empirical evidence. Brian used the term 'Pisse-Prophet' to discredit physicians who engaged in this act and 'confessed' that this practice lacked evidence-base. He stated that physicians, when presented with a urine sample, tried to fabricate knowledge about the patient's disease in vague terms, sometimes exaggerating the severity so that they would be correct if the patient died or a saviour if the patient lived. If physicians refused to perform uroscopy then patients would simply take their sample elsewhere until they received a suitable diagnosis.
Conclusion: Thomas Brian was a fierce critic of uroscopy and contributed to its decline in Medieval times.
Introduction: Uroscopy, the practice of examining a patient's urine for diagnostic purposes, was common throughout antiquity and universally adopted by ancient civilisations from Mesopotamia to the Medieval period. Physicians who performed uroscopy enjoyed much popularity and status from the public, who often demanded that their diseases be diagnosed solely from observation of their urine samples. Despite the widespread praise of uroscopy as a definitive investigation tool, critics such as Thomas Brian attempted to discredit this practice.
Materials and Methods: A literature search relating to the critics of uroscopy was undertaken, including reading Thomas Brian's published work.
Results: Thomas Brian, a physician, was perhaps the most famous of uroscopy critics who published a book entitled 'The Pisse-Prophet' in 1637. This was a tongue-in-cheek attempt to highlight the bizarre practice of what he claimed to be 'uromancy', that is the mystical examination of urine without any empirical evidence. Brian used the term 'Pisse-Prophet' to discredit physicians who engaged in this act and 'confessed' that this practice lacked evidence-base. He stated that physicians, when presented with a urine sample, tried to fabricate knowledge about the patient's disease in vague terms, sometimes exaggerating the severity so that they would be correct if the patient died or a saviour if the patient lived. If physicians refused to perform uroscopy then patients would simply take their sample elsewhere until they received a suitable diagnosis.
Conclusion: Thomas Brian was a fierce critic of uroscopy and contributed to its decline in Medieval times.
Materials and Methods: A literature search relating to the critics of uroscopy was undertaken, including reading Thomas Brian's published work.
Results: Thomas Brian, a physician, was perhaps the most famous of uroscopy critics who published a book entitled 'The Pisse-Prophet' in 1637. This was a tongue-in-cheek attempt to highlight the bizarre practice of what he claimed to be 'uromancy', that is the mystical examination of urine without any empirical evidence. Brian used the term 'Pisse-Prophet' to discredit physicians who engaged in this act and 'confessed' that this practice lacked evidence-base. He stated that physicians, when presented with a urine sample, tried to fabricate knowledge about the patient's disease in vague terms, sometimes exaggerating the severity so that they would be correct if the patient died or a saviour if the patient lived. If physicians refused to perform uroscopy then patients would simply take their sample elsewhere until they received a suitable diagnosis.
Conclusion: Thomas Brian was a fierce critic of uroscopy and contributed to its decline in Medieval times.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}