Skip to main content

Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health by Ivan Illich

This book was profoundly useful, giving me a set of extraordinarily helpful lenses to better understand both the modern medical/healthcare industry, but also to better understand modernity itself. Although this book is primarily about healthcare, it is also prescient in identifying many of the alienating and atomizing aspects of modern civilization. This book may have been written in the early 1970s, but the author was decades ahead of his time.

One of the foundational concepts of this book is iatrogenesis, which essentially means “harm done by the healer.” I was first exposed to this word thanks to Nassim Taleb in his book Antifragile. In Medical Nemesis, Ivan Illich begins with a discussion of medical iatrogenics in the most basic sense, but then expands the concept into far broader terms, discussing three genres of iatrogenesis: 1) clinical iatrogenesis, 2) social iatrogenesis, and 3) cultural iatrogenesis: 

1) Clinical iatrogenesis is the “plain vanilla form” of iatrogenesis: damage done to a patient by a doctor. It can be caused by doctor incompetence, by accident, by a doctor to protect his own legal liability (by ordering tests or procedures that may or may not be necessary to the patient but serve to cover the doctor's legal risk), or by unknown reasons. 

2) Social iatrogenesis is a form of damage done when the medical practice or our government encourages or reinforces society to become greater and greater over-consumers of healthcare. This can come from overscreening, overmedicating, from disease-mongering or from labeling people as sick who may not actually be. This includes “breeding” new categories of patients, who can then be encouraged to pay for meds or treatment to “fix” them. Also, we are subject to various grooming practices, even from childhood, to encourage us to tolerate various behaviors: doctors who “use a foreign language” (medical terminology) while they discuss our case right in front of us; doctors who may perform tests or perform actions (even pain-inducing actions) without explanation or apology, etc.

3) Cultural iatrogenesis is when the healthcare industry interferes with people's potential to deal on their own with human weakness and vulnerability. Examples might be: interfering in healthy responses to suffering and impairment. Or, undermining the individual’s ability to face their reality and accept inevitable decline and death. Think of it like a second-order iatrogenesis that sickens and weakens us culturally. 

The modern phrase “evidence-based healthcare”--widely used by healthcare evangelists and propagandists--should trigger alarm bells in the mind of any competent critical thinker. Once anyone has even the most basic familiarly with the great crisis of reproducibility, to say nothing of the various other problems suffusing all “studies show” science findings (p-hacking, file drawer effects, statistical gerrymandering, overdependence on Gaussian/normal curve statistical analysis, etc.), one cannot no longer hear the words “evidence-based healthcare” without a sense of bitter irony. 

In the modern era we are trained to use money as a solution for everything, including our health. Thus we pay for meds, doctor’s appointments, surgeries, insurance... while we demand more and more government support and funding for “healthcare.” All of this, circularly, simply contributes to the desire to buy our way out of all situations, including buying our way out of reality--and even out of death itself. And of course along the way we have become an enormously overmedicated society. 

I also wonder what this author would think--as he laments the upward explosion of healthcare spending from 4% of GDP in the 1960s to 8% in the 1970s--to know that today healthcare costs exceed 20% of GDP (!) as life expectancy and life quality are actually declining.

It is slowly becoming clear to me that iatrogenesis is a feature, not a bug, of modern healthcare--and possibly of modern society in general. It is endemic in many more ways than we realize. And once you can “see” iatrogenics, you can never unsee it.

More Posts

The Great Taking by David Rogers Webb

"What is this book about? It is about the taking of collateral, all of it, the end game of this globally synchronous debt accumulation super cycle. This is being executed by long-planned, intelligent design, the audacity and scope of which is difficult for the mind to encompass. Included are all financial assets, all money on deposit at banks, all stocks and bonds, and hence, all underlying property of all public corporations, including all inventories, plant and equipment, land, mineral deposits, inventions and intellectual property. Privately owned personal and real property financed with any amount of debt will be similarly taken, as will the assets of privately owned businesses, which have been financed with debt. If even partially successful, this will be the greatest conquest and subjugation in world history." Sometimes a book hits you with a central idea that seems at first so preposterously unlikely that you can't help but laugh out loud (as I did) and think, &quo

The Shipping Man by Matthew McCleery

A must-read for shipping investors--and even if you're not, it will likely make one out of you. It's a fun story, hilarious at times, and it teaches readers all kinds of nuances about investing. Our main character, running his own little hedge fund, finds out by pure accident that the Baltic Dry Index is down 97% (!) over the course of just three months. It makes him curious, and this curiosity takes him on a downright Dantean journey through the shipping industry.  He's outwitted left and right: first by savvy bankers in Germany, then by even savvier Greeks. And then, in an awful moment of weakness, he gets lured into buying a "tramp" (a very old, nearly used-up ship needing massive repairs) at what seems like a good price. The industry nearly eats this guy alive more than once, but he comes out the other end a true Shipping Man.  This should be mandatory reading for MBA students. I think back to all the terminally boring "case studies" I had to read ov

The Two Income Trap by Elizabeth Warren

What is wrong with the following statement? "But the two-income family didn't just lose its safety net. By sending both adults into the labor force, these families actually increased the chances that they would need that safety net. In fact, they doubled the risk. With two adults in the workforce, the dual-income family has double the odds that someone could get laid off, downsized, or other wise left without a paycheck. Mom or Dad could suddenly lose a job." You've just read the fundamental thesis of The Two-Income Trap. If you agree with it--although I truly hope you're a better critical thinker than that--you'll have your views reinforced. Thus reading this book would be an unadulterated waste of your time. If on the other hand you are capable of critical thinking and you can successfully see through hilariously unrigorous "logic" of the above statement, then this book will still be a waste of your time (unless you like reading books for the s