Eight students, four from each UVI campus, faced off for a battle of words and wits Tuesday for an inter-campus debate. This debate on the St. Croix UVI campus follows up on a similar competition earlier in the academic year on St. Thomas. The resolution up for discussion: that innovative medical technology is the cure for individuals plagued with chronic ailments. St. Thomas argued for the proposition and St. Croix argued against.
Campbell Douglas, a senior psychology major, opened for St. Thomas. Technological innovation has saved countless lives, through more effective heart and blood pressure medication, finding and evaluating medicinal compounds in tropical plants, and in a myriad of other ways, he argued, using nearly all of his allotted 10 minutes to hammer home the case.
Diane DaCosta, a senior accounting major, took the podium for the opposition statement. Prevention and a more healthy, natural lifestyle are the keys to dealing with chronic ailments, not technology, she argued.
"Two thousand years ago, the great herbalist and healer Hippocrates said ‘nature cures disease,’" said DaCosta. The healthiest nations have healthier diets and lifestyles, not necessarily better technology, she said.
"Chronic ailments are the leading cause of death and disability in the U.S., accounting for seven out of 10 deaths each year," she said. "Heart attack and stroke account for more than 50 percent of deaths."
Her team gave several anecdotal examples of striking cures from hot peppers, herbs and a diet aimed at changing the Ph balance of the body.
Vandel Percival spoke next in support of medical technology, pointing to new diagnostic tools like magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs), HIV drug cocktails and other lifesaving technological innovations. And using herbal remedies is not an argument against technological innovation, but simply one type of innovation, he argued.
Kenya Emanuel, a St. Croix sophomore majoring in elementary education, hit back hard, pointing to studies showing 200,000 patients worldwide die from preventable medical mistakes; that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say "nearly all" U.S. poisoning cases are attributable to commercially produced drugs, and HIV patients have purportedly gotten hepatitis from intravenous anti-retroviral drugs.
Douglas gave the proposition rebuttal, again emphasizing that natural remedies were themselves one kind of technical innovation, not their opposite. As to herbal cures for cancer, "with all the people dying, why hasn’t it been applied to all of them if it really cures cancer?" Douglas said. And as valuable as prevention is, cures are still needed. "If someone comes in dying from cancer, will you just tell them they should have had a healthier lifestyle," he said.
While the judges tallied up the scores, the debaters took questions from the audience, leading to a spirited unofficial debate on natural versus technological remedies.
When the official results were complete, St. Thomas was declared victorious. Both teams made informed, informative and coherent arguments, but the St. Thomas team gave a more balanced presentation, they said. Douglas received two individual awards for best speaker and best rebuttal speaker.
The St. Croix team consisted of: DaCosta, Emanuel, Kurt Grant, and Marlene Tyson. Members of the St. Thomas team included Douglas, Percival, Charles McCarthy and Dacil Heyliger.
The series marks a return of formal debating to UVI after a hiatus of several years. Both teams are looking for more students to participate in next year’s debates. Interested students should contact the Division of Student Affairs at (340) 693-1111 on St. Thomas and (340) 692-4228 on St. Croix.
