Letters to The EDITOR: Doubtful selection in Veterinary Officer exam

Many candidates have raised concerns over the recent selection of a Veterinary Officer by the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) for ambiguous selection of candidates. The commission had recommended candidates for 162 posts only based on interviews but the selection list shows that APSC has completely neglected higher qualifications, experiences in respective fields etc., necessary for technical posts. The criteria on which basis the selections are made is nowhere written or never declared by APSC in any form which has raised concern amongst candidates. Many candidates with huge experience in the veterinary and animal Husbandry field are out of the list. Some candidates say that only of the unsuitable selection of VOs the Veterinary Department is lying behind its actual capacity. There are 622 candidates interviewed but the commission has not declared the interview schedule of candidates publicly on the website which APSC usually does. Moreover, the APSC didn't declare individual marks allotted to candidates. In 2018, APSC rejected RTI applications seeking individual marks and cut-off marks of selected candidates. The commission has to change this attitude as it brings lots of questions regarding the transparency of the examination when the numbers of the candidate are huge. The candidates demand APSC declare the marks of all candidates that are interviewed. We also request to Chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarmah instruct APSC to declare the marks of all candidates in any exam as it will bring faith to the responsible government. With a huge staff, APSC can do it easily for better transparency in examinations to regain its lost glory.

Some concerned Candidates

Guwahati, Assam

Self-medication

More recently, some people have been seeking treatment through Google. Accordingly, these people search Google for information about the symptoms and treatment of their diseases and collect medicines from pharmacies. Is this scientific or healthy?

Unfortunately, some people sometimes search for medicines through Google and buy them from pharmacies. Why do these people become their own doctors even though the doctor's prescription says "Avoid self-medication"? This is definitely suicidal and a health threat. It is never acceptable or scientific that we will seek treatment with the help of Google just because science and technology have made skyrocketing advances. It is never acceptable or scientific that we will seek treatment with the help of Google just because science and technology have made skyrocketing advances. It is true that Google provides us with medical information, so we should not think that we can get cured by using the information available on Google. Treatment is science. Science has never asked people to be their own doctors. This is something that is absolutely worth knowing and common sense. Yet why do some people in our society do such unscientific things despite being educated? It's really annoying to think about it. By the way, I feel the need to mention that some people (educated?) advise themselves as well as others, i.e. patients, to take medication by doing a Google search. It goes without saying how terrible this is. If treatment could be obtained through Google, then there would be questions about the need for medical degrees and diplomas! In fact, people who want to treat themselves (self-existent) in this way can be described as "A little learning is a dangerous thing' in nature".

However, we should completely avoid the desire to seek treatment with the help of Google and rush to the doctor as soon as the disease appears in the body. There is no alternative to this. It is desirable to instil in our minds that this is a defined responsibility and duty towards our human body. Only then can we achieve the healthy health and longevity we hope for.

Heramba Nath,

Hindumaizali, Kamrup.