Dr Nauman Niaz Cricket in Pakistan, presently isn't really a serious concern since there are numerous other highly sensitive issues pertaining to the sovereignty and integrity of the country juxtaposed with incomprehensible inflation and a frail economy. Nonetheless, quite recently, there was an incident that went completely unnoticed, primairly due to apathy and casualness due to lack of knowledge base. Pakistan Cricket Board released to the print and electronic media that Shoaib Akhtar, their premier fast bowler was being dropped from the Twenty20 World Cup team because of genital warts (Sexually Transmitted Human Papilloma Virus (HPV), Condylomata Acuminata). So easily relayed, so convincingly accepted. It was actually horrific. Akhtar has been condemned for displaying grandiose sense of self-worth, superficial charm, almost criminal versatility, reckless disregard for his health, and impulse control problems. He has been castigated and objected to for irresponsibility, inability to tolerate boredom, near pathological narcissism, sporadic episodes of pathological lying and shallow effects. Furthermore, he has often been damned for manipulativeness, aggressive or violent tendencies, repeated assualts on others, lack of empathy, lack of remorse, indifference to rationalization, a sense of extreme entitlement. Poor judgement, lack of personal insight and a quartert of other symptoms could portray him as a complete lout. He has irked, almost all the regimes during a fledgelling career. He has more enemies than the wickets he has taken for Pakistan. Nevertheless, he has his rights and they were needed to be respected - and ironically, his own board, the custodians of cricket in the country, breached sanity. PCB's Operation Department and their heckenyed Medical Panel failed to register values in medical ethics. It is a serious breach, almost an unpardonable civic offence. Six of the values that commonly apply to medical ethics are 1) Autonomy (the patient has the right to refuse or choose his treamtnet, 'aegroti suprema lex'), 2) Beneficence (a practitioner should act in the best interest of the patient Salus Aegroti Suprema Lex), 3) Non-Maleficence (first, do no harm Primum non nocere), 4) Justice, 5) Dignity and 6) Truthfulness and Honesty. Values such as these do not give answers as to how to handle a particular situation, but provide a useful framework for understanding conflicts. When moral values are in conflict, the result may be an ethical dilemma or crisis. I simply do not refer to what happens in Pakistan, since there seems no respect for law and ethos, in England, the General Medical Council provides clear overall modern guidance in the form of its 'Good Medical Practice statement. Other organisations, such as the Medical Protection Society and a number of university departments, are often consulted by doctors practicing in the United Kingdom regarding issues relating to ethics. In Akhtar's case, it looked, as if the doctors responsible for reporting his illness weren't adequately equipped. The panel or a committee that diagnosed his 'sexually transmitted ailment' surely wouldn't have asked the PCB to release it openly in the media? Then who was responsible? Interestingly, even Akhtar himself couldn't figure out what harm had been done to him-further adding to his paranoia. We need to practice the concept of Non-Maleficence that is embodied by the phrase, 'first, do no harm', or the Latin, Primum Non Nocere. Many consider that should be the main or primary consideration (hence primimum): that is more important not to harm your patient, than to do them good. Non-maleficence is defined by its cultural context. Every culture has its own cultural collective definitions of 'good' or 'evil'. Their definitions depend on the degree to which the culture sets its cultural values apart from nature. In some cultures the terms 'good' and 'evil' are absent: and it seems in our degenerating society, for these words now lack meaning. Depending on the cultural consensus conditioning (expressed by its religious, political and legal social system) the legal definition of non-maleficence differes. Violation of non-maleficence is the subject of medical malpractice litigation. Regulations thereof differ, over time, per nation and in Pakistan, the situation worsens with people being completely cynical of seeking justice, it may well never arrive. In Akhtar's case, confidentiality wasn't taken into account by the PCB. It is defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) as 'ensuring that information is accessible only to those authorized to have access', and is one of the cornerstones of information security. Confidentiality is one of the designed goals for many cryptosystems, made possible in practice by the techniques of modern cryptography. It presently remains unclear to what extent laws and bylaws referring to privacy are in practice in Pakistan, and they are traditionally redundant. And medical practice in this country seems a case of 'no ethics, no values'. Wondering still, such brazen breaches of medical ehthos and confidentiality may well not be as gruesome or blood-stained as unhinged militancy, nonetheless they have an equally damning and regressive effects, enough to take one to the grave, unforgiven. Writer is the Official Historian of Pakistan Cricket