Fox Television Network has produced some bad apples when it comes to television shows, such as “Man vs. Beast,” “Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?,” “Temptation Island,” “Joe Millionaire” and my personal favorite—“When Animals Attack!” However, to the network’s credit, it has recently produced two shows that captivate millions of viewers, particularly “House, M.D.” and “24.” Both shows have won Emmys and both have a large fan base. “House” and “24” attract about 13 million viewers per episode. Both shows also deal with controversial subjects. “24” has already drawn criticism for its implicit acceptance of torture as an interrogation method. I watch both shows regularly, but have noticed the complete disregard for medical ethics on “House.” It leads to an inevitable question: will an immensely popular show like “House” affect people’s understanding of real world medicine?

The question is important because we have already seen some of TV’s ramifications on real world scenarios. In a New York Times article earlier this year, Jane Mayer reported on “24” and its impact on the public, focusing specifically on how it affects newly recruited FBI interrogators and soldiers who watch the show. The series portrays torture during interrogation as an effective method of extracting information, as Jack Bauer readily demonstrates season after season. In response, U.S. Army Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan and three top FBI interrogators met with the producers of “24,” claiming that changes needed to be made regarding the depiction of torture. According to Finnegan, “24”’s depiction adversely affected the training and performance of real American soldiers. Finnegan argued that the show seems to promote torture as an interrogation method, and this affects the public opinion negatively. Will “House” someday also impact medicine the way “24” has impacted interrogation?

It seems probable that, given enough time, if “House” continues to be as successful as it is currently, it will certainly spark controversy over the issue of ethics in medicine. “House”’s protagonist, Dr. Gregory House, goes to great lengths to discover what ails his patients and ultimately cure them. This usually involves breaking and entering, violating procedural protocol and more often than not, nearly killing a patient only to bring him or her back from the brink of death with the solution to the medical mystery that saves the patient’s life. House’s intelligence is certainly admirable, but his methods of solving cases are most unorthodox and dangerous if applied in the real world. Often, when House is prevented from violating a hospital procedure that he believes will lead him to the answer, he emphasizes the importance of saving a patient’s life, above all else, and convinces his reluctant coworkers.

While it makes for good TV, the problem is that it doesn’t apply in the real world and may impact new doctors’ judgments in the way that “24” has harmed new interrogators’ judgments. Assuming “House” continues to be popular and proliferates with several more seasons, it will likely affect how incoming doctors view medicine. More importantly, it may affect the public perception of medicine, infusing people with the false belief that doctors will always be able to find the cure.