Father of the subject or a field is a title given to an individual who is known to have given the first new important contribution to that discipline either through invention, discovery or laying down foundational principle that makes them distinct. However, in recent era, it is observed that there is breach in this system and individuals are being blindly or wrongly being labelled to be father’s without having any evidence of innovations/discoveries/foundational principles in that subject. Few individuals, especially in medical field have bizarre reasons and criteria’s attributed to them, for being called Father of the field. This has led to raise in Pseudo-fathers globally and has undermined the contribution of the original Fathers of the subject who have done discoveries or innovations. Disappointingly, many of them who are being called father of the subject, especially in medical field, don’t even have any contribution to the subject, yet they are being propagated as Father’s by their followers or students or association members. This article briefly highlights on criteria’s that makes one the Father of the field and also the disturbing trends.

Background: Peptic ulcer disease significantly impacts the healthcare system and remains a considerable cause of patient morbidity and mortality, leading to numerous psychosocial, emotional, and economic consequences. Gastrointestinal disorders significantly affect not only the health-related quality of life of those afflicted but also that of their relatives and families. Its onset at a young age disrupts a particularly active phase of human life. Objectives: This study aims to assess patients' awareness of lifestyle modifications for managing peptic ulcers. Methods: This study was a descriptive, cross-sectional, hospital-based research study conducted among patients with peptic ulcer disease (N = 50). Participants were selected from individuals attending the referral clinic of Elmek Nimir University Hospital, as well as patients who were admitted. The selection was carried out through convenience sampling. Before implementing the program, patients' knowledge was assessed using a structured, standardized questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS Version 22 and the Excel program. Results: This study indicated that fewer than half (44%) of the participants fell within the 31- to 40-year-old age range. Over half (58%) had gastric ulcers, and a similar proportion (58%) expressed satisfaction with the definitions and risk factors. Half (50%) reported having satisfactory knowledge regarding the causes, while the majority (70%) demonstrated a satisfactory understanding of the complications of peptic ulcer disease. Almost all (92%) participants used medication for treatment, and over half (60%) reported the ineffectiveness of the medication in stabilizing ulcers as a personal barrier to treatment. Additionally, more than half (56%) cited low socioeconomic status as a socio-cultural barrier. Conclusion: The awareness of factors that aggravate peptic ulcers varied among individuals in Shendi City. Our study revealed that most people understood relevant food types, Helicobacter pylori, analgesic medications, coffee intake, smoking, and social stress. In contrast, weather changes, genetic predispositions, and body weight were associated with poor awareness. Ultimately, these findings should be validated by additional research involving a larger sample from the general population across various regions of Sudan.