Interestingly enough, evidently none of us has commented on the one crucial difference between medieval torture and modern medicine - informed consent. You always have the option, as I understand it, to say "No mas!" and the medical establishment then packs away their tools and goes home. Again, before my open heart procedure, the surgeon went over the procedure, the risks and benefits (there was a 1% chance of dying - about as good as it gets), the recovery regimen, and my likely future prospects. I then gave my signed, written consent to the procedure.

I am not an expert on medieval torture techniques and procedures, but I don't believe those practitioners received consent before initiating their work.

Somehow informed consent makes a huge difference - in surgery as well as other aspects of life.

BTW, as I imagine someone might inquire, if a patient is unconscious or unresponsive, consent is implied....

Additional Comment: Just returned from receiving my annual flu shot, and guess what? I needed to fill out a one page form giving my consent to the procedure! A lot of medical practice today, like giving vaccinations, is preventive medicine which eases pain and suffering, as well as holding costs down. Definitely a long way from torture, medieval or otherwise