[ JBEM Index / Volume 8 / Number 3 ]


U.S. Congressional Representative from New York Edoiphus towns was recently in the news criticizing a decision of the National Cancer Institute to change its recommendation on mammography to exclude many women who are in their forties. Members of Congress, who held a subcommittee hearing on the Institute guidelines, accused the National Cancer Institute of being “sexist, racist, and political . . .” because of the decision.

Let’s see, now… politicians, holding a political hearing on the decision of a scientific consensus group, accuse the group of being “political,” Just who is it that is politicizing medicine? When Paul wrote to Timothy he included health maintenance advice which was to be directed to the individuals, not to Caesar.

The Intercessors for America Newsletter of March, 1994, describes proposed regulatory guidelines by the Equal Employment Opportunity Guidelines. These Guidelines would purportedly protect employees from religious harassment by prohibiting verbal conduct that has the effect of creating an offensive work environment.

Do you ever talk about Jesus in the course of your work-day? Did it ever occur to you that such talk might have the “effect” of religious “harassment” to someone who does not share your beliefs? Aside from the fact that Christians certainly can be needlessly offensive with the gospel message, the gospel itself contains offense. As to that intrinsic offense, we need to respond to Caesar as did Peter and John in Acts 5:29.

Sherwin Nuland in his book, Doctors: The Biography of Medicine, recounts the excellent character of Joseph Lister, the clinician who finally established antiseptic surgery. After reminding his students of Ambroise Pare’s aphorism: “I dressed him, God healed him,” he told them what two great requisites there are for a healer. “First, a warm, loving heart; and secondly, truth in an earnest spirit.”

Where in medical teaching today do students have access to this sort of wisdom? “Why is there in the hand of a fool the purchase price of wisdom, since he has no heart for it?” [Prov. 17:16] Are some of medicine’s current problems related to the omission of character, wisdom, and compassion from the selection process in preference to competitiveness, knowledge, and aloofness? Indeed, would Dr. Lister today be cited by the EEO for religious harassment?

In 1989 the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine [STEM] delivered itself of a set of guidelines for teaching family practice residents about substance abuse. These guidelines are still rattling around and contain the following assertions:

“Substance abuse is a preventable, diagnosable, and treatable, chronic, relapsing, and remitting, individual and family disease. . . Expressions of denial, dishonesty, anger, and irrationality, and other potentially offensive behaviors are often inherent symptoms of substance abuse to be expected, understood, accepted, and managed by family physicians.” [emphasis added]

This is not only a theological/philosophical assertion rather than one based on science, it is a wrong assertion, for among other errors it labels lying, anger, and who knows what other malbehaviors as disease. Far from “accepting” lying and drunkenness, God says we should depart from these behaviors because they are sinful. “And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit.” [Eph. 5:18]. How far would a physician be tolerated who rephrased the STFM as follows: “Expressions of disagreement with and disbelief in the disease model of alcoholism are often inherent symptoms of biblical Christianity and are to be expected, understood, and accepted within the STFM?”

Dr. Cecil Jacobsen entered a federal prison in February for a five year sentence, according to the American Medical News. Dr. Jacobson was convicted of fraud for using his own sperm while artificially inseminating women in his fertility practice. He had told the women he was using sperm from anonymous donors.

Perhaps if Dr. Jacobson had been an alcoholic his misbehavior could have been accepted, rather than dealt with so punitively.

We received notice of “The First National Conference on Abortion Malpractice Litigation” held in Dallas for personal injury attorneys interested in “today’s most prolific litigation opportunity.” Information was available on litigating for emotional injury without accompanying physical injury, the minimum standard of medical care in abortion clinics, “counseling systems for clients with no cause of action,” etc.

Those of us who are opposed to abortion need to fit our opposition methodology into a biblical framework just as we do our ends and our motives. Is the end of abortion so needful that any means at all may be used justly? If we agree to all means to stop abortion, do we have any complaint against the pro-aborts as to the recent use of the RICO law against us? Are pro-lifers really prepared to honestly testify as the right way to do an abortion? Do we really want to open further the “emotional injury” can of worms? Will there not be plaintiffs who allege, perhaps, emotional injury” from carrying a pregnancy of term after anti-abortion counsel? Will there not be “emotional injury” alleged by families whose members converted to Christianity through the witness of a health care worker?

Shock waves are emanating from the recent Federal investigations that a Canadian physician falsified data in a large breast cancer study. Though not as well-known, the same federal “Office of Research Integrity” has recently also called for recantation by Herbert Needleman, who published a “ground-breaking” study on lead and children’s IQ in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1979. Worldwide (EPOCH) condemns “violence which involves a large person hitting often a very small person.

The rhythm of blows against biblically-sanctioned corporal punishment of children thus continues, led by a tyranny of experts, while large segments of Christ’s church give assent by silence. God is, however, not silent on the matter, being unimpressed with retrospective or short-term studies which are careful to focus upon some outcome measures and avoid others. “Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod, and deliver his soul from Hell.”

One wonders where moral outrage comes from in a scientific community which has transmogrified immoralities such as lying into diseases. Why not just launch a dispassionate scientific study of fraud? Then a dispassionate study of the fraud in the fraud studies? Ad infinitum.

A “child advocate” recently appeared before the South Carolina Joint Legislative Committee on Children and Families to inform that body that physical punishment”.., leads to bullying, domestic violence, and violent crime.” Peter Newell, who is the head of End Physical Punishment of Children

[ JBEM Index / Volume 8 / Number 3 ]