False gods of Science and Medicine

Lev 15:13 And when he that hath an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean.

The germ-theory of medicine was only recently appreciated in the mid 1800's.  Doctors routinely went from patient to patient without washing hands at all or washed in a basin of still water.  Consequently, women giving birth under the care of a doctor suffered a near 30% morality.  This high mortality vs midwives generated distrust of the medical profession which exists to the present day. 

Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis 1 July 1818 – 13 August 1865) was a Hungarian physician of ethnic-German ancestry, now known as an early pioneer of antiseptic procedures. Described as the "saviour of mothers", Semmelweis discovered that the incidence of puerperal or childbed fever (endometritis) could be drastically cut by the use of hand disinfection. Semmelweis proposed the practice of washing hands with chlorinated lime solutions in 1847 while working in Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic, where doctors' wards had three times the mortality of midwives'wards.

Despite other publications of results where hand washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings, and some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and mocked him for it. 

In 1865, Semmelweis supposedly suffered a nervous breakdown and was treacherously committed to a asylum by his colleague.  Semmelwies died 14 days after at age 47 from gangrene.  Semmelweis developed gangrene after his wounds became infected which he recieved after being beaten by asylum guards. (Wiki)

Sammelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death, when Louis Pasteur and Joseph Lister confirmed the germ theory.  Lister, acting on the French microbiologist research, practiced and operated using hygenic methods with great success. 

This tragic history of medicine is the fruit of the paternalistic hierarchy of science and medicine that resists change, matrys many of it's revolutionaries, and has harmed and killed millions of people.  So, beware if you are losing your faith in religion, and giving up to worship the gods of science and medicine.  The Church of Jesus Christ is administered by imperfect people.  But if you are going to judge the LDS Church, then it's unfair to not use the same criteria for science and medicine. What I see is a massive double standard. 

Do we reject modern medicine because of it's past history of bloodletting and murcury poisoning?   Do we reject modern science for recently switching from string theory and a multiverse (many world's) to simulation/information/emergence theory  (zero world's)?  Critics of religion will demonize the LDS Church for its limited mistakes but hold up science and naturalism as the source of universal truth.  

Critics may contend that their double standard is justified because religion claims to talk with God while science has to work things out based on evidence and mistakes. Critics may claim that science admits it's faults. Does it? In reality,  this king-of-the-mountain system only admits fault after a mountain of evidence has finally broken the massive dam of resistance and denials.  Then, under the new paradigm, science talks like no scientist in their right mind ever believed anything different. 

The truth with religion is that God doesn't reveal every little detail to man.  And when God does reveal something, He rarely gives reasons or a plan of implementation.  Consequently, while the revealed word of God has proven trustworthy, varous attempts by man to understand, or explain God's word and implement it have been failible. 

I am trained as a scientist and a physician.  I have a masters in biochemistry and a doctorate in medicine with several peer-reviewed publications. I recognize the limitations and faults of both science, medicine, and religion, and despite their mistakes, the benefits far outweigh the risks. We can always work to make things better; even in religion.  But there is no logical justification to outright reject the institutions (hierarchy) of science, medicine or religion. Critics of religion need to learn how to work within the system to bring about change without harming the faith of the innocent. 

There has been a concerted movement in the West to errode our faith in our institutions. While we should tirelessly labor for improvement, we should be wise to recognize this trend and not be found guilty of supporting its aims.