Joseph F. Smith On Vaccination and Smallpox

I just happend onto this passage today and thought I would post it for your edification. It is an excerpt from a speech given by Joseph F. Smith:

When I was on missions I was called to administer to the sick, who were ill with almost every kind of disease. It was not uncommon that we were called to administer to those who were sick with small pox. For myself I dared not turn away from the call of the sick, and I administered to some of them, when, owing to their appearance, it was almost impossible to tell that they were human beings, for they had the disease in its worst form. My guardians had taken the precaution, in my youth, to have me vaccinated. I took the disease, but had it in mild form, so that it did not leave even a mark upon my body. I am as satisfied as I can be that had it not been for vaccination, I would have had the disease in very bad form. I believe that our elders ought to be vaccinated. Now, I know that this will not be in accordance with some people's views. We receive word that many of our elders, who have failed to attend to this matter, are exposed to the disease and become affected with it; and recently a number of them have had to be taken to the pest-houses to be cared for. -Improvement Era, August 1910

I wonder from time to time about whether Jesus ever contracted diseases from those he administered to. It seems to me that some of his boldness in compassion could be attributed to the fact that nothing (including infectious disease) could kill him.

Continue reading...

Cosmology and Climatology

The latest Scientific American has a couple of articles online that I want to point out.

First there is this article on cosmology. When I finish reading it, I hope I'll have a clue.

Second is this article dealing with Michael Mann, a climatologist. The article discusses the controversy over his "hockey stick" graph, and his involvement with the blog realclimate.org. I've visited the blog a few times, but I get quickly overwhelmed. I hope one day to get a better handle on the topic.

Concerning global warming and whether humans are contributing, I am a cautious believer. When scientists report their findings--especially when there is broad consensus--I think we need to take them seriously. However I am not ignorant of the fact that funding and other issues could color their interpretation. And even if it is established that humans are responsible for much of the warming, what to do about it is another issue altogether--much of it economic. I don't know what the answer is, but I'm pretty sure that neither "abandon civilization" nor "the earth can take whatever we do to it" are it.

Continue reading...

Hugh Nibley Has Passed

According to Clark at Millenial Star, Hugh Nibley passed away today. As of yet, neither the Salt Lake Tribune or Deseret News are reporting it.

Continue reading...

The MMR-Autism Disconnect

My post a couple of days ago--Voodoo Medicine--generated some comments on vaccines. Today I found this post on the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) and its connection, or lack thereof, to autism. There is a second post on polio vaccine in Nigeria that is also worth reading (linked to a the bottom.)

Continue reading...

Points of Friction

Over at The Bloggernacle Times Clark Goble lays out general sticky points for Mormons in harmonizing science and religion. He plans to elaborate on them in comming weeks and I look forward to reading.

Clark mentioned that cosmology probably has more problems for LDS theology than evolution, but for some reason doesn't generate much controversy. I have some thoughts as to why that is.

Continue Reading

1. I don't know much about current cosmology so I'm ignorant of the conflict. Sure I've heard to the Big Bang, but so what?
2. Physics is daunting to a guy like me. Math is definately not my strength so I just don't comprehend much of physics.
3. The worlds of quantum mechanics and general relativity are very strange. They are nothing like our everyday experience so it is easy for a person like me to brush them off as abstract concepts. (Note: I'm not saying the are not true, just not intuitive thus hard to relate to and take seriously.)
4. I know very little about them, but my understanding is that quantum mechanics and general relativity are incompatible with one another. Obviously in an ultimate sense this cannot be true, but since they cannot yet be harmonized I excuse myself from forming strong opinions.
5. Aside from Joseph Fielding Smith arguing that planets do not go on to destruction but are celestialized, I'm not aware of any general authorities attacking cosmology. Certainly there have not been any book-length treatments. This may be because of points 1-4 above. (Richard G. Scott excepted?)
6. Science fiction such as Star Treck, along with ever-increasing technological sophistication, helps us believe that physics can be used in apparently miraculous ways.

Continue reading...

The Prophecy of Joel

Concerning the prophecy of Joel that the spirit of the Lord would be poured out upon all flesh, Joseph Fielding Smith said:

There has never been a step taken from that day to this, in discovery or invention, where the Spirit of the Lord (that is, the spirit of which Joel spoke, the Light of Christ, not the Holy Ghost!) was not the prevailing force, resting upon the individual, which caused him to make the discovery or the invention. The world does not understand that but it is perfectly clear to me; nor did the Lord always use those who have faith, nor does he always do so today. He uses such minds as are pliable and can be turned in certain directions to accomplish his work, whether they believe in him or not. (Doctrines of Salvation 1 p.178)

Continue Reading

(Commenting on this passage in his foreword to Evolution and Mormonism, Duane Jeffery writes, "I suppose that Joseph Fielding Smith may not have meant to include Charles Darwin and evolution in this sweeping idealism, though in this particular passage he did not qualify his sentiment at all.")

When we eventually learn of "things as they really were," it will be interesting to find out which scientific advancements were specifically inspired and which were not. My impression of most science is that it is not any more inspired than any other line of work. A detective, for example, probably uses much of the same thought processes as a scientist does.

So why, in all of human history, are we so lucky to have such advancement in the sciences? I don't claim to know the whole answer but I have a couple of thoughts. First, it is interesting to note that advancements in one field of science make advancements in other fields possible. I think most of the sciences owe much to physics and engineering because they have produced equipment and instruments that have allowed exploration of new areas of research. Molecular biology could never have preceded the principles of microscopy, radioactivity, and so forth. Computers have revolutionized the world--including the sciences. So a few foundational advancements can have a broad and lasting effect.

Even more fundamental, I think, are the principles on which this nation was founded and has continued--liberty, economic freedom, commitment to education, etc. (Of course I would also include other countries that share these principles.) These principles have enabled us to live in relative peace and prosperity, which in turn has enabled us to think about greater questions than where the next meal will come from. Furthermore scientific inquiry has been largely free from political domination or religious dogma.

So I see the role of special inspiration in science mostly in the fostering of a climate where scientific research can be carried out, with a few directly inspired foundational ideas from time to time.

Continue reading...

Politics and Science

AP has a story about scientists feeling stifled in the Bush administration.

Continue Reading

Kurt Gottfried of Cornell University and the Union of Concerned Scientists said a survey of scientists in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found that about 42 percent said they felt pressured to not report publicly any findings that do not agree with Bush policies on endangered species.

He said almost a third of the Fish and Wildlife researchers said they were even pressured not to express within the agency any views in conflict with the Bush policies.

"This administration has distanced itself from scientific information," said Gottfried. He said this is part of a larger effort to let politics dominate pure science.

He said scientists in the Environmental Protection Agency have been pressured to change their research to keep it consistent with the Bush political position on environmental issues.

Because of such actions, he said, it has become more difficult for federal agencies to attract and retain top scientific talent. This becomes a critical issue, said Gottfried, because about 35 percent of EPA scientists will retire soon and the Bush administration can "mold the staff" of the agency through the hiring process.

I'll readily admit that scientists have their own interests--funding, career advancement, etc. And I also realize that policy makers have to weigh many factors in the decisions they make, and the recommendations of scientists may not always be top priority. But scientists should not be pressured to tailor findings in order to support political decisions. To whatever extent this happens--under any administration--it is wrong.

Continue reading...

Your Mouth is a Niche

The Panda's Thumb has an overview of dental plaque. It looks like a rather complex structure/community of microbes. There's a pot-shot at ID at the end that doesn't seem well grounded. On the other hand, if some of those microbes only colonize human mouths, then we have to start asking some questions that might make creationists squirm.

Continue reading...