Over the centuries, mankind has developed a way to assess facts that scientists could agree on. This field is called Science. We use the Scientific Method to discover Truth. When the majority of scientists are convinced that a theory is correct, it becomes part of “mainstream science”. Today we are seeing yet another verbal attack on mainstream medicine - questioning the existence of COVID-19, precautions we must take, and the and upcoming vaccine treatment. In this emergency, we shouldn't doubt the conclusions of our medical community. We should do what they advise. Metaphorically, science and religion put the puzzle pieces together to allow us to see a full picture of the universe. Science is a partner in this, not an adversary. We should respect the accomplishments of science and medicine. In the end - please follow your doctor's advice.
email to ScottRFrazer@gmail.com
or visit ScottRFrazer.com
S1E14 – Respecting Mainstream Medicine and Fighting COVID
This is the podcast Science and Scriptures Season 1, Episode 14, or “Supporting Mainstream Science and Fighting COVID”
Hello this is your host Scott Frazer and welcome to another episode of Science and Scriptures.
Given the name of this podcast, I thought we would start out the new year discussing science in general. I know that most of my listeners have strong testimonies of the church. I do not know if you have strong testimonies of science.
With your birth, you were given the best on-board computer in the universe – your brain. With it, you can think. Your brain routinely conducts experiments – you try out different foods, lifestyles, and friends and see which ones you like. Your brain makes conclusions on how you will live, based on the data it collects. But when men and women make their conclusions, they often disagree over their interpretations of the facts. So, over the centuries, mankind put together a way to assess facts that scientists could agree on. This field is called Science. We use the Scientific Method to discover Truth. In a nutshell, groups of scientists run experiments and interpret the results of their testing. They publish their conclusions. Other scientists try to reproduce these experimental results and see if the interpretations of those results make sense to them. They then publish their results and comparisons are made. Theories are debated in scientific conferences. Eventually the majority of scientists are convinced that a theory is correct and it becomes part of “mainstream science”.
Mainstream science is called mainstream because that is what the majority of scientists believe and support. We have heard a number of attacks on mainstream science in our history. To remind you of a few of those challenges, let me remind you of a few known conclusions.
Today we are seeing a new verbal attack on mainstream medicine. So let’s add another example.
To NOT believe in mainstream science, you are doomed to believe in conspiracies. To suggest that COVID-19 is not real, you must believe that there has been a massive conspiracy of scientists, physicians, laboratories, and government agencies. Then you must explain the motivation behind such a conspiracy. What could possibly drive the global medical community to participate in such a hoax?
A second form of attack on the medical community’s handling of COVID-19 is the backlash we are seeing against wearing facemasks and practicing social distancing. There have even been protests marches about having to wear masks. The other day at a skating rink in Midway, I heard an older woman RANT and RAVE at an employee of the rink who was reminding skaters to wear their masks. In her opinion, apparently, facemasks are NOT necessary, and we should all be standing up against the requirements to wear them. I seriously doubt that this woman was a physician or a virologist, but she strongly believed in her opinion nonetheless.
Of all the attacks on science, most do occur in the medical field. Keeping ourselves healthy and alive can be demanding and everyone has their own opinion about how to do it. Many people believe in folk remedies they have been told about since childhood. For example, you may believe that taking Vitamin C keeps you from getting a cold. Studies have shown this to be untrue. Granted, Vitamin C is an essential vitamin. But it provides no protection for you from picking up a cold virus.
There are many products available for people who want to shop for alternatives to mainstream medicine. These are called “complementary and alternative medical” (or CAM) therapies. Often, such therapies are sought for treatment of cancer, since traditional cancer treatments are so traumatic. But you should realize that deciding to delay mainstream cancer treatment to pursue CAM therapies can be a life-or-death decision. The most famous example of such a decision was Steve Jobs, the man who created the multinational technology company Apple. Jobs was diagnosed with a rare form of pancreatic cancer. Called islet cell tumors, these slow-growing tumors which can be surgically removed if done before the tumor metastasizes. Jobs delayed surgery for nine months after his diagnosis, using CAM therapies such as acupuncture, botanicals, and dietary changes. Finally, in 2004, Jobs opted for surgery. He died 7 years later. We will never know whether his delay cost him his life.
Another example of CAM therapies is dietary supplements. For those of us who live in Utah, dietary supplements are a big industry.As their name implies, “dietary supplements” should only be considered only as, well, supplements to your diet. Some people need to take supplemental vitamins, minerals, dietary fiber, or other needed ingredients that may be missing from a good diet. This is fine. A problem arises when people see dietary supplements as a “alternative medical” therapy to what their doctors recommend. Such patients rebel against the advice of mainstream medicine, thinking that a “natural” treatment to their medical issues is a better approach.
In case you are a non-believer in mainstream medicine, please note there is a big difference in the regulation of pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements. A law passed by Congress in 1994, called the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, allows the FDA to only regulate and assure that dietary supplements are SAFE. Nutritional supplements do not have to prove that they are effective at treating a disease. Companies that sell dietary supplements cannot advertise that their product cure a disease. However, the FDA must still frequently send out warning letters to companies who advertise their products can treat disease.
Please note that numerous studies actually HAVE been run on most dietary supplements to determine if they are effective in improving health or fighting disease. Studies have been run, but supplement companies have simply not been able gather statistical proof that their product is effective. Today the latest dietary supplement fad seems to be CBD oil, extracted from the marijuana plant. If you Google CBD oil, you will find reports that will tell you that CBD oil Could Reduce Anxiety and Depression, it may help reduce symptoms related to cancer and its treatment, it May Reduce Acne, it Might Have Neuroprotective Properties, it Could Benefit Heart Health, and is thought to have other health benefits.
Why all of the “maybes”, “mights”, and “coulds” you ask? Because none of these benefits have been demonstrated and the FDA will not allow companies to claim benefits that they have not proven to be real.
Dietary supplements, by definition, have no medicinal value. If a supplement was effective, its value would have been discovered by now and it would be medicine. This is not to say that supplements cannot help you mentally or emotionally. If the scent of lavender oil brings you good memories or a natural calming effect, then smell it. If the aroma and taste of chamomile tea remind you of a warm blanket and a fire in the fireplace and helps chase away depression, then drink it. Supplements have their place in our lives, but not in the medicine cabinet.
In my defense of mainstream medicine, you should probably know of the exhaustive procedures that pharma companies must go through to get a medicine approved for market. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must approve a pharmaceutical before it can be released for sale. The drug must prove itself SAFE and it must prove it is EFFECTIVE in treating a specific disease. Clinical trials of any drug usually take years and cost millions of dollars. The testing can involve thousands of patients, whose files must all be reviewed and approved to participate in the study. Procedures must be followed to the letter. Many clinical trials are DOUBLE BLIND studies. This means that neither the patient nor his doctor knows if the patient is receiving the drug or a placebo. Double blind trials prevent a patient from reporting he is feeling better simply because he took a new medication and thinks he should be feeling better. They prevent the doctor from giving unintentional clues as to the content of the pill. Only when a drug has been statistically proven to be safe and effective to the satisfaction of doctors at the FDA, can it be released to the public.
I compare this complex approval process to criticisms I hear from people about a particular medicine or treatment that their doctor has advised. Most such complaints about a recommended medical approach are based on anecdotal evidence, which is evidence based on one experience or one story. For example, I heard acquaintances dismiss a recommended medication that has proven itself through years of evaluation and multi-million-dollar clinical trials – based on the bad experience with the drug that an aunt’s friend had up in Idaho.
Likewise, I have heard a number of concerns that the new vaccines being developed for COVID-19 could be dangerous. Although the vaccine development has obviously been put on the fast track, it has still had to go through extensive testing. I plan on getting the vaccine as soon as it is available to me. I trust the system, which has conducted such evaluations of drug safety and efficacy for decades. Please note that you will almost assuredly hear of allergic reactions to the virus, perhaps even including anaphylactic shock. Immunity systems in any population are extremely variable. Some people have immunity systems that are hypersensitive to otherwise harmless foods such as peanuts. Those people with confused immune systems may react to the vaccine, but for the vast majority of us, the vaccine will be fine.
Now many of the attacks on mainstream science over the years, while ridiculous, are harmless. If you believe the world is flat or that men did not land on the moon in 1969, there is no harm done – unless of course you are taking a school exam in geography or world history.
But some campaigns against mainstream science have actually done harm. Let me give you an example.
In 1954, the tobacco industry paid to publish a “Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers” in hundreds of U.S. newspapers. It stated that the public's health was the industry's main concern and promised a variety of good-faith changes. The tobacco industry paid their own experts to counter study findings that smoking caused cancer. They criticized the “junk” science that had discovered that cancer is caused by tobacco use. They made self-regulatory pledges, lobbied to stifle government action, and introduced so-called “safer” products.
In multiple studies on the subject, mainstream medicine demonstrated time and again that smoking DOES cause cancer. These scientists and physicians continued to battle against the tobacco industry, finally forcing the government to recognize the truth and institute legislation to force tobacco companies to warn smokers about the dangers of tobacco use and to stop marketing it to children.
We all know how this dispute ended. In 2006, the American Cancer Society and other plaintiffs won a major court case against Big Tobacco. Judge Gladys Kessler found tobacco companies guilty of lying to the American public about the deadly effects of cigarettes and secondhand smoke. In her ruling on the case, Judge Gladys Kessler stated,
“Substantial evidence establishes that [tobacco companies] have engaged in and executed – and continue to engage in and execute – a massive 50-year scheme to defraud the public…”
Who were the tobacco companies battling to defraud the public? Mainstream medicine - including medical researchers, medical schools, the FDA, and other health organizations.
Some of these arguments may sound familiar to you. Certain politicians in our government are now waging a war against the charge that our civilization is causing global warming. It is using the same techniques used by Big Tobacco, calling proof presented by climatologists “junk science”. Conservative groups are declaring that global warming is a conspiracy that helps forward the agenda of liberal environmentalists. Climatologists have become the scapegoat of politicians’ attempts to simply deny that global warming exists.
How can climatologists know for sure that global warming is real? Because they have compiled and studied thousands of pages of data which follow carbon dioxide levels and global temperatures over the past 59 years. Results are not debatable any longer. Just as we now scoff at the past claim that smoking does not cause cancer, future generations will wonder how the people in 2020 could ever be so misled about global warming. Mainstream science has recognized global warming as a reality for many years. Multiple global organizations of scientists have signed statements attesting to the reality of global warming. It is a real thing and should be of concern.
The point of this podcast episode is that all of mainstream science has no agenda, political or otherwise. It is spread out between the pharma industry, hospitals, government agencies, and medical schools. Certainly, mistakes are made in the learning process, but, as I noted earlier, scientists monitor each other. If a paper is published that introduces new conclusions and breakthroughs, other scientists will try to reproduce the study. If they are unsuccessful, they will publish their own results and call into question the original study. Still others researchers will then follow up with their own attempts at the experiment and publish their results. Eventually the truth is uncovered and then reported to the world.
In a podcast called Science and Scriptures, you may wonder why I am defending mainstream science. I would like to point out that both Science and Religion seek TRUTH. Earth sciences work out facts about our earth and our environment and how to keep them clean and functional. Medical research is dedicated to understand how our bodies function and how they can be repaired. Agricultural sciences strive to learn to most efficiently grow our food.All sciences seek to find and understand truth.
Similarly, religion seeks truth, but spiritual truth in this case. As individuals and a people, we seek to understand the Gospel and God’s will for us. We find this similarity in the scriptures and statements by church leaders.
We read in the Doctrine & Covenants Section 93,
“And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come.” (D&C 93:24)
Truth does not have to be spiritual. It has a much greater span than that.
John A. Widtsoe stated in the preface of one of his books, “This volume is based on the conviction that there is no real difference between science and religion. The great, fundamental laws of the Universe are foundation stones in religion as well as in science.”
Ezra Taft Benson was equally straightforward in a 1966 General Conference: “There can never be conflict between revealed religion and scientific fact.”
Metaphorically, science and religion put the puzzle pieces together to allow us to see a full picture of the universe. Science is a partner in this, not an adversary. As a people, I believe we should recognize the efforts and accomplishments of our scientists in figuring out truth. We should appreciate their attention to detail in working out the studies that will conclusively demonstrate the truth of a theory. I admit that, as a scientist, I am biased. But, especially with the COVID epidemic, I hear on-going criticism of mainstream science by people who have no idea of the complexity of the scientific method. I think we should be more impressed with our medical industry than we are with the new features in our cell phone.
As an individual, what can you do to support mainstream medicine? To start, I recommend that you Do what your doctor tells you to do. These men and women have gone to years of medical school and their residency. They keep themselves informed of new developments in their specific fields. They have seen patients with similar problems to your own and they have seen how different treatments worked on them. They have experience and expertise.
The medical industry will try to involve you in decisions about your health to attain a better doctor-patient relationship. Their effort makes for some strange conversations. After years of abuse of my right ankle in volleyball and other sports, I had to have it fused. Just before the operation, my surgeon asked me if I wanted a nerve block and, if so, did I want it in the knee or the hip? I almost laughed. “Doctor” I said, “you are the expert here. What do you think I should do?” He started to explain the advantages of different nerve blocks until I interrupted him. Despite his efforts to be inclusive, this was his decision. I could add nothing to a discussion on the merits of different nerve block choices.
I said, “Doctor, if you were on this gurney instead of me, what would you want YOUR surgeon to do”? He told me what he would do in my situation and I replied, “Great, then do that.”
One of the rules of my life is to trust the experts. Whether it is a mechanic who is going to fix my car or a surgeon who is going to fix my ankle, they are the people who know what they are doing. I rarely hear complaints about car mechanics. But I hear a lot of complaints and grousing about our medical community.
One last comment that I would like to mention about the efforts of our medical community against COVID-19. The physician who is advising the president and leading the fight against COVID-19 is a man named Dr. Anthony Fauci. Dr. Fauci has led the National Institute on Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 36 years. No one has more expertise in fighting viruses. But criticism of his efforts by the President and others has been harsh and continuous, including their opinions as to whether hydroxychloroquine is an effective Covid-19 treatment. Really?
Dr. Fauci’s boss is Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health. Before his present job, Collins led the Human Genome project to determine the base pair sequence that make up human DNA. He is a smart man. Francis Collins became a Christian after a life of study of religion and science. He wrote one of my favorite books, The Language of God, where he lays out the science that supports the existence of God. But more than this, in the book Dr. Collins reveals much about his own determination to live a good and moral life. I don’t believe for a moment that Dr. Collins is part of conspiracy. I believe that he is doing everything in his power to overcome this virus. Dr. Collins has continued to defend the beleaguered Dr. Fauci, calling the prospect of firing or demoting him “unthinkable.” With their level of expertise (and my peek into the commitment to morality of Dr. Collins), if these two men ask me to wear a facemask and practice social distancing, I am going to do it. Trust the experts.
So, that is all that I have for you today. I hope you have enjoyed this podcast. I realize that some of you may disagree with a few of my statements. If you have any questions or comments, please email them to me at scottrfrazer@gmail.comI will be happy to discuss. In any case, thank you for the time you have spent listening to my… lecture today.
This is Scott Frazer of the podcast “Science and Scriptures”. If you think this podcast might be of interest to family members or friends, please share it with them. Take care.