RFK and the Silencing of Debate
Is resistance to nonconformity intrinsic to medicine?
RFK and the Silencing of Debate
The same year that Copernicus published his book asserting that the sun and not the earth was the center of the solar system, a Belgian doctor named Andreas Vesalius published an illustrated anatomy textbook, On the Fabric of the Human Body, that would result in a paradigm shift in medicine as impactful as Copernicus’ was in cosmology. It was 1543, and the doctors of the time still held sacred the teachings of the ancient Roman physician Galen.
Galen himself had revolutionized the medical practice of his time, publishing more than 125 books detailing his knowledge based on his experience treating gladiators. What he lacked, however, was a complete understanding of human anatomy. Although Galen had completed numerous animal dissections, the Romans forbade human dissection.
The practice was still frowned upon in Vesalius’ time. What need was there to dissect human corpses when Galen described them in such perfect detail? When evidence from dissection clearly differed from what Galen described, it was the corpse before them and not Galen’s descriptions that were declared to be flawed. Vesalius proved the need for these dissections was great indeed: via his own study of human bodies, Vesalius discovered over 200 mistakes in Galen’s supposedly flawless texts.
Rather than correct their errant teachings, the doctors of Vesalius’ time rejected his work. They preferred to cling to medical dogma despite what was right in front of their eyes: contrary evidence that could be easily attained through simple dissection. Even Vesalius’ own mentor, Sylvius, published a book denouncing him as a “madman.” Although Vesalius’ work would eventually come to be recognized as among the top ten most important events in medical science, he did not live to see his work vindicated.
As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. undergoes the rigors of his Senate confirmation hearing, the parallels are undeniable. Headlines abound to discredit RFK, an outsider lacking the medical expertise to weigh in on topics like vaccine safety. Despite having repeatedly iterated that he is not anti-vax, RFK’s opponents insist on characterizing him as such.
Conspiracy theorists will say that this is propaganda designed to keep the powerful in power and suppress the truth about vaccines that are making our children sick. Pragmatists like Calley Means will insist that we follow the money; RFK’s call for further testing of the CDC vaccine schedule will almost certainly take its toll on Big Pharma’s bottom line. While both of these scenarios are possibilities, it is also plausible that something else is at play here, something even more basic to our humanity than our greed: the instinct to enforce social conformity.
The history of medicine could be written in terms of thinkers who refused to accept “settled science,” who dared to question and investigate, even when their communities insisted that they weren’t qualified to ask questions. Nearly every single one of medicine’s top ten developments faced scrutiny, mockery, and disbelief. The doctors, chemists, and laymen who made these discoveries were unilaterally forced to defend not only their discoveries but their personal character against scathing criticism from friends, colleagues, and the medical and scientific communities of their day.
While new treatments and methods should be rigorously tested and investigated, their discoverers should not be demonized. Will we ever learn that silencing dissent over so-called “settled science” never serves science—or humanity—well?
While new treatments and methods should be rigorously tested and investigated, their discoverers should not be demonized. Will we ever learn that silencing dissent over so-called “settled science” never serves science—or humanity—well?
Questioning Medical Dogma
As Vesalius’ discoveries in human anatomy were transforming medical practice in Europe, a French barber-surgeon named Ambroise Paré was experimenting with new surgical methods on French battlefields. In Paré’s day, there were no anesthetics. A surgeon’s skill was judged by his speed. Surgeons would amputate limbs that could not be saved and cauterize them with a hot iron as swiftly as possible. Soldiers often survived amputation only to die of shock from the sheer pain of the hot iron. Paré theorized that delicate silk threads might be used to tie off blood vessels.
It would be years before Paré’s discovery could be published and widely disseminated. Parisian surgeons discouraged other doctors and barber-surgeons from attempting Paré’s novel methods and fought publication of his book on legal grounds. He was not a doctor, and his book offered practical tips in plain language rather than repeating the accepted methods of the day. Though he would never receive a medical degree, Paré would go on to be named “First Surgeon of the King” in 1562.
In the early 1600s, English doctor William Harvey published On the Motion of the Heart and Blood, detailing his discovery…
Web: www.snstephenson.com
Books: Mama Prays | Reclaiming Motherhood from a Culture Gone Mad
Few things are as dangerous as the phrase “established science.” That being said, I really like not having polio.
This was a great article. I hope it goes viral (no pun!). The way you summarized the ethics of choice near the end articulated to a large extent how my wife and I reasoned through our own decisions on vaccines for our kids. I only wish I could have worded it then as well as you did here. That would have helped a lot of conversations.