Thursday, November 26, 2009

Evolution and Medicine: Return of the Witch Doctor

Ever wonder what it would have been like to see a doctor in centuries past? How about the village witch doctor? From blood letting to rituals, it is sickening--no pun intended--to think of how ignorance and religious dogma have led to so much needless suffering. Now evolutionists want to bring their religious dogma into modern medicine. Today's doctor, they say, must be fully indoctrinated in their Darwinian ways. As one new "peer-reviewed" (sic) paper in a government funded journal explains:

Like other basic sciences, evolutionary biology needs to be taught both before and during medical school. Most introductory biology courses are insufficient to establish competency in evolutionary biology. Premedical students need evolution courses, possibly ones that emphasize medically relevant aspects. In medical school, evolutionary biology should be taught as one of the basic medical sciences. This will require a course that reviews basic principles and specific medical applications, followed by an integrated presentation of evolutionary aspects that apply to each disease and organ system. Evolutionary biology is not just another topic vying for inclusion in the curriculum; it is an essential foundation for a biological understanding of health and disease.

If you have ever wondered why history is important, wonder no more. Evolution has led the life sciences down so many false trails it is difficult even to keep track. Evolution is constantly wrong and evolutionists are always surprised by nature. And now they incredibly want to force modern medicine to go back in time and embrace absurd nineteenth century naivete. The last thing we want our doctors to be spending time and effort on is religiously motivated pseudo science.

If you don't understand why the controversy over evolution is important, then consider this: Evolutionists are not, and never were, content to be free to pursue their silly religious ideas. Like so many religious movements, they want you to be subject to their beliefs. They insist evolution is a fact to which every student must accede, every scientist must pay homage, and every medical doctor must be indoctrinated. And they will use your tax dollars to do so. Blood letting anyone?


  1. CH: "And now they incredibly want to force modern medicine to go back in time and embrace absurd nineteenth century naivete. "

    What do you suggest instead then? You obviously feel strongly about this. What should be done? Suggestions?

  2. 'Evolutionary biology' has HINDERED, not helped science. Their ridiculous list of vestigial organs/traits and the belief that most of our DNA was 'junk' have only impeded scientific progress.

    Ironically, the most damning statement regarding the foolishness of evolutionary biology comes from mr. evolutionary fundamentalist himself, Jerry Coyne:

    In science's pecking order, evolutionary biology lurks somewhere near the bottom, far closer to phrenology than to physics. For evolutionary biology is a historical science, laden with history's inevitable imponderables. We evolutionary biologists cannot generate a Cretaceous Park to observe exactly what killed the dinosaurs; and, unlike "harder" scientists, we usually cannot resolve issues with a simple experiment, such as adding tube A to tube B and noting the color of the mixture.
    Of Vice and Men The New Republic April 3 2000 p.27

  3. There are problems with medical science that go beyond but are not unrelated to the Darwinian faith and the selling of this faith in med schools. There have been scandals, blunders and dubious affairs in the modern history of medicine that makes for frightening reading. The corruption of medicine by vested interests, like the multi-billion dollar BigPharma industry, its tentacles in the journals and its less than benign influence on funding and research at the universities and in drug trials and the like is a scandal in its own right. The misuse and abuse of all kinds of drugs that have harmed and even killed tens of thousands of patients over the decades is well-known among those who are not in thrall to the medical profession, and have seriously studied the subject. The number of these scandals continue to grow and the media's role in all this is the same as with neo-Darwinism, namely running interference for the Good 'Ol Boys Network.

    Whilst the corruption of medical science by Big Money is notable, it is its underpinnings in scientific reductionism and materialism that underlie so many blunders in medicine, especially in the mistreatment and even misunderstanding of many diseases (of which we still know so little). However this is very little known among the general public (modern medical scandals and mistreatments of illness and the like) and there is far less dissent and complaint on this front, because far more suppression and censorship of dissent in this regard, than is the case with Darwin dissenters. ID supporters and Creationists may disagree with me here, but as an IDist myself I am well aware of the censorship and misrepresentation of ID by Darwinists at the universities, science journals and through the media, the intimidation and ad hominem bullying directed to ID scientists by the Darwinian priesthood, the threats to their jobs and tenure etc.

    However with that said I have likewise made a serious study of modern medicine and what really goes on behind the scenes, and the censorship and threats, the misrepresentations of dissenters (and I am talking about scientists here, including the most highly regarded in their respective disciplines) is far far worse than it is with ID. There is near blanket censorship and out and out deceit, scandals comparable to the very recent and still playing in the news ClimateGate fraud, the difference being the media (conservative and liberal) engage in near-blanket censorship on medical scandals and the selling of dubious claims by medical science, so the public are left totally uninformed (unlike ClimateGate which is all over the rightwing blogosphere even if ignored and downplayed by the media). Modern medicine, although of course it has given us a lot of great things and continues to do so, from open heart surgery to penicillin and more, has also a very dark side that is motivated both by greed and careerism and scientific materialist notions (including reductionist notions of pathology that are often dead wrong). The scientific reductionist paradigm in medicine is a natural target for ID, yet you don't see this targeting or skepticism of orthodox medicine from the ID community happening at all (with a few exceptions).

  4. One of the reasons is simply that ID scientists and academics, for the most part, are as much in the dark here as everybody else. Such are the consequences of overspecialisation and compartementalisation of science and the censorship of dubious and fraudulent medical science of which ID supporters and academics would in the main have no knowledge of, just like the public at large. Another is boxed thinking and a failure to make connections between distinct scientific disciplines, which relates to the first point I make.

    There are other factors involved including predominantly cultural ones, that is beyond the scope of a comment on a blog post, but it is worth acknowledging - that is that ID and genuinely scientific medical dissent (as opposed to fringe medical quackery - a whole other subject) remain natural allies apart, and wilfully apart and even hostile to one another in many respects, for many reasons, most of these reasons/factors not necessarily relating to science per se. Indeed what I obliquely refer to remains probably entirely neglected in the field of the sociology of scientific knowledge, since it would mean recognising not only marginal or forbidden science in two distinct arenas, but making the necessary connections here which go beyond science into sociological dynamics. Frankly readers will not know what I mean as I have not eludicated on these points at all, and cannot do so without writing a very lengthy treatise really. I apologise for that, but it can't be avoided. I also don't have the time and it's not an easy subject to elucidate on.

    My point is this, the indoctrination of med students into Darwinian propoganda is the very least of the problems in the monstrous behemoth that is modern medicine, the very least...

  5. I've been a doctor for thirty years and never once had any need of Darwinian ideas.

    Antibiotic resistance can be very readily understood in terms of differential survival and gene transfer by plasmids, in any event its an empirical observation which a young earth creationist has no problems with. That really is it.

    On the other hand, medicine has gained very much from biomimetics, the science of copying nature, a.k.a. the creation.

    The medical curriculum, under-and postgraduate, is overcrowded. My own special interest is in the early diagnosis of skin cancer, this is not taught well enough due to lack of time, as a result of which lives are being needlessly lost.

    Anyone who wants to foist yet more Darwinism on medical students (who will have had enough of it at college doing biology prior to medical school) is saying that this matters more than training in the early diagnosis of skin cancer, which is one (among many) areas crying out for more time in a crowded curriculum. That tells us something about some people's priorities.

  6. Behe made a couple of predictions based on ID that have held up, so far. I don't know if that is the case with evolutionary medicine.

  7. Evolutionary theory, has help shaped many of the answers we have for the reasons of disease, disease processes and our body's response to disease. It is used to help shape new research and methods in the treatment and prevention of said diseases. Cornelius, perhaps you are the one that is trying to prevent progress.

  8. Yeah It's good I appreciate this article. I recommand it to my friends,I,ll be back here again and again . Visit our blog for more .