An increasing number of requests are coming to the General Conference Allowances and Adjustments Committee and the Retirement Committee for financial assistance for workers and retirees who wish to obtain therapies that they believe to be natural and in harmony with instructions given by Ellen White. These applicants typically believe that the Spirit of Prophecy writings condemn the use of drugs.
Questions have been raised concerning the need to change existing policy. The Retirement Committee has asked the Department of Health and Temperance to study these issues and make recommendations to the committees involved.
This subject is not new. It has been studied before, and the reports from previous studies are readily available. In 1954 the White Estate produced a compilation of Ellen White's writings titled The Use of Drugs in the Care of the Sick. In the foreword Arthur White states, "Because of the strong E. G. White statements concerning the use of drugs, there resides in the minds of not a few conscientious Seventh-day Adventists the opinion that there is a serious conflict between the Spirit of Prophecy teachings and what is considered sound medical practice today. Such a situation is not wholesome or helpful."
Other publications that have dealt with the subject are The Story of Our Health Message, by Dores Eugene Robin son (Southern Publishing Association, 1943), and The Use of Drugs, a pamphlet prepared several years ago that is avail able through the White Estate.
The series of questions and answers that follows summarizes current issues.
Do Ellen Q. White's statements about the use of drugs conflict with medical practice today?
Drugs used in Ellen White's day are generally no longer used in medical science. The few exceptions are drugs now used in an entirely different, acceptable way. Practitioners of the past used drugs with little or no knowledge of or regard for their "baleful"—even acutely toxic —effects.
Today there is serious concern in therapeutics over toxic effects of all medicine, and knowledgeable physicians always weigh benefits against risks. Many former methods of treatment were not subjected to rational, widely accepted criteria. But very careful criteria are prescribed by law today. The effectiveness of medicine is determined qualitatively and quantitatively.
Ellen White advocated the use of rational methods of therapy, and wrote that treatment should be based on a thorough understanding of the human body. This approach to therapeutics is the basis of modern treatment.
Logic and common sense tell everyone that drugs used in our day have been beneficial. Potentially toxic substances can have a salutary effect when they are properly administered. Can you conceive of repairing a child's cleft palate without first anesthetizing the child's brain so that he does not feel the pain of the knife? Can you imagine withholding chloroquine from a child with cerebral malaria when the drug may make the difference between life and death? If a patient has a malignant lymphoma, would you deny treatment involving toxic drugs when there is a 90 percent chance of recovery with this treatment?
In spite of the positive aspects of modern therapeutics, the problems Ellen White pointed out in her day apply in principle to the medicines used in our day. She cautions that drugs may not cure, may give only temporary benefit, may change the form of the disease, may cause harmful effects, may weaken the body, may create a worse problem, may cause congenital disease, or may cause death. All these concerns still apply, but today they are seriously researched and are weighed against the measurable benefits of the medicine in question.
It is also true that physicians and medical scientists of today (both SDA and non-SDA) recognize a tendency to use medications when other forms of treatment may be better. We need to do more research into other kinds of treatment—an area that is often neglected in scientific studies. Nevertheless, non-medicinal treatment is in fact being used- Lifestyle changes (diet, exercise, abstemiousness), for example, are helpful as treatment for many health problems. A dedicated practitioner will use all types of treatment to bring health and happiness to the patient.
Health practitioners are also subject to error and incompetence, and no method of therapy is without the possibility of inappropriate use. Some physicians over medicate and some may use wrong forms of treatment. Individuals who feel they are not receiving proper treatment should get a second opinion and should change physicians if necessary. It is essential for the patient to have confidence in his or her physician.
Ellen White reacted to people's quest for health through medicine as follows: "When attacked by disease, many will not take the trouble to search out the cause of their illness. Their chief anxiety is to rid themselves of pain and inconvenience. So they resort to patent nostrums, of whose real properties they know little, or they apply to a physician for some remedy to counteract the results of their misdoing, but with no thought of making a change in their unhealthful habits. If immediate benefit is not realized, another medicine is tried, and then another. Thus the evil continues" (The Ministry of Healing, p. 126).
Does our church's health-care policy exclude assistance for so-called natural remedies?
Nature's remedial agencies are defined in the Spirit of Prophecy as pure air, sun light, abstemiousness, rest, exercise, proper diet, the use of water, and trust in divine power. In referring to these, Ellen White states, "These are the true remedies. Every person should have a knowledge of nature's remedial agencies and how to apply them. It is essential both to understand the principles involved in the treatment of the sick and to have a practical training that will enable one rightly to use this knowledge" (The Ministry of Healing, p. 127).
For the most part our church health-care assistance policy does not cover these natural remedies because they cost nothing and are part of everyday life. We are not reimbursed for windows that can be opened to get fresh air. The policy does not allow payment for opening curtains to let the sunshine in or for taking a sunbath. It does not pay for refraining from taking alcoholic beverages or other injurious substances. It does not pay for getting the proper amount of rest.
Of course, the above is based on a rather narrow definition of natural remedy. Many other therapies could be included under this heading. The health-care policy does cover certain items that are defined by some as natural remedies. These include physical therapy (such as fomentations, whirlpool baths, etc.), occupational therapy, respiratory therapy, blood tests for nutrition problems, and prescriptions for medicines derived from plants. In special circumstances provision is made for health-enhancement programs (time spent in health education and/or rehabilitation programs).
Much of what is classified by some as natural remedies, however, is neither natural nor remedial and has no support in the writings of Ellen White.
Are other systems of treating disease more consistent with the teachings of the Spirit of Prophecy?
Ellen White strongly supported the training of physicians so they could receive a license to practice medicine. She was always a strong supporter of the school of medicine at Loma Linda.
Her writings do not list every system of healing in existence at the time of her writing. But the ones she does mention give insight into her thinking about acceptable remedies. She excluded irrational forms of therapy, including poisonous drugs; she wrote strongly against hypnotism and attacked spurious scientific theories and various forms of mind cure.
In 1911, for example, a Seventh-day Adventist therapist was advocating a treatment that related disease to pressure and alignment problems of the spine. He quoted Ellen White's writings to support these theories.
Ellen White wrote: "Some days ago I read the booklet called The Search light. ' Last night I was instructed to say to the brother who has used my name and my writings so freely in that document, that he has no right to interpret my writings as he has done, and that it is wrong to place me and my teachings before the public in the light that his booklet represents them. I forbid the use of my writings in any such way.
"Furthermore, I protest against the teachings of the 'Searchlight' as to the method of our Saviour in healing the sick. In the name of the Lord I would rebuke all such representations of our Saviour's work" (letter 108, 1911).
It is obvious from the study of Ellen White's writings that she would not condemn any beneficial system of treatment based on an understanding of the physiology of the human body and administered by someone thoroughly trained in its use. In contrast, she condemned irrational forms of treatment.
We now have very good methods for determining the benefit or harm of a given treatment. Any form of treatment must be shown to be effective for the health problem in question; there is no place for assumptions or blind acceptance.
Should our health-care-assistance policy cover expenditures that workers and retirees feel are more in harmony with Spirit of Prophecy teachings than with accepted medical practice?
The purpose of the policy is to assist workers in caring for their health needs. It cannot, however, provide assistance for everything that the worker may think is good for his health. The policy must have defined limits. The worker is free to choose the health care he desires, but he cannot expect reimbursement for items not covered by the policy.
We have a responsibility to educate our workers concerning what constitutes good health care. Anyone who feels a conflict exists between the health-care policy and his conviction can appeal to the governing committee, which must have the final authority on policy interpretation.
