Signs of the Times
[The San Diego (Cal.) Union]
Hundreds of San Diegans will approve the protest of George W. Vansycle against the sort of "health instruction" in the public schools that instills the fear of disease in the minds of little children. He mentions a specific instance in which, it is said, a "health teacher" told the pupils of a class that the "sleeping sickness" is now "prevalent in the eastern states," that "it is due to follow the influenza," and that it will "arrive" in San Diego this spring.
Making every allowance for possible errors of statement in the transmission of this report of what the teacher said to these young children, there is still enough substance upon which to base the protest uttered by Mr. Vansycle. There is no good evidence that there is a "sleeping sickness" prevalent anywhere except in the wilds of Africa; nobody of absolute authority has said that "it follows influenza"—and if they did, other equally absolute authorities would deny it; and certainly this "health teacher" has no authority for a statement that "it will arrive in San Diego."
The teacher will probably make public denial of the authenticity of the report; but whether she does or does not, the general proposition holds that any teaching which frightens little children is not good teaching. The apothegm, "A sound mind in a sound body" (Mens sana in corpore sano), is older than Galen or Hippocrates. It prescribes the basis of all health. If we fear a disease, if we constantly think of disease, we are more likely to contract the disease than if we forget that disease exists, or if we are mentally indifferent to it. As a man thinketh so he is; and the "state of mind" of an individual or a community invariably eventually produces a reflex effect for good or evil, according as the source of the mental condition is salutary or vicious.
We have health authorities to guard against such diseases as are said to have been mentioned by this "health teacher," and these authorities are also empowered to prevent and exterminate them when they "arrive." That ought to be sufficient, without scaring little children by fearsome prophecies of something which may never happen. A "health teacher" should teach constructively along safe, sane, and cheerful lines of thought. It is no part of such teaching to provide a culture in the community for the reception and propagation of plagues, pestilences, and perilous maladies. We hope that it is not true that anybody is doing this in San Diego.
[Rocky Mountain News, Denver, Colo.]
The so-called "drugless" doctors of New York city, of which there are several hundred, have made the astounding announcement that during the recent epidemic of flu in that city they did not lose a single case. Figures compiled by the osteopaths throughout the country indicate that out of 49,000 cases of flu treated only 472 died—a mortality of less than one per cent. The total mortality from the flu throughout the country, as nearly as can be estimated from a bewildering mass of reports, has been from 5 to 15 per cent.
If these figures are true, and they are put forward as correct by honorable men, what appalling conclusions one would be forced to draw! Think what it would mean! It would mean that most of the four hundred thousand people who have died of the flu did not die—they were actually, though of course unintentionally, killed. It would mean that most of these four hundred thousand persons would be alive today if they had received the right kind of treatment. It would mean that the old school treatment of at least two diseases (the flu and pneumonia) is in many cases more deadly than the diseases themselves. It would mean that in refusing to allow the "drugless" doctors to treat the boys in our Army and Navy the Government sacrificed thousands of lives. It would mean that if the letters M. D. after a man's name are to be an indication of knowledge, intelligence, and broad-mindedness, as they of course ought to be, the medical profession would be forced to abandon false theories for the truth and replace dangerous and out-of-date practices with more modern and successful methods.
Surely the Government cannot ignore a matter of such vital importance. It is its duty to take every precaution for the protection of the people's greatest possession—their health! Death caused by malpractice, whether through ignorance or otherwise, should be prevented.
[The Christian Science Monitor]
She kept her pledge to Belgium! This song
A free earth sings throughout each day and night.
She paid her pledge when it fell due. The wrong
Of evil could not turn her from the might
Of her true word. This sceptered nation hurled
Her all into Love's scale with naught to gain
Except the freedom of a fearful world
From war and wrong and poverty and pain.
She saw the vision of a glad earth blest
With lasting peace, with heaven's work and rest.
Her pledge was paid in full when it fell due.
The word she gave to Principle was true.
She kept her pledge to Belgium! Her men
Fought valiantly in Flanders' mud and rain;
Her women sought the tasks of slaves again.
All England paid that no more war or pain
Should strike at earth. The vision of the King
Who reigns o'er all, she saw by night and day—
A world redeemed from fear and suffering.
Her battle cry became the words we pray:
"Thine is the kingdom!" This her bugle call—
"Thy kingdom come!" Thus England fought for all,
And paid in full her pledge when it fell due.
Thank God, her word to Principle was true!
[Moorfield Story in The Boston (Mass.) Herald]
We know that the only possible method of preventing war is a league of nations formed to preserve international peace, and so strong that no single nation will dare to encounter the penalties which such a league can inflict, if peace is broken. The statesmen of the great civilized nations are engaged in an attempt to organize such a league, and behind them stand leaders of public opinion everywhere. The difficulties arising from habits, prejudices, existing institutions, national pride, and all the dangers which active imaginations can anticipate are very great. No league can be devised which is not imperfect, for it must be made by man. It is impossible to satisfy everybody or to substitute at once for a system of international relations which has lasted for centuries a scheme which will revolutionize the politics of the world.
The question for us all is, Shall we help or hinder the attempt to make war impossible? We may admit that the future of the proposed league is doubtful; we can easily imagine its failure; we can foresee many difficulties in its way. But what of the system which it supplants? The future of that system is certain, its horrors are apparent to every one; its continuance means the end of civilization. Shall we insist upon retaining it because the proposed plan may fail? Must we not recognize that if it is only a step, it is a step in the right direction? In all human affairs progress must be made step by step. Shall we refuse to take the first step?
