We have so far considered five important visions and their relation to the progress of the cause of health reform among Seventh-day Adventists. In 1848 and 1854 preliminary reforms were called for. In the vision of Otsego, Michigan, June 6, 1863, the broad principles of the subject had been revealed to Mrs. Ellen G. White. In that of Christmas Eve, 1865, instruction had been given that led to the establishment of the Western Health Reform Institute. On December 10, 1871, at Bordoville, Vermont, warnings were given regarding the danger of losing sight of the great objectives for which the institution had been established.
Another Vision
In another vision, given in 1868, very important counsel was given, pointing out another serious danger that threatened to bring reproach upon the health reform. An allusion to this vision is made by Elder J.H. Waggoner when, in reporting the session of the New York State Conference held at Adams Center, he wrote in the The Review and Herald, November 10, 1868:
"The evening of the 25th was the occasion of a special favor. While Sister White was leading in prayer,
"'The angel of the Lord came down, and glory shone around.'"
On this occasion, along with counsel in other lines, Mrs. White was given a message for two brethren who were "extremists, and would run the health reform into the ground."--Testimonies for the Church 2:377.
The deleterious effects of their course were thus portrayed:
"These extremists do more injury in a few months than they can undo in their whole lives. By them the entire theory of our faith is brought into disrepute, and they can never bring those who witness such exhibitions of so-called health reform to think that there is anything good in it. These men are doing a work which Satan loves to see go on."--Ibid.
One of the men referred to had injured the health of members of his own family, and even caused the death of some, by imposing upon them an impoverished diet. Nor had their baneful influence been limited to their own households; for, having gained their confidence, they had prescribed for others. In one family a son had died as a result of following their directions for prolonged fasting, and the father would also have succumbed had it not been for the "presence and timely counsel of a doctor from the health institute."--Ibid., 386.
The Matter of Fasting
The following principles regarding the benefits of an occasional fast and the dangers of prolonged abstinence from food were pointed out in the testimony given for these extremists:
"In cases of severe fever, abstinence from food for a short time will lessen the fever and make the use of water more effectual. But the acting physician needs to understand the real condition of the patient and not allow him to be restricted in diet for a great length of time until his system becomes enfeebled. While the fever is raging, food may irritate and excite the blood; but as soon as the strength of the fever is broken, nourishment should be given in a careful, judicious manner. If food is withheld too long, the stomach's craving for it will create fever, which will be relieved by a proper allowance of food of a right quality."--Ibid., 384, 385.
The two persons addressed in this testimony were not the only ones who were bringing discredit upon the cause of health reform by the advocacy of extreme views, or by rigorously adopting and urging certain principles perhaps right in themselves, while at the same time ignoring or violating other equally vital laws of health. Some who had been unsuccessful in other lines of work were, with a smattering of knowledge gained by reading, posing as "health reform physicians." They were experimenting upon others whom they might dupe into giving them their confidence. Mrs. White vigorously protested against such practices. In a lecture on Christian temperance, given about five months after the vision at Adams Center, New York, she said:
"My voice shall be raised against novices undertaking to treat disease professedly according to the principles of health reform. God forbid that we should be the subjects for them to experiment upon! We are too few. It is altogether too inglorious a warfare for us to die in. God deliver us from such danger! We do not need such teachers and physicians. Let those try to treat disease who know something about the human system."--Ibid., 375.
Not alone by novices was the cause of health reform imperiled by the advocacy of extreme views. A more subtle danger lay in the acceptance of erroneous principles advocated by some of the very reformers to whom great credit is due for the leadership which in the main was correct. We have already noted the fact that some questionable principles taken over from the Dansville health home had been adopted by the institution at Battle Creek. These had been pointed out by the Spirit of prophecy and had been corrected. Now there was a danger that through a still closer affiliation with Dr. R.T. Trall, one of the outstanding health reformers of the time, certain extreme views advocated by him would become identified with the health education carried on through The Health Reformer and at the Western Health Reform Institute.
Dr. R.T. Trall's Views
The physicians at the institute had good reason for confidence in the teachings of Dr. Trail. The doctor's scientific works on health were outstanding in their real merit, and they were freely read and offered for sale by the denominational leaders. We may agree with Elder White when he said that Dr. Trail "is admitted by all to stand at the head of the health reform in this country, so far as human science is concerned." The Review and Herald, July 28, 1868.
By invitation of the General Conference Committee, Dr. Trail came to Battle Creek in the summer of 1868 to visit the Health Reform Institute. While there he delivered in the church a series of nine lectures, which were well attended. In a report of these lectures the General Conference Committee wrote:
"We hold it to be duty to hear and gather truth from every possible source, and consider it a very gratifying circumstance that there are such men as Dr. Trail, who have thoroughly investigated these principles on a scientific basis, that we may have still greater confidence in our position, knowing that science cannot be arrayed against us."--Ibid., May 26, 1868.
On his part Dr. Trail was favorably impressed with the principles advocated and the methods followed by our brethren in Battle Creek. This appreciation was shown in two ways: first, by words of commendation; and second, by offering to turn over to The Health Reformer the list of subscribers to his own paper, The Gospel of Health, in return for which he was granted the privilege of conducting a department in the paper.
At the time this affiliation was effected, Dr. Lay had resigned from the active editorship of The Health Reformer, and it was controlled by an editorial committee consisting of four physicians, five ministers, and three laymen. The magazine was enlarged, and for a time it seemed that Dr. Trall's connection with the paper was of great benefit to all concerned. Because of his more advanced scientific education, no one, and least of all a layman who was acting editor, was in a position to weigh the evidence for all the doctor's positions or to take exception to them. Rather, it was but natural that the editor should place emphasis upon the same teachings as did Dr. Trail in his department.
A Problem for The Health Reformer
After a time it became evident that much of Dr. Trail's department was devoted to a defense of certain personal hobbies, or theories, in which he was at variance with members of the medical profession. Arguments pro and con were inserted, relating to matters of minor importance, or in which the majority of the readers took but little interest. And so the readers were given occasion to assert that, according to The Health Reformer, such extreme positions as the absolute discontinuance of salt, sugar, milk, butter, and eggs were the principal reforms to be effected.
With this background the reader can better understand a situation described by Mrs. White in the latter part of 1870, when, after returning from western camp meetings, she and her husband found the editor of The Health Reformer--referred to as Bro. B--sick. She reported:
"The Reformer was about dead. Bro. B had urged the extreme positions of Dr. Trail. This had influenced the doctor to come out in The Reformer stronger than he otherwise would have done, in discarding milk, sugar, and salt. The position to entirely discontinue the use of these things may be right in its order; but the time had not come to take a general stand upon these points."--Testimonies for the Church 3:19.
The situation was indeed desperate. Every day's mail brought to the office of The Health Reformer demands from subscribers that their subscriptions be discontinued. Especially vigorous protests were received from the western states, where the country was new and fruit scarce. Inquiries were raised asking whether the church members at Battle Creek were living entirely without salt or milk or eggs. "We can get but little fruit, and we have left off the use of meat, tea, coffee, and tobacco," some declared, "but we must have something to sustain life."--Ibid., 20.
Mrs. White wrote: "We sympathized with our brethren who were conscientiously seeking to be in harmony with the body of Sabbath-keeping Adventists. They were becoming discouraged, and some were backsliding upon the health reform, fearing that at Battle Creek they were radical and fanatical. We could not raise an interest anywhere in the West to obtain subscribers for The Health Reformer. We saw that the writers in The Reformer were going away from the people and leaving them behind."--Ibid.
A New Editorial Policy
Under these discouraging conditions Elder White took over the editorship of The Health Reformer, at first temporarily to meet the emergency caused by the sickness of the editor. With the November number he began a series of articles entitled "Health Reform, Its Rise and Progress Among Seventh-day Adventists." Four months later his name appeared as the editor of the journal. In his initial statement of policy for the conduct of the paper he sought to remove the prejudices that had arisen because of extreme views. He wrote:
"The Reformer proposes to reach the people with all their prejudices, and their ignorance of the laws of life, where they are. It will avoid extreme positions, and come as near those who need reforming as possible, and yet be true to the principles of health reform."--The Health Reformer, March, 1871.
A clearer statement of policy was made the following month, in which Elder White wrote: "It {The Health Reformer} will not be satisfied with fighting it out with a few friends in defense of positions which are regarded by all the rest of the world as extremely absurd. It will rather stand in independent and bold defense of the broad principles of hygiene, and gather as many as possible upon this glorious platform."--Ibid., April, 1871.
The paper was enlarged from twenty to thirty-two pages. Mrs. White assumed the responsibility for a regular monthly department. Dr. Trail's department was continued, but there is reason to believe that the new editor gave him some counsel regarding the nature of the subject matter from his pen. He also made it clear to the readers that the doctor alone was responsible for the contents of his department. Regarding this, in a tactful way he wrote:
"Should either of the Special Departments fail to please all, besides these there are pages enough where all can read tenfold their money's worth. And no one should feel disturbed on seeing some things in these departments which do not agree with their ideas of matters and things, as the very term, Special Department, shows that the conductors of them are alone responsible for what they say."--Ibid.
"My husband and myself united our efforts to improve The Health Reformer," wrote Mrs. White; and she gives somewhat in detail the united teachings of the leading advocates of health reform, regarding articles of diet, about some of which extreme views had been advocated:
"We should not with our pens advocate positions that we do not put to a practical test in our own families, upon our own tables. This is dissimulation, a species of hypocrisy."--Testimonies for the Church 3:21.
On Sundry Items of Diet
Regarding "salt, sugar, and milk," she said: "We know that a free use of these things is positively injurious to health, and in many cases we think that if they were not used at all, a much better state of health would be enjoyed. But at present our burden is not upon these things. The people are so far behind that we see it is all they can bear to have us draw the line upon their injurious indulgences and stimulating narcotics."--Ibid.
The list of injurious articles against which they did continue to bear "positive testimony," in The Health Reformer, and in their health lectures, includes "tobacco, spirituous liquors, snuff, tea, coffee, flesh meats, butter, spices, rich cakes, mince pies, a large amount of salt, and all exciting substances used as articles of food."--Ibid.
Some who have chosen to criticize Seventh-day Adventists feel that they have found an occasion for reproach because of the inclusion of butter in this list. They assert that this is indicative of an extreme position taken by the denominational leaders. Because of such perplexity in the minds of some, a few facts should be considered in this connection.
Sylvester Graham, who was the leading physiologist and dietitian of that time, testifies that "nearly all who have written or spoken on the subject of human ailment with reference to health have been entirely agreed in considering this favorite article as decidedly objectionable, and some have spoken of it in the severest terms of condemnation."--Lectures on the Science of Human Life, 506. New York: Fowler and Wells.
The Use of Butter
He referred to the experiments and observations of Dr. William Beaumont. Dr. Beaumont's opportunities as physician to Alexis St. Martin, the French Canadian soldier whose stomach was opened by a gunshot wound, were unique. After quoting this doctor regarding the difficulties in digestion of butter and other animal fats, Mr. Graham concluded:
"The point is, therefore, forever established beyond all controversy, that butter is better avoided than eaten by mankind. ... Diseases of every kind, both acute and chronic, are aggravated by it, though it may produce no distress nor sensible disturbance in the stomach. The delicate and feeble and inactive suffer more from it than the robust. And children and youth are always more injured by it than healthy adults."--Ibid.
Graham was very positive in his assertion that no butter should be used except that which was perfectly sweet and recently made from the milk of healthy cows. He maintained that even this should be used very sparingly if at all, and never in the melted form.
This recognition of the dangers incident to the free use of butter was agreed to, as Graham intimates, by practically all the hygienists of that time.
It should be remembered that in those days there was no refrigeration or pasteurization, and that all animal products very quickly became subject to bacterial infection. Under such conditions no one can consistently deny that raw butter was very likely to contain tuberculosis and other harmful germs. Butter was used very freely in frying. Moreover, it was not uncommon for large quantities of butter to be used in gravies and sauces and cakes and desserts, all eaten at the same meal. Such free and excessive use in cooking was justly condemned by the health reformers of those days.
From a Government Report
Nor should we overlook the fact that similar cautions against the free use of butter were uttered by authorities many years later. The prevalence of tubercle bacilli in butter was forcefully set forth in a publication issued by the United States Department of Agriculture in 1908. In summing up the conclusions reached, based upon many experiments made at the Bureau of Animal Industry Experiment Station, the following statements are made:
"(1) The conduct of tubercle bacilli in milk is to move both upward with the cream and downward with the sediment and thus, in both directions, away from the intermediate layer of skim milk. The downward movement is due to their high specific gravity and the upward movement to the tenacity with which they adhere to the comparatively large cream globules. Hence when cream is separated from infected milk, it will contain, volume for volume, more tubercle bacilli than the milk.
"(2) The frequency with which tubercle bacilli occur in sediment from milk is a fair measure of the frequency with which they occur in cream. What this means for the infection of commercial cream may be judged from the following paragraph quoted verbatim from the last [1907] Annual Report of the Secretary of Agriculture:
"'The examination of sediment taken from cream separators of public creameries throughout the country has demonstrated the presence of tubercle bacilli in about one fourth of the samples.'
"(3) When butter is prepared from infected cream, tubercle bacilli are transferred to it in such numbers that they will be present in greater concentration than in the milk from which the cream was derived; hence, measure for measure, infected butter is a greater tuberculous danger than infected milk. ...
"(7) Unimpeachable evidence proves conclusively that tubercle bacilli of the bovine type, from bovine sources, must be classed as highly infectious for man; hence, tubercle bacilli in butter cannot be ignored because they are usually derived from bovine sources."--E. C. Schroeder, M.D.V., and W.E. Cotton, Tubercle Bacilli in Butter; Their Occurrence, Vitality, and Significance, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal Industry--Circular 127, pp. 20, 21. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1908.
Mrs. White maintained that the time would come when, due to increasing disease among animals, it would be unsafe to continue the use of animal products. Testimonies for the Church 7:124, 135. Until her death she personally did not use butter nor did it appear on her table. However, she affirmed that eggs, milk, and butter were not to "be classed with flesh meat." Testimonies for the Church 7:135. In later years (after pasteurization and refrigeration had made the use of dairy products much safer) she recognized that "butter is less harmful when eaten on cold bread than when used in cooking," but still maintained that "as a rule, it is better to dispense with it altogether," especially "where the purest article cannot be obtained."--The Ministry of Healing, 302; Counsels on Diet and Foods, 351. She taught that when properly prepared, olives, like nuts, would "supply the place of butter and flesh meats," and asserted that "the oil, as eaten in the olive, is far preferable to animal oil or fat."--The Ministry of Healing, 298.
More Recent Discoveries
More recent discoveries indicate that the excessive use of butter is a contributing factor to the prevalence of arteriosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries. This has been shown to be caused by a deposit of cholesterol in the walls of the arteries. "Cholesterol comes only from animal fats and animal tissues."--The Review and Herald, July 1, 1937.
Therefore, we now have clear evidence that the use of even the best quality of butter, save in moderate quantities, is still a source of danger, and that in the decades when the light on health reform was given to Seventh-day Adventists, butter was generally used so excessively as properly to be classed among objectionable articles of food.
Through the energetic editorship of Elder James White and a strong campaign in behalf of The Health Reformer, the journal soon regained its standing in the field, and the cause that it advocated again came to the front among Seventh-day Adventists. Within a year the list of subscribers increased from three thousand to over ten thousand. The importance which this leader among Seventh-day Adventists assigned to the cause of health in the message advocated by that church is indicated in his statement that he had "thrown off other labors and cares," and designed to "give The Reformer" his "first and closest attention." "We shall labor," he says, "to secure the best writers, and to make the best selections from health journals and medical works."--The Health Reformer, December, 1872.
He issued a call for the ministry again to rally to the support of the cause. Listing by name nineteen ministers, he said: These "and many more, are especially expected to help by clear, sharp articles, or selections of the same sort, and paragraphs with comments thereon, and with brief articles they may come across in reading. Men of Israel, help!"--The Review and Herald, December 10, 1872.
And so it was that by plain testimonies of counsel through the Spirit of prophecy, and the able leadership of Elder James White, the medical staff of the Health Reform Institute, and the co-operation of the ministry and laymen, an early drift toward extremes was checked, and the minds of the people were led more and more to accept only tried and proved principles of health reform.