Awake!, November 8, 1962
Download: PDF — Awake!, November 8, 1962
Snake-handling Religious Rites
■.J.XTJSi-
The Thalidomide Tragedy
The Problem of Shyness
Iran’s Worst Quake
SF? * S5 Ml
:<-'■■■ ':".S
•••• .. x-
RR?
NOVEMBER 8, 1962
PS *
THE MISSION OF THIS JOURNAL
News sources that are able to keep you awake to the vital issues of our times must be unfettered by censorship and selfish interests. “Awake!" has no fetters, if recognizes facts, faces facts, is free to publish facts. It is not bound by political ambitions or obligations; it is unhampered by advertisers whose toes must not be trodden on; it is unprejudiced by traditional creeds. This journal keeps itself free that it may speak freely to you. But it does not abuse its freedom. It maintains integrity to truth.
“Awake!" uses the regular news channels, but is not dependent on them. Its own correspondents are on all continents, in scores of nations. From the four corners of the earth their uncensored, on-the-scenes reports came to you through these columns. This journal's viewpoint is not narrow, but is international. It is read in many nations, in many languages, by persons of all ages. Through its pages many fields of knowledge pass in review—government, commerce, religion, history, geography, science, social conditions, natural wonders—why, its coverage is as broad as the earth and as high as the heavens.
"Awake!" pledges itself to righteous principles, ta exposing hidden foes qnd subtle dangers, to championing freedom for all, to comforting mourners and strengthening those disheartened by the failures of a delinquent world, reflecting sure hope for the establishment of o righteous New World.
Get acquainted with "Awake!" Keep awake by reading "Awake!"
Published Simultaneously in the United States by the WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC. 117 Adams Street Brooklyn 1, N. Y.r U. S. A.
and in England by
WATCH TOWER BIBLE Watch Tower House, The Ridgeway N. H. Know, President
Printing this issue: 3,650,000 4d t “Awake!” Is FuSllihnl In th. following 25 languages: SMlnuwtftJji—-jUjUmjUl*, rJijflnia.- Danis ft. fritch, Prt-gllsb, Finnish, French, German, Greek, mil an, Japanese, Norwegian, Pcrtugtitfe, Spanish, Swedish, Tusalog, Zulu. Monthly-—Cehu-Visayan, Chinese, Iloc&nv, Korean, Mala* yal&m, Polish, Tamil, Ukrainian.
' Yearly subscription rales Qflcei for semimonthly editions
America, U.S., 117 Adams 81., Brooklyn 1, N.Y. *1 Australia, 11 Jlerentord Rd, Slrathtteld, N.S.W.
Canada, 150 Bridgeland Ave., Tornnlu 19, Ont.
England, Watch fewer House,
The Ridgeway, Undon N.W. 7
Nnr Idland, 621 New North Rd., Auckland, S.W. 1
Bouth Afrlaa, Private Hag, Elandblopteiu, Tri,
Monthly editions cost half the shore rates.
AND TRACT SOCIETY
London N.W. 7r England Grant Suiter, Secretary
1 copy (Australia, 5d; South Africa, flaarttaniai for vubscrlptionB should be smH. Ic th+?
tit etMKitrx DthariFlve ecad your remittance to Landon. Natlca al aplration is lent at least two issues before subscription expires.
CHANGES OF ADDRESS should roach us thirty days More your moving date. Give us your old and new adiJrus (If possible, your old address label). Write Watch Tower, Watch Tower House, The Ridgeway, London N.W. 7, England.
Entered as second’class matter at Brooklyn, N.Y, Printed In England
The Bible translation la "Awa to!” U the New Waritf Trantfaffon <rf the Kofy Scriptures, istfl edition When other translations are used the following symbols will atMar behind the citations:
AS - American Standard Version AT -An American Translation AV - Authorized Version (1611) Da — J. N. Darty's version
Dy - Catholic Douay vendon £D - The Emphatic Dlaalott JP —Jewish Publication Sue. Le - Isaac Ledger's version
Mo — James Moffatt's version Ro - J. B. Rotherham's version RS - Revised Standard Version Y0 - Robert toung's version
CONTENTS
What’s Your Hurry?
Snake-handling Religious Rites
The Thalidomide Tragedy
Finding Hope and Happiness
The Problem of Shyness
What Are They Doing to Wine?
How Churches Raise Money
Iran’s Worst Quake
What a Sneeze Can Do
Television and Football—-They
Brought Us to Chile
Archaeological Discoveries
in the Sahara
“Your Word Is Truth”
Raised in the Spirit
Watching the World
Volume XLIII London, England, November 8, 1962 Number 21
Whati
New Yorkers have a reputation of being people in a hurry. As a rule they talk fast, eat fast, drive fast and many die fast. The millions of tourists who come to visit the city each year never cease to be amazed at the pace of the city. But before their two-week vacations are up, they too become engulfed in the hurried rhythm of things, so much so that often it becomes hard to distinguish the visitor from the native New Yorker. In fact, some even like the excited pace and dread to return to the slow gait of their hometowns.
But why the hurry? A private secretary who was about to leave her office was asked the question. She answered: “I have a home to go to, meals to cook and a couple of children waiting for me. That’s why I hurry.” After she leaves the office, there are buses and trains to catch and shopping to do. To miss a single transportation connection may mean the loss of as much as fifteen or twenty minutes. “Think what I could do at home in twenty minutes!” she said.
An electrician, like so many workers who drive to and from work, is always conscious of the traffic problem. “I hurry to beat the traffic,” he said. “It’s no picnic after a hard day’s work to buck traffic for an hour. You’ve got to make every second count or else you won’t have time to enjoy the wife and kids.” He rushes to
t/ow Mny?
number who have no idea why
avoid traffic or he fights traffic to be with his family.
Of course, there are a
they hurry. Everybody else is hurrying, so they hurry too. They often lack patience. If they are driving, they will frequently pass on dangerous curves or hills and honk their horns at the slightest delay. When shopping or dining out, they demand immediate attention or else they will make
life miserable for themselves and others. And about the first thing they do when they get home is to collapse exhausted in a chair and wonder what makes them so tired. If they would but slow down a little, they would know. 1
But why do people hurry? No doubt many have legitimate reasons for hurrying, but do they all?
Poor judgment, perhaps, should head the list of reasons why people hurry. Many just do not allow themselves time enough to do the things they want to do. They do not allow time for the unforeseen to happen. Their schedules are always so tight that when some mishap does occur, they become people in a hurry. As a rule, they are worried people, worried about missing a train or an appointment. So they rush.
Another reason for the big rush can be traced to ambition. Many people are trying to crowd too many activities into an already overcrowded schedule. To escape this killer one must learn to be content with getting less done. Be conscientious, but do not be a worrier. “Sufficient for each day is its own evil,” said Jesus. (Matt. 6:34) No doubt it would be nice to have and do many things. Since we cannot have and do all things, some things must be sacrificed. So why not sacrifice the nonessentials? Be reasonable. Learn to slow down so that you can see and appreciate the things that you already have.
Without doubt the critical times in which we live have also had some influence on the increased tempo of living. People are saying the same things the ancients said: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we are to die.” (1 Cor.,15:32; Isa. 22:13) Their outlook is fatalistic, hopeless. So they hurry through life.
There was a time when neighbors would sit together on the front porch and enjoy good, wholesome conversation. But who has time for that anymore, especially in the larger cities? People have become too busy chasing rainbows. They do not have time even to enjoy a meal. They exist on snatches here and there and gobble their food down as if they were on the way to a fire.
The same can also be said about good reading. How many read the Bible anymore with the thought of letting its wisdom soak in and do its building work? “We have no time to ponder over such things or to be absorbed in them,” say they. “We are too busy making a living.” But is that really living?—1 Tim. 4:15, 16.
Of what profit is all this haste? One thing is sure, the quickened pace has contributed to poor health, unpleasant relations and jagged nerves. In moments of rush people often forget that they are human. They shove their way into buses and push others aside carelessly or rudely. Frequently their behavior causes tempers and fists to fly. tJlcers and nervous breakdowns are a common fruit of the hurried.
Impatience and haste are also chief causes of accidents on the highways, in the homes and in factories. An impatient car driver will risk passing on a hill rather than creep along behind another vehicle. This move of his too often ends in disaster. An impatient housewife may call a repairman and then try to do the job on her own before he arrives. As a result, often she injures herself, and greater damage is caused to the equipment. The old proverbs are still true: “One that is impatient is exalting foolishness.” (Prov. 14: 29) “Haste makes waste.”
Some people rush, not only in and out of books, buses and trains, but also in and out of marriage, in and out of their prayers and in and out of their vows to God. Solomon said: “Have you beheld a man hasty with his words? There is more hope for someone stupid than for him.” “Do not hurry yourself as regards your mouth; and as for your heart, let it not be hasty to bring forth a word before the true God.” (Prov. 29:20; Eccl. 5:2) So there are times when it is wise to curb the tongue and consider one’s course in life.
However, there are times when haste is also necessary. We should be “swift about hearing” the commands of God. Jesus said: “Be about settling matters quickly with the one complaining against you at law.” And righteously disposed persons Eire urged to flee to God’s provision for protection and not delay. So there is a time to hurry. But even then, such hurry must be mingled with the good sense, the love, mildness and self-control that keep one balanced and cause him to consider others.—Jas. 1:19; Matt. 5:25; 24:16; Gal. 5:22,23.
IF YOU were to enter one of the churches where snake-ha nd ling rites are conducted, what would you find? Mass excitement! Music, singing, shouting, thumping, clapping, rhythmic throbbing, jerky body movements, women dancing ahout with eyes closed and mouths open, all contributing to the mass excitement that lifts the devotees to the threshold of hysteria. Poisonous serpents such as rattlesnakes, copperheads and water moccasins are being passed from hand to hand; some snakes are draped around the necks and over the heads of emotional worshipers.
Where and how did such snake-handling religious rites begin? The cradle of this unconventional approach to religion is found in the southeastern part of the United States; namely, Grasshopper Valley, Tennessee. The year was 1909, Then it was that George W. Hensley began to wonder about the meaning of the text found at Mark 16:17, 18. It reads, according to the Authorized Version;
“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
they shall take
— up serpents; and if
they drink any deadly 'll thing, it shall not hurt jgl them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”
In view of this textual support Hensley concluded that picking up snakes must be a
test of one’s religious faith. He set out to prove this. Upon climbing a nearby mountain and after a bit of searching, he finally located a rattlesnake and captured it. Lo and behold! It had not bitten him. Convinced that his interpretation of Mark 16:17, 18 was correct, Hensley set out to preach his new-found doctrine far and wide. Before long, scores of followers were converted to this novelty in religious rites,
All was not to be rose-colored for long, however, for one snake handler by the name of Garland DeFriese was bitten by a rattlesnake. Though he recovered, the snakebite put a temporary damper on the development of the movement, this despite the fact that it was claimed the bite was due to his having backslid.
In due time serpent handling developed with greater momentum, until it gained widespread publicity in 1938, when the Associated Press reported on a court case involving snake-handling rites at the Church of God at Pine Mountain, not far from Harlan, Kentucky. A farmer by the name of John Day brought charges against three members of the church because he objected to his wife’s handling of poisonous snakes. Subsequent events led to greater publicity, much of which was adverse because of deaths resulting, from snakebite during religious services and which brought the snake handlers into conflict with the law.
In 1948, in Durham, North Carolina, there was held an interstate convention of snake cultists. Snake handling has thus spread throughout the southeastern section of the United States and still exists there in varying degrees.
Snakes In Worship Nothing New
Religious rites in which serpents are Used are not something peculiar to the twentieth century or to the United States. Snake worship was very prominent in ancient Egypt, and serpents appear quite frequently on Egyptian sculptures. The same is true of Hindu monuments and temples, the Hindus venerating the cobra to this day, Serpents also appear in Mexican, Japanese, Chinese and other ancient mythologies. The ancient city of Pergamum had a celebrated temple of Aesculapius, which deity was worshiped in the form of a living serpent.
Then there is the Dahomey cult in Africa, about which The Enayctapcedia Britannica says, with regard to their python deity: “In addition to his ministrant priestesses, the god has numerous ‘wives’ Who form a complete organization. . , . These ‘wives’ take part in licentious rites with the priests and male worshippers, and the python is the reputed father of the offspring.”
0ne of the pagan groups that bear con- L siderable resemblance to the so-called Christian snake handlers is the Hopi Indian® of Arizona, who handle poisonous reptiles in their snake dances. In these dances live rattlesnakes are used as representatives of their sky god. These dances are regarded as among the most spectacular of all American Indian ceremonies, since the snakes are not deprived of their fangs or poison glands. Yet the Indians handle the rattlesnakes fearlessly, usually with no fatal consequences, even when the poisonous reptiles are carried in the dancers’ mouths!
The so-called Christian snake handlers, however, are hardly outdoing the pagans, for Hensley’s followers do get bitten and die. Even George Hensley, the sect’s founder, paid with his life.
Being bitten, however, does not necessarily mean a fall from grace, they say, for It is rationalized that some must suffer martyrdom to prove to unbelievers that the snakes have not been tampered with, that they have not been defanged or their mouths sewed up.
Snake cultists say that the purpose in handling the serpents is not to be bitten and then prove one’s faith by recovering without medical treatment, although invariably medical treatment is refused by those bitten, but rather to handle the snakes without suffering snakebite.
Why Not More Fatalities?
No explanation appears to be wholly adequate as to why more snake handlers are not victims of fatal snakebites. There are many factors to be considered when snakebite is incurred, Whether death will result depends on a number of variables, such as the age and health of the victim, as well as the serpent, the place of bite, depth of penetration and amount of venom Injected. One factor of significance may be that snakes in captivity usually become somewhat tame.
One of the most celebrated snake women of modem times, Grace O. Wiley, claimed she could tame all kinds of deadly serpents, though not for religious purposes. She was often photographed handling her pet, a flfteen-fobt king cobra whose fangs were never pulled. Over the years she handled with her bare hands some of the world's most poisonous snakes. In her paper, “Taming King Cobras,” she said: “Snakes are very intelligent arid ‘catch on’ much sooner than we do to Indications of sympathy—that is, they are not, as a rule, afraid to trust you first” Referring to the snakes she “tamed” (including thirteen species of rattlesnakes, the Australian tiger snake, and the Gaboon viper), she sums up: “Somehow they know very, very soon that I am friendly, and that I like them. They appear to listen intently when I stand quietly at their open door and talk to them in a low, soothing voice. In some unknown manner my idea of sympathy Is conveyed to them.” She believed it was only the “untamed” snakes that ever bit her. She experienced some forty bites but was finally bitten fatally by a cobra that she had not yet “tamed,”—Natural ffw-tary, November, 1951,
Thus experienced keepers of snakes know that once a reptile has became accustomed to conditions of captivity and to the presence of people, it can often be handled, but never without some risk.
But the explanation that snakes are “tamed" is not entirely satisfactory with regard to the snake cultists, because snakes are often used that'have just been captured.
So there are other theories. One of them is that cataplexia or toss of muscle power occurs when the reptiles are held dangling by their middles. This may be induced by a strong emotional stimulus and is characterized by clear consciousness but loss of muscular control. There is also the question of whether the snakes are not confused or “charmed” by the mass excitement or music accompanying the rites. It is known that snakes such as cobras can be charmed by sounds. Thus Kerman, in his article entitled “Rattlesnake Religion,” presents this observation: “Beyond suggesting that the strong, monotonous beat of the saints' music might have a numbing or hypnotic effect on snakes and that hysteria does curious things, I offer nq explanation of the strange religious rites,” And in his bock Tftey Shall Take Up Serpents, La Barre states: “I regard the question of why more snake-handlers are not bitten as being unsolved and still open.”
Whatever the factors involved in there not being more fatalities, this should be obviously clear: The pagans such as the Hopi Indians do just as well jf not more remarkably than the so-called Christian snake handlers. So snake handling does not make a Christian distinctive from the pagans, who also handle snakes for religious reasons.
Concerning the snake cultists professing to be Christians, reporter Kerman stated: “This was a ritualistic matter, an act of worship, for which scriptural sanction was claimed.” Expressed in the vernacular of a snake cultist, as quoted by writer Kohler, “Life is jest a dressin’ room for eternity. Hit’s either take up serpents or hell.” It seems that snakes are viewed as Satan incarnate, whom man must dominate to save his soul.
At this point one may wonder whether Satan has turned the tables on the cultists and instead of being dominated by them is really .receiving the worship of the communicants. The answer depends on what God’s Word, the Bible, shows regarding proper Christian worship. But first, what about the textual support, Mark 16:18, claimed as a foundation for snakehandling rites?
Christian or Pagan
Many Bible translators regard the texts found at Mark 16:17, 18 as being an uninspired addition to God’s Word. They believe Mark’s inspired Gospel, as we have it, comes to an end at 16:8, that the original conclusion was somehow lost, and that to avoid an abrupt ending some person or persons added an uninspired conclusion. Thus Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed, the Bible translator, says on page 127 of The Goodspeed Parallel New Testament:
"The Gospel of Mark ends in four different ways in ancient manuscripts of the original Greek or of the versions.
“1. It stops abruptly at the end of 16:8 in the two best and oldest Greek manuscripts, the Sinaitic and the Vatican [of the fourth century], and a few others; also in the Sinaitic Syriac and in a few manuscripts of the Georgian, Armenian, and E thio pic versions. The few lines that must have followed when Mark stood complete may be recovered from the narrative of Matthew, which continues that of Mark in 28:1-10 and 16-20 and records just such a reunion in Galilee as Mark has foreshadowed in 14:28 and 16:7.
"2. Of the ancient efforts to supply the conclusion the gospel so evidently needed, the simplest was the addition of the so-called ‘Short Conclusion’ . . . which follows 16:8 in the Old Latin Codex Bobiensls of the fourth or fifth century [but does not contain 16:17,18].
"3. But the great majority of Greek and other manuscripts follow 16:8 with the so-called ‘Long Conclusion' (16:9-20), though it does not connect well with Mark's narrative and is, in fact, inconsistent with it, for it says nothing about such a reunion in Galilee as Mark anticipates in 14:28 and 16:7.
"4. Both conclusions appear, the Short one preceding the Long, in the Codex Regius (eighth century), the Codex Laurensis (eighth or ninth century). . . .
“The Short Conclusion connects much better with Mark 16:8 than does the Long, but neither can be considered part of the Gospel of Mark. The most reasonable explanation of the loss of the closing lines of Mark seems to be that . . . when the plan of collecting the Four Gospels and publishing them together was made, about A.D. 115-20, no complete copy of Mark was to be found, and the editors of the collection had to be satisfied with one that broke off just before the end. This might easily arise through wear and tear in a papyrus roll, which, like a modern leaf book, would first lose its beginning or end.”
ARTICLES IN THE NEXT ISSUE
* Pay Attention to the Word of God.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica
* —-Unquestionable Fact?
T Sleeping to Survive.
— Disputed Territory: South-Weet Africa. Chrietian View of Thoee Who Oppoie.
Hence the authority for handling snakes cannot be said to rest on an authentic Christian foundation. Indeed, handling snakes as a religious rite is no practice of true Christianity. Christ himself never handled snakes! Never did the apostles of Christ practice such a rite. The apostle Paul once carried a bundle of sticks to a fire, and a snake came out and coiled around his hand. But what did Paul do? Start handling it and putting it around his neck? No! He quickly shook it off into the fire.—Acts 28:2-5.
Paul and the other apostles showed their faith, not by snake handling, but by preaching, “for with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.” (Rom. 10:10) Moreover, Matthew closes his gospel account with the inspired conclusion about preaching: “Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations.” And what was it that Jesus foretold would mark the “last days” of Satan’s world? Not snake handling by true Christians, but rather the preaching of God’s kingdom worldwide for a witness to all the nations.—Matt. 28:19; 24:14.
Snake handlers are not contributing to this all-important work of preaching worldwide the Kingdom good news. And little wonder! Snake-handling religious rites are not of Christian origin. They are pagan.
FOR more than a year now it has figured prominently in the world news, in the press, radio and television. “The worst disaster in pharmaceutical history." “One of the greatest medical tragedies in history,” it has been called. Yes, the thalidomide (thalid'o.mide) tragedy is all of that, for it means that upward of 12,000 mothers will have given birth to deformed babies. Of this number, some 10,000 have been or will have been born in West Germany, upward of 1,400 in Great Britain, with the majority of the rest in Sweden, Australia and Canada.
One half of these babies are so badly deformed that they either are born dead or die within a matter of hours or days. Of the remaining half, from two to three thousand are without any limbs at all, or with deformed limbs or with either their arms or their legs missing. This particular type of malformation is known as phoco-melia, from the two Greek words phoke, meaning “seal,” and melos, meaning “limb." It is so named because in this malformation babies have tiny seal-like flippers instead of normal limbs.
What a life of hardship awaits these children! What a challenge their condition presents to their immediate families! And all because of thalidomide.
What is thalidomide? It Is a synthetic, that is, an artificially produced drug. First synthetized by a Swiss firm in 1954, it was discarded because, to the extent of their
Could it have been prevented?
observations, it produced no effects upon animals. It then was taken up by West Germany’s chemical firm, Chemie Grd-nenthal, which, while experimenting with it upon epileptics, discovered that it made the “perfect sleeping pill." For one thing, there was apparently no danger of taking an overdose and it seemed to be free from the side effects usually accompanying sleeping pills. Sold under the trade name Contergan, it was by 1960 West Germany’s most popular sleeping pill, with its fame rapidly spreading to other lands—but not without a sinister shadow appearing. Already in 1959 there was a 1,000-percent increase in the number of deformed babies born as compared with previous years. By May, 1962, there was a 16,000-percent increase.
Needless to say, physicians in West Germany began to be disturbed by this phenomena. What could be the cause? It was not until late in 1961 that a discerning Hamburg physician, Widukind Lenz, discovered the relationship between this epidemic of malformed babies and their mothers having taken Contergan during the early stages of their pregnancies. Upon his findings being made public Contergan was removed from the market.
About the same time Dr. W. G. McBride in Australia discovered the same relationship, as a result of which Difctaval, the trade name under which thalidomide was being sold in Australia as well as in Great Britain, was withdrawn even before it was in West Germany. Gradually other lands followed suit. It was April, 1962, however, before Canada took action against Keva-dan, the name by which it was known there. By this time thalidomide wras being marketed worldwide under flfty-one different trade names.
That the United States had among the least instead of the most victims was due to the conscientiousness of a pharmacologist in government employ. When she received the application for approval of thalidomide she found so many suspicious things about it that she held it up pending clarification. Then news came out of Germany that prolonged use of the drug resulted in inflammation of the nerves. But only when it was learned that thalidomide was responsible for the phocomelia epidemic did the firm making the application withdraw it.
Could this thalidomide tragedy have been prevented? No! is the vociferous shout of the pharmaceutical industry. And that also seems to be the concensus of opinion among the medical profession. Even such a reputed foe of the pharmaceutical industry as Dr. Mark Nickerson, professor of pharmacology at the Manitoba Medical School, is quoted as saying: “In this case, I don’t see how-they could have caught it.” Are these judgments correct, or could it, after all, have been prevented?
Drug Therapy
Of course, if men had limited their therapeutic efforts to what is known as “physical medicine,” this tragedy would not have happened. Physical medicine is said to be the oldest of the healing arts and consists of treatment by heat, cold, water, massage and manipulations. But drugs are used, and they have been for centuries.
For many years organized medicine employed only natural elements in anima], vegetable and mineral realms for its drugs, but in the nineteenth century it began to turn to synthetic drugs. The introduction of sulfa drugs in 1935 was widely heralded, although followed by many disappointments, and the adoption of antibiotics during World War II was greeted with even more enthusiasm. Currently the production of medicinal chemicals in the United States has reached the amazing total of $2.5 thousand million annually, and that at the manufacturer’s level ‘of value. In 1960 the pharmaceutical industry produced 120,000,000 pounds or 60,000 tons of synthetic medicines and developed more than three hundred new products for use by doctors.
“A Calculated Risk”
Just what constitutes a drug? A fine, enlightening and comprehensive definition appears in Webster’s Third New International Dictionary: “A substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease in man or other animal.” This, of course, is from the standpoint of organized medicine; other schools or therapies might dispute that definition.
Regarding the use of drugs one doctor stated: “We don’t really know what is happening at the cellular level. When we take drugs it is always a calculated risk.” But the manufacture and use of drugs is not generally marked by appreciation of this fact on the part of either the drug industry, physicians or the public. Certain basic principles simply may not be ignored. Not only is the size of the dose important, but also the frequency with which it is administered and whether orally (by mouth), parenterally (by injection), or m some other way, as by sprays; but even the location of the injection and its dispatch or speed can mean the difference between life and death at times. Certain drugs work harm to certain parts of the body and so care must be exercised lest, when giving a drug, say for the stomach or lungs, a weak heart be put out of commission. Then again, various drugs affect each other in differing ways and some should not be used together. Also to be kept in mind are such factors as age, weight, sex, health, pregnancy, allergy, sensitization and the patient’s degree of tolerance.
We simply cannot escape it. As Dr. I. Kerlan of the United States Food and Drug Administration observed: “There is an element of danger in all drugs—even in aspirin.” And as another doctor put it: “Every drug upsets some function of the body—that is how it works.”
Testifying in the same vein, Dr. Louis Lasagna, professor of phamiacology at Johns Hopkins, one of America’s leading hospitals and medical schools, said: “There is a very good chance that there are drugs whose full toxicity we don’t understand. Look how long aspirin has been. on the market, and it was only in the last decade that it was found to produce gastrointestinal hemorrhage in some cases.” And Dr. Modell, who holds a like position at Cornell University, warns: “As the number of new and active drugs increases, and both knowledge and experience with each become smaller and proportionately more difficult to obtain, it is mathematically inevitable that drug reactions will mount. Even now the situation is alarming—but the future looks dismal indeed.” This was said in 1959.
Note also the testimony of Dr. L. Mey-ler of the Netherlands, who has made a specialty of the subject. In his book Side Effects of Drugs he states, among other things: "As a consequence of the presentday tendency toward the preparation and marketing of synthetic drugs, many of which are of complicated structure and very different from the natural elements of the body, more and more drugs with possible untoward side effects will become available. ... A drug may be taken weeks, months or years before it produces any unpleasant side effects; but on the other hand this may occur at the first dose. There is always a certain risk entailed in the prescription of drugs, and in every case the physician must ask himself whether the condition he is treating justifies that risk,”
Recent medical history bears out the foregoing. Warnings were sounded, in particular in Great Britain, regarding the indiscriminate use of Imferon, which is given to build up the blood. Chloramycetin stands convicted of causing many deaths by reason of its blood-destroying chemical that plays havoc with the bone marrow. Repeatedly it has been necessary to discontinue treating arthritis with cortisone because of untoward side effects, among which was even diabetes. Mer-29 was withdrawn earlier this year because of its side effects, namely, cataracts of the eyes, skin rashes and hair damage.
Teratogenic Drugs
Bearing most directly on the question as to whether the thalidomide tragedy could have been prevented or not is the evidence that for some time has been mounting as to the harm done to the unborn when drugs are taken by the mothers during pregnancy. The development of a malformed fetus is termed teratogeneSis, from two Greek words, teras, meaning “wonder” or “monster,” and genesis, meaning “to be born.” A drug having the power to affect a fetus in this way, as did thalidomide, is termed teratogenic. In thalidomide the teratogenesis took the form of phocomelia, flipper limbs.
That the matter of teratogenesis occupied medical minds, even if it was ignored by many in the drug industry, can be seen from such works as Congenital Malforma-items, which summarizes what specialists in various fields knew about the subject in 1959. Among other things, it stresses that most drugs that are teratogenic or cause malformations of the fetus have few if any side effects on the mothers taking them. It also shows that both insulin and thyroid extract are teratogenic, extended research showing that where mothers took these drugs during pregnancy as many as 70 percent of them experienced either miscarriages, or gave birth to premature, malformed or dead babies. Obviously, the teratogenic effect of certain drugs did not need to wait for thalidomide to underscore it.
In much the same strain a British specialist recently noted that “much work has been done in experimental animals on the effects to the fetus of various drugs given during pregnancy,” even though “until recently the subject has been somewhat neglected in clinical medicine.” He points out that certain drugs are to be avoided in the early stages of pregnancy, others in the late stages: “It is particularly important to avoid treatment during the first three months with any hormone preparations which have [sex] effects, however slight.” Failure to heed this warning may result in malformations of a masculine nature in infant girls. And included in the drugs to be avoided in the final stages of pregnancy are the sulfa drugs, barbiturates or sleeping pills and anticoagulants, those that prevent undue clotting of the blood.
Still another physician issuing a warning regarding the possible harm to the unborn by reason of their mothers taking teratogenic drugs is Dr. J. D. Ebert, director of Carnegie Institution’s department of embryology. Calling for tighter controls so that drugs with teratogenic effects are kept off the market or properly labeled, he said: “Many of the staggering number of children now born each year with congenital defects—conservatively estimated at five per cent—might be spared lifelong misery and their parents spared endless distress if the unborn were protected against some of the new wonder drugs taken by their mothers during pregnancy . . . We must recognize that the chemistry and the physiology of the embryo are unique and that the current practice of testing new drugs only on adult animals offers no assurance that they are safe for administration during pregnancy.”
The Drug Industry’s Responsibility
From the foregoing it is not at all surprising that the thalidomide tragedy happened, and it forces the conclusion that the tragedy could have been prevented. In view of what was known about certain drugs having teratogenic effects, why should any drug have been released without its first being tested for such effects? The fact is that after this tragedy took place thalidomide was tried on pregnant animals, with the same results to their offspring as to humans. This fact alone stamps the manufacturers of thalidomide as guilty of criminal negligence. So does the course of the alert United States pharmacologist who saw all manner of grounds for suspicion in the application for thalidomide as presented by the William S. Merrel Company, which had sent 2,500,000 samples to more than 1,200 physicians. Why not resolve doubts on the safe side? Why endanger thousands of lives for a few thousand dollars?
While many who do drug research and preparation no doubt desire to improve the lot of their fellowmen, the ruthless greed of the drug Industry in genera) is well known. It fights against any control and seeks to influence legislation. In the United States it succeeded in having an honest pharmacologist responsible for checking drug applications removed because she did not let the drug industry have its way but insisted on safeguarding the interests of the public. But her successor was made of the same stuff and so spared United States parents untold misery by challenging thalidomide when it was presented to her.
One drug company waited five years to report to the government that its muscle relaxant had caused fifty-four cases of jaundice and hepatitis and fifteen deaths. Regarding another drug, Mer-29, a government official stated: "It should never have gone on the market in the first place,” and a grand jury is investigating the company for fraudulent advertising in connection therewith; incidentally, it is the same company that tried to put over thalidomide in the United States. And when Drs. Lenz of West Germany and McBride of Australia advised the drug companies of their suspicions concerning thalidomide, they both received high-handed treatment;
Responsibility of Politicians
and Physicians
Only slightly less reprehensible in regard to the thalidomide tragedy are the politicians. Not all of them but the majority of them have worked hand in glove with the drug interests, so that the drug industry has had things pretty much its own way. For several years honest men sought to improve the drug picture in the United States but got nowhere until the thalidomide tragedy. Then when a bill was discussed that was in the interests of the people and that had been vigorously opposed by the drug interests one United States senator had the temerity to exclaim: "What a magnificent job the pharmaceutical industry of this country has done. We had better salute them.” What rank hypocrisy! And yet even with this bill it has been debated whether it is necessary for a physician to tell his patient that he is using him as a guinea pig! Nor does it limit the number of doctors to which a drug company may send samples for using their patients as guinea pigs, before the drug is approved for sale to the public!
What about the physicians? Voltaire once said: "A physician is somebody that administers drugs of which he knows little to a body of which he knows less.” Clever? Yes, but it has more than a modicum of truth in it, as can be seen by its being quoted in a book for physicians, warning them of the side effects of drugs. Physicians time and again serve as the willing tools of the drug industry, a case in point being their willingness to go along with the highly questionable practice of prescribing mixed drugs, especially mixed antibiotics.
Physicians have known that there is such a thing as teratogenesis, but many have all too frequently ignored it when prescribing drugs for pregnant women. In fact, one of the leading physicians in the United States, an editor of a medical weekly and who for many years was the president of the American Medical Association, complained that to test drugs for their effect on the unborn was needless expense! But a more humane physician stated, "The fact is that the medical profession deserves to be censured for not demanding more rigid controls.” Also, physicians generally are prone to prescribe drugs for minor ills, such as morning sickness associated with pregnancy, when a placebo would do as well and be far safer.
Because of this scandal involving the side effects of drugs, in recent years two aids for the conscientious physician have been brought forth. One is The Medical
Lettert a biweekly. It is impossible to read issue after issue of it without feeling righteously indignant as to the tactics used by the pharmaceutical industry in the United States and Great Britain. Serving a similar purpose is Mediphone, a telephone service available to physicians. It is prepared to give all the available data regarding any drug to its clients. But both seem to be “voices in the wilderness” as far as most doctors are concerned. A conscientious doctor, however, is not going to slight the welfare of his patient for a fast treatment
The Public
The public too are not altogether free from censure or blame. Pregnant women who do not want to miss out on “a good time” and so resort to drugs such as thalidomide to help them keep burning the candle at both ends share the blame. Says one doctor: “We are too soft. There is too much demand on the part of the public for relief of mild or even moderately severe symptoms. People won’t put up with the slightest discomfort or headache; they demand medication from their doctors. If they can’t get it from one, they’ll go to another,” And a leading professor of pharmacology says: ‘Too many people are taking too many pills . . . Taking any pill is a risk. If you really need the pill, it’s worth the risk. Never take a drug without a good reason, and not without the best reason if you are pregnant.”
Yes, the modem public has become pill-happy. As one Canadian pediatrician expressed it: “I find patients are eager to try out a brand-new drug, can hardly wait to get at it. You’d think that they’d be reluctant, prefer someone else to go first. Maybe they will be less enthusiastic after thalidomide.” Athletes take pep pills to win games. Teen-agers take pills for “kicks.” Physicians have even found young children suffering from paralysis of the jaws because of the tranquilizer pills that their mothers gave them to serve in the place of baby-sitters.
Calmly viewing the drug situation, it must be admitted that the thalidomide tragedy could have been prevented. The fact that further experiments have proved that thalidomide affects the lower animals the way it did humans convicts the drug firms of rank negligence. Physicians who do not show concern as to whether drugs have been tested for safe use of pregnant women or not and even object because of the cost involved are also reprehensible. And to the extent that the public, including pregnant women, have followed the line of least resistance, demanding pills to compensate for a lack of moderation, good judgment and self-control, they also must share the blame. The thalidomide tragedy is but a reflection of the selfishness, the lack of neighbor love and the lack of selfcontrol that mark the world in these last days.
an,
appineSS
DWAS seven years old when World War I broke out. My father was the son of a Scottish marine engineer, and he and his two brothers sailed as chief engineers. During the war we moved from our home in Ireland and came back to England. My first really t vivid impression is of us all on the deck of ( the ship with our parents, with my father f saying, “Well, if we go down, at least we'll \ all be together.” Because of danger from U* \ boats, the ship was In complete darkness.
/ Back in England, my grandfather provided ub with a nice house on the Lancashire coast. We all lived in the shadow of a grandfather whose motto was, "Nothing succeeds like success.” However, when my grandfather was dying he said, "Too late, too late, shall be the cry, Jesus of Nazareth hath passed me by.” This greatly affected my outlook on life.
When I was sixteen I spent seven weeks of my summer’s vacation with an aunt in Whitehaven in Cumberland. She had a little cottage, and I spent hours on the beach looking for unusual shells. It was on the beach at Seaacale that an earnest elderly lady started talking to me about God. Under her guld-ance I made what I thought to be a dedication of myself to God. I did not tell a soul about this, certainly not the family. Although they .were great talkers and would talk about almost anything, one subject was never discussed; that was religion. So I kept my newfound knowledge to myself.
When my grandfather died in 1927, my parents bought some property in a pretty village in Cheshire, and in due time I met the man who became my husband. After our marriage we started farming. Nearly three years later our son Robin was born; and two years later, our daughter Barbara was born during the blackout conditions of World War H
I have always had a happy disposition, being contented with my lot, but always at the back of my mind I was dissatisfied with world conditions generally. Periodically I would explode over the awful things I would see happening in the world. But, up to 1942, my lot had fallen in very pleasant places, and I had not been touched by real troubles
One dreadful day in August, 1942, I drove to my mother's home about nine miles from the farm. Robin was at school, Barbara was beside me. My father’s ship was overdue and my mother was distraught with worry. I stayed longer with her than I should have and then drove home to get Robin from school. I was about ten minutes too late— ten minutes that brought disaster to us. As soon as I arrived at the farm, I could see that something was wrong. Robin, crossing the road from the car of a neighbor who had given him a ride, had been struck by a ce-
J ment lorry right at our own gate. Ha died • two days later of internal injuries, We buried f our little son. An apologetic policeman came j for his ration books, and life went on.
J But I went tn places. Well-meaning friends f kept saying, “Pull yourself together." I tried j to “pull myself together." I read and reread j my Bible. It gave me solace, but I had ques-\ tions. I went to my friends and relatives, j asking them, “What happens to you when j you die?” and, “Where do people go when \ they die?” No one seemed to know. I read j the Bible from cover to cover and then started t over again. ’
• One day a young woman came up the drive, f When she knocked, I called out, “Come ln.’; J She came in and explained her mission, as ■ one of Jehovah’s witnesses. She offered m< f six booklets about Bible topics for a shilling contribution. I took them and told her oj
• our tragedy. Three days later who shoulc f come again but this young woman. Again ; ) asked her in and made a cup of tea. She gavi \ me a booklet called “Hope.” I promised he; \ I would read it. I did, that evening. I checket f every scripture, I think I can say that : learned the truth that night. At last 1 hai
• found the real hope for mankind, and, yu f I had learned about the hope of the resurf rection of the dead. I ached with every fiber \ of my soul for the young woman to come 1 again so that she could answer my questions, r This young woman and her companion now I became regular visitors at the farm. My hus-p band soon became interested. The following • year, exactly one year to the very day after f Robin died, I symbolized my dedication to j Jehovah God by water baptism.
\ In 1946 we started our greatest adventure • of all, by becoming pioneers or full-time f preachers of God’s kingdom, helping others / learn of the hope of everlasting life in God’s \ new world. Our daughter also started to plo-• neer as soon as she left school. My husband f and I both continue in the pioneer ministry, having many wonderful experiences. I thank \ Jehovah that those two faithful Witnesses f returned time and again to our farm to help / us find true hope and happiness.—K. S., Any do ver, England.
PROBLEM
THE
OF
be no
HYNESS can be a problem not only for children but also for adults. 'i1/ Since shyness, for 7 the adult, can be a barrier to accomplishing things in life, it may small problem.
Many kinds of problems may thus arise. Shyness may make it difficult to make new friends; it may impair one’s efficiency either when one is working with others or when under special observation. For some persons shyness may even make it an ordeal to go into a restaurant and sit down at a table by themselves. Even to speak up for their rights and to declare their beliefs to or before others may seem too difficult.
Despite such problems, shyness should not be viewed entirely in a negative way. How so? Because shyness so often reflects what is highly commendable, and that is modesty. Yes, modesty is commended in the Holy Scriptures: “Wisdom is with the modest ones." (Prov. 11:2) Modesty, which is an absence of any undue self-confidence appealing. That is why a small measure of shyness can endear a person to others. Yet when modesty becomes excessive, the shyness or diffidence results may lead pleasure of weak-bne must be careful not to let becoming modesty turn into impotent shyness, for shyness can shade into weakness and hobble necessary action. This is what happened in the days of ancient Israel, just before Saul was made king. It was commendable when Saul of the tribe of Benjamin modestly told Samuel: “Am I not a Benjaminite of the smallest of the tribes of Israel, and my family the most insignificant of all the families of the tribe of Benjamin? So why have you spoken to me a thing like this?” But soon the time came for Saul to respond to a need, for he was selected as king. But where was Saul? In hiding! “They went looking for him, and he was not to be found. Hence they inquired further of Jehovah: ‘Has the man come here as yet?’ To this Jehovah said: ‘Here he is, hidden among the luggage.’ So they went running and took him from there.”—1 Sam. 9:21; 10:21-23.
Saul’s modesty was commendable, but when it turned into impotent shyness he held back from responding to the call. An unwillingness to meet a necessary call for service because of excessive modesty is not becoming, especially when it is God’s work that is involved. So a major problem with shyness is to keep modesty in proper balance, not letting it cause one to evade responsibility or to go into hiding when activity and speaking are properly called for.
and an awareness of one’s limitations, is
Besides modesty, there is something else
closely related to shyness; that is fear. Yet shyness is generally distinct from fear in the ordinary sense. A shy person may not particularly like to initiate conversations with strangers, but he may not really be afraid of them. What the shy person may fear is that he will be snubbed or that he may say something that will embarrass him. Hence there may be too much selfconsciousness.
The self-conscious person feels he is more the object of other people's interest than, in fact, he really is. This heightening of the awareness of one’s self, both as an object of one’s own awareness and of the awareness of others, is most common in adolescents, and is associated with the well-known accompaniments of shyness, blushing and general embarrassment.
Aiding Young People
Parents can do much to resolve this problem of shyness in their children, so aiding them to reach adulthood without being self-consciously shy. This does not mean that parents should become disturbed about some shyness in their children. Parents may well reflect on the fact that the opposite in children, a rash boldness and an unbecoming lack of modesty, can be most unpleasant. So parents want their children to be balanced, neither being immodestly bold nor too modest and shy. How can parents help their children in this regard?
For one thing, they should not become unduly upset about shyness in their children, constantly drawing it to their attention; for that may only aggravate the situation. It may make the child feel more self-conscious. Nor is teasing and ridiculing a child for being shy the way to approach the problem.
Approach the problem constructively, realizing that shyness eases up under affectionate, sympathetic treatment. Build up a child’s confidence by commendations when things are done well. When things are not done well, make appropriate corrections, doing so in a manner that will not be hypercritical. Some trivial mistakes may need to be overlooked so as not to be overly critical. The hypercritical parents may make a child say, “I can’t do anything well; whatever I do is wrong.” To avoid putting a child in such a downhearted state, the Holy Bible directs Christian fathers this way: “You fathers, do not be exasperating your children, so that they do not become downhearted.”—Col. 3:21.
Making children downhearted is not the way to approach the problem of shyness. Hence parents would not want to correct their children in an exasperating way, such as by scolding a shy child for a minor mistake or accident in the presence of others. For example, a self-conscious fourteen-year-old girl was taught by her mother to do a certain amount of serving at dinner when they had guests. After the main course the girl got up to take off the dishes gnd, in doing so, reached her arm across in front of a guest to get the plate. The mother snapped out loudly: “Look what you’re doing, Mary. How many times have I told you how to remove dinner plates! I should think you could remember!” Aside from the embarrassment guests may suffer, such type of correction does not Lessen the shyness and may only exasperate children. The constructive way would be to correct the girl privately after the guests were gone, and the mother would avoid giving the impression of being overly critical or somewhat hysterical. Christian parents need to be “long-suffering and kind,” for such is the way of love.—1 Cor. 13:4.
Love does not magnify mistakes. Making an obvious mistake is embarrassing enough to shy children, and when parents lovingly lessen the embarrassment by avoiding public reprimands, this is appreciated. For instance, during a dinner at which there were guests a shy boy accidentally spilled his glass of milk. The mother, instead of bursting out with hysterical remarks, merely said to her son, as he began to stem the flood with his napkin, “Dish towels will be better, Michael—take the ones on the rack.’’ The boy’s father got up and laid a newspaper on the rug. There were no cross looks and no tenseness of anger withheld for company’s sake. Such loving treatment will help any child, especially the shy ones.
Shy children often need more confidence, and the best way to give them this is to bring them up according to Bible principles. Then the children will know where they stand; they will know what is right and what is wrong. Being taught early in life to trust in Jehovah God, they do not grow up being proud and arrogant, nor do they shyly hold back from doing God’s work. They learn the need to do as Proverbs 3:5-8 counsels: “Trust in Jehovah with all your heart and do not lean upon your own understanding. In all your ways take notice of him, and he himself will make your paths straight. Do not become wise in your own eyes. Fear Jehovah and turn away from bad. May it become a healing to your navel and a refreshment to your bones.” Thus the Christian youth learns to seek guidance and wisdom from God, and the result is healing to his flesh, the body being invigorated, with a corresponding wholesome effect upon the mind. Such a Christian youth will have neither too much nor too little self-confidence; he will be firm in his determination to do the good and reject what is bad. This firmness for doing God’s will greatly lessens any tendency to shyness.
Moreover, when parents take their children from an early age to congregational meetings of God’s people, they are doing an excellent thing to build up their children to be strong spiritually. They learn to have the mental attitude of Jesus Christ, and this fortifies them for courageously doing God’s will. (1 Pet. 4:1) Being regularly at meetings of God’s people also gets children accustomed to being in groups of people and to speaking to others.
Prepare Well, Be Absorbed in Ideas
Not all persons have been brought up in an ideal Christian atmosphere, and a measure of shyness may carry over into adulthood. What may one do to prevent such shyness from becoming weakness? One great aid to shy persons is thorough advance preparation. Even in the matter of shopping, forethought helps considerably. If the shy person finds that fasttalking salespeople tend to foist products upon him that he does not want, he should make up his mind beforehand just exactly what is wanted. If a substitute is being forced upon one, very pleasantly one can say: “I evidently did not make myself clear. I want such and such and nothing else.” Shy people find that usually gets results.
Likewise shy persons should prepare well when they are to speak publicly. When they prepare well, shy people often do exceptionally well in public speaking. So shy persons should not hold back from learning how to speak before groups.
Whatever the occasion, when a person finds that he has too much awareness of himself, then something must be done. But what? He should think of something else besides himself and self-consciousness will disappear. Become absorbed in the subject If the subject is a Bible topic, the Christian should be so absorbed in the message, when he is giving a talk, that he will no longer be preoccupied with the impression he is making on the audience.
When one is trying to make an exceptionally good impression upon someone who is held in high regard, selfconsciousness may get in the way. Fearful of not making a good impression, one keeps thinking about oneself; and so a good impression is not made. But divert the attention from oneself to ideas, to a study of the interests and needs of others; this takes the attention from oneself, and self-consciousness is no longer in the way.
Living by the Bible
The greatest aid for overcoming shyness and self-consciousness is to put Bible principles to work in one’s life. Even though one has long passed the age of adolescence, one can take Bible counsel to heart and by means of accurate knowledge and God’s spirit he can “put on the new personality,” with resultant “courage to speak the word of God fearlessly.”—Eph. 4:24; Phil. 1:14.
The 'Bible counsel to take a greater interest in other persons is most helpful for shy persons. “Let each one keep seeking, not his own advantage, but that of the other person.” (1 Cor. 10:24) Christians will be on the alert to seek the spiritual advantage of others; they will not deprive others of this spiritual advantage on account of shyness. How hospitable is the atmosphere of a Christian congregation when shyness does not hold back people from being friendly and from initiating conversations! Shy persons should realize that other persons are reserved, not because they are unfriendly, but because they have some shyness too.
When any Christian has some difficulty with shyness, he does well to take Paul’s words to Timothy to heart: “God gave us not a spirit of cowardice, but that of power and of love and of soundness of mind. Therefore do not become ashamed of the witness about our Lord.” (2 Tim. 1:7, 8) Whether Timothy had become a little fearful we do not know, but the apostle encourages him not to hold back either out of fear or of diffidence in speaking God’s truths to others. And what good reason there is for not holding back! God has given his true worshipers no spirit of cowardice but that of “power and of love." Hence the true worshiper can draw on God Almighty for power; and with the spirit of Christian love he drives away restraining forces such as fear and shyness: “There is no fear in )ove, but perfect love throws fear outside, because fear exercises a restraint."—1 John 4:18.
So the Christian will want to pray to God for this spirit of “power and of love.” Then, lovingly trusting in God and drawing power from him, he will not hold back out of any shyness. Thus, whether shyness is engendered by some fear, by selfconsciousness or by lack of confidence in one’s abilities, following Bible counsel is the best way to overcome the problem.
…